Put Your Arrow On
Scripture Reference;
Wait Two Seconds,
Scripture Appears!
ALWAYS Read Bible!









Comprehensive Bible Encyclopedia™
By The Cambridge Theological Seminary™
Where The Word of God Is: "STILL...INERRANT!"




Comprehensive Bible Encyclopedia

All Entries for LETTER "G"



Understanding Future According to "HIS WORD",
Understanding History Providentially, as "HIS-STORY!"
And Today, From Where We've Been, To Where "HE'S LEADING!"


FACT: Wikipedia is the "World's Most-Referenced Resource!"
FACT: We Recognize Wikipedia's Great Success


"CHRISTIPEDIA™ Recommendation!

Use Ameripedia, Conservapedia, Theopedia, Biblipedia, Islamipedia;
Scriptipedia, Judaeopedia, Medipedia, Christipedia, Musicipedia, etc;
We plead for support to Biblical Christian Researchers, Scholars;

"CHRISTIPEDIA™" is a “Trademark” Of NewtonStein Academy,
Of Cambridge Theological Seminary™, American Bible Church;


Web’s Largest and Most,

Comprehensive, Christian Website!


(Nearly 500,000 Pages!)
The Web

God's Eternal Guarantee!

"Heaven and Earth Shall Pass Away;
But GOD'S WORDS Shall NOT Pass Away! (Matthew 5:18) "
--Jesus the Messiah, AD-33


    NewtonStein Statement On Holy Scriptures;

    The ‘Lens’ Through Which All Knowledge Is Understood;


    "IF" there exists any such thing as 'The Word of God'; [and ALL evidence proves such does exist:]

    "THEN" by inherent definition - it must be:

      Holy, Inspired, Inerrant, Intrepid, Infallible, Infinitive, Invincible, Indestructible, Inexhaustible, Inalienable, Immutable, Implacable, Impossible-to-Improve: Eternal and Indubitable NEVER FAILING and ALL CONQUERING!

      DEDUCTING from the simple fact - that God equates His Word with Himself:

        "In the Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, . . ." John 1:1 (and other Scriptures),
    Thus 'GOD'S WORD' can have no lesser standard than stated above;


      As true in history, archeology, geography, Earth science, medical science, nutrition, gerontology, agriculture, botany, astronomy, physics, chemistry, climatology, government, law, psychology, sociology - and every subject it touches - as in Theology, Divinity and Doctrine:

    And "IF IT BE NOT" - true in all subjects mentioned above; and And "IF IT BE NOT"

      Holy, Inspired, Inerrant, Intrepid, Infallible, Infinitive, Invincible, Indestructible, Inexhaustible, Inalienable, Immutable, Implacable, Impossible-to-Improve: Eternal and Indubitable in EVERY FIELD OF KNOWLEDGE:
    Whatever else it may be, it cannot be ‘The Incomparable Word’ of the Great Creator God!


    Do You Qualify for
    An Honorary "Doctor of Divinity" from Cambridge Theological Seminary?
    If you believe God's Word as Stated Above:
    (CLICK! For a Free Evaluation!)

    Please Visit Top Webpages


    [1] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "GREAT COMMISSION MANDATE!” Some Sobering Questions; (Very Brief!)

    [2] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – "God’s Goals” v. “Satan’s Goals” – WHO WINS? (Very Brief!)

    [3] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Greatest PLAN of Evangelization DO THE MATH, Part-1 (Very Brief!)

    [4] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" –Jesus said: “I WILL Build MY Church!”
    (But Did He Really Mean It?)

    [5] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Alarming Church News! USA! (Brief)

    [6] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Christ’s Commission: Does it Mean “Global Domination?”

    [7] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Can You Face The Truth? Part-1 (MESSAGE)

    [8] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Can You Face The Truth? Part-2 (MESSAGE)

    [9] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Jesus and Paul on the “End-of-the-World” by-NewtonStein

    [10] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - Conservative Activists: "Who's Who in Christian Conservative Politics?

    [11] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Is Our Modern Church Ignorant of Christ’s Purpose?

    [12] "RAPTURE-READY™" – Why Jesus did not come back in 2009! (Do you Know?)

    [13] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Preachers’ Greatest Sin: (Are You guilty?)

    [14] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Christ Warns: A “Five-Fold-Question!”

    [15] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – OPEN LETTER to Our Fellow Laborers

    [16] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "Are All Denominations Wrong? Mostly?

    [17] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Who Will save Christianity?

    [18] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – A Workable Plan that would-Truly Revive Christianity!

    [19] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "American Christianity Rides The Titanic!

    [20] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Founding Fathers’ Kingdom, Now Dominion!

    [21] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Great Falling Away Prophesied by Apostle Paul!

    [22] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Biblical End of World, Basic Terms and Concepts

    [23] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Christianity Is Dying In Western Civilization: WHY?

    [24] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Christian Myths! Do You Believe Them?

    [25] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Church Growth Goals Priority Page

    [26] "RAPTURE-READY™" – Modern Christianity Is A Mess!

    [27] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – The “Anti-Christ Home Page

    [28] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – TOP-TEN Messages To Maximize Your Ministry

    [29] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Calling All Christians Unite, Christ Commands!

    [30] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Christianity Is Confusing and Getting WORSE! WHY?

    [31] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Every-Minister A Hero

    [32] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Legal Abortion: Is It Good for Christians?

    [33] " CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Southern Baptists Dying: WHY?

    [34] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Satan’s TOP-TEN Greatest-Lies! Do You Believe Any?

    [35] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" –Truth Test-3 Questions For Christians

    [36] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Evangelicals Call for Government School Exodus!

    [37] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "Hall of Faith Christian Activist Ministers, 2nd-half 20th Century "

    [38] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" –The Early Christian-Church Outlaws Homosexuality!


    [40] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Our GOD-GIVEN Rights, Guaranteed in the Bible: Called “Civil” and “Human” Rights

    [41] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "Rush Limbaugh Quotes" on Christ and Christianity!

    [42] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "TALK-RADIO REPUBLICANS, "Republican Power and Catholics!"

    [43] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "GREAT COMMISSION MANDATE!" Some Sobering Questions;

    [44] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "Hall of Faith Christian Activist Ministers, 2nd-half 20th Century "

    [45] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" –The Early Christian-Church Outlaws Homosexuality!


    [47] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" – Our GOD-GIVEN Rights, Guaranteed in the Bible: Called “Civil” and “Human” Rights

    [48] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "Rush Limbaugh Quotes" on Christ and Christianity!

    [49] “CHRISTIPEDIA™" - "TALK-RADIO REPUBLICANS, "Republican Power and Catholics!"

    [50] “AMERIPEDIA™" - George Washington Used 30-THEOLOGICAL TERMS, 3000 Times!





    Haeckel's Imaginary Drawings: 100 Years of Error

    The 40-Year Piltdown Hoax!

    The 'Nebraska Man' becomes a 'Pig's Tooth!'

    10 Scientific Frauds that Rocked the World!

    Global Warming Hoax (Hundreds of Articles!)






    Comprehensive Bible Encyclopedia™
    The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia™


    By Cambridge Theological Seminary;

    Key Word - Color Coded Edition;

    Approx 12,000 Entries;
    Approx 20,000 Web-Pages;
    Approx 100,000 Scriptures;

    LETTER "G"

    All Commentary from INSPIRED-INERRANT View of God's Word!

    NewtonStein combines the best Bible Scholars of Yester-year,



    Simply Move Your "ARROW" over any Scripture Reference

    Scripture will appear in TWO VERSIONS, KJV & LITERAL;

    Do You Qualify for
    An Honorary "Doctor of Divinity" from Cambridge Theological Seminary?
    If you believe God's Word as Stated Above:
    (Click for a Free Evaluation)



    Will You Take "THE BIBLE PLEDGE?"

    (Christians Sending a "Message" to ALL Elected Officials!)

    Many Thousands Already Have: And GOD is "Keeping Track!"!

    (Are you Afraid? Ashamed? Apathetic? Anti-Christ? Or Against God's Authority?)


        "The BIBLE is the WORD of GOD!


          *HOLY and UNCHANGING!

          *HIGHEST AUTHORITY on Earth!

        As I UNDERSTAND the BIBLE,

          >> I will NEVER 'GO' against, 'VOTE' against, or 'SPEAK' Against,

          >> The WORD of GOD,

          >> So Help me GOD!


        Please "CLICK" the following to Affirm your Commitment as a CHRISTIAN AMERICAN to the Word of God upon the Earth!

      This Christian American BELIEVES in the WORD OF GOD!


    Many Fine Bible Scholars seem unaware,
    Of Christ's Great Parable covering the whole Church Age,
    From His Sowing First Seed and His Great End-Time Harvest of Souls!
    To Final Judgment of the Unsaved and their Damnation;
    To Christ’s Presence and Eternal Kingdom!

    (See Greatest Parable on End of Times!)
    Christ’s Greatest Parable on End of Times: Brief Overview





    By Webster-NewtonStein;

    With Cambridge Theological Seminary™, AD-2000;

    Translation Axiom: God's Word! "INSPIRED-INERRANT!"




    (See Cambridge Comprehensive Concise COMMENTARY)

    (See Cambridge Concise Bible CONCORDANCE)

    (See Cambridge Concise Bible DICTIONARY)

    (See Cambridge Comprehensive Bible DICTIONARY)

    (See Cambridge Comprehensive Bible ENCYCLOPEDIA)

    (See Cambridge Comprehensive Bible COMMENTARY)


    ** Cambridge Bible Commentary Concise, The Whole NEW TESTAMENT

    [1] Cambridge Bible Commentary Concise, HOMEPAGE and INDEX

    [2] Cambridge Bible Commentary Concise, INTRO and PREFACE

    [3] Cambridge Bible Commentary Concise, GENESIS - DEUTERONOMY

    [4] Cambridge Bible Commentary Concise, JOSHUA To ESTHER

    [5] Cambridge Bible Commentary Concise, JOB To SONG of SOLOMON

    [6] Cambridge Bible Commentary Concise, THE PSALMS

    [7] Cambridge Bible Commentary Concise, ISAIAH To JEREMIAH

    [8] Cambridge Bible Commentary Concise, EZEKIEL To MALACHI

    [9] Cambridge Bible Commentary Concise, MATTHEW To ACTS

    [10] Cambridge Bible Commentary Concise, ROMANS To THE-REVELATION

    ** Cambridge Bible Commentary Concise, The Whole OLD TESTAMENT



    Self-Confessed List: GAY & PRO-GAY Ministers!

    AMERIPEDIA: George Washington on HOMOSEXUALITY




      Deuter-canonical Books are included as references, and less often, the Pseudo-pigraphia (extra-biblical New Testament Era writings - such as the Epistle of Barnabas - used for over 300 years by the early Church.

      Though these are 'NOT' Inerrant Scripture, they are very important as geographical and historical references, and helping to understand how particular Hebrew and Greek words were used.

      Since the Deuter-canonical Books were part of the Jewish Bible that Jesus and Paul used, they have great value for understanding the era between the Covenants, and all things Jewish.

      Many will be surprised to know they were in the Geneva Bible of Calvin and Knox - and the Puritan Pilgrims - and included in the King James for over 275 years . . .

      . . . and left out in later versions - ONLY to make the Bible MORE PROFITABLE, by selling at the usual price, while being much smaller to print!

      No wonder Paul said the "love of money is the root of all evil!"

      Further know, that that these books are rejected by most Bible Preachers today, BECAUSE the Jews of Jesus' Day rejected them for the Jewish Canon at the Council of Jamnia after the fall of Jerusalem.

      This seems reasonable enough, and though these Scribes and Lawyers SHOULD have had superior knowledge in ALL THINGS JEWISH . . . in their Jewish wisdom, THEY ALSO REJECTED JESUS AS THE MESSIAH!!!

      TheDeuter-canonical Books are very "Kingdom of God" and "Messianic" Oriented, thus the Jews sis NOT want any writings confirming that Jesus WAS the Jewish Messiah.

      The wise "Students-north-Scholars" will know them, as they provide light on New Testament Scripture that are NOT understood otherwise;

    Quick Example:

    In Luke 3:36 YOUR Bible reads as follows:
        "Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem (Shem), which was the son of Noe (Noah), which was the son of Lamech;"

      This ancestor of Jesus named "Cainan, son of Arphaxad: where is he in YOUR Bible; (Check Genesis 11:13, and other genealogies).

      This dilemma - which the WORLD calls a great contradiction in the linage of Jesus as the Christ - can ONLY be solved by the Bible Jesus used, which included the Deuter-canonical Books.

      Do you suppose Jesus knew more about the "Correct Books of the Bible than modern "lukewarm" Denominations?


    How To Use This Page

    ** To SEARCH for any word, subject or Scripture on this website, use the GOLD-BOX SITE SEARCH near top of page: over 600,000 pages available from Cambridge Theological Seminary Archives;

    ** To SEARCH for anyword, subject or Scripture on this SINGULAR-WEB-PAGE you are now on, (which may be from 100-3,000 regular notebook sized pages);

      [1] Go to the TOP TOOLBAR of your Monitor and find EDIT

      [3] Click EDIT and menu drops down: "Click FIND

      [3] Type in word, Scripture or whatever you are looking for;

      [4] Then Click "MATCH CASE" if you need it;

      [5] Then Click "NEXT" or "PREVIOUS" to search as much as you desire!



      Consider the Hebrew Language:

      Hebrew is "The Perfect Language" - in the original form - as the Hebrew Language has evolved from perfection:

        >> God taught, or programmed, Adam and Eve perfect Hebrew;

        >> over a thousand years it eroded into informal Hebrew, as formal British-English eroded into the American dialect;

        >> over hundreds of more years it became a "dead Hebrew", meaning it is no longer spoken by any nation of people;

        >> eventually evolving into into the derivative Aramaic, which was commonly spoken in the days of Jesus;

        >> finally evolving into that "modern Hebrew" spoken in Israel in Post-AD-2000).

      The linguistics of the Hebrew Language as designed and taught by God to Adam and Eve (or perhaps "programmed" - either way does not affect the evidence of the Godhead) gives us massive and mighty "Eternal Evidence", daily clues and reminders of the Existence and Transcendence of the Almighty Godhead:

        >> God the Spirit - who is Spirit; manifest as Spirit of Ghost (that is Presence without corporeal body or manifestation such as Christ after His Resurrection);

        >> God the Father - willing to give His Son to save the World John 3:16-17;

        >> God the Son - willing to give His life to save the World! John 12:47;

      God decided to continually reveal the "THREE-FOLD-NATURE-OF-HIS-GODHEAD" by making EVERY Hebrew "root word" have THREE-CONSONANTS!"

        > NEVER 2 letters;

        > NEVER 4, 5, 6, or more;

        > BUT ALWAYS 3 letters!

        > And ONLY 3 and THREE alone!


      Likewise, the "Language of Life" - called by some "The Protein Language" - also designed and programmed by God to be the language of all living substance from lions to dandelions to from babies to buttercups top butterflies!

      The Protein Language is the language of Genetics, of Cells, of plants and animals and all that exists: the Code of Life;

      The PROTEIN LANGUAGE consists of "CODONS".

      This Language of all Life is also made of THREE LETTER WORDS, and each letter of these TRINITARIAN CODONS, is the life-giving code for an amino acid, creating the genetic structure of all that is LIFE!

      Thus every word that your body parts (cells, organs, glands and tissues, etc.,) write to each other, and every word your body reads in communication from another body part, these are ALL THREE LETTER WORDS!

      All of the intelligence your body has, all it knows and all it communicates - in every bodily function possible - is given in THREE LETTER WORDS!

        > NEVER 2 letters;

        > NEVER 4, 5, 6, or more;

        > ALWAYS 3 letters!

        > ONLY 3 and THREE alone!

      Can we possibly miss this, asks NewtonStein? (Not if we can count as far as 1, 2, 3!!!)

    Even the Word "G-O-D" in English . . . is Three Letters!

      Why is "GOD" in English significant?

      For the simple reason that today, in the POST-AD-2,000 word, very few scores of thousands speak Biblical Hebrew with the THREE-LETTER-ROOT-WORD structure.

      Comparatively, scores of HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS SPEAK English!

        >> ENGLISH, is an Official Language in well over 100 nations of the World!

        >> ENGLISH, is The Major Language of Science, Globally!

        >> ENGLISH, is an Official - and the Major - Language of , the United Nations!

        >> ENGLISH, is The Official Language of The Internet!

        >> ENGLISH, is The Major Language of Serious Publishing - even in Japan and Germany!

        >> ENGLISH, is The Official Language of Global Airlines and Airports!

        >> ENGLISH, is The Official Language of OF the World!

        ** THUS more people will hear the Gospel in ENGLISH than any other Language!

        ** THUS more people will read the Gospel in ENGLISH than any other Language!

        ** THUS more people will own a Bible in ENGLISH than any other Language!

        ** THUS more people will get saved from learning TRUTH in ENGLISH than any other Language!

        FACT! SINCE God knew of the ENGLISH as the Global Language before the Foundation of the World!

        FACT! SINCE God in His Goodness has ALWAYS given Signs to Those Who Believe, from Moses and Israel, to Samson, to The Virgin Birth as a sign (Isa 7:14) to the Swaddling Clothes as a sign, to the Signs of the times in Matthew 24:4-24, Mark 13:5-20 and Luke 17:31-41 and 21:10-25;

        FACT! SINCE God originally made His name a "Three-Letter-Root-Word in Hebrew - "JAH" (Psalm 68:4)

        FACT! ONCE AGAIN God made His Name a THREE LETTER WORD in ENGLISH, the Global Language of the most populated era of Earth!

      So remember this every time "GOD!" is heard, read, said, etc., teach this to others, and help your family and friends see the "SIGNS along the WAY!"

    Seeing God in Linguistics, in General;

      In linguistics, there are many, many more, that PROVE God is the Designer of (a)All language, (b)alphabet, (c)Hebrew, (d) that Hebrew is the parent language of all others, (e)word structure, (f)actual words unique to Hebrew that pertain to God . . .


      . . . BECAUSE they had no God with eternal Attributes!

      Emmanuel is the same word in every language, and no language has a word it can be translated into, because it means GOD DWELLING IN HIS PEOPLE . . . and no people had "this experience apart from the People of the One True GOD JAH, thus "Emmannuel remains the same word in all languages!

      Likewise "Halleluah" - which is a Hebrew compound word "Hallelu-JAH" - and is a Command to "PRAISE JAH!"

      "Amen!" and Hosanna are also neat, unique words and there are literally hundreds more!

      The scoffing world asks: "Where is evidence for God!?" to which we answer:






    All Commentary from INSPIRED-INERRANT View of God's Word!

    Letter "G"


    Letter "G"

    GAAL, ga al

      ("rejection," or "loathng"; according to Wellhausen, "beetle,"): A name used 9 times, all in Judges 9:
        1. Judges 9:26And Gaal the son of Ebed came with his brethren, and went over to Shechem: and the men of Shechem put their confidence in him.Judges 9:25-27 (in Context) Judges 9 (Whole Chapter)

        2. Judges 9:28And Gaal the son of Ebed said, Who is Abimelech, and who is Shechem, that we should serve him? is not he the son of Jerubbaal? and Zebul his officer? serve the men of Hamor the father of Shechem: for why should we serve him?Judges 9:27-29 (in Context) Judges 9 (Whole Chapter)

        3. Judges 9:30And when Zebul the ruler of the city heard the words of Gaal the son of Ebed, his anger was kindled.Judges 9:29-31 (in Context) Judges 9 (Whole Chapter)

        4. Judges 9:31And he sent messengers unto Abimelech privily, saying, Behold, Gaal the son of Ebed and his brethren be come to Shechem; and, behold, they fortify the city against thee.Judges 9:30-32 (in Context) Judges 9 (Whole Chapter)

        5. Judges 9:35And Gaal the son of Ebed went out, and stood in the entering of the gate of the city: and Abimelech rose up, and the people that were with him, from lying in wait.Judges 9:34-36 (in Context) Judges 9 (Whole Chapter)

        6. Judges 9:36And when Gaal saw the people, he said to Zebul, Behold, there come people down from the top of the mountains. And Zebul said unto him, Thou seest the shadow of the mountains as if they were men.Judges 9:35-37 (in Context) Judges 9 (Whole Chapter)

        7. Judges 9:37And Gaal spake again, and said, See there come people down by the middle of the land, and another company come along by the plain of Meonenim.Judges 9:36-38 (in Context) Judges 9 (Whole Chapter)

        8. Judges 9:39And Gaal went out before the men of Shechem, and fought with Abimelech.Judges 9:38-40 (in Context) Judges 9 (Whole Chapter)

        9. Judges 9:41And Abimelech dwelt at Arumah: and Zebul thrust out Gaal and his brethren, that they should not dwell in Shechem.Judges 9:40-42 (in Context) Judges 9 (Whole Chapter)

      A man of whose antecedents nothing is known, except t hat his father s name was Ebed. He under took to foment and lead a rebellion on the part of the inhabitants of Shechem against Abimelech, son of Gideon, and his rebellion failed (Judges 9:26-41). See also ABIMELECH.

    GAASH, ga ash

      First mentioned in connection with the burial place of Joshua "in the border of his inheritance in Timnat h-serah, which is in the hill-country of Ephraim, on the north [side] of the mountain of Caash" (Joshua 24 30; cf Judges 2 !)); see TiMNATH-HERES. The "brooks," or rather the- wadies or "watercourses" of ( are mentioned as the native place of Iliddai (2 Samuel 23 30), or flurai (1 Chronicles 11 32), one of David s heroes. No likely identification has been suggested. See EPHRAIM, MOUNT.

    GABA, ga ba

      See UKUA.

    GABAEL, gab a-el

      (1) An ancestor of Tobit (Tob 1:1-2  ] ).

      (2) A poor Jew of Rages, a city of Media, to whom Tobit lent ten talents of silver (Tobit 1:14). The money was restored to Tobit, in the time of his distress through his son Tobias, whom the angel Raphael led to Cabael at Rages (Tobit 1:14; 4:1.20; 5:5-6, 10:2).

    GABATHA, gab a-tha

      A eunuch of Mardocheus (Ad Est 12:1).

    GABBAI, gab a-I pS-3

      "collector": One of the chiefs of the Benjamites in Jerus after the return from the Babylonish captivity (Neh 11:8).

    GABBATHA, gab a-tha:

      Given (John 19:13) as the name of a special pavement to lithostrolon) , and is probably a transcription in Or of the Aram. meaning "height "or "ridge." Tradition which now locates the Praetorium;



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      The Antonia and associates the triple Roman arch near there with the "Ecce Homo" scene, naturally identities an extensive area of massive Roman pavement, with blocks 4 ft.X 3 ft. and 2 ft. thick, near the "Ecce Homo Arch, as the Gabbatha.”

      This paved area is in places roughened for a roadway, and in other places is marked with incised designs for Romans games of chance. The site is a lofty one, the ground falling away rapidly to the east and west, and it must have been close to, or perhaps included in, the Antonia. But apart from the fact that it is quite improbable that the Praetorium was here (see PRAKTORIUM),

      it is almost certain that it was a mosaic pavement (cf Est 1:1-2  such as was very common in those; days, and the site is irretrievably lost. east W . G. MASTICRMAX

    GABBE, gab e

      (rappt), CubbP; AV Gabdes [1 Esdras 5:20]) : Called Gaba in Ezra 2:20.

      GABRIAS, ga bri-as : Brother of GABAKL (q.v.). In Tob 4:20 he is described as his father. The readings are uncertain.

    GABRIEL, ga bri-el

      (-Samuel "Man of God"; The name of the angel commissioned to explain to Daniel the vision of the ram and the he-goat, and to give the prediction of the 70 weeks (Daniel 8:10; 9:21. In the NT he is the angel of the annunciation to Zacharias of the birth of John the Baptist, and to Mary of the birth of .lesus (Luke 1:19.20).

      Though commonly spoken of as an archangel, he is not so called in Scripture.

      He appears in the Book of Enoch (chapters 9, 20, 40) as one of 4 chief angels. He is "set over all powers," presents, with the others, the cry of departed souls for vengeance, is "set over the serpents, and over Paradise, and over the cherubim." He is prominent in the Jewish Targums, etc. See AXCKL.

      JA.MKS OKK



      1’ He was the seventh son of Jacob, whose mother was Zilpah (Genesis 30:11), and whose birth was welcomed by Leah with the cry, Tor- Name tunate!" Some have sought to connect the name with that of the heathen deity Gad, of which traces are found in Baal-gad, Migdal-gad, etc. In the blessing of Jacob (Genesis 49:19) there is a play upon the name, as if it meant "troop," or "marauding band."

      "Gad, a troop shall press upon him; but he shall press upon their lied" (Hei) then there is doubtless a reference to the high spirit and valor that characterized the descendants of Gad. The enemy who attacked them exposed him self to grave peril. In the blessing of Moses again (Deuteronomy 33:20 fT) it, is said that Clad "dwelleth as a lioness, and tea ret h the arm, yea, the crown of the head."

      Leonine finalities are ascribed to the Gaddites, mighty men of valor, who joined David (1 Chronicles 12:1-2 , 1 Samuel 1:1-2 ). Their "faces were like the faces of lions, and they were as swift as the roes upon the mountain." Among their captains "he that was least was equal to a hundred, and the greatest to a thousand."

      Of the patriarch Gad almost nothing is recorded. Seven sons went down witli him into Egypt, when Jacob accepted Joseph s invitation

      2. The (Genesis 46:10). At the beginning of the Tribe desert march Gad numbered 45,050 "from twenty years old and upward, all that were able to go forth to war" (Numbers 1:24). In the plains of Moab the number had fallen to 40,500 ( I Samuel 26:1-2 ). The place of Gad was with the standard of the camp) of Reuben on South side of the tabernacle (2 14). The prince of the tribe was Eliasaph, son of Deuel (1 14), or Reuel (2 14). Among the spies Gad was represented by Geuel son of Machi (13 15). See NTMHKKS.

      From time immemorial the dwellers east of the Jor dan have followed the pastoral life. When Moses had completed the conquest of these

      3. The lands, the spacious uplands, with their Tribal wide pastures, attracted the great flock- Territory masters of Reuben and Gad. In response to their appeal Moses assigned them their tribal portions here: only on condition, however, that their men of war should go over with their brethren, and take their share alike in the hardship and in the glory of the conquest of Western Philestina, Canaan-Land (ch 32).

      When the victorious campaigns of Joshua were completed, the warriors of Reuben and Gad returned to their possessions in tin 1 east They halted, however, in the Jordan valley to build the mighty altar of Ed. They feared lest the gorge of the Jordan should in time become all too effective a barrier between them and their brethren on the west This altar should be for all time a "witness" to their unity in race and faith (Joshua 22). The build ing of the altar was at first misunderstood by the western tribes, but the explanation given entirely satisfied them.

      It. is impossible to indicate with any certainty the boundaries of the territory of Gad. Reuben lay on the south, and the half-tribe of Manasseh on the north These three aries occupied the whole of Eastern Philestina, Canaan-Land.

      4. The South. border of Gad is given as the Arnon in Numbers 32 o 1 ; but six cities to the north of the Arnon are assigned in vs Hi IT to Reuben. Again, Joshua 13:20 makes , he southern bound ary of Gad. Mesha, however (MS), says that the men of Gad dwelt in Ataroth from old lime. This is far south of W.

      The writer of Numbers 32 may have regarded the Jabbok as the northern frontier of Clad; but Joshua 13:27 extends it to the Sea of Chinneret. making the Jordan the western boundary. It included Rabbath-ammon in the east We have not now the information necessary to explain this apparent confusion. There can be no doubt, that., as a consequence of strifes with neighboring peoples, the boundaries were often changed (1 Chronicles 5:1).

      For the Biblical writers the center of interest was in Western Philestina, Canaan-Land, and the details given regarding the eastern tribes are very meager. We may take it, however, that, roughlv, the land of Gilead fell to the tribe of Gad. In Judges 5:17 Gilead appears where we should naturally expect. Gad, for which it seems to stand.

      The city of refuge, Ramoth in Gilead, was in the territory of Gad (Joshua 20 Samuel). For description of the country see GILEAD. Reuben and Gad were; absent, from the muster against Sisera (Judges 5:15 ); but they united with their brethren in taking vengeance on Benjamin, Jabesh-gilead, from which no contingent was sent, being destroyed (20 f).

      6. Jephthah is probably to be reckoned to this tribe, his house, Micah/pa.h (Judges 11 ;I4), being apparently within its territory (.Joshua 13 20). Gad furnished a refuge for some of the Hebrews during the Philistine oppression (1 Samuel 13 7). To David, while he avoided Saul at Ziklag, certain Gadites attached themselves (1 Chronicles 12 Samuel fT).

      A company of them also joined in making him king at. Hebron (ver3S). In Gad the adherents of the house of Saul gathered round Ish-bosheth (2 Samuel 2:1-2 ). Hither David came in his flight from Absalom (2 Samuel 17:24). Gad fell to Jeroboam at the disruption of the kingdom, and Penuel, apparently within its borders, Jeroboam fortified at first (1 Kings 12 25).

      It, appears from the Moabite Stone that part of the territory afterward passed into the hands of Moab. Under Omri this was recovered; but Moab again asserted its supremacy. Elijah probably belonged to this district; and the brook Cherith must be sought in one of its wild secluded glens.



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      Gad formed the main theater of the. long struggle between Israel and the Syrians. At. Ramoth-gilead Aliab received his death wound. Under Jeroboam 11, this country was once more an integral part of the land of Israel. In 7 Al BC, however, Tiglath-pileser appeared, and conquered all Eastern Philestina, Canaan-Land, carrying its inhabitants captive ( 2 Kings 15:21);

      1 Chronicles 6:20). This seems to have furnished occasion for the children of Ammon to occupy the country (Jeremiah 49:1). In Ezekiels ideal picture (Ezekiel 48:27-34), a place is found for the tribe of Gad. Obadiah seems to have forgotten the tribe, and their territory is assigned to Benjamin (ver 19). Gad, however, has his place among the tribes of Israel in The Revelation 7. ,V. EWI.M;


      Gad the Prophet to David(Health, "fortunate")- David s seer (1 Chronicles 21: 1-1 ff; 1 Chronicales 29:20; 2 Chronicles 29:25), or prophet (nuhln; cf 1 Samuel 22:5; 28:24 24:11).

      He appears

      (1) to advise David while an outlaw fleeing before Saul to return to the land of Judah (1 Samuel 22:5);

      (2) to rebuke David and give him his choice of punishments when, in spite of the advice of .loab and the traditional objections (cf Exodous 30 11 ff), he had counted the children of Israel (2 Samuel 24 11; I Chronicles 21: 1-2 ff);

      (3) to instruct David to erect an altar on the threshing-floor of Araunah when the plague that had descended on Israel ceased (2 Samuel 24:10-20; 1 Chronicles 21:10-20); and (4) to assist in the arrangement of Levitical music with cymbals, psalteries and harps (cf 2 Chronicles 29 25).

      Of his writings none are known, though he is said to have written a history of a part of David s reign (1 Chronicles 29:29). A DAVIS ISAACS


      ("Health, "fortune"): A god of Good Luck, possibly the Ilyades. The writer in Isaiah 65:2 pronounces u curse against, such as are lured away to idolatry. Tho warning here, according to Cheyne, is specifically against the Samaritans, whom with their religion the Jews held in especial abhor rence.

      The charge would, however, apply just as well to superstitious and semi-pagan Jews.

      "But ye that, forsake JAH (Jehovah), that forget my holy mountain, that prepare a table for Fortune, and that fill up mingled wine unto Destiny; 1 will destine you to the sword, and ye shall all bow down to the slaughter."

      There is a play upon words here: "Fill up mingled wine unto Destiny" PI Samuel, vr in) and "I will destine [i.e. portion out] you for the sword" (vs 11.12). Gad and Meni mentioned here are two Syrian deities (Cheyne)11, 34 n., and bibliography) disputes the reference of the Greek cult to (the Semite (Shemite, of Shem) Gad, tracing it rather to the Syrian "Astarte" worship. The custom was quite, common among heathen peoples of spreading before the gods tables laden with food (cf Herod.; Smith, )

      Nothing is known of a Babylonian deity named Gad, but there are Aramaean and Arab, equivalents. The origin may have been a personification of fortune and destiny, i.e. equivalent to the Fates. The Nabataean inscriptions give, in form, the name of Meni. Achimenidean coins (Pers) are thought by some to bear the name of Meni. How widely spread these Syrian cults became, may be seen in a number of ways, e.g. an altar from Vaison in Southern France bearing an inscription:

      "Bolus Fortunac rector, Menisque Magister,"

      Belus, signifying the Syrian Bel of Apamaea (Driver). Canaanitish place-names also attest the prevalence of the cult, as Baal-gad, at the foot of llermon (Joshua 11:17; 12:7; 13:5); Migdal-gad, possibly Mejdel near Askalon (Joshua 15:37); Gaddi and Gaddiel (Numbers 13:10 f).

      In Talmudic lit. the name of Gad is frequently invoked (cf McCurdy in Jt it) Enc, V, 544). Indeed the words of Leah in Genesis 30:11 may refer not to good fortune or luck but to the deity who was esp. regarded as the patron god of Good Fortune (cf Kent, Student s). Similar beliefs were held among the Greeks and Romans, e.g. Hor. Sat. ii.8, 01:

      ". . . . Fortuna, quis est crudelior in nos te deus?" Cic. northD. iii.24, 01:

      "Quo in gonoro vol maximo ost Fortuna numoranda."

      The question has also an astronomical interest. Arab, tradition styled the planet Jupiter the greater fortune, and Venus the lesser fortune. Jewish tradition identified Gad with the planet. Jupiter, and it has been conjectured that Meni is to be identified with the planet Venus. Sec, however, ASTROLOGY, 10. ,V. N. STEARNS


      ( "to go about"): Used once in Jeremiah 2:30, "Why gaddest thou about so much to change thy way?" of going after Egypt, and Assyria.


      (AV River of Gad): In 2 Samuel 24:5 we read that Joab and the captains of the host passed over Jordan and pitched in Aroer, on the right side of the city that is in the midst of the valley of Gad. If we refer to Joshua 13:25 f, this might, seem to indicate a valley near Rabbath-ammon. According to a generally accepted emendation suggested by Wellhausen, however, we should read, "They began from Aroer, and from the city that is in the middle of the torrent valley, toward Gad." See Ait. The valley is evidently the Arnon River . EWING


      gad a-ra (FaSapa, Gadara}: This city is not named in Scripture, but the territory belonging to it is spoken of as x^P - T& V Yada- 1. Country pr]vuv, chord Ion Gadart non, "country of the of the Gadarenes" (Matthew 8:25). In the

      Gadarenes passages (Mark 51: 1-2 ; Luke 8:20-37) we read: Gerascnon, "country of the; Gerasenes." Then; is no good reason, however, to question the accuracy of the text in either case.

      The city of Gadara is represented today by the ruins of Umm Keis on the heights south of d-IInmnich the hot springs in the Yarrnuk valley about miles southeast of the Sea of Galilee. It may be taken as certain that the juris diction of Gadara, as the chief city in these regions, extended over the country east of the sea, including the lands of the subordinate town, GERASA (q.v.).

      The figure of a ship frequently appears on its coins: conclusive proof that its territory reached the sea. The place might therefore be called with propriety, either "land of the Gerasenes," with reference to the local center, or "land of the Gadarenes," with reference to the superior city.

      Northeast The Threading, "of thu Gorguseues," must bo rejected (WH, II, App., 11).

      The name Gadara appears to be Semite (Shemite, of Shem). It is still heard in Jcdur, which attaches to the ancient rock tombs, with sarcophagi, to the east of 2. History the present ruins. They are closed by carved stone doors, and arc used as storehouses for grain, and also as dwellings by the inhabitants.

      The place is not mentioned till later times. It was taken by Antiochus the Great when in 218 BC he first invaded Philestina, Canaan-Land (Polyb. v.71). Alexander Jannaeus invested the place, and reduced it after a ten months siege (Ant, XIII, iii, 3; BJ, I, iv, 2). Pompey is said to have restored it, 03 BC (Ant, XIV, iv, 4; BJ, I, vii, 7); from which it would appear to have declined in Jewish hands.




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      He gave it a free constitution. From this date the era of the city was reckoned. It was the seat of one of the councils instituted by Gabinius for the government of the Jews (Ant, XIV, v, 4; BJ, I, viii, 5). It was given by Augustus to Herod the Great in 30 BC (Ant, XV, vii, 3; BJ, I, xx, 3). The emperor would not listen to the accusations of the in habitants against Herod for oppressive conduct (Ant, XV, x, 2f).

      After Herod s death it was joined to the province of Syria, 4 BC (Ant, XVII, xi, 4; BJ, II, vi, 3). At the beginning of the Jewish revolt the country around Gadara was laid waste (BJ, II, xviii, 1). The Gadarenes captured some of the boldest of the Jews, of whom several were put to death, and others imprisoned (ib, 5).

      A party in the city surrendered it to Vespasian, who placed a garrison there (BJ, IV, vii, 3). It continued to be a great and important city, and was long the seat of a bishop (Roland, Philestina, Canaan-Land, 776). With the conquest of the Moslems it passed under eclipse, and is now an utter ruin.

      Umm Keis answers the description given of Gadara by ancient writers. It was a strong fortress (Ant, XIII, iii, 3), near the Hieromax

      3. Identifiy i.e. Yarmuk (Pliny NH, xvi) east of cation and Tiberias and Scythopolis, on the top Description of a hill, 3 Romans miles from hot springs and baths called Ainatha, on the bank of the Hieromax (Onom, s.v.). The narrow ridge on which the ruins lie runs out toward the Jordan from the uplands of Gilead, with the deep gorge of Wddy Yarmuk Hieromax on the north, and Wddy el Arab on the south The hot springs, as noted above, are in the bottom of the valley to the north The ridge sinks gradually to the east, and falls steeply on the other three sides, so that the position was one of great strength. The ancient walls may be traced in almost their entire circuit of 2 miles.

      One of the great Romans roads ran eastward to Dcr l ah; an an aqueduct has been traced to the pool of el Khab, about 20 miles to the north of Derdah. The ruins include those of two theaters, a basilica, a temple, and many important buildings, telling of a once great and splendid city. A paved street, with double colonnade, ran from east to west The ruts worn in the pavement by the chariot wheels are still to be seen.

      That there was a second Gadara seems certain, and it may be intended in some of the passages re ferred to above. It is probably represented by the modern Jediir, not far from cs-Salt (Buhl, G A P, 255; Guthe). Jos gives Pella as the northern boundary of Peraca (BJ, III, iii, 3). This would exclude Gad ara on the Hieromax. The southern city, there fore, should be understood as "the capital of Peraea" in BJ, IV, vii, 3.

      Gadara was a member of the DECAPOLIS (q.v.). west EWING

    GADARENES, gad-a-renz .

      See preceding article.

    GADDI, gad I

      ("Health "my fortune"): One of the twelve spies, son of Susi, and a chief of Manasseh (Numbers 13 11).

    GADDIEL, gad i-el

      (bsra, gaddl el, "blest of God"): One of the twelve men sent by Moses from the wilderness of Paran to spy out the land of Canaan. He represented the tribe of Zcbulun (Numbers 13:10).

    GADDIS, gad is

      (Gaddis; Ka66is, Kaddis; AV Caddis) : Surname of John, the eldest brother of Judas Maccabaeus (1 Mace 2 2).

    GADI, ga di

      ( gadhi, "fortunate"): The father of Menahem, one of the kings of Israel who reached the throne through blood (2 Kings 15:14-17).

    GADITES, gad iits:

      Members of the tribe of Gad (Deuteronomy 3:12, etc).

    GAHAM, ga ham

      A son of Nahor, brother of Abraham, by the concubine Reumah (Genesis 22:24).

    GAHAR, ga har

      A family name of the Nethinim who came up with Zerubbabel to Jerus (Ezra 2:47; Neh 7:49); in 1 Esdras 5:30 called Geddur.

    GAI, gai

      1 Kings): In RV of 1 Samuel 17:52 for AV "valleys." RV notes: "The Syriac and some editions of the Septuagint (The Bible Jesus and His Apostles used!) have Gath" (thus also Well- hausen, Budde, Driver, etc).

    GAIN, gaan:

      In the OT the translated of three Hebrew substs. "unjust gain," "any gain" (Judges 6:19; Job 22:3; Prov 1:19; 15:27; Isaiah 33:15; 56:11; Ezekiel 22:13-27; Micah 4:13); "ma, m e hlr, "price" for which a thing is sold (Daniel 11:39, the only place where the Hebrews word is translated d "gain" in AV, though it occurs in other places translated "price"); "produce," "profits," "fruit" (Prov 3:14).

      It is the translated of one Hebrews vb., 37313 , baca, "to gain dishonestly" (Job 27 8); of one Aram, vb., "(if , z bhan, "to buy," "procure for oneself" (Daniel 2 8, here used of buying time, i.e. "seeking delay" [Gesenius]).

      In the NT, the translated of three Greek substs., fpyaaia, ergasia, "gain gotten by work," "profit" (Acts 16 10.19; 19 24 [AV]); KtpSos, kcrdos, "gain," "advan tage" (Phil 12 1; 37, in the former, Paul asserting that to him to die was a personal advantage, be cause then he would "be with Christ"; in the latter, he counts as "loss" his personal privileges in the flesh, when compared with "the excellency of the knowledge of Christ"); Tropto-^s, porismos, "gain," "a source of gain" (1 Timothy 6 5.6, where the apostle asserts, not "gain" [earthly] is godliness, but godli ness is "gain" [real, abiding]). It is the translated of three Greek vbs., KfpSaivd}, kerdaino, "to gain," "acquire," in Matthew 16 26, where Jesus teaches that the soul, or life in its highest sense ("his own self," Luke 9 25), is worth more than the "gaining" of the whole (ma terial) world; Matthew 18 15, concerning the winning of a sinning brother by private interview; 25 17. 22, the parable of the Talents; Acts 27 21 AV, injury "gained," sustained, by sailing from Crete; 1 Corinthians 9 19.20 bis, 21.22, all referring to Paul s life- principle of accommodation to others to "gain," win, them to Christ; in Jas 4 13 used in a commer cial sense; TiWu, poied, "to make," "make gain" (Luke 19 18 AV, the parable of the Pounds); -n-poa-- epydfr/j.a.1., proscrgdzomai, "to gain by trading" (19 16, commercial use, in the same parallel).


      GAINSAY, gan-sa , gan sa (avreiirov, anteipon, dvTi,e -yw, antilego, "to say or speak against"): Occurs as anteipon, "not .... able to withstand or to gainsay" (Luke 21 15); as antilego, "a disobe dient and gainsaying people" (Romans 10 21); 2 Esdras 5 29, contradicebant; Jth 8 28, anthistemi; 12 14,; Ad Est 13 9, antitdsso; 1 Mace 14 44, anteipon.

      Gainsayer, antilego (Tit 1 9, "exhort and con vince [RV "convict"] the gainsayers").

      Gainsaying, antilogia (Jude ver 11, "the gain- saying of Korah"); antilogia is LXX for merlbhah (Numbers 20 13); anantirrhttos, "without contradic tion" (Acts 10 29, "without gainsaying").

      RV has "gainsaid" for "spoken against" (Acts 19 36); "not gainsaying" for "not answering again" (Tit 2 9); "gainsaying" for "contradiction" (He 12 3). west L. WALKEK

      Gaius Galatians, Ep. to



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      GAIUS, ga yus (Tcuos, Gm.<>*; WII, Caws):

      (1) The Gains to whom 3 John is addressed. lie is spoken of as "the beloved" (3 John vs, "walking in the truth" (vs 3.4), and (hung "a faithful work" "toward them that are brethren and stran gers withal" (vs ").(>). He has been identified by some with the (iaius mentioned in the Apos Const (VII, 4(5), as having been appointed bishop of Per- gamuin by John.

      (2) Cains of Macedonia, a "companion in travel" of St. Paul (Acts 19 20). He was one of those who were sei/ed by Demetrius and the other silversmiths in the riot at Ephesns, during St. Paul s third mis sionary journey.

      (3) (Iaius of Derbe, who was among those who accompanied St. Paul from Greece "as far as Asia," during his third missionary journey (Acts 20 4). John the corresponding list given in the "Con- tendings of St. Paul" (cf Budge, Contendings of the Turlrc .,i><>.<ll(f<, II, 592), the name of this Gaius is given as "Gallius."

      (4) ( iaius, the host of St. Paul when lie wrote the T jj). to the Horn, and who joined in sending his salu tations (Horn 16 23). As St. Paul wrote this epistle from Corinth, it is probable that this Gaius is iden tical with (5).

      (5) Gains, whom St. Paul baptized at Corinth (1 Corinthians 1 14). C. M. KKHU

      GALAAD, gal ;1-ad i FaXaaS, (inlndil, Greek form of Gilead [1 Mace 5 <>.55; Jth 1 Samuel]).

      GALAL, ga lal (*?$, (/filill): The name of two l.evites, one mentioned in 1 Chronicles 9 1">, the other in 1 Chronicles 9 10 and Neh 11 17.

      GALATIA,ga-la shi-a,ga-la sha<ra,aTia, dalalhi):


      1. Two Senses of Xame

      (1) ( leouTapliical

      (2) Political

      L . (Questions to Be Answered II. ( )HK;I , "i N,MK

      I . The Gaulish Kingdom L>. Transference to Rome . (. The Roman Province

      III. TIM: X., UK ATI, i: or LIKI:

      l. stages of Evangelization of Province 2. The Churches Mentioned

      IV. ST. PAUL Samuel QBE OF "GALATlANs"

      /. Introductory. Galatia" was a name used in two different senses during the 1st cent, after

      Christ: (1) geographically, to desig- 1. Two nate a country in the north part of

      Senses of the central plateau of Asia Minor, Name touching Paphlagonia and Bithynia

      north, Phrygia ,Y. and south, Cappadocia and Pont us southeast and east, about the headwaters of the Sangarios and the middle course of the Ilalys; (2) politically, to designate a large province of the Romans empire, including not merely the country Galatia, but also Paphlagonia and parts of Pont us, Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycaonia and Isauria. The name occurs in 1 Corinthians 16 1; Gal 1 2; 1 Pet 1 1, and perhaps 2 Timothy 4 10. Some writers assume that Galatia is also mentioned in Acts 16 6; 18 23; but the Greek there has the phrase "Galatic region" or "territory," though the EV has "Galatia"; and it must not be assumed without proof that "Galatic region" is synonymous with "Galatia." If e.g. a modern narrative mentioned that a traveler crossed British territory, we know that this means something quite different from crossing Britain. "Galatic region" has a different connotation from "Galatia"; and, even if we should find that geo graphically it was equivalent, the writer had some reason for using that special form.

      The questions that have to be answered are: (ti) In which of the two senses is "Galatia" used by Paul

      and Peter? (h) What did Luke mean by Galatic region or territory? These questions have not

      merely geographical import ; they bear 2. Ques- most closely, and exercise determining tions to Be influence, on many points in the biog- Answered raphy, chronology, missionary work

      and methods of Paul.

      //. Origin of the Name "Galatia." The name was introduced into Asia after 27S-277 BC, when a

      large body of migrating Cauls (Culi Uni

      1. The in Greek) crossed over from Europe at Gaulish the invitation of Nikomedes, king of Kingdom Bithynia; after ravaging a great part

      of Western Asia Minor they were grad ually confined to a district, and boundaries were fixed for them after 232 BC. Thus originated the independent state of Galatia, inhabited by three Gaulish tribes, Tolistobogioi, Tektosages and Trok- moi, with three city-centers, Pessinus, Ankyra and Tavia (Tavion in Strabo), who had brought their wives and families with them, and therefore con tinued to be a distinct Gaulish race and stock (which would have been impossible if they had come as simple warriors who took wives from the conquered inhabitants). The Gaulish language was apparently imposed on all the old inhabitants, who remained in the country as an inferior caste. The Calatai soon adopted the country religion, alongside of their own; the latter they retained at least as late as the 2d cent, after Christ, but it was politically important for them to maintain and exercise the powers of the old priesthood, as at, Pessinus, where the Galatai shared the office with the old priestly families.

      The Galatian state of the Three Tribes lasted

      till 25 BC, governed first by a council and by te-

      trarchs, or chiefs of the twelve divisions

      2. Trans- (four to each tribe) of the people, then, ference to after (53 BC, by three kings. Of these, Rome Deiotaros succeeded in establishing

      himself as sole king, by murdering tin- two other tribal kings; and after his death in 40 BC his power passed to Castor and then to Amyn- tas, 3(5-25 BC. Amyntas bequeathed his kingdom to Rome; and it was made a Romans province (Dion Cass. 4S, 33, 5; Strabo, 5(17, omits Castor). Amyn tas had ruled also parts of Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycao nia and Isauria. The new province included these parts, and to it were added Paphlagonia (5 BC, part of Pont us 2 BC (called Pont us Calaticus in dis tinction from Eastern Pont us, which was governed by King Polemon and styled Polemoniacus), and in (54 also Pont us Polemoniacus. Part of Lycaonia was non-Romans and was governed by King Antiochus; from 41 to 72 AD Laranda belonged to this district, which was distinguished as Anliochiana mjio from the Romans re/jio Li/c/ionta called Caldlica.

      This large province was divided into rcgioncs for administrative purposes; and the rci/ioncs coin cided roughly with the old national

      3. The divisions Pisidia, Phrygia (including Roman Antioch, Iconium, Apollonia), Lycaonia Province (including Derbe, Lystra and a district,

      organized on the village-system), etc. See Calder in Journal of Romans Ktmlicx, 1012. This province was called by the Romans Galatia, as being the kingdom of Amyntas (just like the prov ince Asia, which also consisted of a number of different countries as diverse and alien as those of province Galatia, and was so called because the Romans popularly and loosely spoke of the kings of that congeries of countries as kings of Asia, . The extent of both names, Asia and Galatia, in Romans language, varied with the varying bounds of each province. The name "Galatia" is used to indi cate the province, as it was at the moment, by Ptolemy, Pliny v. 146, Tacitus Hist, ii.9; Ann. xiii.





      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      g^atians, Ep. to

      . 5 ); later chroniclers, Syncellus, Eutropius, and ///*/. Any. Max. ct Balb. 7 (who derived it from earlier authorities, and used it in the old sense, not, the sense customary in their own time); and in inscriptions CJ L, III, 254, 272 (Kph. E/>. v.ol); ,l, 1 IDS, 1400, 3:52 ; V1I1, 1 1028 (Mommsen rightly, not Schmidt), 1S270, etc. It will be observed that these? are almost all Romans sources, and (as we shall see) express a purely Romans view. If Paul used the name "Galatia" to indicate the province, this would show that he consistently and naturally took a Romans view, used names in a Romans connota tion, and grouped his churches according to Romans provincial divisions; but that is characteristic of the apostle, who looked forward from Asia to Rome (Acts 19 21), aimed at imperial conquest and marched across the Empire from province to province (Macedonia, Achaia, Asia are always provinces to Paul). On the other hand, in the East and the Graeco-Asiatic world, the tendency was to speak of the province either as the Galatic Eparchia (as at Iconium in 54 AD, CIG, 3991), or by enumer- ation of its regiones (or a selection, of the regiones). The latter method is followed in a number of in scriptions found in the province (C1L, 111, /w/.s-.s/ w ). Xow let us apply these contemporary facts to the interpretation of the narrative of Luke.

      ///. The Narrative of Luke. The evangeliza tion of the province began in Acts 13 14. The stages are: (1) the audience in the 1. Stages of synagogue, vs 42 f; (2) almost the Evangeli- whole city, ver 44; (3) the whole zation of region, i.e. a large district which was Province affected from the capital (as the whole of Asia was affected from Ephesus

      19 10); (4) Iconium another city of this region: in 13 51 no boundary is mentioned; (5) a new region Lycaonia with two cities and surrounding district (14 6); (0) return journey to organize the churches in (a) Lystra, (/>) Iconium and Antioch (the secondary reading of WH, Kal ets Iubviov Kal ,i TMxei-av[k<ii cAn Ikunion kal Antiocheian], is right, distinguishing the two regions [a] Lycaonia, [1>] that of Iconium and Antioch); (7) progress across the region Pisidia, where no churches were founded (Pisidian Antioch is not in this region, which lies between Antioch and Pamphylia).

      Again (in 16 1-6) Paul revisited the two regiones: (1) Derbe and Lystra, i.e. m//o Lijcaonid Galat- icn, (2) the Phrygian and Galatic region, i.e. the region which was racially Phrygian and politically Galatic. Paul traversed both regions, making no new churches but only strengthening the ex isting disciples and churches. In 18 23 he again revisited the two ni/ioncs, and they are briefly enumerated: (1) the Galatic region (so called briefly by a traveler, who had just traversed Antiochiana aiid distinguished Galatica from it); (2) Phrygia. On this occasion he specially appealed, not to churches as in 16 6, but to disciples; it was a final visit and intended to reach personally every indi vidual, before Paul went away to Rome and the West. On this occasion the contribution to the poor of Jerus was instituted, and the proceeds later were; carried by Timothy and Gaius of Derbe (Acts

      20 4; 24 17; 1 Corinthians 16 1); this was a device 1o bind the new churches to the original center of the faith.

      These four churches are mentioned by Luke always as belonging to two regiones, Phrygia and

      Lycaonia; and each reyio is in one 2. The case described as Galatic, i.e. part of

      Churches the province Galatia. Luke did not Mentioned follow the Romans custom, as Paul did; by Luke he kept the custom of the Greeks and

      Asiatic peoples, and styled the province by enumerating its r calories, using the expression

      Galatic (as in Pont us Oalaticus and at Iconium, ("/(/, 3991) to indicate t he supreme unity of t he prov ince. By using this adjective about both m//om .s he marked his point, of view that all four chii -ches are included in the provincial unity.

      From Paul s references we gat her that he regarded the churches of Galatia as one group, converted together (4 13), exposed to the same influences and changing together (1 6.Samuel; 31; 4 9), naturally visited at one time by a traveler (1 8; 4 14). He never thinks of churches of Phrygia or of Lycaonia; only of province Galatia (as of provinces Asia, Macedonia, Achaia). Paul did not include in one class all the churches of one journey: he went di rect from Macedonia to Athens and Corinth, but classes the churches of Macedonia separate from those of Achaia. Troas and Laodicea and Colossae he classed with Asia (as Luke did Troas, Acts 20 4), Philippi with Macedonia, Corinth with Achaia. These classifications are true only of the Romans usage, not of early Greek usage. The custom of classifying according to provinces, universal in the fully formed church of the Christian age, was derived from the usage of the apostles (as Theodore Mopsuestia ex pressly asserts in his Coniin. on / //*/ Timothy [Swete, II, 121]; Harnack accepts this part of the statement [Vcrbri itung, 2d ed, I, 3S7; Expansion, II,_9t>]). His churches then belonged to the four provinces, Asia, Galatia, Achaia., Macedonia. There were no other Pauline churches; all united in the gift of money which was carried to Jerus (Acts 20 4; 24 17).

      IV. St. Paul s Use of "Galatians. "The people of the province of Galatia, consisting of many di verse races, when summed up together, were called Galatai, by Tacitus Ann. xv.6; Syncellus, when he says AiVyoDcrros TaXdrats (f>6povs tOero (Augouslos Galdlais pfiorous cl/icto), follows an older his torian describing the imposing of taxes on the province; and an inscription of Apollonia Phry- giae calls the people of the city Galatae (Lebas- Waddington, 1192). If Paul spoke to Philippi or Corinth or Antioch singly, he addressed them as Philippians, Corinthians, Antiochiana (Phil 4 15; 2 Corinthians 6 11), not as Macedonians or Achaians; but when he had to address a group of several churches (as Antioch, Iconium, Derbe and Lystra) he could use only the provincial unity, Galatae.

      All attempts to find in Paul s letter to the Gala tians any allusions that specially suit the character of the Gauls or Galatae have failed. The Gauls were an aristocracy in a land which they had con quered. They clung stubbornly to their own Celtic religion long a ft er t he t hue of Paul, even 1 hough t hey also acknowledged the power of the old goddess of the country. Thev spoke their own Celtic tongue. They were proud, even boastful, and independent. They kept their native law under the Empire. The "Galatians" to whom Paul wrote? had changed very quickly to a new form of religion, not from fickle ness, but from a certain proneness to a more oriental form of religion which exacted of them more; sac rifice of a ritual type. They needed to be called to freedom; they were submissive rather than arro gant. They spoke Greek. They were accustomed to the Graeco-Asiatic law: the law of adoption and inheritance which Paul mentions in his letter is not Romans, but Graeco-Asiatic, which in these depart ments w r as similar, with some differences; on this see the writer s Historical Commentary on Gal.

      ,V. M. RAMSAY

      GALATIANS, ga-la shanz. See preceding article.



      1. Position of the Dutch School

      2. Early Testimony

      Galatians, Ep. to



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary



      A) Summary of Contents 1. Outline

      2. Personal History

      Paul s Independent . ,postleship

      3. The Doctrinal Polemic (I ) Thesis

      (2) Main Argument

      (3) Appeal and Warning

      4. The ICthical Application Law of the Spirit of Life

      , r >. The Kpilogue

      B) Salient Poitits

      1. The Principles at Stake

      2. Present Stage of the ( ontroversy

      3. Paul s Depreciation of the Law

      4. The Personal Question

      C) Characteristics

      1. idiosyncrasy of the Kpistle

      2. Jewish Coloring


      1. Galatians and Komans

      2. Links with 1 and 2 Corinthians

      3. With the Corinthians-Romans Group

      4. With Oilier Croups of Kpistlcs f>. (ieneral Comparison


      1. Place and Time Interdependent

      2. Internal Kvidence

      3. Kxternal Data

      (1) (ialatia and the Galatians

      (2) Prima facie Sense ol Acts 16

      (3) The Grammar of Acts 16

      (4) Notes of Time in the Kpistle

      (, r >) Paul s Kenewed Struggle with Legalism

      (0) Kphesus or Corinth .

      (7) Paul s First (Coining to Galatia

      (5) Barnabas and t lie Galatians (II) The Two Antiochs

      (10) Wider iieariiigs of the Problem LITE RAT CUE

      When and to whom, precisely, this letter was written, it is difficult to say; its authorship and purpose arc unmistakable. One might conceive it addressed by the apostle Paul, in its main tenor, to almost any church of his gentile mission attracted to Judaism, at any point, within the years cir -If) til) AD. Some plausibly argue that it was the earliest, others place it among the later, of the PaulineEpis- tles. This consideration dictates the order of our inquiry, which proceeds from the plainer to the more involved and disputable parts of the subject.

      /. The Authorship. The Tubingen criticism of the last century recognized the four major epistles

      of Paul as fully authentic, and made 1. Position them the corner-stone of its const ruc- of the t ion of NT history. Only Bruno Bauer

      Dutch (Kritik. d. paulin. ttriefe, 1850-f)2)

      School attacked them in this sense, while

      several other critics accused them of serious interpolations; but these attempts made little impression. Subsequently a group of Dutch scholars, beginning with Loman in his Quaestiones Paulinae (1882) and represented by Van Manen in the; KB (art. "Paul"), have; denied all the canonical epistles to the genuine Paul. They postulate a gradual development in NT ideas covering the first century andahalf after Christ, and treat the exist ing letters as "catholic adaptations" of fragmentary pieces from the, apostle s hand, produced by a school of "Paulinists" who carried their master s principles far beyond his own intentions. On this theory, Gal, with its advanced polemic against the law, ap proaching the position of Marcion (140 AD), was a work of the early 2d cent. Edwin Johnson in Eng land (Antigua Mater, 1887), and Steck in Germany (Galaterbrief, 1888), are the only considerable scholars outside of Holland who have adopted this hypothesis; it is rejected by critics so radical as Scholten and Schmiedel (see the art. of the latter on (lalatians" in EK}. Knowling has searchingly examined the position of the Dutch school in his Witness of the Epistles (1892) it is altogether too arbitrary and uncontrolled by historical fact to be entertained; see Jiilicher s or Zahn s Introduction to NT (ET), to the same effect. Attempts to dis member this writing, and to appropriate it for other

      hands and later times than those- of the apostle Paul, are idle in view of its vital coherence and the pas sionate force with which the author s personality has stamped itself upon his work; the Paulinum pcctiis speaks in every line. The two contentions on which the letter turns concerning Paul s apostle ship, and the circumcision of gentile Christians belonged to the apostle s lifetime: in the fifth and sixth decades these were burning questions; by the 2d cent, the church had left, them far behind.

      Early Christianity gives clear and ample testi mony to this document. Marcion placed it at the head of his Apostolikon (1-40 AD) ; Justin 2. Early Martyr, Athenagoras, Melito, quoted Testimony it about the same time. It is echoed by Ignatius (Pliiltul., i) and Polycarp (Philip., iii and v) a generation earlier, and seems to have been used by contemporary gnostic teachers. It stands in line with the other epistles of Paul in the oldest I, at, Syriac and Egyp translated 3 , and in the Mura- torian (Horn) Canon of the 2d cent. It comes full into view as an integral part of the new Scripture in Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian at the close of this period. No breath of suspicion as to the authorship, integrity or apostolic authority of the Ep. to the Gal has reached us from ancient I lines.

      II. Matter of the Epistle.

      A double note of war sounds in the address and greet ing (,1 1.4). Astonishment replaces the customary thanksgiving (vs 0-10): The Galatians 1) Sum- ari> listening to preachers of "another gos- ar-i7 /->f pel" (vs 0.7) and traducers of the apostle

      rnary o. (vs s 10) w hom he declares "anathema."

      Contents Paul has therefore two objects in writing

      tn fi ndii iiti Ininsi-lf, and tn cliitr and rein force his doctrine. The first he pursues from 1 1 1 to 2 21; the second from 3 1 to 5 12. Appropriate moral ex hortations follow in 5 13 6 10. The 1 Outline closing paragraph (6 11-17) resumes in cisively the purport of the letter. Per sonal, argumentative, and hortatory matter interchange with the freedom natural in a letter to old friends.

      / mil s iniii-pcndi nt apostleship. Paul asserts himself for his gospel s sake, by showing that his commission was God-given and complete (vs 11.12). On 2. Personal four decisive moments in his course he History dwells for this purpose as regards the

      f-i.-i l__0. 91 second manifestly (ver 20), as to others ^ rr O .r probably, in correction of misstatements : [4:12-20; (1) A thorough-paced Judaist and per-

      6: 171) secutor (vs 13.14), Paul was supernaturally

      converted to Christ (ver 1~>), and received at conversion his charge for the Gentiles, about which he consulted no one (vs 10.17).

      (2) Three years later he "made acquaintance with Cephas" in Jerus and saw James besides, but no "other of the apostles" (vs IS. 19). For long he, was known only by report to "the churches of Judaea" (vs 21-24).

      (3) At the end of "fourteen years" he " went up to Jerus," with Barnabas, to confer about the " liberty" of gentile believers, which was endangered by "false breth ren" (2 !-">). Instead of supporting the demand for the circumcision of the "Greek" Titus (ver 3), the "pillars" there recognized the sufficiency and completeness of Paul s "gospel of the uncircumcision " and the validity of his apostleship (vs 0-Samuel). They gave "right hands of fellowship" to himself and Barnabas on this understand ing (vs 9.10). The freedom of gentile Christianity was secured, and Paul had not "run in vain."

      (4) At Antioch, however, Paul and Cephas differed (ver 11). Cephas was induced to withdraw from the common church-table, and carried "the rest of the Jews," including Barnabas, with him (vs 12.13). "The truth of the gospel," with Cephas own sincerity, was compro mised by this "separation," which in effect "compelled the Gentiles to Judaize" (vs 13.14). Paul therefore reproved Cephas publicly in the speech reproduced by vs 14-21, the report of which clearly states the evangeli cal position and the ruinous consequences (vs 18.21) of reestablishing "the law."

      (1) Thesis. The doctrinal polemic was rehearsed in the autobiography (2 3-5.11-12). In 2 16 is laid down the thesis of the epistle: "A man is not justified by the works of law but through faith in Jesus Christ." This proposition is (n) demonstrated from experience and history in 3 1 4 7; then (b) enforced by

      3. Doc trinal Polemic (3:1-

      ___story in J -5:12) 4 s 5 12.

      (2; Main argument. (al) From his own experience (2 19-21) Paul passes to that of the readers, who are "bewitched" to forget "Christ cruci-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Galatians, Ep. to

      fled" (3 1)! Had their life in "the Spirit" come through " works of the law" or the " hearing of faith" ? Will the flesh consummate what the Spirit began (vs 2-5) > (o2) Abraham, they are told, is the father of God s people; but the men of faith are Abraham s true heirs (vs6-9). "The law" curses every transgressor; Scrip ture promised righteousness through faith for the very reason that justification by legal "doing" is impossible (vs 10-12). "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law" in dying the death it declared "accursed" (ver 13). Thus He "conveyed to the nations "the promise of the Spirit " pledged to them through believing Abraham (vs 7 14). (o3) The " testament " God gave to"Abraham and his seed" (a single "seed," observe) is unalterable. The Mosaic law, enacted 4:50 years later, could not nullify this instrument (vs 15-17 AV). Nullified it would have been, had its fulfilment turned on legal performance instead of Divine "grace" (ver 18). (a4) " Why then the law ? " Sin required it, pending the accomplishment of "the promise." Its promulgation through interme diaries marks its inferiority (vs 19.20). V, ith no power to give life, it served the part of a jailer guarding us till "faith came," of "the paedagogus" training us for Christ (vs 21-25). (ao) But now "in Christ." Jew and Greek alike, "ye are all sons of God through faith"; being such, "you are Abraham s seed" and heirs in terms of the promise (vs 26-29). The infant heirs, "

      redemption accomplished (vs ti.7).

      The demonstration is complete; 3 1 4 7 forms the core of the epistle. The growth of the Christian con sciousness has been traced from its germ in Abraham to its (lower in the church of all nations. The Mosaic law formed a disciplinary interlude in the process, which has been all along a life of faith. Paul concludes where he began (32), by claiming the Spirit as witness to the full salvation of the Gentiles; cf Horn 8 1-27; 2 Corinthians 3 4-18; Eph 1 115.14. From 4 s onward to 5 12, theargu- mentis pressed home by appeal, illustration and warning.

      (:{) Appeal and warnin:/. (bi) After " knowing God." would the Galatians return to the bondage in which ignorantly they served as gods "the elements" of Na ture? (vs 8.9). Their adoption of Jewish "seasons points to this backsliding (vs 10.11). (l>2) Paul s anxiety prompts the entreaty of vs 12-20, in winch lie recalls his fervent reception by his readers, deplores their present alienation, and confesses his perplexity. (6:i) Observe that Abraham had two sons "after the flesh" and "through promise" (vs 21-23); those who want to be under law are choosing the part of Ishmael: "Hagar" stands for the present Jerusalem in her bondage; the Jerusalem above is free she is our mother! 24-28 31). The fate of Hagar and Ishmael pictures the issue of legal subjection (vs 29.30): "Stand fast there fore" (5 1). (64) The crucial moment comes at 5 2: the Galatians are half-persuaded (vs 7.Samuel); they will fatally commit themselves, if they consent to be cir cumcised. This will sever them from Christ, and bind them to complete observance of Moses law : In w or grace by one or the other they must stand (vs 3-5). "Cir cumcision, uncircumcision" these "count for nothing in Christ Jesus" (ver 6). Paul will not believe in the defec tion of those who ran so "well"; "judgment" will fall on their disturber (ys 7-10.12). Persecution marks himself as no cireumciskmist (ver 11)!

      The ethical application is contained in the phrase of jm 8 2, "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus." (1) Love guards Christian liberty from


      4. The Ethical Application

      (1) Love guar

      license; it fulfils the whole law in a single word (5 13-15). (2) The Spirit, who imparts freedom, guides the free man s "walk." Flesh and spirit are oppugnant


      Kings T.^c^iVi^ principles: deliverance from "the flesh" {0 :io O.lUJ anc j j ts " W orks" is found in possession by "the Spirit," who bears in those He rules His proper "fruit." Crucified with Christ and living in the Spirit, the Christian man keeps God s law with out bondage under it (5 16-2(5). (3) In cases of unwary fall men of the Spirit will know how to "restore the lapsed, fulfilling Christ s law and mindful of their own weakness (6 1-5). (4) Teachers have a peculiar claim on the taught; to ignore this is to mock God. Men will "reap corruption" or "eternal life," as in such matters they sow to the flesh or to the Spirit. Be patient till the harvest! (vs 6-10).

      The autograph conclusion (ver 11) exposes the sinister motive of the circumcisionists, who are ashamed of tin- cross, the Christian s only boast (vs 1: Kings Thf 15). Such men are none of " the Israel of

      " ., God!" (ver 16). "The brand of Jesus" is

      Jipuogue now on p au i s body ; at their peril " hence- (6:11-18) forth" will men trouble him! (ver 17). The benediction follows (ver 18).

      The postscript reveals the inwardness of the legalists agitation. They advocated circumcision from policy more than from conviction, hoping to conciliate Judaism and atone for accepting the

      Nazarcnc to hide the shame of the cross by cap turing for the Law the gentile- churches. They

      attack Paul because he stands in the .ft) Salient way of this attempt. Their policy is Points treason; it surrenders to the world that

      cross of Christ, to which the world for its salvation must unconditionally submit. The grace of God the one source of salvation (1 3;

      2 21; 5 4), the cross of Christ its

      1. The sole ground (1 4; 2 19-21; 3 13; 6 Principles 14), faith in the Good News its all- at Stake sufficient means (2 10.20; 3 2.5-9.23-26;

      5 5), the Spirit its effectuating power (3 2-o ; 4 G.7; 5 o.l(>-2f>; 6 Samuel)- -hence emanci pation from the Jewish law, and the full status of sons of God open to the Gentiles (2 4.0.10-19; 3 10-14; 3 284 9. 20-31; 5 IS; 6 15): these con nected principles are at stake iti the contention; they make up the doctrine of the epistle.

      Circumcision is now proposed by the Judaists as a supplement to fnitk in Chrixt, as the qualification

      forsonship to Abraham and communion

      2. Present with the apostolic church (3 7.29). Stage of the After the Council at Jems, they no Controversy longer say outright, Except ye be

      circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved" (Acts 15 1). Paul s Galatian converts, they admit, "have begun in the Spirit"; they bid them "be perfected" and attain the full Christian status by conforming to Moses "Christ will profit" them much more, if they add to their faith circumcision (3 3; 5 2; ef Romans 3 1). This insidious proposal might seem to be in keeping with the findings of the Council; Peter s action at An- tioch lent color to it. Such a grading of the Cir cumcision and Uncircumcision within the church offered a tempting solution of the legalist contro versy; for it appeared to reconcile! the universal destination of the gospel with the inalienable pre rogatives of the sons of Abraham. Paul s reply is, that believing Gentiles are already Abraham s seed" nay, sons and heirs of God; instead of adding anything, circumcision would rob them of everything they have won in Christ; instead of going on to perfection by its aid, they would draw back unto perdition.

      Paul carries the war into the enemies camp, when he argues, (a) that the law of Moses brought con demnation, not blessing, on its sub-

      3. Paul s jects(3 10-24); and (6) thai instead of Deprecia- completing the work of faith, its part tion of the in the Divine economy was subordinate Law (3 19-25). It was a temporary pro vision, due to man s sinful unripeness

      for the original covenant (3 19.24; 4 4)._ The Spirit of sonship, now manifested in the Gentiles, is the infallible sign that the promise- made to man kind in Abraham has been fulfilled. The whole position of the legalists is undermined by the use the apostle makes of the Abrahamic covenant.

      The religious and the personal questions of the epistle are bound up together; this 5 2 clearly in dicates. The latter naturally emerges

      4. The first (1 1.1 Iff). Paul s authority must Personal be overthrown, if his disciples are to be Question Judai/ed. Hence the campaign of de traction against him (cf 2 Corinthians 10-12).

      The line of defence indicat es the nat ure of t he at t ack . Paul was said to be a second-hand, second-rate apostle, whose knowledge of Christ and title to preach Him came from Cephas and the mother church. In proof of this, an account was given of his career, which he corrects in 1 13 2 21. Ce phas" was held up (cf 1 Corinthians 1 12) as the chief of the apostles, whose primacy Paul had repeatedly acknowledged; and "the pillars" at Jems were quoted as maintainers of Mosaic rule and authorities

      Galatians, Ep. to



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      for the additions to be made to Paul s imperfect, gospel. Paul himself, it was insinuated, "preaches circumcision where it suits him; he is a plausible time-server (1 10; 511; cf Acts 16 3; 1 Corinthians 9 19-21). The apostle s object in his self-defence is not to sketch his own life, nor in particular to re count his visits to Jerus, but to prove his independ ent apostleship and his consistent, maintenance of gentile rights. He states, therefore, what really happened on the critical occasions of his contact with Peter and the Jerus church. To begin with, he received his gospel and apostolic oflico from Jesus Christ directly, and apart from Peter (1 13-20); he was subsequently recognized by "the pillars" as apostle, on equality with Peter (2 0-9); he had finally vindicated his doctrine when it was assailed, in spite of Peter (2 11-12). The adjustment of Paul s recollections wit li Luke s narrat ive is a matter of dispute, in regard both to 1 he conference of 2 1-10 and the encounter of 2 11-21; to these points we shall return, iv.3 (1 ), (.">).

      This is a letter of expostulation. Passion and argument are blended in it. Hot indignation and

      righteous scorn (1 7-9; 4 17; 5 10. O Charac- 12; 6 12. b -i), tender, wounded alTec- teristics tion (4 11-20), dee]) sincerity and

      manly integrity united with the loftiest consciousness of spiritual authority (1 10-12.20; 2 l-o. If; 5 2; 6 17), above all a consuming devo tion to the person and cross of the Redeemer, fill these few pages with an incomparable wealth and glow of Christ inn emot ion. The power of mind the

      epistle exhibits matches its largeness

      1. Idiosyn- of heart. Romans indeed carries out the crasy of the argument with greater breadth and Epistle theoretic completeness; but Gal excels

      in pungency, incisiveness, and debating force 1 . The style is that of Paul at the summit of his powers. Its spiritual elevation, its vigor and resource, its subtlety and irony, poignancy and pathos, the m riridd that animates the whole, have made this letter a classic of religious controversy. The blemishes of Paul s composition, which con tribute to his mastery of effect, are conspicuous here his abrupt turns and apostrophes, and .some times difficult ellipses (2 4-10.20; 4 10-20; 5 13), awkward parentheses and entangled periods (2 1- 10. is; 3 1(1. 20; 4 2f>), and outburst of excessive vehemence (1 south9; 5 12). The anti-legalist po lemic gives a special ( )T coloring to the epistle; the apostle meets his adversaries on their own ground

      In 3 10.19-20; 4 21-31, we have ex-

      2. Jewish amplesof the rabbinical exegesis Paul Coloring had learned from his Jewish masters.

      These texts should be read in part as argiimenta <i<l hotninem; however peculiar in form such Pauline passages may be, they always contain sound reasoning.

      ///. Relations to Other Epistles. (1) The con nection of Gal with Romans is patent; it is not sufficiently understood how pervasive that connec tion is and into what manifold detail it extends. The similarity of doctrine ami doctrinal vocabulary manifest in Gal 2 13- -6 10 and Romans 1 10 8 39 is accounted for by the Judaistic controversy on which Paul was engaged for so long, and by the fact that this discussion touched the heart of his gospel and raised questions in regard to which his mind was made up from the beginning (1 If). 10), on which he would therefore always express himself in much the same way. Broadly speaking, the differ ence is that Romans is didactic and abstract, where Gal is personal and polemical; that the former presents a measured and rounded development of concep tions projected rapidly in the latter under the stress of controversy. The emphasis lies in Romans on justi fication by faith; in Gal on the freedom of the

      Christian man. The contrast of tone is sympto matic of a calmer mood in the writer the lull which follows the storm; it, suits the different, address of the two epistles.

      I ii sides (lie correspondence of purport, there is a verbal resemblance to Romans pervading the tissue of (ial.und traceable in its mannerisms and incidental 1. Gala- expressions. Outside of the identical quo- tians and tations, we find more than 40 Or locutions, some of them rare in the language, common to these two and occurring in these only of Paul s epistles including the words ren dered "bear" (Romans 11 IS and (ial 5 1<>, etc); " bless ing" or "ju at illation" (makarismox), "divisions" (Romans 1617; (ial 5 20); "fail" or "fall from" (rkpiptu) ; "labour oil" or "upon" (of persons), "passions" (patht- iiiniii, in this sense); " set free " or " deliver " (< /. ittlu rdu) ; "shut up" or "conclude," and "shut out" or "exclude"; "travail [together]," and such phrases as "die to (with dative), "hearing of faith," "if possible," "put on [the Lord .Jesus] Christ." "those who do such tilings," "what sail h the Scripture . " "where then?" (rhetorical), "why any longer? 1 The list would lie greatly extended by adding expressions distinctive of this pair of letters that occur sporadically elsewhere in Paul. The kinship of Gal- Romans in vocabulary and vein of expression resembles that existing between Col-Kph or 1-2 Thessalonians; it is twice as strong proportionately as that of 1-2 Corinthians. Not only the same current of thought, but with it. much the same stream of language was running through Paul s mind in writing these two epistles.

      The association of (ial with the two Corinthian letters, though less intimate than that of Gal-Romans, is unmistakable.

      We count 23 distinct locutions shared by 2 Corinthians alone (in its 13 chapters) with (ial. and 20 such shared with 1 Corinthians

      (l(i chapters,) a larger proportion for theformer. 2. Links Among the (ial-1 Corinthians peculiarities are the,

      T.MfVi 1 onrl 9 sayings. "A little leaven." etc. " circum- wuniana^ <.j s ion j s nothing," etc, and the phrases, Corinthians "be not deceived," "it, is manifest," (,/</

      as predicate to a sentence), "known by Cod. profit nothing" and "to be something," "scandal of the cross," "the spiritual" (of persons), "they that are Christ s [of Christ Jesus]." Peculiar to (ial-2 Corinthians are "another gospel" and "false brethren," " brings into bondage," "devour" and "zealously seek" or "am jeal- ousover" (of persons) ; " a new creation," "confirm "or "ratify" (/,///<;<);; "I am perplexed," the antithesis of "sowing" and "reaping" (fig. i; the phrase "on the contrary" or "contrariwise " (t ou nan tion), etc. The con ception of the "two covenants" (or "testaments") is conspicuous in both epistles ((ial 3 17-21; 4 21-31; 2 Corinthians 3 s-lSi, and does not recur in Paul; in each case tlie ideas of "law" (or "letter"), "bondage." "death," are associated with the one. ilinthi l;, -, of "spirit " "free dom," "life," with the other, (ial 3 l:i ("Christ .... made a curse for us") is matched by 2 Corinthians 5 21 ("made sin for us"); in (ial 2 U) and 6 14 we find I aul "crucified to the world" in the cross of his Master and " Christ " alone " living in" him; in 2 Corinthians 5 ll.l.~> thN experience becomes a universal law for Christians; and where in (ial 6 17 the apostle appears as from hence forth .... bearing in his body the brand of Jesus, in 2 Corinthians 4 10 lie is "always bearing about in" his "body the dying of Jesus."

      These identical or closely congruous trains of thought and turns of phrase, varied and dominant as t hey are, speak for some near connection between the two writings. By its list of vices in 5 19.20 Gal curiously, and somewhat intricately, links itself at once with 2 Corinthians and Horn (see 2 Corinthians 12 20; Horn 13 l:>; 16 17). Gal is allied by argument and doctrine with Romans, and by temper and senti ment, with 2 Corinthians. The storm of feeling agitating our epistle blows from the same quarter, reaches the same height, and engages the same emotions with those which animate 2 Corinthians 10-13.

      If we add to the 43 locutions confined in the Pauline

      Epp. to Gal-Romans the; 23 such of (ial-2 Corinthians, the 20 of

      (ial-1 Corinthians, the 14 that range over Gal-

      3. With the Uom-2 Corinthians, the 15 of Gal-Uom-1 Corinthians, the

      Corinthians- /. of V 11 ", ,"^ ( " or and , thu J l , runnin - p through all four, we get a total of 133

      words or phrases (apart from OT quota- Group tions) specific to Gal in common with one

      or more of the Corinthians-Romans group an aver age, that is, of close upon 3 for each chapter of those other epistles.

      With the other groups of Pauline letters Gal is associated by ties less numerous and strong, yet




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Galatians, Ep. to

      4. With Other

      marked enough to suggest, in conjunction with the general style, a common authorship.

      The proportion of locutions peculiar to Gal and the :M group (Col-Philem-Eph -Phil i is L to each of their l.~> chapters. Prnnnc nf The more noticeable of these are in (ial- Lrrpup. ( , ()1 . .. ek , m(>nts of tlu> wor i ( i," un d the

      .hpistles maxim, " Then- is no .Jew nor Greek, "etc,

      associated with tin- " putting on of Christ " ("tin 1 new man"); "fulness of the time" (or "seasons"; and "householders of faith [of God]," also "Christ loved me (the church] and gave up himself for me [her]," in Gal-Kph; "he that supph e-th [your supplying of, vpi- c/ti >rfi.ilii, the Spirit," and "vain-glory" (kcnodoxfa), in Gal-Phil; "redeem" (exayordzu) and "inheritance" are peculiar to Gal with Col-Eph together; the association of the believer s "inheritance" with "the Spirit" in Gal- Kph is a .significant point of doctrinal identity.

      The Thessalonians and Timothy-Tit (1st and 4th) groups are out liers in relation to Gal, judged by vocabulary. There is little to associate our epistle with either of these com binations, apart from pervasive Corinthians-Kom phrases and the Pauline complexion. There are 5 such expressions regis tered for the 8 chapters of 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 7 for the 1:5 of

      1 and 2 Timothy and Tit just over one to two chapters for each group. While, the, verbal coincidences in these two cases are, proportionately, but one-half so many as those connecting Gal with the :id group of epistles and one-lift h or one-sixth of those linking it to the 2d group, they are also less characteristic; the most striking is the contrast of "well-doing" (kntuixiiffi) with "fainting" or "wearying" (cykakao) in Gal 6 9 and 2 Thessalonians 3 13.

      No other writing of Paul reflects the whole man so fully as this -his spiritual, emotional, intellectual,

      practical, and even physical, idiosyn- 5. General crasy. We see less of the apostle s Comparison tenderness, but more of his strength

      than in Phil; less of his inner, mystic experiences, more of the critical turns of his career; less of his "fears," more of his "fightings," than in

      2 Corinthians. While the 2d letter to Timothy lifts the curtain from the closing stage of the apostle s min istry, Gal throws a powerful light upon its begin ning. The Pauline theology opens to us its heart in this document. The apostle s message of deliver ance from sin through faith in the crucified Re deemer, and of the new life in the Spirit growing from this root, lives and speaks; we see it. in Gal as a working and fighting theology, while in Romans it peacefully expands into an ordered system. The immediately saving truth of Christianity, the gospel of the Gospel, finds its most trenchant utterance in this epistle; here we learn "the word of 1 lie cross as Paul received it from the living Saviour, and de fended it at t he crisis of his work.

      IV. The Destination and Date. The question of the people to whom, is bound tip wit li that of the

      time at which, the Epistle to the Gala- 1. Place tians was written. Kadi goes to de- and Time 1 ermine the other. The expression Inter- the first time" (to proleron) of 4 13

      dependent presumes Paid to have been twice

      with the readers previously for the first occasion, see 4 13-15; for the second, 1 9; 6 3. The explanation of Round (Dale of Kings[>. to Gal, 1906), that the apostle intended to distinguish his first arrival at the several (south) Galatian cities from his return in the course of the same journey (Acts 14 21- 23), cannot be accepted: Derbe, the limit of the expedition, received Paul and Barnabas but once on that round, and in retracing their steps the mis sionaries were completing an interrupted work, whereas Gal 4 13 implies a second, (list inct visitat ion of the churches concerned as a whole; in Acts 15 3t> Paul looks back to the journey of Acts 13 1414 20 as one event.

      Now the apostle revisited theS. Galatian churches in starting on the 2d missionary tour (Acts 16 1-5). Consequently, if his "Galatians" were Christians of I isidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe (the south Galatian hypothesis), the letter was written in the further course of the 2d tour -from Mace donia or Corinth about the time of 1 and 2 Thessalonians

      (so Zahn, Intro to the. NT, I, ETi, or from Antioch in the interval between the 2d and 3d journeys (so Ramsay); for on this latter journey (Acts 18 23) Paul (ex hyp.) traversed the [south] Galatian country a third time. On the other hand, if they were people of Galatia proper, i.e. of X. (Old) Galatia, the epistle cannot be earlier than the occasion of Acts 18 23, when Paul touched a second time "the Galatian country," which, on this supposition, he had evan gelized in traveling from south Galatia to Troas during the previous tour (Acts 16 0-Samuel). On the north Gala tian hypothesis, the letter was dispatched from Ephesus duringPaul s long residence there (Acts 19; so most interpreters, ancient and modern), in which case it heads the 2d group of the epistles; or later, from Macedonia or Corinth, and shortly before the writing of the Epistle to the Romans (thus Lightfoot, Salmon, A. L. Williams and others.).

      Per contra, the earlier date, if proved independ ently, carries with it the south Galatian, the later date the north Galatian theory. The subscription of theTR "written from Rome," rests on inferior MS author ity and late Patristic tradition. Clemen, with no suggestion as to ]>laci of origin, assigns to the writing a date subsequent to the termination of the 3d mis sionary tour (55 or 57 AD), inasmuch as the epistle reflects the controversy about the Law, which in Romans is comparatively mild, at an acute, and, there fore (he supposes), an advanced stage.

      Lightfoot (ch iii of Intro to Coin in.) placed Gal

      in the 2d group of the epistles between 2 Corinthians and

      Romans, upon considerations drawn from

      2. Internal "the style and character" of the epistle. Evidence His argument might be strengthened

      by a detailed linguistic analysis (see III, 1-3, above)- The more minutely one com pares Gal with Romans and 1 and 2 Corinthians, t he more these four are seen to form a continuous web, the product of the same experience in the writer s mind and the same situation in the church. This presumption, based on internal evidence, must be tested by exam ination of the topographical and chronological data. (1) Cidldlia and the Cnlaluuis. The double sense of these terms obtaining in current use has been

      shown in the art. on GALATIA; Stein-

      3. External maim sets out the evidence at large Data in his essay on Der /,< .si rhn /.s des

      Galaterbricfes, (51-70 (1<)OS); see also A. L. Williams Intro to Gal in Cumhr. (lr Test. (1910). Romans authors of the period in using these expressions commonly thought of provincial Gala tia, 1 which then embraced in addition to Galatia proper a large tract of Southern IMirygia and Ly- caonia, reaching from I isidian Antioch in the west to Derbe in the east; but writers of Asia Minor leaned to the older local and national usage, accord ing to which "Galatia" signified the north-central highlands of the peninsula, on both sides of the river llalys, in which the invading Galatae had settled long before this time. (On their history see the previous art.) It is asserted that Paul strictly fol lowed the official, as against the popular, usus lo~ quenill in these matters a questionable dictum (see A. L. Williams, op. cit., xix, xx, or Steinmann s Leserkreis, 7S-104), in view of Gal 1 21.22 (note the Greek double article), to go no farther. There was nothing in Paul s Romans citi/enship to make him a precisian in a point like this. Ramsay has proved that all four cities of Acts 13 14^14 23 were by this time included in provincial Galatia. Their inhabitants might therefore, ollicially, be styled "Galatians" (d alatac); it does not follow that this

      1 Schtirer seems to bo right, however, in maintaining that "Galatia" was only the abbreviated designation for the province, named a purtr i>oti<>ri, and that in more formal description it, was styled "Galatia, Pisidia, Phry- gia," etc.

      Galatians, Ep. to



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      was a fit or likely compollation for Paul to use. Jiilichcr says this would have been a piece of "had taste" on his part. The attachment of the .southern districts (Phrygian, Pisidian, Lycaonian) to Ciala- tia was recent Derbe had been annexed so late as the year 41 and artificial. Supposing t hat their Romans "colonial" rank made the designation "Gala tians" agreeable to citizens of Antioch or Lystra, there was little in it to appeal to Iconians or Derbeans (cf Schmiedel, in En, col. 1004).

      (2) Primn fticie^scnse of Arts 16 6. The " Oalatian country" (Galatike c/nlm) is mentioned by Luke, with careful repetition, in Acts 16 and 18 23. Luke at any rate was not tied to imperial usage; he distinguishes "Phrygia" from "Asia" in Acts 2 9.10, although Phry- gia was administratively parceled out between Asia and (ialatia. When therefore "Asia" is opposed in 16 <i to "the Phrygian and Galatian country" (or " Phrygia and (ialatian country," Zahn), we presume that the three terms of locality bear alike a non-official sense, so that the "Galatian country" means Old (ialatia (or some part of it) lying to the X.Kings., as "Asia" means the nar rower Asia west of " Phrygia." On this presumption we understand that Paul and Silas, after completing their visitation of " the cities " of the former tour (Acts 16 4.f>; cf 15 :{<>, in conjunction with 13 14 14 2:5), since they were forbidden to proceed westward and "speak the word in Asia," turned their faces to the region first Phrygian, then Galatian that stretched northward into new territory, through which they traveled toward "Mysia" and "Bithynia" (,er 7). Thus ver fills in the space between the south (ialatia covered by vs 4 and f>, and the Mysian-Bithynian border where we find the travelers in ver 7. I pon this, the ordinary construction of Luke s somewhat involved sentence, north (ialatia was entered by Paul on his 2d tour; he retra versed, more completely, " the (ialatian region " at the commencement of the :id tour, when he found "disciples" there (Acts 18 23) whom he had gathered on the previous visit.

      (.Samuel) Tin tjrnwmiir of Arts 16<>. In the interpre tation of the Lukan passages proposed by Kamsay. ver Kia, detached from !(> ), is read as the completion of vs 1-5 ( And they went through the Phrygian . . . . region. They were forbidden by the IToly (ihost .... in Asia, and came over against Mysia, etc); and "the Phrygian and (ialatian region" means the southwestern division of Provincia (ialatia, a district at once Phrygian (ethnically) and (ialatian (politically i. The combina tion of two local adjs., under a common art .. to denote the same country in different respects, if exceptional in (ir idiom (15 41 and 27 - r > illustrate the usual force of this collocation), is clearly possible the one strictly geo graphical expression, "the Ituraean and Trachonite country" in Luke 3 1, unfortunately, is also ambiguous. But the other difficulty of grammar involved in the new rendering of Acts 16 <> is insuperable: the severance of the participle, "having been forbidden" (k<ilut/tvnt<-x), from the introductory vb., "they went through" (i/ifl- tlioii), wrenches the sentence to dislocation: the aorist participle in such connection "must contain, if not something antecedent to they went, at least something synchronous with it, in no case a tiling subsequent to it, if all the rules of grammar and all sure understanding of language are not to be given up" (Schmiedel, Eli, col. 1599; endorsed in Moullon s I roli-ij. to Crninmnr of A 7 (Ir, i:?4; see also Chase in Kspus, IV, viii. 404 1 1. and ix, :W9-42). Acts 10 29 ("[ camo .... when I was sent for") affords a grammatical to 16 <> ( They went through .... since thev were hindered ).

      /aim s position is peculiar (Intro to ., T , I, 104-202). Rejecting Ramsay s explanation of Acts 16 0, and of 18 23 (where R. sees Paul a tit in! time crossing south (ialatia), and maintaining that Luke credits the apostle with suc cessful work in X. (Ialatia, he holds, notwithstanding, the south Galatian view of the epistle. This involves the para dox that Paul in writing to "the churches of (ialatia" ignored those of north (ialatia to whom the title properly belonged an incongruence which Ramsay escapes by denying that Paul had set foot in Old (ialatia. in the 1st ed of the Kinlritumj Zahn had supposed north and south (.ialatia together included in the address; this supposition is contrary to the fact that the readers form a homoge neous body, the fruit of a single mission (4 1. *), and are affected simultaneously by the same disturbance (1 6; 5 7-9). Associating the letter in 2d ed with south Galatians alone, Zahn suggests that, while Paul had labored in north (ialatia and found "disciples" there on his return, these were too few and scattered to form "churches" an esi i- mate scarcely in keeping with Luke s phrase 5 7-9 " all the disciples" (18 23), and raising a distinction between "dis ciples" and "churches" foreign to the historian s usage (sec Acts 6 2; 9 19; 14 20). We must choose between north and south Galatia; and if churches existed among the people of the north at the time of writing, then the north erners claim this title by right of use and wont and the epistle with it. The reversal of "Galatian and Phry- gia[n]" in Acts 18 2.3, as compared with 16 0, implies that the apostle on the. 3d tour struck "the Galatiap

      country" first, traveling this time directly north from Syriac ian Antioch, and turned westward toward Phrygia when lie had reached Old Galatia; whereas his previous route had brought him westward along the highroad traversing south (ialatia, until he turned northward at a point not far distant from Pisidian Antioch, to reach north Galatia through Phrygia from the southwest. See the Map of Asia Minor.

      (4) Notes of lime in the epistle. The "3 years" of 1 IS and the "14 years" of 2 1 are both seemingly counted from Paul s conversion, (a) The syn chronism of the conversion with the murder of Stephen and the free action of the high priest against the Nazarenes (Acts 9 2, etc), and of Saul s visit to Jerus in the 3d year thereafter with Aretas rule in Damascus (2 Corinthians 11 32.33), forbid our placing these two events further back than 36 and 38 at furthest, 3"> and 37 AD (see Turner on "Chronology of the XT" in IIDB, as against the earlier dating). (b) This calculation brings us to 4S-49 as the year of the conference! of Gal 2 1-10 a date precluding the association of that meeting with the errand to Jerus related in Acts 11 30 and 12 2o, while it suits the identification of the former with the council of Acts 15. Other indications converge on this as the critical epoch of Paul s apostleship. The expe dition to Cyprus and south (ialatia (Acts 13,14) had revealed in Paul signs of the apostle which the chiefs of the Judaean church now recognized (Gal 2 7 It; cf Acts 15 12), and gave him the ascendency which he exercised at this crisis; up to the time of Acts 13 1 "Saul" was known but as an old perse cutor turned preacher ((lal 1 23), one of the band of "prophets and teachers" gathered round Barna bas at Antioch. The previous visit of Barnabas and Saul to Jerusalem (Acts 11,12) had no ostensible object beyond thai of famine-relief. From Acts 12 we learn that the mother church just then was suffer ing deadly persecution; Peter certainly was out of the way. There was no opportunity for the nego tiation described in 2 1 10, and it would have been premature for Paul to raise the question of his apostleship at this stage. In all likelihood, he saw few Judaean Christians then beyond "the elders," who received the Antiochene charity (Acts 11 30). Nothing transpired in connection with this remit tance, important as it was from Luke s standpoint, to affect the question of Gal 1, 2; it would have been idle for Paul to refer to it. On the other hand, no real contradiction exists between Acts 15 and Gal 2: "The two accounts admirably complete each other" (Pfleiderer; cf Cnmbr. (ir Test., 14.1, 14(>; Steinmann, Die Abfassungszeit d. Gal.-Briefes, 7); in matters of complicated dispute involving per sonal considerations, attempts at a private under standing naturally precede the public settlement. It would be strange indeed if the same quest ion of the circumcision of gentile believers had twice within a few years been raised at Antioch, to be twice carried to Jerus and twice over decided there by the same parties Barnabas and Paul, Peter and James and with no reference made in the second discussion (that of Acts, ex hy/t.) to the previous compact (Gal 2). Granting the epistle written after the council, as both Ramsay and Zahn sup pose, we infer that Paul has given his more intimate account of the crisis, about which the readers were already informed in the sense of Acts 15, with a view to bring out its essential bearing on the situation.

      (r) The encounter of Paul and Cephas at An tioch (2 11-21) is undated. The time of its occur rence bears on the date of the epistle. As hitherto, the order of narration presumably follows the order of events, the "but" of ver 11 appears to contrast Cephas present attitude with his action in Jerus just described. Two possible opportunities present themselves for a meeting of Paul and Cephas in Antioch subsequently to the council the time of




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Galatians, Ep. to

      Paul s and Barnabas sojourn there on their return from Jerus (Acts 15 35.36), or the occasion of Paul s later visit, occupying "SOUK" time," between the 2il and 3d tours (18 22.23), when for aught we know Barnabas and Peter may both have been in the Syrian capital.

      The former dating assumes that Peter yielded to the Judaizers on the morrow of the council, that "Barnabas too was carried away" while still in colleagueship with Paul and when the cause of gentile freedom, which he had championed, was in the Hush of victory. It assumes that the legalists had no sooner been defeated than they opened a new attack on the same ground, and presented themselves as "from James" when James only the other day had repudiated their agitation (Acts 15 19.24). All this is very unlikely. "SVe must allow the legalists time to recover from their discomfiture and to lay new plans (see 112, (2), (3), (4). Moreover, Luke s detailed narrative in Acts 15 30-30, which makes much of the visit of Judas and Silas, gives no hint of any coming of Peter to Antioch at that time, and leaves little room for this; lie gives an impression of settled peace; and satis faction following on the Jerus rmtronlut, with which the strife of Gal 2 11 ff would ill accord. Through the course of the 2d missionary tour, so far as the Thessa- lonian epistles indicate;. Paul s mind remained undis turbed by legalistic troubles. "The apostle had quitted Jerus [after his understanding with the pillars] and pro ceeded to his 2d missionary journey full of satisfaction at the victory he had gained and free from anxiety for the future The decisive moment of the crisis neces sarily falls between the Thessalonian and (ialalian epis tles A new situation suddenly presents itself

      to him on his return" to Antioch (A. Sabatier, The Apostle Paul, ET, 10, 11, also 124-36).

      (5) Paul s renewed struggle with legalism. The new situation arose through the vacillation of Peter: and the "certain from James" who made mischief at Antioch, were the forerunners of "troublers" who agitated the churches far and wide, appearing simul taneously in Corinth and north Galalia. The attempt to set up a separate church-table for the circum cised at Antioch was the first movement in a crafty and persistent campaign against gentile liberties engineered from Jerus. The Ep. to the Romans sig nalized Paul s conclusive victory in this struggle, which covered the period of the 3d missionary tour. On his revisitation of the (Jalatians (1 9; 5 3 i Acts 18 23), fresh from the contention with Cephas and aware of the wide conspiracy on foot, Paul gave warning of the coming of another gospel"; it had arrived, fulfilling his worst fears. I pon this view of the course of affairs (see Neander, Planlini/ an/1 Training of On Christian Church, III, vii: (lodet s Intro to the, XT, KI>I>. of Paul, 200-201; Sabatier, as above), the mistake of Peter at Antioch was the proximate antecedent of the trouble in Galatia; hence Gal 2 11-24 leads up to 3 1 and the main argument. Now, if the Antiochene collision befell so late as this, then the epistle is subsequent to the date of Acts 18 22.23; from which it follows, once more, that Gal belongs to the 3d missionary tour and the Corinthians-Romans group of letters.

      (6) Ephesus or Corinth? Chiefly because of the words, "you are removing so quickly," in 1 6, the epistle is by many referred to the earlier part of the above period, the time of Paul s protracted sojourn in Ephesus (Acts 19 8.10: 54-56 AD); "so quick ly," however, signifies not "so soon after my leaving you," but "so suddenly" and "with such slight per suasion" (6 7.8). From Ephesus, had the apostle been there when the trouble arose, he might as easily have visited Galaiia as he did Corinth under like circumstances (so much is implied in 2 Corinthians 13 1): he is longing to go to Galatia, but cannot (Gal 4 19.20). A more distant situation, such as Macedonia or Corinth (Acts 20 1-3), where Paul found himself in the last months of this tour (56- 57 AD), and where, in churches of some standing, he was surrounded by a body of sympathetic "brethren" (1 1) whose support gave weight to his remonstrance with the Galatians, suits the epistle better on every account.

      (7) Paul s first coming to (Ialalia. In 4 13-15 the apostle recalls, in words surcharged with emo tion, his introduction to the readers. His "preach ing the good news" to them was due to "weakness of the flesh" to some sickness, it seems, which arrested his steps and led him to minister in a local ity that otherwise he would have "passed over," as he did Mysia a little later (Acts 16 8). So we understand the obscure language of ver 13. The south Galatian theorists, in default of any reference to illness as affecting the apostle s movements in Acts 13 13.14, favor Ramsay s conjecture that Paul fell a victim to malaria on the Pamphylian coast, and that he and Barnabas made for Pisidian Antioch byway of seeking the cooler uplands. The former explanation lies nearer to the apostle s lan guage: he says "I preached to you," not "I came to you, because of illness." The journey of a hundred miles from Perga to Antioch was one of the least likely to be undertaken by a fever-stricken patient (see the description in Conybeare and Howson s Life of St. Paul, or in Ramsay s Paul the Traveller). Besides, if this motive had brought Paul to Antioch, quite different reasons are stated by Luke for his proceeding to the other south Galatian towns (see 13 50.51; 14 6.19.20). Reading Gal 4 13-15, one imagines the missionary hastening forward to some further goal (perhaps the important cities of Bithv- nia, Acts 16 7), when he is prostrated by a malady the physical effects of which were such as to excite extreme aversion. As strength returns, he begins to offer his gospel in the neighborhood where the unwilling halt has been made. There was much to prejudice the hearers against a preacher addressing them under these; conditions; but the Galatians welcomed him as a heaven-sent messenger. Their faith was prompt and eager, their gratitude bound less.

      The deification of Barnabas and Paul by the Lycao- nians (14 11 IS) is the one incident of Luke s narrative of which the apostle s description reminds us. To this the latter is thought to be alluding when he writes, "You received me as an angel of (!od, as Christ Jesus!" But could he speak thus of his reception hateful at the time in the character of a heathen god, and of a reception that ended in his stoning . The "welcome" of the messenger implies faith in his message (cf (!al 4 14; 2 ( or 61; 1 Thessalonians 1 6; Matthew 10 40.41, where the same ( ir vb. is used).

      Paul s mishandling at Lystra (Acts 14 19.20) has sug gested a correspondence in the opposite sense between the epistle and the story of theS. (ialatian mission. The Lystran stones left their print on Paul s body; in these disfiguring scars one might see "the marks of Jesus" to which he points in Gal 6 17, were it not for the note of time, "from henceforth," which distinguishes these stigmata as afresh infliction, identifying the servant now more than ever with his Master. The true to Gal 6 17 is 2 Corinthians 4 10 (see the context in 4 7 5 4, also 1 8), which we quoted above (III, 2). When he wrote 2 Oor, the apostle was emerging from an experience of crucial anguish, which gave him an aspect imaging the dying Saviour whom he preached; to this new consecration the appeal of our epistle seems to refer.

      (8) Barnabas and the Galatians. The references to Barnabas in 2 1.9.13, at first, sight suggest the south Galatian destination of the letter. For Barnabas and Paul were companions on the first only of the three tours, and Barnabas is named thrice here and but twice in the rest of the epistles. Yet these very references awaken misgiving. Barnabas was Paul s full partner in the south Galatian mission; he was senior in service, and had introduced Saul to the apostles at Jerus; he was the leader at the outset of this journey (Acts 9 27; 11 22-26; 13 1-3; 15 25) Barnabas was taken for "Zeus" by the heathen of Lystra, while the eloquent Paul was identified with "Hermes" (Acts 14 12). The churches of south Galatia had two founders, and owed allegiance to Barnabas along with Paul. Yet Paul deals with the readers as though he alone were their father in Christ. Referring to Barnabas oonspicu-


      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary



      ously in the letter and us differing from himself on ,-i ])oiti1 affecting the question ;it issue (2 lo), Paul ,v:is the more hound to give liis old comrade his due and to justify his assumption of sole authority, it lie wen 1 in truth addressing communities which owed their Christianity to the two men in conjunc tion. On the south (ialatian hypothesis, the apostle appears ungenerously to have elbowed his colleague out of the partnership. The apostle Paul, it is to he noted, was particularly sensitive on matters of this kind (see I. Corinthians 4 ir>; 1> Corinthians 10 IM 10). The name of Barnabas was known through the whole church (see 1 Corinthians 9 0; Col 4 10); there is no more difficulty in supposing the north (lalatians to be familiar with it than with the names of James and John (2 9). Possibly Paul, as his responsibilities extended, had left, the care of south ( ialatia to Barna bas, who could readily superintend this district from Antioch in Syria; Paul refers to him in 1 Corinthians 9 0, long after the separation of Acts 15 o .). as a fellow-worker. This would account for his making direct for north Olalatia on the i->d tour; see IV, o (3).

      (<)) The- tiro Antiorhx. In 2 11 Paul refers to "Antioch," the famous city on the Orontes. To south (ialatians "Antioch" meant, as in 2 Timothy 3 11, the Pisidian city of t hat name. 1 lad Paul been address ing south Galatians, and Antiochenes imprimis, he could not without singular inadvertence have failed to make the distinction. The ijiiucln rii would have been as marked as if, in writing to a circle ot ,est- of-England towns including Bradford-on-Avon, one should mention "Bradford" without qualification, meaning the Yorkshire Bradford.

      The arguments drawn from local difference in legal usage in the matters of adoption, testament, ,( ( i n favor of the south C.alatian destination (see Schmiedel s examination of Hamsay s views in EH, coll. 100S-0), and from the temperament of Paul s "(ialatians" in favor of north (lalatia (Light foot), are too precarious to build upon.

      (10) , i<l<r hc(irint/x of the problem. On a broad view of the scope of Paul s missionary work and of the relation of his letters to Acts, then 1 is much to commend the south (ialatian theory. It simplifies the situation by connecting this cardinal writing of Paul with churches of cardinal importance in Luke s narrative 1 . The south C.alatian cities lay along the main route of the apostle s travels, and in the mid-stream of the church s life. The epistle, when associated with the Christian communities of this region, gains a definite selling and a firm point of attachment in NT history; whereas the founding of north (ialatian Christianity is indicated by Luke, if at all, in the most cursory fashion, and it held an obscure plaee in the early church. How, it is asked, could Paul s intimate 1 friend have been (on the. north (ialatian theory) so uninterested in churches by which Paul himself set. such store? And how can Paul have ignored, apart from the allusion of 2 Timothy 3 11, the south (ialatians who formed the first- fruits of his wider labors and supplied a vital link in his chain of churches? In reply, we must point out: (1) that for anyt hing we know Paul wrote many letters to south (ialatia; we possess but a selection from his correspondence; the choice of the canonical epistles was not governed by the importance of tin 1 parties addressed in them witness Col and Philem; nor were Paul s concern for his churches, and the ei{)rt ,w>nc.nt with which he wrote, determined by their magnitude and position, but by their needs and their hold on his affections (see Cal 1 0, etc; 4 12-20). (2) The north Galatian mission lay off the central line of Paul s journeyings and of the advance of gentile Christianity; this is probably the reason why Luke, who was compelled to a strict economy of space, just ignores this field, though he shows himself aware of its existence. The apostle s con

      fession that he preached to the readers, in the first instance, not from choice but necessity (4 13), accords with the neglect of north (ialatia in Acts; the evangeli/ing of the north Galatians was an n.^ide in Paul s work an incident, beyond the scope of his plans, from which at this period he was compelled again and again to deviate (Acts 16 (5-10).

      After all, though less important during the 1st cent, than south (ialatia, north (ialatia was not an un important, or inaccessible region. It was traversed by the ancient "Royal Road" from the east to the Hellespont, which the apostle probably followed as far as Phrygia in the journey of Acts 18 22.23. Planted by Paul in Old Galatia, the gospel would spread to Bithynia and Pont us farther north, as it certainly had done by the time Peter wrote to the 1 churches of Asia Minor (1 Pet 1 1). It is observ able that "Galatia" stands between "Pontus and ( appadocia" in Peter s enumeration of the provinces an order indicating that Christians of Xorlh Ga latia were particularly in the writer s mind. Had Paul never set foot in X. Galatia, had he not worked along the Royal Road and put his message in the way of reaching the northern provinces of Asia Minor, the claim of Romans 15 10 is difficult to sus tain, that "from Jerusalem, and in a circle as far as Illyricum, he had fulfilled the gospel of Christ." On the whole, we find the external evidence in accord with the testimony given by the internal character and a (Unities of the epistle: we judge that this epistle was written cir the autumn or winter of f)()-.">7 AD, from Macedonia, or Corinth, toward the end of Paul s third missionary tour; that it was ad dressed to a circle of churches situated in Galatia proper or X. Galatia, probably in the western part of this country contiguous to (or overlapping) Phry gia (Acts 16 ti); and that its place lies between the two Corinthian and the Romans letters among the epistles of the second group.

      LITEKATUBeast The south Galatian destination was pro posed hytlie Dullish M ynstcr (Einltn. in d. Brief tin ,1 . d<il. 1825; M. however included north Galatia), and adopted by the French Perrol (!)< (jalntin I mrincin Itnmuim, 1SC>7) aiid Kenan (southPaul); by the German Clemen (Chrono- loijic. (I pan! in. Brief e, 1S1K5; J)ir Adressaten d. dnl.- Briefes; Paulus: sein Leben u. , iric< , 1004), Ilausrath (XT Zeiliieschichte, 1ST:?, KT>, Plleideror (Ptiulinismiis. 1X7H. KT; Pauliniamus-, much altered; Urchristenthum, IDOL ), Sleek (as above). Weizsacker (Dnn tipost. Zcitnllei". l H)2 KTr after Ramsay (see under GALATIA), by Bel- ser (Beitrdge z. Krl.-/iirun</ <l. Ad, etc), O. Holtzmann (Zeitschrift f. KG, 1X94), von Soden (Hint of Early Chris tian Lit., ET; he includes south with north (ialatia), Weber (Oil Adressaten d. Gal.- Brief es), J. ,Veiss (RE">, art. Kleinusien"), in Germany; by Askwith (Ei>. t" dul: ,t Essay <>n It* Destination and Date), Bacon (Expos, V vii 12:i-:i(>; x, :i51-(>7), Hartlet (Expos, V, x, 263-8O), Gilford (Expos, IV, x, 1-20), Maclean (1-vol HDB), Kendall (Expos, IV, ix, 254-C>4; Kings(!T, Intro to "Gala tians"}, Round (as above), Sunday (with hesitation, Kt- pos IV vii. 4!>1 95). ,Voodhouse (EH. art. "Galatia I. The N Galatian destination, held by earlier scholars up

      (Cambr dr Test., I .HO), in this country: by Sabatier (// ,p,;tre Paul 2 , KT. 1X91); by Gheorghiu (Adressatii ep c. Galateni, (Vrnauti, 1904, praised by SLeinmann), and by the German critics 131 ass (Aeta A pout.), von Dob- scliiiU (Die urrkr. Gemeinden, 1902, and Probleme d. apost. Zeitaltrrs), Hartiack (Apostelgeschichte, 1908, 87- 90), II. llolt/.mann (Ituntlromm. z. NT, "AG"), Jiilicher ( ,T Intro, ETi. Lipsius (Handcomm. z. .,T, " Galater ) Lietzmann (doubtfully, Hnndburk :. AT.III.i, "Galater- brief"), Monunsen (ZXTW, 1901, 81-96), Schmiedel (EB), Schiirer (Jahrbuck f. prot. Theologie, XVIII, 460- 74), Sietrert ( .lfr//rr .s- Kommentar), Steinmann (as above), Zockler (a full and masterly discussion: Studienu. Kritiken, 1895 51-102). Mommsen s verdict is thus expressed: "To ai)pre)iend the Galatians of Paul otherwise than in the strict and narrower sense of the term, is unallowable. The Provinces associated with Galatia under the rule of a single legate, as e.g. Lycaonia certainly was as early as the time of Claudius, wore in no way incorporated in that region; the official inscriptions simply set Galatia at the head of the combined regions. Still less could the inhabitants of Iconium and Lystra bo named Gala tians in common speech."

      11 63



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      3 Ep to

      Apart from the aforesaid controversy, besides the standard Comm. on Paul s Kpp.. Luther s Ail Galatna is of unique historical interest: the interpretations of Usteri (1833), Hilgenfeld (18.32), Winer (1.S5IC), llol- Sten (Das Eean</el. d. Patilux, 18SO), Pllilippi (18S4i. in Cerman; Baljon (188!) i, in Dutch; and of B. .Jowett, Ellicott, Beet, are specially serviceable, from different points of view; see also CUT and KB.


      GALBANUM, garba-num (HZSlbn, Ijdh-nah; X.,pavi], c/iulbdnc): A gum-resin which occurs in small, round, semitranslucent tears or in brownish yellow musses; has a pleasant aromatic odor and a bitter taste; and is today, at any rate, imported from Persia. It is derived from certain umbellifer ous plants, Ferula galbaniflua and / . riihricittiliH. It is mentioned in Exodous 30 34 as an ingredient of the holy incense, and also in Sir 24 15: "a pleasant odour .... as galbanum."

      GALEED, gal e-cd (~"?3 , t/id alfi): Derived from the Hebrews (jut, "a heap of stones," and W/i, "wit ness. The meaning therefore is "cairn" or^ heap of witness," corresponding to yghar-sahadhutha in Aram. (Genesis 31 47). It is applied to the cairn raised by Jacob and Laban, beside which they sealed their covenant in a common meal, the memory of which they appealed to the silent cairn to preserve. The ancient custom of associating events wit li inani mate objects as witnesses is often illustrated in Hebrews history (Joshua 4 4 ff , etc). There may be in this nar rative a suggestion of how the name "Gilead" came to be applied to that country. ,V. E,vi.,<;

      GALGALA, gal gal-a (TdX^aXa, Cnbinln): Greek er]iiivalent for Gilgal. The word occurs in 1 Mace 9 2 in connection with Arbela, in Galilee -"The way to Galgala" but it is doubtful which Gilgal is meant. Cf Jos, Ant, XII, xi, 1; and see GILCAL.

      GALILEAN, gal-i-le an. See GALILKeast

      GALILEE, gal i-le (b^ban , n^bjn , Ii<i-ytll7l, hn-

      g r I ll ah, lit. "the circuit" or "district"; T] TaXtXaia,

      lie (ItiUlnin) : Kedesh, the city of refuge,

      1. Galilee of is described as lying in Galilee, in Ml. the Nations Naphtali (Joshua 20 7; cf 21 32).

      The name seems originally to have referred to the territory of Naphtali. Joshua s vic torious campaign in the north (ch 11), and, sub sequently, the triumph of the northern tribes under Deborah and Barak (Judges 4 f) gave Israel supremacy; yet the tribe of Naphtali was not able to drive out all the former inhabitants of the land (1 33). In the time of Solomon the name applied to a much wider region, including the territory of Asher. In this land lay the cities given by Solomon to Hiram (1 Kings 9 llj. Cabul here named must be identical with that of Joshua 19 27. The Asherites also failed to possess certain cities in their allotted portion, so that the heathen continued to dwell among them. To this state of things, probably, is due the name given in Isaiah 9 1 to this region, "Galilee of the na tions," i.e. a district occupied by a mixed popula tion of Jews and heathen. It may also be referred to in Joshua 12 23, where possibly we should read "king of the nations of Galilee (l e galll), instead of "( lilgal" (I) ijUtjCd). Yet it was within this territory that, according to 2 Samuel 20 IS (LNX) lay the two cities noted for their preservation of ancient Israel- it ish religious customs in their purity Abel-bet h- maacah and Dan.

      Then; is nothing to guide us as to the northern

      boundary of Galilee in the earliest times. On the

      east it was bounded by the upper Jordan

      2. Ancient and the Sea of Galilee, and on the south by Boundaries the plain of cl-Jialtunf. That all within

      these limits belonged to Galilee we; may be sure. Possibly, however, it included Zebu-

      lun, which seems to be reckoned to it in Isaiah 9 1. In this territory also there were unconqucred Canaanite cities (Judges 1 30}.

      At the instigation of Asa, king of Judah, Benha-

      dad, son of Tabrimmonof Damascus, moved against

      Israel, and the cities which he smote

      3. Before all lay within the circle of Galilee (IK the Exile 15 20). Galilee must have been the

      arena of conflict between Jehoahaz and Hazael, king of Syria. The cities which the latter captured were recovered from his son Ben- hadad by Joash, who defeated him three times (2 Kings 10 32; 13 22 if). The afflict ion of Israel neverthe less continued "very bitter," and God saved them by the hand of Jeroboam son of Joash, the great warrior monarch of the Northern Kingdom, under whom Galilee passed completely into the hands of Israel (2 Kings 14 25 IT). Hut, die days of Israel s supremacy in Northern Philestina, Canaan-Land were nearly over. The beginning of the end came with the invasion of Tig- lath-pileser III, who took the 1 chief cities in Galilee, and sent their inhabitants captive to Assyria (ver 2!)). Probably, as in t he case of t he Sout hern King dom, the poorest, of the land were left as husband men. At any rate then 1 still remained Israelites in the district (2 Chronicles 30 10 fi; but the measures taken by the conqueror must have made for the rapid increase of the heathen element.

      In post-exilic times Galilee is the name given to the most northerly of the three divisions of Western

      Philestina, Canaan-Land. The boundaries are indicated

      4. After by Jos i /> ./, Ill, iii, 1). It was di- the Exile vided into Lower and l/pper Galilee,

      and was encompassed by Phoenicia and Syria. It marched with Ptolemais and Matthew. Carmel on the YV. The mountain, formerly Gali lean, now belonged to the Syrians. On the south it adjoined Samaria and Scythopolis (Bcin<~nt) as far as the river Jordan. It was bounded on the east by Hippene, Gadara, Gaulonitis and the borders of the kingdom of Agrippa, while the northern frontier was marked by Tyre and the count ry of the Tyrians. The northern limit of Samaria was Ginea, the mod ern Jcu ttt, on the south border of Esdraelon. Lower Galilee, therefore, included the great plain, and stretched northward to the plain of cr-lfriniclt Kamah of Joshua 19 3C>. Jos mentions Bersabe, the modern Abu-Shcbd,fin<, t lie Talin, A />lmr Hdnanyah, the modern /v./V . ,nnii. as the northern border; t h, former being about a mile north of t he lat ter. The plain reaches to the foot of the mountain chain, which, running east and ,V., forms a natural line of division. I pp.T Galilee may have included the land as far as the gorge of the Lildn//, which, again, w.iuld have formed a natural boundary to the north Jos, however, sp:-aks of Kedesh as belonging to the Syrians (BJ, II, xviii, 1), situated "between the land of the Tyrians and Galilee" (Ant, XIII, v, (>). This gives a point on the northern frontier in his time; but the rest is left indefinite. Gut he, Sanday and others, followed by Cheyne (/ 7/?, s.v.}, on quite inadequate grounds conclude that certain localities on the east of the Sea of Galilee were reckoned as Galilean.

      In the mixed population nfter the exile the purely Jewish element must have been relatively small.

      In 1(3") BC Simon Maccabaeus was

      5. Character able to rescue them from their threat- of the ening neighbors by carrying the whole Galileans community away to Judaea (I Mace

      5 14 ff). Jos tells of the conquest by Aristobulus 1 of Ituraea (Ant, XIII, xi, 3). He compelled many of them to adopt Jewish religious customs, and to obey the Jewish law. There can be little doubt that Galilee and its people were treated in the same way. While Jewish in their religion, and in their patriotism too, as subsequent

      Galilee Galilee, Sea of



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      history showed, the population of Galilee was com posed of strangely mingled elements Aramaean, Ituraean, Phoen and Greek. In the circumstances they could not he expected to prove such sticklers for high orthodoxy as the Judaeans. Their mixed origin explains the differences in speech which dis tinguished them from their hrethren in the south, who regarded Galilee and the Galileans with a certain proud contempt (John 1 4(5; 7 52). But a fine type of manhood was developed among the peasant farmers of the two Galilees which, according to Jos (HJ , Ill, iii, 2), were "always able to make a strong resistance on all occasions of war; for the Galileans are inured to war from their infancy .... nor hath the country ever been destitute of men of courage. Jos, himself a Galilean, knew his countrymen well, and on them he mainly relied in the war with Rome. In Galilee also the Messianic hope ,vas cherished with the deepest intensity. When the Messiah appeared, with His own Galilean upbringing, it was from the north-countrymen that He received the warmest welcome, and among them His appeal elicited the most gratifying response.

      In 47 BC, Herod the Great, then a youth of 25,

      was made military commander of Galilee, and won

      great applause by the fashion in which

      6. Later he suppressed a hand of robbers who History had long vexed the country ( ./</, XIV,

      ix, 2). When Herod came to the throne, 37 BC, a period of peace and prosperity for Galilee began, which lasted till the banishment of his son Antipas in 40 AD. The tetrarchy of Gali lee was given to the latter at his father s death, 4 BC. His reign, therefore, covered the whole life of Jesus, with the exception of His infancy. After the banishment of Antipas, Galilee was added to the dominions of Agrippa I, who ruled it till his death in 44 AD. Then followed a period of Romans administration, after which it was given to Agrippa II, who sided with the Romans in the subsequent wars, and held his position till 100 AD. The patriotic people, however, by no means submitted to his guidance. In their heroic struggle for independence, the, command of the two Galilees, with Gamala, was intrusted to Jos, who has left a vivid narrative, well illust rat ing t he splendid courage of his freedom- loving countrymen. Hut against such an adversary as Homo even their wild bravery could not prevail; and the country soon lay at the feet of the victorious Vespasian, (57 AD. Then 1 is no certain knowledge 1 of the part played by Galilee in the rebellion under Hadrian, 132-35 AD.

      At the beginning of the Romans period Sepphoris (Samuel/tf/lrit/eh), about 3 miles north of Nazareth, took the leading place. Herod Antipas, however, built a new city on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee, which, in honor of the reigning emperor, he called Tiberias. Here he reared his "golden house," and made the city the capital of his tetrarchy. See TIHKRIAS. After the fall of Jems, Galilee, which had formerly been held in contempt, became the home of Jewish learning, and its chief seat was found in Tiberias where the Mish was committed to writing, and the Jerus Tahn was composed. Thus a city into which at first no pious Jew would enter, in a province which had long been despised by the leaders of the nation, became the main center of their national and religious life.

      Among the more notable cities in Galilee were

      Kedesh Naphtali, the city of refuge, the ruins of

      which lie on the heights west of cl-Huleh;

      7. Cities of Chorazin, Bethsaiela and Capernaum, Galilee north of the Sea of Galilee; Nazareth, the

      city of the Saviour s youth and young manhood; Jotapata, the scene of Jos heroic defence against the Romans, which stood at Tell Jefdt, north of the plain of Asochis (BJ, III, vii, viii); Cana

      of Galilee; and Nain, on the northern slope of the mountain now called Little Hermon.

      In physical features Galilee is the most richly

      diversified and picturesque district in Western Philestina, Canaan-Land;

      while in beauty and fertility it is

      8. General strongly contrasted with the barren Description uplands of Judah. Cut off from Matthew.

      Lebanon in the north by the; tremendous gorge of the Litany, it forms a" broad and high plateau, sinking gradually southward until it ap proaches Xfifed, when again it rises, culminating in ,/dx t J <rin nL, the highest summit on the west of the Jordan. From Safed there is a rapid descent by stony slope and rocky precipice to the shore of the Sea of Galilee. The mountains of which Jchcl Jirinnl; is the northeast outrunner stretch westward across the country, and drop upon the plain of cr- Rannh to the south Irregular hills and valleys, with breadths of shady woodlands, lie between this plain and that of Asochis (cl-lhittauf). The latter is split from the east by the range of Jcbcl Tor an. south of Asochis rise lower hills, in a cup-like hollow among which lies the town of Nazareth. south of the town they sink steeply into the plain of Esdraelon. The isolated form of Tabor stands out on the east, while Carmel bounds the view on the west The high pla teau in the north terminates abruptly at the lip of the upper Jordan valley. As the Jordan runs close to the base of the eastern hills, practically all this valley, with its fine rolling downs, is included in Galilee. The plain of Geimesaret runs along the northwestern shore of the Sea of Galilee. From the uplands to the west, stretching from Knrun, Ilatlln (the traditional Mount of Beatitudes) to the neigh borhood of Tabor, the land lets itself down in a series of broad and fertile terraces, falling at last almost precipitously on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee. The descent toward the Mediterranean is much more gradual; and the soil gathered in the longer valleys is deep and rich.

      The district may be described as comparatively well watered. The Jordan with its mighty springs is, of course, too low for purposes of irrigation. But then 1 are many perennial streams fed by fountains among the 1 hills. The springs at Jenin are the main sources of tin 1 river Kishon, but for the greater part of its course through the plain the bed of that river is far below the surface 1 of the adjoining land. The dews that descend from Lebanon and Ilennon arc also a perpetual source 1 of moisture 1 and refreshment.

      Galilee 1 was famous in ancient time s for its rich

      and fruitful soil, "full of the plantations of trees of

      all sorts, insomuch that it invites the

      9. Products most slothful to pains in its cultiva

      tion by its fniitfulness; accordingly it is all cultivated by its inhabitants, and no part of it lie s ielle" (/> ./, Ill, iii, 2). See also GKXNESAKET, LAND e>F. The grape s grown in Naphtali were in high repute, as were the pomegranates e>f Shikmona the Sykaminos of Jos which stood on the she>re near Alt. Carmel. The silver sheen of the olive me e ts the e ye 1 in almost every valley; and the olive oil produced in Galilee has always been esteemed of the highest excellence. Its wheat fields also yielded an abundant supply, the wheat of Chorazin being proverbial. The great plain of Eselraelon must also have furnished rie h provision. It cannot be eloubteel that Galilee was largely drawn upon for the gifts in kind which Solomon bestowed upon the king of Tyre (2 Chronicles 2 10). At a much later day the inhabitants of Tyre and Sielon depended upon the produce of Galilee (Acts 12 20).

      Galilee was in easy touch with the outside world by means of the roads that traversed her valle-ys, crossed her ridges and ran out eastward, westward and southward. Thus she was connected with the harbors on the Phoen seaboard, with Egypt on the




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Galilee Galilee, Sea of

      south, with Damascus on the northeast, and with the markets

      of the east by the great caravan routes (see "Roads"

      under PALESTINE). In the days of

      10. Contact Christ the coming and going of the with the merchantmen, the passing of armies Outside and the movements of the represent a- World tives of the Empire, must have made

      these highways a scene of perpetual activity, touching the dwellers in Galilee with the widening influences of the great world s life.

      The peasant farmers of Galilee, we have seen, were a bold and enterprising race. Encouraged

      by the fruit fulness of their country,

      11. Popu- they were industrious cultivators of lation the soil. Jos estimates the population

      at 3,000,000. This may be an exag geration; but here we have all the conditions neces sary for the support of a numerous and prosperous people. This helps us to understand the crowds that gathered round and followed Jesus in this dis trict, where the greater part of His public life was spent. The cities, towns and villages in Galilee are frequently referred to in the Gospels. That the Jewish population in the centuries immediately after Christ was numerous and wealthy is sufficiently proved by the remains from those times, esp. the ruins of synagogues, e.g. those at TiU Hili//, Kcrdzch, Iii/itl, < l-Jinh, I,tfr Bikini, M< iron, etc. Near the last named is shown the tomb of the great Jewish teacher HUM.

      Galilee was not without her own heroic memories The great battlefields of Megiddo, Gilboa, and tin- waters of Merom lay within her borders; and among the famous men of the past she could claim Barak, Ibzan, Elon and Tola of the judges; of the prophets, Jonah and Elisha at least; possibly also Hosea who, according to a Jewish tradition, died in Babylon, but was brought to Galilee and buried in Safed (Neubauer, Gcog. der Talmud, 227). When the chief priests and Pharisees said, "Search, and see that out of Galilee arise! h no prophet," it argued strange and inexcusable ignorance on their part (John 7 52). Perhaps, however, in this place we should read 6 TTPO^TJTTJS, ho prophtlcx, "the prophet," i.e. the Messiah. It is significant that. 11 out of the 12 apostles were Galileans.

      For detailed description of the country, see Iss,- CHAR; ASHER; ZEHULUN* AND NAI-HTALI; see also GALILEE, SEA OF. , . EWING

      GALILEE, MOUNTAIN IN: After the resur rection the disciples "went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them" (Matthew 28 In). Here Jesus came to them, declared that all authority in heaven and earth had been given to Him, commanded them to go and make disciples of all nations, concluding with the memorable promise: "Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." Probably it was some well- known height not far from the scenes most fre quented during the Galilean ministry. Looking from the western shore at the uplands north of the lake, it is not easy to imagine a more appropriate spot for this never-to-be-forgotten interview than ./<!>/! Kan an, a bold headland not far to the east of Safed, overlooking the land of Gennesaret and the sea, and commanding from its lofty summit a view of about 80 miles in every direction. Of course, there is no certainty. west EWIXG

      GALILEE, SEA OF (r, ed,acr<ra T^Samuel

      he thulassa its Galilaias) : This is the name 5 t given in the NT (Matthew 4 18; 15 29; Mark 1 10;

      1. The 7 31; John 6 1) to the sheet of water

      Name which is elsewhere called "the sea of

      Tiberias" (John 21 1; cf 6 1); "the

      lake of Gennesaret" (Luke 5 1); "the sea" (John 6 16,

      etc), and "the lake" (Luke 5 1, etc). The OT names were "sea of Chinnereth" (rn2?~ C , yam-kinnereth: Numbers 34 11; Deuteronomy 3 17; . JoshTlS 27; 19 35), and "sea of Chinneroth" (rniS D" 1 , yam-kin e roth: Joshua 12 3; cf 11 2; 1 Kings 15 "20)" In 1 Mace 11 67 the sea is called "the water of Gennesar" (RV "Genesis- nesareth"). It had begun to be named from the city so recently built on its western shore even in NT times (John 21 1; 6 1); and by this name, slight ly modified, it is known to this day Bahr Taba- rlijeh.

      Sea of (ialileo.

      The sea lies in the deep 1 rough of the Jordan valley, almost due east of the Bay of Acre-. The sur face- is 6SO ft. below the level of the 2. General Mediterranean. It varies in depth Description from 130 ft. to 1 IS ft., being deepest along the course of the Jordan (Bar- rois, PEFS, 1X94, 211-20). From the point where the Jordan enters in the north to its exit in the south is about 13 miles. The greatest breadth is in the north, from el-Mejdel to the mouth of Wudij Scmak being rather over 7 miles. It gradually narrows toward the south, taking the shape of a gigantic pear, with a decided bulge to the west The water of the lake is clear and sweet. The natives use it. for all purposes, esteeming it light and pleasant. They refuse to drink from the Jordan, alleging that, "who drinks Jordan drinks fever." Seen from the mountains the broad sheet appears a beautiful blue; so that, in the season of greenery, it is no exaggeration to describe it as a sapphire in a setting of emerald. It. lights up the landscape as the eye does the human face; and it is often spoken of as - the eye; of Galilee." To one descending from Matthew. Tabor and approach ing the edge of the great, hollow, on a bright spring day, when the land has already assumed its fairest garments, the view of the sea, as it breaks upon the vision in almost its whole extent, is one never to be forgotten. The mountains on the east and on the west rise to about, 2,000 ft,. The heights of Naphtali, piled up in the north, seem to culminate only in the snowy summit of Great Hermon. If the waters are still, the shining splendors of the mountain may be seen mirrored in the blue depths. Round the greater part of the lake there is a broad pebbly beach, with a sprinkling of small shells. On the sands along the shore from cl-Mcjihl to *Ain ct-Tinch these shells are so numerous as to cause a white glister in the sunlight.

      The main formation of the surrounding district is limestone. It is overlaid with lava; and here and there around the lake there are outcrops of basalt through the limestone. At et-Tabyha in the north, at *Ain el Fullyeh, south of el-Mejdel, and on the shore, about 2 miles south of modern Tiberias, there are strong hot springs. These things, together with the fre-

      Galilee, Sea of Gallic



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      quent, and sometimes terribly destructive, earth quakes, sufficiently attest the volcanic character of tin region. The .soil on the level parts around the sea is exceedingly fertile. See GENNESARET, LAND OF. Naturally the temperature in the valley is higher than that, of the uplands; and here wheat and barley are harvested about a month earlier. Frost: is not quite unknown; but no one now alive remem bers it to have done more than lay t he most delicate fringe of ice around some of (lie stones on the shore. The fig and the vine are still cultivated with success. Where vegetable gardens are planted they yield plentifully. A few palms are still to be seen. The indigo plant is grown in the plain of Gennesaret. In their season the wild flowers lavish a wealth of lovely color.-, upon the surrounding slopes; while bright-blossoming oleanders fringe the shore.

      Coming west. ward from the point where the .Jor dan enters the lake, the mountains approach within a short distance of the sea.. On the shore, fully 2 miles from the Jordan, are (he ruins of Till Uilni. See CAi KKXAr.M. About 2 miles farther west arc the hot springs of et-Tabgha. Here a shallow vale breaks northward, bounded on the west by T<-ll ,rciinfh. This tell is crowned by an ancient Canaanite settlement. It throws out. a rocky promontory into the sea, and beyond this are the ruins of Khan M/ni/ch, with *Ain ct-Tlttch close under the cliff. Important Horn remains have recently been discovered here. From this point the plain of Gennesaret (rl-dhiiurir) sweeps round to d-Mejdel, a distance of about 4 miles. west of this village opens the tremendous gorge, , <li/i/ cl- lldindni, with the famous robbers fastnesses in its precipitous sides, and the ruins of Arbela on its southern lip. From t.he northern parts of the lake the Horns of HaUln., the traditional Mount of Beati tudes, may be seen through the rocky jaws of the gorge. south of tl-Mtjiltl the mountains advance to the shore, and the path is cut, in the face of the slope, bringing us to t. he hot spring, ^Ainel-Fidlyeh, where is a little valley, with gardens and orange grove. The road then crosses a. second promontory, and proceeds along the base of the mountain to Tiberias. Hen? the mountains recede from the shore leaving a crescent-shaped plain, largely cov ered wit h t he ruins of t he ancient city. The modern town stands at the northern corner of the plain; while at the southern end are the famous hot baths, the ancient. Hainmalh. A narrow ribbon of plain between the mountain and the shore runs to the south end of the lake. There t.he Jordan, issuing from the sea, almost, surrounds the mound on which are the ruins of Ki nil:, the Tarichaea of Jos. Crossing tin 1 floor of t.he valley, past tirnuikk, which is now a sta tion on the Haifa-Damascus railway, we find a similar strip of plain along the eastern shore. Near ly opposite Tiberias is the stronghold of Kal at d- IJoHii, possibly the ancient Hippos, with the village of Flk, the ancient Aphek, on the height to the east To the north of this the waters of the sea almost touch the foot of the steep slope. A herd of swine run ning headlong down the mountain would here inevi tably perish in the lake (Matthew 8 32, etc). Next we reach the mouth of , a</i/ Xcmtilc, in which lie the ruins of Kurxcli, probably representing the ancient Gerasa. Northward the plain widens into the marshy breadths of < 1-/>fiteilitifi, and once more we reach the Jordan, flowing smoothly through the flat lands to the sea.

      The position of the lake makes it liable to sudden storms, the cool air from the uplands rushing down the gorges with great violence and 3. Storms tossing the waters in tumultuous billows. Such storms are fairly fre quent, and as they are attended with danger to small craft, the boatmen are constantly on the alert.

      Save in very settled conditions they will not. venture far from the shore. Occasionally, however, tem pests break over the lake, in which a boat could hardly live. Only twice in over 5 years the present writer witnessed such a hurricane. Once it burst from the south In a few moments the air was thick with mist, through which one could hear the roar of the tortured waters. In about ten minutes the wind fell as suddenly as it had risen. The air cleared, and the wide welter of foam-crested waves attested the fury of the blast.. On the second occasion the wind blew from the east, and the phe nomena described above were practically repeated.

      Ki.shiiiK on the Sea of < . alileo.

      The sea contains many varieties of fish in great numbers. The fishing industry was evidently pur sued to profit in the days of Christ. 4. Fish Zebedee was able to hire men to assist

      him (Mark 1 20). In recent years then- lias been a considerable revival of this industry. See Fismxc. Four of the apostles, and these the chief, had been brought up as fishermen on the Sea of Galilei Peter and Andrew, James and John.

      The towns around the lake named in Scripture are treated in separate articles. Some of these it is impossible to identify. .Many are the ruins of great and splendid cities on slope and height of which almost nothing is known today. But from their mute testimony we gather that the lake in the valley which is now so quiet was once the center of a busy and prosperous population. We may assume that (he cit ies named in t he ( iospels were mainly Jewish. Jesus would naturally avoid those in which Greek in fluences were strong. In most, cases t hey have gone, leaving not even their names with any certainly behind; but His memory abides forever. The lake and mountains are, in main outline, such as His eyes beheld. This it is that lends its highest charm to "the (-ye of Galilee."

      The advent of the railway has stirred afresh the pulses of life in the valley. A steamer plies on the sea between the station at Kcmakh and Tiberias. Superior buildings are rising outside the ancient walls. Gardens and orchards are being planted. Modern methods of agriculture are being employed in the Jewish colonies, which are rapidly increasing in number. Slowly, perhaps, but surely, the old order is giving place to the new. If freedom and security be enjoyed in reasonable measure, the region will again display its long-hidden treasures of fer tility and beauty. west Ewixo

      GALL, gol:

      (1) UJSn, rush, or TlTH , ms7i (Deuteronomy 32 32 only, "grapes of gall") : Some very bit ter plant, the bitter ness as in (2) being associated with the idea of poison. Deuteronomy 29 18 m "rosh, a poisonous herb"; Lam 3 5.19; Jeremiah 8 14; 9 15; 23 15, "water of gall," m "poison"; Hosea 10 4, translated 1 "hemlock"; Am 6 12, "Ye have turned justice into gall"; Job 20 16, the "poison of asps": here rosh clearly refers




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Galilee, Sea of Gallic

      to a different substance from the other references, the points in common being bitterness and poison ous properties. Hemlock (Coniiim maculaium), colocynth (Citrullus colocynthus) and the poppy (Papaver somniferum) have all been suggested as the original rosfi, the last, having most support, but in most reference s the word may represent any bitter poisonous substance. Rush is associated with la andh, "wormwood" (Deuteronomy 29 18; Lam 3 19; Am 6 12).

      (2) rrri2, m rerah (Job 16 13), and PHIE , m 1 rural i, (20 14.25], both derived from a root mean ing "to be bitter," are applied to the human gall or "bile," but like (1), in rurak is once applied to the venom of serpents (20 14). The poison of these animals was supposed to reside in their bile.

      (3) XO,T}, cholp (Matthew 27 34), "They gave him wine to drink mingled with gall"; this is clearly a reference to the LXX version of Psalm 69 21: "They gave me also gall [cholc, Hebrews rux/i] for my food; and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink." In Alk 15 23, it says, "wine mingled with myrrh." It is well known that the Romans gave 1 wine with frankincense to criminals before their execution to alleviate their sufferings; hen 1 the c/iol<~ or bitter substance used was myrrh (Pliny Kings/>. xx.lS; Sen. EI>. 83). east ,Y . G. MASTEHMAX

      GALLANT, gal ant: The translated of T~X , ,i<M7r, "bright," "splendid," "mighty" Ui 33 21, "Neither shall gallant. , inl(l7r, ship pass thereby")) the word istr 1 "mighty" in Exodous 15 10; 1 Samuel 4,Samuel; Isaiah 10 31; Zee 11 2 AV . In Isaiah 33 21, above, it i.s applied to J<-h, "glorious [V/r/,/7,-] Lord" A, , R, "Jch .... in .... majesty"; cf also Psalm 16 3, "the excellent ." As a noun it i.s used in m of Nah 2 5 as alternative for "worthies," RV "nobles"; in Zee 11 2, for "the mighty," RV "goodly ones," m "glorious"; it. is translated 1 "nobles" in Judges 5 13; 2 Chronicles 23 20, etc. Set; also SHIPS, AND BOATS.

      GALLERY, gal er-i:

      (1) ip ? PX, ullnk, Kings Mlnbh; pT?Samuel, al(7k, used only in Ezekiel 41 Hi; 42 3..">; etymology and mean ing uncertain; among the more probable sugges tions are "pillar," "column," "walk with pillars," "colonnades." "passageway," "porches," "galleries" and "terraces." Cornill suggests the substitution of 1:7 rutli, "walls," to suit the context; others, e.g. Rothstein, would omit it as a dittography or other corruption): A long narrow balcony formed either by pillars or by the receding upper stories of a build ing. Both kinds are described in E/ekiel s vision of 1 he Temple restored. They surround t he three stories of side chambers around the Temple proper, and also the "building before the separate place which was at the back thereof," and the three- story structure containing rows of chambers in the outer court opposite the side-chambers of the Temple. Those around the Temple proper were apparently supported by pillars, and hence they did not. take away from the width of the 2d- and 3d-story rooms (cf 41 7). On the other hand, the galleries of the outer buildings which were not sup ported by pillars and therefore not on top of each other, but in terraces, did take away from the upper stories more than from the lowest and middlemost : the upper chambers were shortened or "straitened more than the lowest and the middlemost from the ground."

      The lower porches of the outer court were cut off from the view of those of the inner court by a low wall, but in the 3d story, gallery looked out to gallery across the "twenty cubits which belonged to t he inner court and 1 he pavement which belonged to the outer court." These "galleries," or <illikl>n, are one of the few features that distinguish the

      temple of Ezekiel s vision from Solomon s temple. The idea and perhaps the word seem to have been borrowed from the more elaborate architecture of the countries of the Exile, which must have im pressed the Jews of Ezekiel s time very strongly. The building Ezekiel would place in the outer court with its terraces is a perfect Babylonian ziggiiral or stage- tower temple (cf Enc Brit, llth ed, II, 374, or/).

      (2) (I3rn , ra/i/it, probably "lock of hair," Cant 7 5; I2VH , rahlt, Kings re, uTn"J , rdlut, Kings e thlbh, prob ably "rafters," Cant 11 7; both words and also the similar word [rliallni, Genesis 30 3S; Exodous 2 10], translated* 1 "troughs," are probably connected with the Aram. flint, "to flow," "to run"): Although AV uses "galleries" in Cant 7 5 and 1 17 m, the context in each place clearly points to another meaning. In the former of these passages, "the king is held cap tive in the tresses thereof," there follows a descrip tion of the head. In the latter passage the word in question is in parallelism with korolh. batcnu, "the beams of our house," and "rafters" AV, or possibly "boards," is suggested. NATHAN ISAACS

      GALLEY, gal i. See SHIPS AND BOATS, II, 2, (2).

      GALLIM, gal im (~~>*~* , yaltim, "heaps"): Prob ably two distinct, places:

      (1) A town mentioned among the 11 additional cities of Judah which are in t he LXX appended to Joshua 15 59, and have altogether disappeared from the Hebrews text. It occurs between Karem (Mm Kuirs/ii) and Bait her (litltlr); it. is probably t In- large and flourishing village of Beit Jala, near Beth lehem.

      (2) Gallim is mentioned in Isaiah 10 30; not far from Laishah and Anathoth and certainly north of Jems. It was the home of Palti the son of Laish (1 Samuel 25 44), and it is by many authorities identified with the Gilgal on the north border of Judah (Joshua 15 7), the G r l7lr>th of the j| passage (18 17), and the Beth-gilgal of Neh 12 29.

      east west G. MASTERMAN-

      GALLIC, gal i-6 (FaXACwv, (, alli.rm): The Romans deputy or proconsul of Achaia, before whom Paul was haled by his Jewish accusers on the apostle s first visit, to Corinth, during his second missionary journey (Acts 18 12-17). The trial was not. of long duration. Although Gallio extended his protection to the Jewish religion as one of the religions recog nized by the state, he contemptuously rejected the claim of the Jews that, their law was binding upon all. In the eyes of the- proconsul, the only law uni versally applicable was that of the Romans code and social morality: under neither was the prisoner chargeable; therefore, without, even waiting to hear Paul s speech in his own defence-, he summarily ordered his lictors to clear the court. Even the subsequent treatment meted out to Sosfhenes, the chief ruler of the synagogue, was to him a matter of indifference. The beating of Sosthenes is ascribed by different readings to "Jews" and to "Greeks," but the incident is referred to by the writer of Acts to show that the sympathies of the populace lay with Paul, and that Gallio made no attempt to sup press them. Gallio has often been instanced as typical of one who is careless or indifferent to reli gion, yet in the account given of him in Acts, he merely displayed an attitude characteristic of the manner in which Romans governors regarded the re- liuious of the time (cf also LYSIAS; FELIX; FESTUS). Trained by his administrative duties to practical thinking and precision of language, he refused to adjudicate the squabbles of what, he re garded as an obscure religious sect, whose law was to him a subtle quibbling with "words and names." According to extra-canonical references, the origi nal name of Gallio was Marcus Annacus Novatus,

      Gallows Games



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      but this was changed on his being adopted by the rhetorician, Lucius Junius Gallio. He was born at Cordova., but, came to Rome in the reign of Tiberius. He was the brother of the philosopher Seneca, by whom, as also by Statins, reference is made to the affable nature of his character. As Achaia was reconstituted a proconsular province by Claudius in 44 A I), the accession of (iallio to office must have been subsequent to t hat date, and has been variously placed at ol-;">3 AD (cf also Knowling in Expos (Ir Test., II. US .)-! 1:2 j. C. M. KKHH


      GAMAEL, gam a-el (ra^ariX., (lainnti): Chief of the familv of Ithamar who went- up from Babylon with E/ra (1 Esdras 8 29); called Daniel in Ezra 8 2.

      GAMALIEL, ga-ma li-el (biT5E3 , tinmlTcl, "re ward or recompense of Cod"; ranaXirjX, GainaliH):

      (1) The son of Pedahzur, and "prince of (.he children of Manasseh," chosen to aid in taking the census in the Wilderness (Numbers 1 10; 2 20; 7 54. .V,); 10 23).

      (2) A Pharisee who at the meeting of the "coun cil" succeeded in persuading its members to adopt a more reasonable course when they were incensed at, the doctrine of Peter and the rest of the apostles and sought, to slay them (Acts_5 33-40). That lie was we ll qualified for this task is attested by the fact that he was himself a member of the Sanhedrin, a teacher of the law, and held in high honor among all the people. In his speech he pointed out to his fellow-councillors the dire consequences that might ensue upon any precipitous action on their part. While quoting instances, familiar to his hear ers, of past insurrections or se, lit ions that had failed, he reminded them at, the same time that if this last under Peter "is of Cod, ye will not be able to over throw (hem; lest, haply ye be found even to be fight. ing against Cod." As a result of his arguments, the apostles, after being beaten and admonished to speak no longer in the name of Jesus, were re leased. In the speech which lie was permit.! ed by Lysias to deliver from the stairs of the palace after the riot in Jems, Paul referred to Camaliel as the teacher of his youth, who instructed him rigidly in the Mosaic law (Acts 22 3).

      The toleration and liberality displayed by Gama liel upon the occasion of his speech before the San- hcdrin were all the more remarkable because of their rarity among the Pharisees of the period. Although the strict observance by the Christians of temple- worship, and their belief in immortality, a point in dispute between Pharisees and Sadducees, may have had influence over him (Knowlingj, no credence is to be attached to the view that he definitely favored the apostles or to the tradition that he afterward became a Chrisiian. The high place accorded him in Jewish tradition, and the fact that, the title of llabban, higher even than Rabbi or Master, was first bestowed upon him, testify that he remained a Pharisee to the end. His speech is rather indicative of one who knew the deeper truth in the OT of the universal fatherhood of God, and who recognized that the presence of His power was the deciding factor in all human enterprise. His social enactments were permeated by the same broad-minded spirit. Thus his legislat ion on behalf of the poor was formulated so as to include Gentiles as well as Jews. The authenticity of his speech has been questioned by Wendt and others, chiefly on account of the alleged anachronism in regard to Theudas (see THEUDAS); but, the internal evidence is against, this view (cf Knowling in Expos Greek Test., II, 1(>1). It has also been objected by Baur and

      the Tubingen school that the liberal, peace-loving Gamaliel could not have been the teacher of the fanatical Saul. To this, reply has been made, firstly, (hat the charges against Stephen of de stroying the temple and subverting the laws of Moses were not brought against Peter and the other apostles, and, secondly, that, the doctrines of any teacher, however moderate he himself may be, are liable to be carried to extremes by an over-zealous pupil.

      Lrrr.u.vrrRK. Conybeare and Howson, Life am! Kings,n>- i if St. I liul. rhii: Kitto. Cyclopaedia of Biblical Lit., lS(>r>, art. "Gamaliel" (Ginsberg).

      art. "Gamaliel" (Ginsberg) GAMES, gamz:

      C. M. KEHH

      I. IS 1.

      II. T 1.


      Children s Games

      M iinicry


      Games of Chance and Skill




      Kiddles IIK GAMES OF GnKKei: AND ROME

      Historical Introduction 2. General References

      15. Specific References to Greek Athletics 1. References to the Theater and the Drama LITERATURE

      About the amusements of the ancient Israelites we know but little, partly on account of the nature of our literary sources, which are almost exclusively religious, partly because the antiquities thus far discovered yield very little information on this topic as compared with those of some other countries, and partly because of the relatively serious char acter of the people. Games evidently took a less prominent place in Ileb life than in that of the Greeks, the Romans and the Egyptians. Still the need for recreation was felt and to a certain extent supplied in ways according with the national tem perament. Mere athletics (apart from Greek and Romans influence) were but little cultivated. Simple and natural amusements and exercises, and trials of wit and wisdom, were more to the Hebrews taste. What is known or probably conjectured may be summed up under the following heads: Games of Children; Sports; Games of Chance and Skill; Story-telling; l)ancing; Proverbs; Riddles. The amusements of Greece and Rome, which to some extent influenced later .Jewish society and esp. those which are directly or indirectly referred to in the NT, will be the theme of the latter part of the article.

      /. Israelitish Games. There are two general ref erences to the playing of children: Zee 8 5: "And

      the streets of the city shall be full of 1. Chil- boys and girls playing in the streets dren s thereof"; and Genesis 21 9m, where we

      Games read of Ishmael "playing" (m gaheJf).

      The rendering of our Bibles, "mock ing," is open to question. Of specific games and pets there is hardly a mention in the OT. Playing with boMis alluded to in Isaiah 22 18: "He will .... toss thee like a ball into a large country," but chil dren need not be thought of as the only players. If the balls used in Philestina, Canaan-Land were like those used by the Egyptians, they were sometimes made of leather or skin stuffed with bran or husks of corn, or of string and rushes covered with leather (cf Wilkinson, Popular Account, I, 198-201; British Museum Guide, to the Eg yp Collections, 78). The question of JAH (Jehovah) to Job (41 5): "Wilt thou play with him [the crocodile] as with a bird? or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens?" suggests that tame birds were petted by Hebrews children, esp. by girls. The NT has one reference to children s play, viz. the half-parable about the children in the market-place who would neither dance to the flute as if at a marriage feast nor wail as if at a funeral (Matthew 11 16 f j Luke 7 32).




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Gallows Games

      Mimicry. There are interesting accounts in Les en- fants de Nazareth, by the Abbe Leviticus Camus (60-66; 101- 10), of the way in which the children of the modern Nazareth mimic scenes connected with weddings and funerals. That Israelitish children had toys (dolls, models of animals, etc) cannot be doubted in view of the finds in Egypt and elsewhere, but no positive evidence seems to be as yet forthcoming.

      Running was no doubt often practised, esp. in

      the time of the early monarchy. Saul and Jonathan

      (2 Samuel 1 23), Asahcl (2 IS), Ahimaaz

      2. Sports (18 23.27) and some of the Gadites

      in David s service (1 Chronicles 12 8) were renowned for their speed, which can only have been the result of training and exercise. The same may be said of the feats of those who ran before a king or a prince (1 Samuel 8 11; 2 Samuel 15 1; 1 Kings 1 5; 18 46). The Psalmist must have watched great run ners before he pictured the sun as rejoicing like a strong man to run his course (Psalm 19 56; cf also Eccl 9 11; Jeremiah 8 6; 23 10). For running in the Greek games,see the latter part of this article.

      Archery practice is implied in the story of Jona than s touching interview with David (1 Samuel 20 20. 35-38) and in Job s complaint: "He hath also set rne up for his mark. His archers compass me round about" (Job 16 12 f). Only by long practice could the 700 left-handed Benjamite slingers, every one of whom could sling stones at a hair-breadth and not miss (Judges 20 16), and the young David (1 Samuel 17 49), have attained to the precision of aim for which they are famous.

      In Zee 12 3, "I will make Jems a burdensome stone," lit. "a stone of burden," Jerome found an allusion to a custom which prevailed widely in Philestina, Canaan-Land in his day, and has been noticed by a recent traveler, of stone-lifting, i.e. of testing the strength of young men by means of heavy round stones. Some, he says, could raise one of these stones to the knees, others to the waist, others to the shoulders and the head, and a few could lift it above the head. This interpretation is not quite certain (Wright, Comm., 364), but the form of sport described was probably in vogue in Philestina, Canaan-Land in Biblical times.

      High leaping or jumping was probably also prac tised (Psalm 18 29). The "play" referred to in 2 Samuel 2 14 ff of 12 Benjamites and 12 servants of David was not a sport but a combat like that of the Horatii and the Curiatii.

      Dice were known to the ancient Egyptians, and

      Assyr dice have been found, made of bronze with

      points of gold, but there is no trace of

      3. Games them in the OT. Recent research at of Chance Ta annck has brought to light many and Skill bones which seem to have been used

      in somewhat the same way as in a game played by the modern Arabs, who call it ka^ab, the very word they apply to dice. These bones were "the oldest and most primitive form of dice" CKonig after Sellin, RE 3 , XVIII, 634). The use of dice among the later Jews is attested by the con demnation of dice-players in the Mish (Sanh., iii. 3). The Syrian soldiers ,vho cast lots for the rai ment of Jesus at the cross (Matthew 27 35 [| Mark 15 24; Luke 23 34; John 19 24) may have used dice, but that can neither be proved nor disproved.

      It has been suggested that the mockery of Jesus before the Sanhedrin described in Matthew 26 67 f if Mark 14 65; Luke 22 63 f may have been connected with a Greek game in which one of the players held the eyes of another while a third gave him a box on the ear. The last was then asked with what hand he had been struck. A somewhat similar game is represented in an Egyp tomb picture (Wilkinson, Popular Account, I, 192). This reference, however, though not quite inadmissible, is scarcely prob able. Games with boards and men bearing some resem blance to our draughts were in great favor in Egypt (ib, 190-95), but cannot be proved for the Jews even in NT times.

      Listening la stories or recitations has long been a favorite amusement of Orientals (cf Lane, Modern Egyp tians, 359-91: "The Thousand and One Nights"), but

      there seems to be no reference to it in the Bible. There can be no reasonable doubt, however, that the Hebrews,

      like their neighbors, had story-tellers or

      4 Storv- reciters, and heard them with delight.

      jr. >" Egyp tales of great antiquity are well

      1 elling known from the two volumes edited by

      Professor Petrie in 1895; and there are several non-canonical Jewish tales which combine romance and moral teaching: the Books of Tob and Jth and per haps the Story of Ahikar, the last of which, with the help of the Aram, papyri discovered at Elephantine, can be traced back (in some form) to about 400 BC (Schurer, GJ I" 4 , III, 255) . There are also many short stories in the Haggadic portions of the Talm and the Midr.

      Dancing, that is, the expression of joy by rhyth mical movements of the limbs to musical accompani ment, is scarcely ever mentioned in the 5. Dancing Bible as a social amusement, except in a general way (Judges 16 25.27[?]; Job 21 11; Psalm 30 11; Eccl 3 4; Jeremiah 31 4.13; Lam 5 15; Matthew 11 17; Luke 15 25). There is one exception, the

      Egyptian Dance from Tomb at Thebes.

      dancing of Salome, the daughter of Herodias, before Herod Antipas and his court (Matthew 14 6 || Mark 6 22), which was a solo dance, probably of a pantomimic, character affected by Romans influence. The other Biblical references to dancing can be grouped under two heads: the dance of public rejoicing, and the dance which was more or less an act of worship. Of the former we have two striking examples in the OT: the dance accompanied by the tambourine with which the maidens of Israel, led by Jephthah s daughter, met that leader after his victory (Judges 11 34), and the dances of the Israelitish women in honor of Saul and David to celebrate the triumph over thcPhilis (1 Samuel 18 6; 21 11; 29 5).

      It was probably usual to welcome a king or general with music and dancing. There is a good illustration in a fine Assyr sculpture in the British Museum which represents a band of 11 instrumentalists taking part in doing homage to a new ruler. Three men at the head of the procession are distinctly dancing (SBOT, "Psalms," Eng., 226).

      The distinctly religious dance is more frequently mentioned. The clear instances of it in the Bible are the dance of the women of Israel at the Red Sea, headed by Miriam with her tambourine (Exodous 15 20); the dance of the Israelites round the golden calf (32 19); the dance of the maidens of Shiloh at an annual feast (Judges 21 19 ff ) ; the leap ing or limping of the prophets of Baal round their altar on Carmel (1 Kings 18 26), and the dancing of David in front of the ark (2 Samuel 6 14.16 || 1 Chronicles 15 29). There are general references in Psalm 149 3: "Let them praise his name in the dance"; 150 4: "Praise him with timbrel and dance"; and perhaps in 68 25. The allusions in Cant 6 13, "the dance of Mahanaim," and in the proper name Abel-meholah, "the meadow of the dance" (1 Kings 19 16, etc), are too uncertain to be utilized. The ritual dance was probably widespread in the ancient East. David s performance has Egyp parallels. Seti I, the father of Rameses II, and three other Pharaohs are said to have danced before a deity (Budge, The Book of the Dead, I, xxxv), and Asiatic monuments attest the custom elsewhere. About the methods of dancing practised by the ancient Hebrews but little is known. Probably the dancers in some cases




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      joined hands and formed a ring, or part of a ring, as in sonic heathen representations. The descrip tion of David s dance: he "danced before JAH (Jehovah) with all his might ..... leaping and dancing before JAH (Jehovah)" (2 Samuel 6 11-lli) suggests three features of that par ticular display and the mode of dancing which it represented: violent exertion, leaping (m e phazzez), and whirling round (t, lc/inr/ccr). Perhaps the whirling dance of Islam is a modern parallel to the last. Women seem generally to have danced by themselves, one often leading t lie rest .both in dancing and antiphonal song; so Miriam and the women of Israel, Jcphthah s daughter and her comrades, the women who greeted Saul and David, and, in the Apoc, Judith and her sisters after the death of Holofernes (Jth 15 12 f). Once the separation of the sexes is perhaps distinctly referred to (Jeremiah 31 , ->). In public religious dances they may have occasionally united, as was the case sometimes in the heathen world, bill there is no clear evidence to that effect (cf, however, 2 Samuel 6 20 and Psalm 68 2.1). Of t he social dancing of couples in the modern fashion there is no trace. There seems to be some proof that the re ligious dance lingered among the Jews until the time of Christ and later.

      If the Mish can he trusted (Hukkah. v.4), there was a torch-light dance in the temple in the illuminated court of the women at the Feast of Tabernacles in which men of advanced years and high standing took part. The (iemura to the Jerus Talm adds that a famous dancer on these occasions was Rabbi Simeon or Simon, the son of Gamaliel, who lived in the apostolic age (Jos, li,/. IV, iii. !i. According to another passage (Tn tinilli 4 si the daughters of Jems used to dance dressed in white in the vineyards on Tishri the 10th and Ah the loth. Reli gious dancing in the modern Fast is illustrated not only by the dances of the dervishes mentioned above, but also by occasional dances led by the sheikh in honor of a saint (Cnrtiss. Primitive Semitic Kiliuio/, To-dun, lt>9). Among the later Jews dancing was not unusual at wedding feasts. More than one eminent rabbi is said to have (lanced before the bride (Kings thul>hf>tli 17<i). Singing and dancing, with lighted torches, are said to be wedding customs of the modern Arabs.

      LITKU.MTHK. Arts. "Dance" in Smith /)/?-, ///)/?. DC G, /;/> , Jew Em- (also "(iames"); "Tanz" in /, /; and the German Dictionaries of Winer, Richm, and (Juthe (/iV/r;r,/); Xowack, II A, I, 278 f.

      1 rnnrhx (- C , inuslial; Trapoi/xict, ptiroimin): Prov erbs and proverbial expressions seem to have been, to some extent, a means of amusement 6. Proverbs as well as instruction for the ancient Oriental who delighted in the short. pointed statement of a moral or religious truth, or a prudential maxim, whether of literary or popular origin. Most of these sayings in the Bible belong to the former class, and are couched in poetic form (see PROVERBS; KCCLKSIASTF.Samuel; KCCLKSIASTHTS,). The others which are shorter and simpler, together with a number of picturesque proverbial phrases, must have recurred continually in daily speech and have added greatly to its vivacity.

      Tho OT supplies the following 10 examples of the popular proverb: (1) "Like Isimrod a mighty hunter before JAH (Jehovah)" ((ieu 10 0); (2) "As the man is, so is his strength" (Judges 8 21), only two words in the Ileb; (3) "Is Saul also among the prophets?" (1 Samuel 10 11 f- 19 24j; (4) "Out of the wicked (wicked men] comet li forth wickedness" (1 Samuel 24 13); (5) "There are the blind and the lame; he cannot come into the house" (2 Samuel 5 8); ((i) "Let not him that girdeth on his armor boast himself as he that putteth it off" (1 Kings 20 11) (7) "Skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life" (Job 2 4); (Samuel) "The days are prolonged. and every vision faileth" (Ezekiel 12 22), a scoffing jest rather than a proverb; (9) "As is the mother, so is her daughter" (Fzk 16 44), two words in the Hebrews; (10) "The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children s teeth are set on edge" (Jeremiah 31 29; Ezekiel 18 2). In the NT we find 10 others: (1) "Physician, heal thyself" (Luke 4 23); in the Micah<lhraxli Rnhhak on (Jen: "Physician heal thine own wound"; (2) "Can the blind guide the blind? shall they not both fall into a pit?" (6 39); (3) "With what measure ye mete, it shall he measured unto you" (Matthew 7 2 i Mark 4 24; Luke 6 38), almost identi cal with a Jewish proverb, "measure for measure" cited several times in the ancient Midrash, the M e khiUa;

      (4) "One soweth, and another reapeth" (John 4 37)-

      (5) "A prophet is not without honor, save in his owii country" (Matthew 13 57; Luke 4 24; John 4 44; Logion of Oxyrhynchus); ((i) "There are yet four months, and then cometh the harvest" (John 4 35), possibly a kind of proverb; (7) " Wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles [m " vultures") be gathered together" (Matthew 24 28 Luke 17 37); perhaps a proverb of which there is a trace also in the reference to the vulture: "Where the slain are. there is she" (Job 39 30); (Samuel) "It is hard for thee to kick against the goad" (Acts 26 14), a Or proverb: for proof cf Wetstein s note; (9) "The dog turning to his own vomit again, and t he sow that had washed to wallow ing in the mire" (2 Pet 2 22); Wetstein gives rabbinic parallels for the former half, and <ir for the latter; (10) "Ye . . . . strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel" (AI t 23 24) .

      There are also many proverbial phrases which added piquancy to conversation. Kxeeeding smallness was likened to the eye of a needle (Matthew 19 24 Mark 10 2.V Luke 18^ 25). or to a grain of mustard (Matthew 13 31 Mark 4 31; Matthew 17 20 Luke 17 (i), comparisons both found also in the Talm, the Koran, and modern Arab, sayings. Rela tive greatness was likened to a camel (Matthew 19 24. etc), in the Talm to a camel or an elephant. Oreat number was illustrated by reference to "the sand which is upon the sea-shore" (Oen 22 l< and many other passages); "the dust of the earth" (13 l(i, etc; also an Arabian figure); "the grass of the earth" (Job 5 25; 1 s 72 H>; cf 92 7). an early Babylonian figure; a swarm of locusts (Nan 3 15 and 4 other passages), a similitude used also by Sennacherib (If/ , n.s. VI, 97), and the stars of heaven (Oen 15 5 and 10 other passages). When complete security was promised or described it was said that not a hair of the head was or should be injured or perish (1 Samuel 14 45; 2 Samuel 14 1 1 ; I Kings 1 52; Daniel 3 27; Luke 21 18; Acts 27 34). Overcoming of difliculties was referred to as the removal of mountains (Matthew 17 20; 21 21 Mark 11 23; 1 Corinthians 13 2), an expression which has rabbinic parallels. Other proverbial phrases mav perhaps be found in the saying about the mote and the beam iMt 7 3-5), jot or tittle (Matthew 5 18 Luke 16 17), and the foolish words of Rehoboam and his young ad visers (1 Kings 12 lof). Many old proverbs have no doubt perished. Dukes in his Rabbinische Hlumcnli-x,- gives (i(>5 proverbs and proverbial expressions from the Talm and related lit., and modern collections show that proverbial lore is still in great favor in the Biblical Orient. See also PBOVBEBS.

      LITERATUReast In addition to works already mentioned Konig. StiHxtik, etc, !)( (! ("Jesus Use of Proverbs"); Murray, 1)H, art. "Proverbs"; Cohen, Ancient Jewish Proverbs, 1911.

      Riddle* (!~n n n , hldhtlh; aiviyna, ainigma) : Riddle- making and riddle-guessing were in favor in the an cient Kast, both in educated circles 7. Riddles and in comparatively common life. There is a tablet in the British Museum (Kings 4347: Guide to Assyr and Hub Antiquities 2 , >>) from the library of Ashur-bani-pal which attests the use of riddles not only by the Assyrians of the 7th cent. BC, but. also in a far earlier age, for ii contains a Sinner as well as a Semite (Shemite, of Shem) text. So it is not surprising that wo find a remarkable example in early Israelitish history in Samson s famous riddle: "Out of the eater came forth food, and out of the strong came forth sweetness" (Judges 14 14). The riddle is couched in poetic form, as is also the solution: "What is sweeter than honey? and what is stronger than a lion?" (ver IS), and the comment : "If ye had not plowed with my heifer, ye had not found out my riddle" (ib). the stipulation of a prize or penalty according to the success or failure of the persons challenged to solve the riddle was a custom met with also among the ancient Creeks and in a later age among the Arabs, in 1 Kings 10 1 || 2 Chronicles 9 1 the word used of Samson s riddle (hldhah) is employed of the "hard questions" put to Solomon by the queen of Sheba. The LXX seems to have understood the word as "riddle" here also, for it renders "enigmas," and some of the later Jews not only adopted this interpretation, but actu ally gave riddles said to have been propounded. Of these riddles which, of course, have no direct, historic value, but are interesting specimens of riddle lore, one of the best is the following: "With out movement while living, it moves when its head is cut off"; the answer to which is: "a tree" (Jew Enc, art, "Riddle"; see also for these riddles




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      Wunsche, Die Rdthsclwcishcit bc.i den Ilcbrdcrn, 13-23). If Jos can be trusted, historians of Phoe nicia recorded a riddle-contest between Solomon and the 1 hoen Hiram in which the hitter finally won with the help of a Tyrian named Abdemon (Ant, VIII, v, 3; CAp, I, IS). In this case, too, defeat involved penalty. The testing of ability by riddles has a striking parallel in the Pers epic, the tikah Xainrh, in the trial of the hero Sal by the mobeds or wise men (Wunsche, op. cit., 43-47). Solomon s fame as an author of riddles and riddle-like sayings is referred to in Sir 47 15.17 (,Hebrews): "With song, and proverbs, dark .sayings ,hldhdh, and figures, thou didst greatly move, the nations." H id/id/i occurs only once in Prov (1 0) : "the words of the wise, and their dark sayings," but the collection contains several examples of what Konig calls "the numerical riddle": 610-19; 30 7 ff.lof.18f.21ff. 24-28.29ff. In each case the riddle is stated first and then the solution. The saying in Prov 26 10: "As an archer that woundeth all, so is he that hireth the fool and he that hireth them that pass by," has been cited as a riddle, and it is certainly obscure enough, but the obscurity may be due to textual corruption. There are several passages in the OT in which the word Ijldhdh seems to be used in the general sense of "mysterious utterance": Numbers 12 <Samuel; Psalm 49 4; 78 2; l)nl 5 12 (the Aram, equivalent of hldhd/i) , 8 23; Hal) 2 6. In Ezekiel 17 1 it describes the parable or allegory of the Two Eagles and the Cedar and the Vine. Sir has several numerical riddles: 23 Hi; 25 lf.7f; 26 /if; 50 23 f; and there are similar sayings in Ah 5 1-11.16-21 (Taylor s ed). In the Hook of Jeremiah (25 20; 51 41; 51 1) are two examples of a cryptic or cipher modi 1 of writing which comes very near the riddle. SHe SHalvlI, in the first two passages, represented by the three letters ,s//7/i, tsk tit, kaph, answering to our sh, sh. k, is meant to be read with the substitution for each letter of the letter as near the beginning of the alpha bet as it is near the end, the result being sh- = b, s/i = />, /,- = /, that is, B blor Babel, Babylon. In the same way in the last passage the consonants com posing (lie word Lebkamai l,b,k.t,i/, suggest, A , .s, //, //, in, that is, Kaadlni or Chaldees. This cipher or riddle-writing was called by the Jews A(-lxinh (cf Buxtorf, Lexicon Clmlddicnin, etc, I, 131, 1. 57 f, edited by Fischer; and modern com mentaries on Jeremiah). The NT contains no riddle except the numerical puzzle, The Revelation 13 IS (cf Nr,i- JJKH; CKMATKIA), and has the fir equivalent of ludfidfi only in 1 Corinthians 13 12, for now we see .... ilnrkl//," RVm in a riddle" (fir en <iitti</tn<tti). There can be little doubt that riddles enlivened marriage festivals, such as that of Cana. Wiinsche (op. cit.) gives some interesting specimens of later Jewish riddles, subsequent indeed to Our Lord s t ime, but such as might have been in circulation then.

      LITERATUReast The most important authority is the above-cited monograph of Wiinsclio. Koiiifj; lias an interesting paragraph in liis titilixtik, Itlirt<irik, i m-tik, etc, 12 f. ( f also Hamburger, KK, II, 9(i(i If; arts, on " Kiddle" in Jew Enc, Smith s L>B, IfDli, larger and smaller; Murray s I) Li; German bible Dictionaries of Winer, Hichni-, and (J-utlie; Rosenmuller, Dan alte und neue .,{nr</>-nln<l. 111. 48 f.

      //. The Games of Greece and Rome. This is not the place to give a detailed ac.count of the Greek

      gymnasia and the elaborate contests 1. Histori- for which candidates were prepared cal Intro- in them, or to describe the special forms duction of sport introduced by the Romans,

      but these exercises and amusements were so well known in Philestina, Canaan-Land and throughout the Romans Empire in the time of Christ and the apostles that they cannot be passed over in silence. Some ac quaintance with them is absolutely necessary for the interpretation of many passages in the NT, esp.

      in the Epistles. Hellenic athletics found their way into Jewish society through the influence of the Greek kingdom ruled over by the Seleucidae. Early in the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes (cir 170 BC) a gymnasium, "place of exercise," was built in Jerus

      Theater at (Serasa.

      (1 Mace 1 14; 2 Mace 4 9.12) and frequented by priests (vs 14 f), who are spoken of as "making of no account the honours of their fathers, and thinking the glories of the Greeks best of all." After the success of the Maccabean rising Greek games fell into disrepute among the Jewish population of Philestina, Canaan-Land, and were thenceforth regarded with .suspicion by all strict religionists, even t he worldly Jos sharing the general feeling (Ant, XV, viii, 1). Neverthe less gentile games must have been familiar to most in Jerus and elsewhere during the llerodian rule and the Romans occupation. Herod the Great built a theater and amphitheater in the neighborhood of the city (Jos, ib; for probable sites, see G. A. Smith, Jerusalem, II, 493), and instituted in the name 1 of Caesar games which included Romans as well as Hel lenic sports, celebrated every 3 years. There was also a hippodrome or race-course for horses and chariots, bearing considerable resemblance to the Romans circus (Jos, Ant, XVII, x, 2; BJ , II, iii, 1). Jericho, too, was provided with a theater, an am phitheater and a hippodrome. There was a hippo drome also at Tarichaea. In addition there were scattered over Syria many Hellenic and partially Hellenic cities Schurer (GJV, II, 10S -221) gives the history of 33 Caesarea Stratonis, Caesarea Philippi, the cities of th - Decapolis, Tiberias, etc, which would all have had gymnasia and games. In Tarsus, which must have had a large Greek element in its population, Paul must have heard, and perhaps seen, in his childhood, much of I he athletic exer cises which were constantly in progress, and in later life he must often have been reminded of them, esp. at Corinth, near which were celebrated bien nially the Isthmia or Isthmian Games which drew visitors from all parts of the Empire, at Caesarea which possessed a theater, an amphitheater and a stadium, and at Ephesus. Tin; custom, indeed, seems to have been almost universal. No provincial city of any importance was without it (Schurer, op. cit., 48), esp. after the introduction of games in honor of the Caesars. The early Christians, there fore, whether of Jewish or gentile origin, were able to understand, and the latter at any rate to appre ciate, references either to the games in general, or to details of their celebration.

      The word which described the assembly gathered together at one of the great Grecian games (nfjon)

      was also applied to the contests them- 2. General selves, and then came to be used of References any intense effort or conflict. The

      corresponding vb. (agonizomai) had a similar history. Both these words are used fig. in the Pauline Epistles: the noun in Phil 1 30; Col 2 1; 1 Thessalonians 22; 1 Timothy 6 12; 2 Timothy 4 7, ren dered in RV (except in the second passage), "con flict" or "fight"; the vb. in Col 1 29; 4 12; 1 Timothy 4 10; 6 12; 2 Timothy 4 7, translated 1 "strive," "fight." In

      Games Gap



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      1 Corinthians 9 25; 2 Timothy 2 5 (when: another word is used) there are literal references. The former pas sage KRV: Every man that st rivet h in the games [agonizdmenos] is temperate in all things," also

      Fighting with Wild

      alludes to the rigid self-control enforced by long training which the athlete must practise. The training itself is glanced at in the exhortation: "Exodous ercise thyself [fftimnaze] unto godliness" (1 Timothy 4 7), and in the remark which follows: "Bodily exer cise [t/nninns ia] is profitable for a little." It is remarkable that the word <ji/utaxiuni, or "place of training," which occurs in the Apoo (2 Mace 4 9. 12) is not met with in the NT. The necessity for the observance; of rules and regulations is referred to in the words: "And if also a man contend in the games, he is not crowned, except he have contended lawfully" (2 Timothy 2 5). In all these passages the games will have been more or less in the apostle s thought (for other possible NT references cf He 5 If; 10 :; 12 1; 2 Pet 2 14).

      In addition to these general references there are many allusions to details, again found mainly in the

      Pauline Epistles. These may most 3. Specific conveniently be grouped in alpha- References betical order.

      to Greek (u) Hi-nxl-fuihl. The combats of wild

      Athletics animals with one another and with

      men, which were so popular at Rome toward the close of the Republic and under the Empire, we re not unknown in Philestina, Canaan-Land. Condemned criminals were thrown to wild beasts by Herod the (Ireat in his amphitheater at Jems, "to afford de light to spectators," a proceeding which Jos (Ant, XV, viii, 1) characterizes as impious. After the fall of Jerus in 70 AD many Jewish captives were slain in fighting with wild beasts (HJ, VII, ii). This horrible form of sport must have been in the apostle s mind when he wrote: "I fought with beasts {^ Uierioniacln Kd] at Ephesus" (1 Corinthians 15 32). The reference is best understood as figurative, as in Ignatius on Romans 6 1, where the same word (theriomacMo) is used, and the soldiers are compared to leopards.

      Boxing with the Costus.

      [From Puiiufka, Bildtr lies uiitikcit Lebens.}

      (b) Boxing. This form of sport is directly re ferred to in 1 Corinthians 9 20: "So box I [RVm, Greek pukte-ud], as not beating the air." The allusion is probably continued in ver 27a: "but I buffet [RVm "bruise," Greek hupupidzo] my body."

      (c) The course. Foot-races and other contests

      took place in an inclosure GOG ft. 9 in. in length, called a stadium. This is once referred to in a pas sage in the context of that just mentioned, which almost seems based on observat ion : "They that run in a race-course [RVm, Greek stt ulion] run all" (ver 24).

      (d) Discus throwing. The throwing of the discus, a round plate of stone or metal 10 or 12 in. in diame ter, which was a prominent feature of Greek athletics and is the subject of a famous statue, a copy of which is in the British Museum, is not mentioned "m the NT, but is alluded to in 2 Mace 4 14 as one of the amusements indulged in by Hellenizing priests in the reign of Antiochus Epiphancs.

      (c) The fool-race. The words for "run" and "race" (Greek t redid and drdmos) sometimes clearly, and in other cases probably, allude to foot-races at the games. For obvious references cf 1 Corinthians 9 24; He 12 1; 2 Timothy 4 7; for possible references see Acts 13 25; 20 24; Romans 9 1G; Gal 2 2; 6 7; Phil 2 1G; 2 Thessalonians 3 1. The second of these

      Discus Thrower.

      passages (He 12 1) alludes to the necessity for the greatest possible reduction of weight, and for steady concentration of effort. All the passages would remind the first readers of the single-course and double-course foot-races of the games.

      (/) The </o<tl. The goal of the foot-race, a square pillar at the end of the stadium opposite the entrance, which the athlete as far as possible kept in view and the sight of which encouraged him to redouble his exertions, is alluded to once: "I press on toward the goal" (Phil 3 14, Greek skopds).

      (g) The herald. The name and country of each competitor were announced by a herald and also the name, country and father of a victor. There may be an allusion to this custom in 1 Corinthians 9 27: "after that I have been a herald [RVm, Greek ke- russd] to others"; cf also 1 Timothy 2 7; 2 Timothy 1 11, where the Greek for "preacher" is kcrux, "herald."

      (h) The prize. Successful athletes were rewarded at the great games by a wreath consisting in the apostolic age of wild olive (Olympian), parsley




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Games Gap

      (Neinean), laurel (Pythian), or pine (Isthmian). This is referred to in a general way in Phil 3 1-1, and in 1 Corinthians 9 24: "One receiveth the prize" (Greek in both cases brabeion; cf also Col 3 15: "Let the


      peace of Christ arbitrate [RVm] in your hearts," where the vl>. is brubeuu). The wreath (*/< /;/"" "*> is directly alluded to in 1 Corinthians 9 25: They (the athletes] do it to receive a corruptible crown"; 2 Timothy 2 5: "A man .... is not crowned, ex cept he have contended lawfully"; and 1 Pet 5 4: "^ e shall receive the crown of glory that th not away." There may be allusions also in Phil 4 1 ; 1 Thessalonians 2 19; He 2 7.9; Jas 1 12; The Revelation 2 10; 311. In the palm-bearing multitude of the Apoc alypse (The Revelation 7 9) there is possibly a reference to the carrying of palm-branches by victors at the games. The judges who sat near the goal and who, at Olympia at any rate, had been carefully prepared for their task, may be glanced at in 2 Timothy 4 Samuel: "The crown .... which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give to me at that day."

      (i) Wrestling. This form of sport, which was in great favor in Greek society from the age of Homer onward, is alluded to once in the NT: "Our wres tling [Greek pale] is not against flesh and blood," etc (Kph 6 12). The exercise made great demands on strength, perseverance and dexterity. Then- is an indirect allusion in the term palaestra, which first meant "place for wrestling," and then "place for athletic exercises in general" (2 Mace; 4 1-lj.

      Isthmian Crowns.

      Although there is no direct reference; in the NT to the intellectual contests in which the Greeks de lighted as much as in athletics, the 4. Refer- former cannot be entirely ignored. ences to the The word "theater" (Greek tficntron) Theater and occurs 3 t: twice in the sense of "pub- the Drama lie hall" (Acts 19 29.31); and once with a clear reference to its use as a place of amusement: "We are made a spectacle" (1 Corinthians 4 9). "The drama was strongly dis countenanced by the strict Jews of Philestina, Canaan-Land, but was probably encouraged to some extent by some of the Jews of the Diaspora, esp. in Asia Minor and Alex andria. Philo is known to have witnessed the rep

      resentation of a play of Euripides, and the Jewish colony to which he belonged produced a dramatic poet named Ezekiel, who wrote inter alia a play on the Exodus, some fragments of which have been preserved (Schtirer, (, ./ , , 11, 00; ill, 500 f f). An inscription found not long ago at Miletus shows that part of the theater of that city was reserved for Jews (Deissmann, Lit/lit fro/n the Ancient East, 440 f f). The readers of the Pauline Epistles, Jews as well as Gentiles, would be generally more or less familiar with the theater and the drama. It has been suggested that there is a glimpse of a degraded form of the drama, the mime or mimic play, which was exceedingly popular in the 1st, cent, and after ward, in the mockery of Jesus by the soldiers (Matthew 27 27-30 Ji Mark 15 16-19). The "king" seems to have been a favorite character with the comic mime. The mockery of the Jewish king, Agrippa I, by the populace of Alexandria, a few years later, which furnishes a very striking parallel to the incident recorded in the Gospels (Schiirer, (1.1 V^, I, 497), is directly connected by Philo with the mimes. The subject is very ably discussed by a German scholar, Hermann Reich, in a learned monograph, Der Kit nig mil dec Dornenkrone (1905). Certainty is, of course, unattainable, but it seems at least fairly probable that the rude Syrian soldiers, who were no doubt in the habit of attending the theater, may have been echoing some mimic play in their mock homage to "the king of the Jews."

      LITERATUReast In addition to works already mentioned see for the whole subject: arts, "(lames" in Smith, DH-; lIDli, large and small; Eli; ,/ciu Knc; arts. "Spiele" in Winer, R ,[ Li, and Kiehm-, and esp. Konig, " Spiele bei den Ilebriiern," RE*. On the games of Greece and Koine

      see arts, in Smith s Dirt. / (/ / //</ h .nn A ntii/intirx, " Atuphitheatruin," "Circus," "Olvnipia," "Stadium," etc.


      GAMMADIM, gam a-dim (IPTGJ, <ja>ninadhltn): The word occurs only in E/k 27 11, in AV in form "Gammadims," in ERV "Gammadim." In ARV, as also in ERVm, it is rendered "valorous men." Some think a proper name is required, but identi fication is not possible, ami the meaning remains doubtful.

      GAMUL, ga mul (b^VD}, gam ill, "weaned"): The head of the 22d of the 24 courses of priests inaugu rated by David (1 Chronicles 24 17J.

      GANGRENE, gan gren (yo.-yypcuva, </ti(/</raitt, pronounced yiin-graiiin; AV canker): The name was used by the old Greek physicians for an eating ulcer which corrodes the soft parts and, according to Galen, often ends in mortification. St. Paul com pares the corrupting influence of profane babbling or levity, in connection with subjects which ought to be treated with reverence, to this disease (2 Timothy 2 17). The old Eng. word "canker" is used by IGlh- and 17th-cent. authors as the name of a cater pillar which eats into a bud. In this sense it occurs 1S t_in Shakespeare (e.g. Midsummer NiijIiCa Dream, II, ii, 3). The canker-worm mentioned t by Joel and Nahum is probably the young stage of A nidi inn peregrinum, a species of locust. Cankered in Jas 5 3 AV means "rusted" (Greek katidtai), and is so rendered in RV. In Sus ver 52 Coverdale uses the phrase, "O thou old cankered carle," in Daniel s address to the elder, where EV has "waxen old in wickedness." The word is still used in the Scottish dialect and applied to persons who an- cross-grained and disagreeable. ALKX. MACALISTEK

      GAP: The translated of flE , pcreq, "a breach" (Ezekiel 13 5, "Ye have not gone up into the gaps," RVm "breaches"; 22 30, "I sought for a man among them, that should build up the wall, and stand in

      Gar Gate


      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      the gap before me for the land"). who failed to stand up for tin; right and preserve the people.

      GAR, gar: A V ford AS (q.v.).

      Said of prophets and to strengthen

      GARDEN, giir d n ("$ , ynn, H23, ganndh, "23, (jinnnh; KTJTTOS, /, ryw.s ) : The Arab, jannah (dim. janniiinafn, like the Hei) (j/ntnah, lit. "a covered or hidden place," denotes in the mind of the dweller in the East something more than the ordinary garden. ( lardens in Biblical times, such as are fre quent I v referred to in Semite (Shemite, of Shem) lit., were usually walled inclosiires, as 1 he name indicates (I. am 2 GAKVm), in which t here wer- pat hs winding in and out among shade and fruit, trees, canals of running water,

      4; 52 7). They are inclosed with walls of mud blocks, as in Damascus, or stone walls capped with thorns, or wit h hedges of thorny bushes (cf Lam 2 OARYmj, or prickly pear. In nearly treeless countries, where there, is no rain during 4 or 5 months, at least, of the year, the gardens are often the only spots where trees and other vegetation can flourish, and here the existence of vegetation depends upon the water supply, brought in canals from streams, or raised from wells by more or less crude lifting machines (cf Nil 24 7). Such refer ences as den 2 10; Numbers 24 t>; Deuteronomy 11 10; Isaiah 1 30; 58 1 1 ; Cant 4 la indicate that in ancient times they were as dependent upon irrigation in Biblical lands as at present. The planning of their gardens so as to utilize the water supplies has be-

      ^ >

      Samuel- - 1 . 1 i j i / TTrV. ^^Vv ? :^arC^ v ^*^H: .(.#:" -v^ f^i5A_Vi--s-f .1 rfm.TTTrrir/~^

      I ^n^^^Samuel?^"^ 1 * """^ ^ 1


      UUJu I i: -i- r4 *Wi^>M& ..-.:. t -.:li : l ii-flU a ^ fe^flfeMj



      fountains, sweet-smelling herbs, aromatic blossoms and convenient arbors in which to sit and enjoy the effect. These gardens are mentioned in den 2 and 3; 13 10; Cant, 4 12-10; Eccl 2 5.6; Ezekiel 28 i: >; 31 south<); 36 lio; Joel 2 3. Ancient Babylonian, Assyr and Kgyp records show the fondness of the rulers of these countries for gardens laid out on a grand scale; and planted with the rarest trees and plants. The drawings made by the ancients of their gardens leave no doubt about their general features and their correspondence with Biblical gardens. The Pers word panics (Trapddeuro^, parddeisos) ap pears in the later Hebrews writings to denote more ex tensive gardens or parks. It is translated d "orchards" in Eccl 2 5 AV; Cant 4 13. See PARADISeast

      Such gardens are still common throughout the Levant. They are usually situated on the out skirts of a city (cf John 18 l.2G; 19 41), except in the case of the more pretentious estates of rich pashas or of the government seats (cf 2 Kings 21 LS; Est 1 5; 7 7.Samuel; Neh 3 15; 2 Kings 25 4; Jcr 39

      come instinctive with the inhabitants of Philestina, Canaan-Land and Syria. The writer has seen a group of young Arab boys modeling a garden out of mini and conducting water to irrigate it by channels from a nearby canal, in a manner that a modern engineer would admire. (lardens are cultivated, not only for their fruits and herbs (cf Cant 6 11; Isaiah l Samuel; 1 Kings 21 2) and shade (cf Cant 6 11; Luke 13 IS)), but they are planned to serve as dwelling-places during the summer t ime when the houses are hot and stuffy. That this was an ancient practice is indicated by Cant 5 2; 6 2; 8 13. A shaded garden, the air laden with the ethereal perfumes of fruits and flowers, accompanied by the music of running water, a couch on which to sit or recline, suggest a condi tion of bliss dear to the Oriental. Only one who has t raveled for days in a dry, glaring desert country and has come upon a spot like the gardens of such a city as Damascus, can realize how near like para dise these gardens can appear. Mohammed pic tured such a place as the future abode of his follow-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Gar Gate

      ers. No doubt the remembrances of his visit to Damascus were fresh in his mind when he wrote. El-Jannah is used by the Moslems to signify the "paradise of the faithful."

      Gardens were used as places of sacrifice, esp. in heathen worship (Isaiah 1 29; 65 3; 66 17). They sometimes contained burial places (2 Kings 21 18.26; John 19 41).

      Figurative: The destruction of gardens typified desolation (Am 4 9); on the other hand, fruitful gardens figured prosperity (Numbers 24 6; Job 8 16; Isaiah 51 3; 58 11; 61 11; Jeremiah 29 5.28; 31 12; Am 9 14). JAMES A. PATCH

      GARDEN, THE KING Samuel: Mention is made of "the king s garden" in 2 Kings 25 4; Jeremiah 39 4; 52 7

      (fundamentally the same passage), in connection with the flight of Zedekiah from Jerus; and again in Neh 3 15. The last passage shows that the "garden" was at the pool of Siloah (RV "Shelah"), at the mouth of Tyropceon, near the "fountain gate." This would seem to be "the gate between the two walls which was by the king s garden" of the passages in 2 Kings and Jeremiah (cf 2 Chronicles 32 5). On the topography, see JERUSALEM; also Robinson, Philestina, Canaan-Land, II, 142. _ Arnold (in Herzog) thinks the garden is probably identical with "the garden of Uzza" of 2 Kings 21 18.26. JAMES ORR

      GARDENER, gar d n-er (tcfjirovpos, ktpouros): "Gardener" occurs once in the EV (John 20 15), the translated of kepos and ouros, "warden" or "keeper." It is likely that the man referred to was the watchman or keeper (Arab, natur; Hebrews noqer), correspond ing to those mentioned in 2 Kings 17 9; 18 8; Job 27 18, etc, and not one who did the manual labor. It is the common practice in Philestina, Canaan-Land today to pet a watchman over a garden during its productive season. See WATCHMAnorth

      GARDEN-HOUSE Cj3n rP3 , beth ha-gan): A place mentioned in describing the flight of Ahaziah, king of Judah, from Jehu (2 Kings 9 27). Probably we ought not to translate the Hebrews, but take it as a proper name, BETH-HAGGAN (q.v.). If he fled southward, the town might possibly be Jenln, EN- GANNIM, which see.

      GAREB, ga reb (ITU , garebh}: One of David s "mighty men of the armies" (2 Samuel 23 38; 1 Chronicles 11 40), an "Ithrite," i.e. a member of one of the fami lies of Kiriath-jearim (1 Chronicles 2 53). Some, how ever, read ha-yattirl for ha-yithrl, thus making him a native of Jattir. See IRA.

      GAREB, ga reb, THE HILL OF (115, garebh): A hill in the neighborhood of Jerus, which was one of the landmarks to which the prophet Jeremiah (31 39) foresaw that the city should extend. The site is unknown. Cheyne (E B) would connect this with the "mountain that lieth before the valley of Hinnom westward" (Joshua 15 8), but this is too far south; it is inconceivable that the prophet could have imagined the city extending so far in this direction; most probably the hill was to the north the one natural direction for the city s exten sion and is now incorporated in the modern suburbs. east west G. MASTERMAN

      GARIZIM, gar i-zim. See GERIZIM.

      GARLAND, gar land (or^a, stemma, "wreath") : Mentioned only in Acts 14 13, where it is said that the priest of Jupiter brought oxen and garlands unto the gates with which to offer sacrifices unto Barna bas and Paul. The rendering "oxen and garlands," instead of "oxen garlanded," seems to imply that

      the garlands were for the priests and altar and wor shippers themselves, as well as for the victims sacri ficed. Only occasionally did the Hebrews use such ornaments for themselves, and that almost alto gether in their later history. See CROWnorth

      GARLIC, gar lik (D1EJ, shum, used only in pi. D^TU, shumlm; cf Arab. *.j, thtim): One of the

      delights of Egypt for which the Israelites in the Wilderness longed (Numbers 11 5); we know from other sources that, though originally a product of Central Asia, garlic was known to the ancient Egyptians. It is the bulb of Alliarn sativum, northO. Liliaceae, and is cultivated all over the Orient. It is eaten cooked in stews; its disagreeable penetrating odor is in evi dence in the houses and on the breath of most Orien tals. A bulb of garlic, hung over a bed or over the door of a house, is a powerful charm against the evil eye and other malign influences.

      east west G. MASTEUMAN GARMENT, gar ment. See DRESS.

      GARMITE, gar mit (^% garmi): A gentilic name applied to Kcilah in 1 Chronicles 4 19. The reason for this is not known.

      GARNER, gar ner (^ITO , mazii; <iiro0TJKii, apo- thtke) : "Garners," derived from zawah, "to gather," occurs in Psalm 144 13; dear is similarly translated d in Joel 1 17. In the NT apolheke is twice translated d "garner" (Alt 3 12; Luke 3 17). The same word is translated d "barns" in Matthew 6 26; 13 30; Luke 12 18.24.

      GARNISH, gar nish (HSl y , tfppah, PHSttJ, shiphrah; KOO-^ W, kosmeo): The word is ,ised twice in the OT. In 2 Chronicles 3 6, Qippah means "to overlay," or "to plate." Thus he "garnished" the house or "overlaid" it, "studded" it, with precious stones, and thus adorned and beautified it. In Job 26 13, shiphrah is a fern, noun meaning "fairness," "beauty," "brilliancy." "By his Spirit the heavens are garnished," i.e. the clouds are driven off by the wind or breath of JAH (Jehovah), and the sky made bright and clear.

      In the NT (Matthew 12 44; 23 29) the word kosmeo means "set in order," "make ready," "adorn," etc. In Matthew 25 7 it is translated d "trimmed," and in The Revelation 21 19 "adorned." J. j. REEVE

      GARRISON, gar i-s n. See WAR.

      GAS, gas (Fas, Gas): Named among the "sons of the servants of Solomon" (1 Esdras 5 34); not mentioned in the lists of Ezra and Neh.

      GASHMU, gash mu, gash rmx) OVJaipa, gashmu): A form of the name GESHEM (q.v.), found in Neh 6 6 (cf ver 1), "And Gashmu saith it." According to BOB the same termination -u is found in Naba- taean proper names.

      GATAM, ga tam (3^5, ga*tam): An Edomite chief, grandson of Esau (Genesis 36 11.16; 1 Chronicles 1 36).

      GATE, gat (Hebrews normally [over 300 t] "l?TZJ, sha ar; occasionally rib 1 ! , deleth, prop, "gateway" [but cf Deuteronomy 3 5] ; elsewhere the gateway is nns , pet hah [cf esp. Genesis 19 6]; Aram. 3Hn, pra*; ~Greek Xc6v, pulon, irv,T], pule; ERV and AV add DO, saph, "threshold," in 1 Chronicles 9 19.22; and AV adds

      rib^I, d e lathayim, "double-door," in Isaiah 45 1; 0vpa, thtira, "door," Acts 3 2):

      (1) The usual gateway was provided with double doors, swung on projections that fitted into sockets

      Gate, Corner Gather



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      in the sill ;uul linlcl. Ordinarily the material was ,vood (Xeh 2 o.l7), hut greater strength and pro tection against fire ,vas given by plating with metal (Psalm 107 Hi; Isaiah 45 2). Jos (HJ, V, v, 3) speaks of the .-:nl.fil metal doors of the Beautiful (late (Acts 3 2) as a very exceptional thing. Some doors were solid slabs of stone, from which the imagery of single jewels (Isaiah 54 12; The Revelation 21 21) was derived. When closed, the doors were secured with a bar (usually of wood, Xah 3 13, but sometimes of metal, 1 Kings 4 13; Psalm 107 10; Isaiah 45 2), which fitted into clamps on the doors and sockets in the post, uniting the whole firmly (Judges 16 3). Some times, perhaps, a portcullis was used, but Psalm 24 7 refers to the enlargement or enrichment of the gates. As the gate was esp. subject to attack (E/,k 21 !.">. 22), and as to possess the gate" was to possess the city (den 22 17; 24 00), it was protected by a tower (2 Samuel 18 21.33; 2 Chronicles 14 7; 26 9), often, doubtless, overhanging and with flanking projec tions. Sometimes an inner gate was added (2 Samuel 18 24). Unfortunately, Philestina, Canaan-Land gives us little monu mental detail.

      GATE, EAST: The expressions are found in Ezekiel: Even the gate that looketh toward the east" (43 1); "The gate whose prospect is toward the east" (ver 4); but the idea of a gate on the eastern side as the principal entrance to the court of the sanctuary goes back to the days of the tabernacle (Exodous 27 13-10). In addition to its use as admitting to the sanctuary inclosure, it may be presumed, in analogy with the general mode of the administration of justice, to have been the place where in earlier times cases were tried which wen; referred to the jurisdiction of the sanctuary (cf Exodous 18 19-22; Deuteronomy 17 Samuel; 19 10. IS; Numbers 27 2.3, etc).

      In Exodous 27 13-10 the "gate" by which the con gregation entered the tabernacle is carefully de scribed. An embroidered screen of the 1. The three sacred colors (blue, purple and

      Tabernacle scarlet), 20 cubits in width, hung from 4 pillars (really 5 pillars, 5 cubits apart; on the reckoning see TABERNACLE), in the renter of the east side of the tabernacle court. This is further alluded to in Numbers 4 20, " the screen for the door of the gate of the court."


      (2) As even farm laborers slept in the cities, most of the men passed through the gate every day, and the gate was the place for meeting others (Ruth 4 1; 2 Samuel 15 2) and for assemblages. For the latter purpose "broad" or open places (distinguished from the "streets" in Prov 7 12) were provided (1 Kings 22 10; Neh 8 1), and these were the centers of the public life. Here t he markets were held (2 Kings 7 1), and the special commodities in these gave names to the gates (Xeh 3 1.3.2S). In particular, the "gate" was the place of the legal tribunals (Deuteronomy 16 IS; 21 19; 25 7, etc), so that a seat "among the elders in the gates" (Prov 31 23) was a high honor, while "oppression in the gates" was a synonym for judicial corruption (Job 31 21; Prov 22 22; Isaiah 29 21; Am 5 10). The king, in especial, held public audiences in the gate (2 Samuel 19 Samuel; 1 Kings 22 10; Jeremiah 38 7; cf Jeremiah 39 3), and even yet "Sublime Porte" (the French translated of the Turkish for "high gate") is the title of the Court of Constantinople. To the gates, as the place of throngs, prophets and teachers went with their message (1 Kings 22 10; Jeremiah 17 19; Prov 1 21; 83; 31 31), while on the other hand the gates were the resort of the town good-for-nothings (Psalm 69 12).

      (3) "Gates" can be used figuratively for the glory of a city (Isaiah 3 20; 14 31; Jeremiah 14 2; Lam 1 4; contrast Psalm 87 2), but whether the military force, the rulers or the people is in mind cannot be deter mined. In Matthew 16 IS "gates of Hades" (not "hell") may refer to the hcsts (or princes) of Satan, but a more likely translated is the gates of the grave [which keep the dead from returning] shall not be stronger than it. The meaning in Judges 5 south 11 is very uncertain, and the text may be corrupt. See CITY; JERUSALEM; TABERNACLE; TEMPLeast BURTON SCOTT EAS.TON


      etc. See JERUSALEM.

      Nothing is said of the position of gates in connec tion with Solomon s temple, but there was an "inner" (1 Kings 6 30), and also an "outer" or

      2. Solo- "great" court (2 Chronicles 4 9), the latter mon s with doors overlaid with brass, and Temple analogy makes it certain that, here also

      the chief gate (inner or outer court? see COURT) was on the east side. Provision was made by Solomon in his adjoining palace for the administration of justice; in a hall or "porch of judgment" (1 Kings 7 7), but graver cases were still, apparently, referred for decision to the sanctuary (Jeremiah 26 10). The trial in Jeremiah s case, how ever, took place, not at the east gate, but at "the entry of the new gate of JAH (Jehovah) s house" (Jeremiah 26 10; cf 36 10), probably Jot ham s "upper gate" (2 Kings 15 35).

      In Ezekiel a ideal temple, "the gate whose pros pect was toward the east" was that by which the glory of JAH (Jehovah) went up from the city

      3. Ezekiel s (11 23), and by which the prophet in Temple vision saw it return (43 4). Nothing

      is told of an east gate in the temple of

      4. Second Zerubbabel, but it may be assumed Temple that there was one as in the other

      eases. The great east gate of the He-

      5. Herod s rodian temple, which followed those Temple above mentioned, was that "Beautiful

      Gate of the temple" where the miracle of the healing of the lame man was performed (Acts 3 1-10). See GATE, THE BEAUTIFUL; HARSITH; SHECANIAH. west SHAW CALDECOTT

      GATE, ( THE BEAUTIFUL, bu ti-fool (fj <Lpaa irviX.T] TOV Upov, he horuia pule tou hierou) : This gate of Herod s temple is mentioned in the narrative of the healing of the lame man by Peter and John in Acts 3 2.10. Little dispute exists as to the identi fication of the Beautiful Gate with the splendid




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Gate, Corner Gather

      "gate of Nicanor" of tho Mish (Mid., i.4), arid "Corinthian Gate" of Jos (II. J , V, v, 3), hut author ities are divided as to whether this gate was sit uated at the entrance to the women s court on the east, or was the gate reached by 15 steps, dividing that court from the court of the men. The balance; of recent opinion inclines strongly to the former view (cf Kennedy, "Problems of Herod s Temple," Expos T, XX, 170); others take the opposite view (Waterhouse, in Sacred Sites of the Gospels, 110), or leave the question open (thus G. A. Smith, Jeru salem, II, 212). See TEMPLE, HEROD south The gate itself was of unusual size and splendor. It received the name "Nicanor" from its being the work, or having been constructed at the expense, of an Alexandrian Jew of this name. Lately an ossuary was discovered on Matthew. Olivet bearing the Greek inscrip tion: "The bones of Nicanor the Alexandrian, who made the doors." Its other name, "Corinthian," refers to the costly material of which it was con structed Corinthian bronze. Jos gives . many interesting particulars about this gate, which, he tells us, greatly excelled in workmanship and value all the others (BJ, V, v, 3). These were plated with gold and silver, but this still more richly and t hickly. It was larger than the other gates; was 50 cubits in height (the others 40); its weight was so great that it took 20 men to move it (BJ , VI, vi, 3). Its massiveness and magnificence, therefore, well earned for it the name "Beautiful."


      GATE, VALLEY: In Nch 2 13 AV, "gate of the valley." See JERUSALEM.

      GATH, gath (nil, gath; LXX Ttt, Geth, "wine press"): One of the five chief cities of the Philis (Joshua 13 3; 1 Samuel 6 17). It was a walled town (2 Chronicles 26 6) and was not taken by Joshua, and, al though many conflicts took place between the Israelites and its people, it does not seem to have been captured until the time of David (1 Chronicles 18 I). It was rendered famous as the abode of the giant Goliath whom David slew (1 Samuel 17 4), and other giants of the same race (2 Samuel 21 18-22). It was to G. that the Ashdodites conveyed the ark when smitten with the plague, and G. was also smitten (1 Samuel 6 8.9). It was G. where David took refuge twice when persecuted by Saul (21 10; 27 2-4). It seems to have been destroyed after being taken by David, for we find Rehoboam restoring it (2 Chronicles 11 8). It was after this reoccupied by the Philis, for we read that Uzziah took it and razed its walls (26 (5), but it must have been restored again, for we find Hazael of Damascus capturing it (2 Kings 12 17). It seems to have, been destroyed before the time of Amos (Am 6 2), and is not further mentioned in the OT or Mace, except in Micah 1 10, where it is referred to in the proverb, "Tell it not in Gath" (cf 2 Samuel 1 20). Since its destruction occurred, probably, in the middle of the 8th cent. BC, it is easy to under stand why the site has been lost so that it can be fixed only conjecturally. Several sites have been suggested by different explorers and writers, such as: Tell es Sdfi, Beit Jibrin, Khurbet Jeladiyeh, Khurbet Abu Geith, Jennata and Yebna (see PEFS. 1871, 91; 1875, 42, 144, 194; 1880, 170-71, 211- 23; 1886,200-202). Tradition in the early centuries AD fixed it at 5 Romans miles north of Eleutheropolis (Beit Jibrin, toward Lydda, which would indicate Tell es Sdfi as the site, but the Crusaders thought it was at Jamnia ( Yebna), where they erected the castle of Ibelin, but the consensus of opinion in modern times fixes upon Tell es Sdfi as the site, as is to be gathered from the references cited in PEFS above. The Biblical notices of G. would indicate a place in the Phili plain or the Shephelah, which was fortified, presumably in a strong position on the

      border of the Phili country toward the territory of Judah or Dan. Tell r.s Sdfi fits into these condi tions fairly well, but without other proof this is not decisive. It is described in SWP, II, 240, as a posi tion of strength on a narrow ridge, with precipitous cliffs on the north and west, connected with the hills by a narrow neck, so that it is thrust out like a bastion, a position easily fortified. In 1144 Fulke of Anjou erected here a castle called Blanchegarde (Alba Specula ). The writeron "Gath and Its Worthies" in PEFS, 1886, 200-204, connects the name Sdfi with that of the giant Saph (2 Samuel 21 18), regarding him as a native of Gath, but the most direct evidence from early tradition connecting Tell es Sdfi with Gath is found in a MS said to be in the library of the Patriarchate of Jerus, which informs us that Catherocastrum was situated on a mountain called Telesaphion or Telesaphy, which is clearly Tell es Sdfi. Catherocastrum must be the Lat for "camp of Gath" (PEFS, 1906, 305). H. PORTER

      GATHER, gath er (?C , amph, 75)5 , kabhag; <rvX,Y&), sullegd, o-vva-yw, sundgd): "Gather," trans "to bring together," "collect," etc, and intrans "to come together," "assemble," etc, occurs frequently and represents many Hebrews and Cr words. It is the translated of dsaph, "to bring together," in Joshua 6 9, AVm "gathering host"; Psalm 27 10, AVm "The Lord will gatherme"; cf Numbers 12 14.15; Isaiah 52 12 AVm. The phrases "gather thee unto thy fathers," "gathered unto his fathers," "gathered into the grave," etc, are frequently used for "to die" and "death" (Genesis 25 8.17; 49 29.33; Deuteronomy 32 50; 2 Kings 22 20; 2 Chronicles 34 28; Job 27 19; cf Jeremiah 8 2), etc; kdbliac, "to take or grasp with the hand," is frequently used of the Divine "gathering" or restoration of Israel (Deuteronomy 30 3.4; Noh 1 9; Psalm 106 47; Isaiah 43 5, etc; Ezekiel 20 34, etc; Hosea 8 10; Micah 2 12; Zeph 3 19.20; Zee 108.10); figuratively, Isaiah 40 11, "He shall gather the lambs with [RV "in"] his arm" (cf Psalm 27 10 AVm); sometimes it denotes bringing together for punishment or destruction (Micah 4 12), "He hath gathered them as the sheaves to t he threshing-floor."

      In the NT we have sullego, "to lay together," "to collect" (Matthew 13 28. 29. 30.40.41. 48); sunagd,"tolead or bring together," "to gather," "to collect" (25 26, "seek returns"; John 4 36, "fruit unto life eter nal"); episundgo, "to lead or bring together" (Matthew 23 37, "even as a hen gathereth her chickens") ; ana- kephalaidomai, "to sum up under one head," "to recapitulate" (Eph 1 10, "that he might gather together in one all things in Christ," RV "to sum up all things in Christ"; cf 2 14; in Romans 13 9 the pass, is translated d "be briefly comprehended," RV "sum med up").

      "To gather," in the sense of "to infer," occurs in Acts 16 10 as the translated of sumbibdzo, "to bring to gether" (here, in mind), "assuredly gathering," RV "concluding" (cf 9 22, "proving").

      Gatherer occurs in Am 714 as the translated of boles, from bdlas, to cultivate figs or sycomores, "a gatherer of sycamore fruit," RV "a dresser of sycomore-trees" ("a nipper of sycomore figs, i.e. helping to cultivate a sort of figs or mulberries produced by the real sycamore tree" [used only by the poorest], which requires nipping in the cultivation, perhaps an occupation of shepherds; Vulg vellicans sijcamnia).

      Gathering is the translated of episunagogt, "leading to gether unto" (2 Thessalonians 21), "our gathering to gether unto him"; in 1 Corinthians 16 2 we have "gath ering" (logia from lego) in the sense of a collection of many, RV "collection," as AV in ver 1.

      "Gather," etc, occurs frequently in Apoc, e.g. "will gather us out of all tho nations, sunai/0 (Tob 13 5); "gather thorn together" (1 Mace 9 7; lO^N) ; "Gather together our dispersion," epixund/jage ten dinsjwrdn hlmOn (2 Mace 1 27); "gathered to his fathers"

      Gath-hepher Gazites



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      prosetethe pr6s tdn Ia6n autou. KV" people" (Jth 16 22; L5el ver 1, toils patera*; 1 Mace- 2 <><>); "gathering up bi-icfly," RV "gather." sunUmno (2 Mace 10 10i; a "gathering" in the sense of a collect inn of money (12 i:{). KV "collection."

      Among the changes in RV we have "hold firm" for "gather" (Jeremiah 51 11); "(lather thee together" for "Go one way or other" (Kings/k 21 10 m, " Make thyself one") ; for"ga ther blackness" (Nah 2 10), "are waxed pale", for "or gather together" (Job 11 10). "and call unto judgment," m " Hebrews cull an assembly": for "even as a hen doth gather her brood" (Luke 13 34) "gathereth her own brood"; for "as the partridge sitteth on eggs and hateheth them not." AKV has "that sitteth on eggs which she hath not laid," m "gathereth young which she hath not brought forth," text of ERA and AVm (Jeremiah 17 11).

      , . L. , ALKER

      GATH-HEPHER, gath-he fer ("ffinn r,3, gath ha-hepher, "winepress of the pit"): A (own on the boundary of Xebulun (Joshua 19 13; AV in error, "Gittah-hapher")) the birthplace of the prophet Jonah (2 Kings 14 2 )). Jerome (Cotiim. on Jon) speaks of C!eth as an inconsiderable villas* , about 2 miles from Sepphoris on the Tiberias road, where the tomb of Jonah was shown. Benjamin of Tudela says thai Jonah I lie son of Amittai the prophet was buried "in the mountain near Sepphoris (Holm, Early Tmrcls in J al, <SS). These indications agree with the local tradition which identifies ( lat h-hepher with cl-Mcsltlu d, a village with ancient ruins on a height north of the road as one goes to Tiberias, about 2 miles from Na/areth, and half a mile from Kefr Kcit nail. west EWIM;

      GATH-RIMMON, gath-rim un CpE"! P3 , gnth rinintd/i, "winepress of Himmon"):

      (1) A city in the territory of Dan named with Bene-berak and Me-jarkon, in the plain not far from Joppa (.Joshua 19 4f>), assigned to the Kohathite Levites (21 24), reckoned to Ephraim in 1 Chronicles 6 (59. Onom locates it 12 miles from Eleutheropolis on the way to Diospolis. This, however, is too far to the south More probably it is identical with tin 1 "(lath" which Ononi places between Antipatris and Janmia. It is not identified.

      (2) A town in the territory of Manasseh, west of Jordan, given to the Levites (Joshua 21 2.")). There is nothing to indicate the position of the place, and there is much confusion in the writing of the name: LXX A,"; B, "Jebatha." In 1 Chronicles 6 70 it is replaced by "Bileam," i.e. IHLKAM (q.v.).

      west Ewi.Nd GAULONITIS, gol-on-1 tis. See GOLAnorth

      GAULS, gol/ (FaXou-cu, (lalalai): Galatia in Asia Minor is literally the (fallia of the East; its in habitants are called CoilL by Romans writers, just as the inhabitants of ancient France are called d alatai by Greek writers. In some MSS in 2 Timothy 4 10, r/.s (laUiiin is read for c/.s d ulatian. The emigration of the Gauls from Europe and their settlement in the central region of the peninsula of Asia Minor are somewhat obscure subjects, but the ancient authorities leave no doubt of the main facts. In 1 Mace 8 2 it is difficult to say whether Judas Maccabaeus is referring to the Gauls of Europe or the Gauls of Asia Minor. Both became finally sub ject to the Romans, and about the same time. It was in 191 BC that Gallia Cisalpina was reduced to the form of a Romans province, and in 189 BC oc curred the defeat of Antiochus, king of Asia. Mommsen argues that the reference is to the Gauls in the north of Italy, from the circumstance that they are mentioned as being under tribute to the Romans, and also from their mention in connect ion with Spain. Not much, however, can be argued from this, as the notice of them is in a manner rhetorical, and the defeat of Antiochus is mentioned practically in the same connection. In 2 Mace 8 20 the reference is without doubt to the Asiatic Gauls or Galatians,

      as they are more commonly called. In the Macca- bean period they were restless and fond of war, and often hired themselves out as auxiliaries to the Asiatic kings. J. HTTCHISON

      GAZA, ga /a (r,~," , azzah, "strong"; LXX rda, (liiza; Arab, syt , (ihazzch): One of the five

      chief towns of Philistia and probably the oldest, situated near the coast in lat. 31 30 and about 40 miles south of Jaffa. It is on a hill rising (50 to 200 ft. above the plain, with sand dunes between it, and the sea, which is about 2^, miles distant. The plain around is fertile and wells abound, and, being on the border of the desert between Syria and Egypt and lying in the track of caravans and armies passing from one to the other, it was anciently a place of importance. The earliest notices of it are found in the records of Egypt. Thot limes III refers to it in the account of his expedition to Syria in 1479 BC, and it occurs again in the records of the expedition


      of Seti I in 1313 BC (Breasted, History of Egypt, 2S- r ), 409). It occurs also in the early catalogue of cities and tribes inhabiting Canaan in the earliest times (Genesis 10 19). Joshua reached it in his con quests but did not take it (Joshua 10 41; 11 22). Judah captured it (Judges 1 IS) but did not hold it long, for we find it in the hands of the Philis in the days of Samson, whose exploits have rendered it noteworthy (16 1-3.21.30). The hill to which he carried off the gate of the city was probably the one now called el-Miinlar ("watch-tower"), which lies southeast of the city and may be referred to in 2 Kings 18 Samuel, "from the tower of the watchmen to the fortified city." G., with the other chief towns, sent a tres pass offering to JAH (Jehovah) when the ark was returned (1 Samuel 6 17). He/ekiah defeated and pursued the Philis to G., but does not seem to have captured it. It was taken by Sargon in 720 BC, in his war with Egypt, since Khanun, the king of G., joined the Egyptians and was captured at the battle of Raphia (Hawlinson, Ancient Monarchies, II, 142). It was probably destroyed (see Am 1 7). It was cer tainly dismantled by Alexander the Great in 332, when it dared to resist him. It was then exceedingly strong, verifying its name, and was most bravely defended, so that it took Alexander two months to reduce it. He put to death all the men and sold the women and children as slaves (Grote, History of d riicc, XI, 467 ff). It was restored, however, and we learn that Jonathan forced it to submit to him (Jos, Ant, XIII, v, 5; 1 Mace 11 62), and Alex ander Jannaeus took it and massacred the inhabit ants who escaped the horrors of the siege (Jos, Ant, XIII, xiii, 3). Pompey restored the freedom of G. (ib, XIV, iv, 4), and Gabinius rebuilt it in 57 BC (ib, XIV, v, 3). G. is mentioned only once in the NT (Acts 8 2(5), in the account of Philip and the eunuch. In the 2d and 3d cents. AD, it became a center of Greek commerce and culture, and pagan in fluence was strong, while the church founded there was struggling for existence. Many martyrs there




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Gath-hepher Gazites

      testified to the faith, until finally, under Theodosius, Christianity gained the supremacy (HGHL, 12th ed, 188). It fell into the hands of the Arabs in 634 AD, and became and has remained a Moslem city since the days of Saladin, who recovered it from the Crusaders in 1187, after the battle of Hattin. It is now a city of some 20,000 inhabitants, among whom are a few hundred Christians. See also AZZAH.

      H. PORTER

      GAZARA, ga-za ra (Parapet, Gazdra, Fa^-qpcC, Gazerd) : A fortress of great strength in Judaea, which figures often in the Maccabean wars. To this place Judas pursued Gorgias (1 Mace 4 15). It was fortified by the Greek general Bacchides (9 52; Ant, XIII, i, 3). It was captured by Simon Macca- baeus, who turned out the inhabitants and purified the city. He built here a palace for himself, and appointed his son John commander of his army (1 Mace 13 43 ff). A different account of this occurrence is given in 2 Mace 10 32 ff, where the capture is attributed to Judas. The narrative here, however, is inspired by antagonism to Simon because he had assumed the high-priesthood.

      The fortress is identical with Tell Jczcr, the an cient GEZEH (q.v.). It is interesting to note that recent excavations have uncovered the ruins of Simon s palace (PEFS, 1905, 26). west EWING

      GAZATHITES, ga zath-Its (DT7?, ozzathim): The inhabitants of GAZA (q.v.) (Joshua 13 3 AV), rendered "Ga/ites" (Judges 16 2).

      GAZELLE, ga-zel p22 , fbhl, and fern. fblui/ah; cf Taf3i0d, Tabcilhd [Acts 9 36], and Arab, /c**"* 5 , zabi; also Arab. J y- , ghazul; AopKas,

      Dorkds [9 36] ; modern Greek apKa8i., zarkddi) : The word "gazelle" does not occur in AV, where fbhl and c e bhiyah, in the 16 passages where they occur, are uniformly translated d "roe" or "roebuck." In RV the treatment is not uniform. We find "gazelle" with out comment in Deuteronomy 12 15.22; 14 5; 15 22; 1 Kings 4 23. We find "roe," with marginal note "or ga zelle," in Prov 6 5; Cant 2 7.9.17; 4 5; 8 14;

      Gazelle (Gazella dorcas).

      Isaiah 13 14. We find "roe" without comment in 2 Samuel 2 IS; 1 Chronicles 12 Samuel; Cant 3 5; 7 3. In the last passage cited, Cant 7 3, while ARV has no note, ERV refers to Cant 4 5, where "gazelle" is given in the in. In the opinion of the writer, the rendering should be "gazelle" in all of these pas sages. It must be acknowledged, however, that the gazelle and the roe-deer are of about the same size, and are sometimes confused with each other. The Greek dorkas may refer to either, and in Syria the

      roe-deer is sometimes called ghazdl or even wa*l, which is the proper name of the Pers wild goat.

      The gazelle is an antelope belonging to the bovine family of the even-toed ruminants. There are more than twenty species of gazelle, all belonging to Asia and Africa. The species found in Syria and Philestina, Canaan-Land is the Dorcas gazelle (Gazella dorcas). It is 2 ft. high at the shoulders. Both sexes have un- branched, lyrate, ringed horns, which may be a foot long. The general coloration is tawny, but it is creamy white below and on the rump, and has a narrow white line from above the eye to the nostril. Several varieties have been distinguished, but they will not bear elevation to the rank of species, except perhaps G. merilli, a form of which a few speci mens have been obtained from the Judaean hills, having distinctly different horns from those of the common gazelle. The gazelle is found singly or in small groups on the interior plains and the uplands, but not in the high mountains. It is a marvel of lightness and grace, and a herd, when alarmed, makes off with great rapidity over the roughest country (2 Samuel 2 18; 1 Chronicles 12 ,Samuel; Prov 6 5; Cant 8 14). The beauty of the eyes is proverbial. The skin is used for floor coverings, pouches or shoes, and the flesh is eaten, though not highly esteemed. See DEER; GOAT; ZOOLOGY. ALFRED ELY DAY

      gazer [in pause]). Sec

      GAZER, ga zer GEZER.

      GAZERA, ga-ze ra (Pa^pd, Gazerd) :

      (1) A fortress of Judaea (1 Mace 4 15; 7 45); in RV always GAZARA (q.v.).

      (2) Head of a family of temple-servants who re turned with Zerubbabel (1 Esdras 5 31) = "Gazzam" in Ezra 2 48 and Neh 7 51.

      GAZEZ, ga zez (TT3, gdzez, "shearer"):

      (1) A son of Ephah, Caleb s concubine (1 Chronicles 2 46).

      (2) A second Gazez is mentioned in the same ver as a son of Haran, another son of Ephah.

      GAZING-STOCK, gaz ing-stok: This obs word occurs twice: (1) in Nah 3 6, as the translated of " 1 Sn, ro I, "a sight" or "spectacle" (from radh, "to look," "see," also "to look down upon," "despise"); "I will .... make thee vile, and will set thee as a gazing-stock," as one set up to be gazed at , mocked and despised a form of punishment in olden times; cf "mocking stock" (2 Mace 7 7), and "laughing stock" still in use. The Hebrews word occurs only here and in Genesis 16 13; 1 Samuel 16 12; Job 7 8; 33 21, in which places it does not have the same bad mean ing; for a similar threatening cf Isaiah 14 16; Jeremiah 51 37. (2) In He 10 33, it is the translated of thcatrizo, "to bring upon the theater," "to be made a spectacle of," "made a gazing stock both by reproaches and afflictions"; cf 1 Corinthians 4 9, theatron ginoniai, where St. Paul says the apostles were "made a spectacle unto the world," AVm "Greek theatre." The reference in both instances is to the custom of exhibiting criminals, and esp. gladiators, men doomed to death, in the theaters. "In the morning men are exposed to lions and bears; at mid-day to their spectators; those that kill are exposed to one another; the victor is detained for another slaughter; the conclusion of the fight is death" (Seneca, Ep. vii, quoted by Dr. A. Clarke on 1 Corinthians 4 9). We are apt to for get what the first preachers and professors of Chris tianity had to endure. west L. WALKKR

      GAZITES, gaz its: Inhabitants of Gaza, who were Philis when the Israelites came into contact with them (Joshua 13 3; Judges 16 2), but there! was an older stratum of population which occupied the

      Gazzam Gederoth



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      place before the invasion of the Philis, probably of

      Amorite stock.

      GAZZAM, gaz am (2-J3 , r/azzam, "devouring"): Head of a family of Nethinim who returned from exile (Ezra 2 48; Neh7f>l; 1 Esdras 6 31, "Ga-


      GEBA, ge ba (723, gebha 1 , "hill ):

      (1) A town on the northI 1 ], boundary of the terri tory of Benjamin (Joshua 18 24), given to the Lovites (Joshua 21 17; 1 Chronicles 6 (50). It stood on the north ern frontier of the kingdom of Judah, Geba and Beersheba marking respectively the northern and southern limits (2 Kings 23 Samuel). In 285 2,5 "Geba" should be altered to "Giboon," which stands in the corresponding passage, 1 Chronicles 14 16. In Judges 20 10.33; 1 Samuel 13 3.1(5, the Hebrews reads "Geba," the translated "Gibeah" being due to confusion of the two names. From 1 Samuel 14 5 we gather that Geba stood to the south of the great gorge, Wddy fiuweinlt, commanding the pass at Michmash. This was the scene of Jonathan s daring enterprise against the Philis, when, accompanied by his armor-bearer, he accomplished an apparently impossible, feat, climb ing the rocky steeps of the gorge to the north and put ting the enemy to flight. Then 1 can be no doubt that t lie modern village of Jclia* occupies the ancient site. It stands to the south of , <ltlij Xuwdtnt, looking toward Michmash modern Mukhmas with Seneh, the crag on the southern lip of Hie gorge, in front of it. The distance from Jerus is about miles. It was fortified by Asa with materials that his enemy Baasha had used to fortify Ramah against him (1 Kings 15 22). It is named by Isaiah in his descrip tion of the terrifying march of the Assyrians upon Jerus from the north (10 28 ff). It appears among the cities which were reoccupied by Israel after the Exile (Ezra 2 2(5, etc; Neh 11 31).

      (2) (Yaiftai, Guilxii): Between a fortress so named and Scythopolis (Hci-tan), Holof ernes pitched his camj) (Jth 3 10). On Hie high road that runs through Jcnln, and down the Vale of Jezreel to Jin san, about 2 miles to the south of 8anur, stands the village of ,/<ha, with which this fortress may be identified. west EWING

      GEBAL, ge bal (bna, rfbhnl, border"; BvfBXos, Bullion, and BipXos, Biblos; Il>/l>l/is, mod. Jchcil):

      (1) An ancient Phoen city, situated on a bluff of the foothills of Lebanon, overlooking the Medi terranean. It was one of the principal seaports of Phoenicia, and had a small but good harbor for small ships. It lies in hit . 34 8 , nearly, and about 4 miles north of the river Adonis (Nahr Ibrahim}. It was regarded as a holy city by the ancients. Philo men tions the tradition that it was founded by Kronos, and was sacred to the worship of Belt is and, later, of Adonis, whose rites were celebrated yearly at the river of the same name and at its source in the mountain, at Apheca (sen: TAMMUZ). G. was the center of quite an extensive district, extending from the Eleutheru.s on the north to the Tarnyras on the south, a distance of (50 or 70 miles along the coast. It is mentioned by Joshua (13 5) as the land of the Gebalites (q.y.) (AV "Giblites"), and the Gebalites are also mentioned in 1 Kings 5 18 (Hebrews 32) as aiding in the construction of Solomon s temple. The "el ders" and the wise men" of G. are among the work men employed on Tyrian ships (Ezekiel 27 ,) ARVm). The earliest mention of G. found in history is in the Am Tab, which were composed in the first half of the 14th cent. BC. It had become, in connection with all Phoenicia, a dependency of Egypt in the days of Thothmes III and was under Egyp govern ors, but, in the reign of Amenhotep IV (Ikhnaton), the Ilittites and Amorites from the north and Khabiri

      from the south attacked the territory of G., and its governor wrote letters to Amenhotep, calling for help. There are over 60 of these, ((escribing the desperate condition of the city and of its governor, Ribaddi, who was expelled and took refuge in Beirut, but afterward regained his capital only to be be sieged and lose all his dependencies, and finally to fall into the hands of the enemy. G. afterward became independent, as is shown by the records of Ramses IX (1442-1423 BC) and of Ramses XII, for its king retained the emissaries of the former 1 7 years in captivity, and treated a trusted agent, of the latter with scant civility. Its king at this time was Zakkar-Baal, and kings of G. are mentioned in the Assyr records, one paying tribute to Ashur- nazir-pal (c 887 BC) and another to Sennacherib (705-680). The latter king was Uru-melek, and kings of G. are mentioned in connection with other Phoen cities under Pers rule. The city submitted to Alexander the Great without opposition, and furnished a fleet to aid him in the siege of Tyre (332). Strabo refers to it as a town of note in the days of Pompey (xvi.2.17), and it is frequently mentioned in Phoen (r/Samuel Y , 1) and Assyr inscriptions in the forms Gubal and Gubli (COT, I, 174).

      (2) (bna, tfbhal; TofioXlns, Gobolitis): A district southeast of the Dead Sea, which is referred to in Psalm 83 7 (Hebrews 8) in connection with Moab, Ammon, Ama- lek and others, as making a covenant together against Israel (cf 1 Mace 5). Robinson (till, II, 154) found the name Jcbdl still applied to this region, and Jos (Ant, II, i, 2) speaks of a Gcbulitix as form ing part of Idumaea. It is a hilly region, as the modern name signifies, and includes the towns of k and Tolfh h. H. POKTKK

      GEBALITES, ge bal-its Inhabitants of GEBAI, (q.v.). According to the present text of Joshua 13 5, "the land of the Genesis balites" was given to Israel as part of its future territory. But it was never occupied by the Is raelites. LNN, however, has a very different read ing, indicating an early corruption of the text. Perhaps with many modern scholars it is better to read "to the borders of the Gebalites."

      In 1 Kings 5 18 AV translates this word "stone- squarers," AVm gives "Giblites," and 11 V "Gebal ites," as workmen who, with the men of Solomon and of Hiram, fashioned the stones for the temple. Here also the text is doubtful, and some by a slight change would read: "and made a border for them" (i.e. for the stones). In Ezekiel 27 9 the men of Gebal are described as the "calkers" of the ships of Tyre and Sidon. GEORGE RICE HOVEY

      GEBER, ge bcr ("03, gcbher, "man," "strong one"):

      (1) According to 1 Kings 4 13 AV the father of one of the 12 officers who provided food for Solomon and his household (but here RV "Ben-geber"). His district lay to the northeast of Jordan.

      (2) Another, and the last in the list of Solomon s commissariat officers (1 Kings 4 19). His district, was also east of the Jordan, but probably to the south of that named in connection with the official of ver 13 (RV "Ben-geber"). According to the rendering of EV, he is said to have been "the only officer that was in the land." Unless the text, which presents some difficulties, is corrupt, as some suppose, it probably means that this large region was assigned to one official because less able than the others to furnish the required supplies.


      GEBIM, ge bim (D" 1 ?* , ycbhim, "trenches"): A place named only in Isaiah 10 31. Some would place it at Jebla, identifying it with the Geba of




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Gazzam Gederoth

      Eusobius, 5 Romans miles from Gophna (modern Jif- nch), on the way to Shechem. Its place, however, in the order of names, after Anathoth, seems to point to some position south of that village, to the northeast of Jerus.

      GECKO, gek o (RV for Kings^X , anakah, only in Leviticus 11 30; LXX (juryo-X^i, mugdle, "shrew mouse" or "field mouse"; AV ferret): Probably a shrew or a field mouse. See FERRET; LIZARD; SPIDER.

      GEDALIAH, gcd-a-li a (H^nil , cfdhalydh, except in 1 Chronicles 25 3.9 and Jcr 38 1, where it is ^*?~? , ffdhalyahu, "Yah[u] is great"):

      (1) Gedaliah, the son of Ahikam (the friend and protector of Jeremiah) and grandson of Shaphan (the scribe in the reign of Josiah) (2 Kings 25 22-25; Jcr 39 14; 40 5-16; 41 1-18).

      After the destruction of Jerus and the carrying

      away captive of the Jews to Babylon (586 BC),

      Gedaliah was appointed by Nebuchad-

      1. His Ap- nezzar governor over the poor Jews pointment who had been left in the land to be as Governor vinedressers and husbandmen (2 Kings in Judah 25 12.22). To his charge were com mitted also some royal princesses (Jeremiah

      43 6) and courtiers (41 16) who had been allowed to remain as unlikely to cause any trouble. Gedaliah fixed his residence at Mizpah, a few miles northwest of Jerus. Here he was joined by Jeremiah (40 6).

      The Jewish soldiers who had escaped capture,

      having heard that the Chaldaeans had departed, and

      that Gedaliah, one of their own nation,

      2. His Con- had been appointed governor in ciliatory Judah, came with Ishmael, Johanan Spirit and and other officers at their head, 1o Wise Rule Gedaliah at Mizpah (2 Kings 2.6 23.24;

      Jeremiah 40 7-10). The governor assured them that they need have no fear of vengeance from their conquerors, and promised them on oath pro tection and security, if they would remain and cultivate the land and become the peaceful subjects of the king of Babylon. This assurance led to a general gathering around Gedaliah of refugees from all the neighboring countries (Jeremiah 40 11.12). For two months (some think longer) Gedaliah s benefi cent and wise rule did much to consolidate affairs in Judah and to inspire the feeble remnant of his countrymen with heart and hope.

      But evil spirits were at work against him. Baalis,

      king of Ammon, had determined upon his life

      (Jeremiah 40 13-16). The peaceful and

      3. His popular rule which was being estab- Treacherous lished by the good governor stood in Assassi- the way of the accomplishment of nation any plan of conquest he entertained.

      Baalis found a ready instrument for his murderous design in Ishmael who, as one of royal birth and in the counsels of the king (41 1), was doubtless jealous of the man who had been chosen governor in preference to himself. Gedaliah was informed by Johanan and the other captains of the plot to assassinate him, and Johanan at a private interview expressed to him a strong desire to go himself and slay Ishmael secretly, declaring that t he safety of the Jews depended upon the life of the governor. But Gedaliah refused to allow Johanan to anticipate his enemy, believing, in the generosity of his heart, that Ishmael was not capable of such an act of treachery. He soon found, however, that his confidence had been sadly misplaced. Ishmael, with ten of his companions, came on a visit to him to Mizpah, and after they had been hospitably entertained they fell upon their good host and mur dered him, along with all the Jewish and the Chal- daean soldiers whom he had with him for order and protection (2 Kings 25 25; Jeremiah 41 1-3). They then

      cast the bodies of their victims into the cistern which Asa had made (ver 9). Ishmael was pursued and overtaken by Johanan, but he succeeded in effecting his escape to the Ammonites (vs 11-15). Then Johanan and the other captains, afraid lest the Chaldaeans should avenge upon them the murder of the governor (vs 16-18), and against the earnest entreaties of Jeremiah (ch 42), fled to Egypt, taking the prophet and the Jewish remnant with them (43 5-7). In memory of the date of Gedaliah s assassination the Jews kept a fast (which is still retained in the Jewish calendar) on the 3d day of the 7th month, Tishri (Zee 7 5; 8 19).

      The narratives reveal Gedaliah in a very attract ive light, as one who possessed the confidence alike

      of his own people and their conquerors; 4. His a man of rare wisdom and tact, and

      Noble of upright, transparent character,

      Character whose kindly nature and generous

      disposition would not allow him to think evil of a brother; a man altogether worthy of the esteem in which he was held by succeeding generations of his fellow-countrymen.

      (2) ((fdhalyahu): Son of Jeduthun, and instru mental leader of the 2d of the 24 choirs in the Leviti- cal orchestra (1 Chronicles 25 3.9).

      (3) A priest of the "sons of Joshua," in the time of Ezra, who had married a foreign woman (Ezra 10 18) .

      _(4) ((fdholijahu) : Son of Pashhur (who beat Jere miah and put him in the stocks, Jeremiah 20 1-6), and one of the chiefs of Jerus who, with the sanction of the king, Zcdekiah, took Jeremiah and let him down with cords into a cistern where he sank in the mud (38 1.4-6).

      (5) Grandfather of Zephaniah the prophet, and grandson of Hezekiah, probably the king (Zeph 1 1).


      GEDDUR, ged ur (FeSSovp, Gcddour): Head of a family of temple-servants (1 Esdras 5 30), corre sponding to Gahar of Ezra 2 47 and Neh 7 49.

      GEDEON, ged 0-on (He 11 32 AV). See GID EOnorth

      GEDER, ge der ("Ha, gedhcr): A royal city of the Canaanitcs taken by Joshua along with LachLsh, Eglon, Gezer, Debir and Hormah (Joshua 12 13 f). It may be the city called "Beth-gader" in 1 Chronicles 2 51, and the birthplace of Baal-hanan, who had charg" of David s olives and sycomores (27 28); un identified.

      GEDERAH, ge-de ra, GEDERATHITE, ge-dd ra- thit (rn~an, ha-g e dhcrdh, "the inclosed place"): A town in the Shephelah of Judah, named with Socoh, Azekah, Shaaraim and Adithaim (Joshua 15 36). In 1 Chronicles 4 23 RV reads, "the inhabitants of Netaim and Gederah," for AV, "those that dwelt, among plants and hedges." It is probably repre sented by Khirbet Jadireh, about 3 miles southwest of Gezer. "Gederathite," applied to Jozabad (12 4), probably meant an inhabitant of this place.

      GEDERITE, ge der-it, ge-de rit ( >1 1~J , ffdhcrl): Inhabitant of GEDER, which see (1 Chronicles 27 28).

      GEDEROTH, gcd 6-roth, ge-de roth (ni"l"3, g c dhcrotk) : A town in the Shephelah of Judah, named with Kithlish, Beth-dagon, Naamah and Makkedah (Joshua 15 41). It is mentioned along with Beth- shemesh and Aijalon as taken by the Philis in the reign of Ahaz (2 Chronicles 28 18). It possibly corre sponds with the "Kidron" of 1 Mace 15 39.41; 16 9. Onom places a very large village named Gedrom 10 Romans miles from Lydda on the road to Eleutheropolis. This points to Katrah, southeast of Yebnah.

      Gederothaim Genealogy



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      GEDEROTHAIM, ged-e--ni-tha im (DTTna, g e dherdthayim, "place of inclosures"): Stands as the 15th in a list which professes to give only the names of 14 cities in the Judaean Shephelah (Joshua 15 30). AVm suggests that we might read "or" for "and" after Gederah, but this is impossible. LXX reads, "and its cattle shelters." Probably, however, the name has arisen by dittography from the preceding

      CiKDKRAH (q.V.).

      GEDOR, ge dor (THS , ydhfir; B, Ccddor, A, FcScop, d cdor):

      (1) A town in the mountains of Judah, named with Hallml and Beth-zur (Joshua 15 f>Samuel). It seems to be referred to by Eusebius as (Madeira (Onoin, s.v.), which he identifies with Gaidora (Jerome calls it Gadora), a village in the borders of Jerus, near the terebinth. It is probably represented today by Khirlx t Jcdilr, about 7 miles north of ilebron (l*EF, III, 313, Sh XXI).

      (2) Among the Benjamites who joined David at Ziklag were the sons of Jeroham of Gedor (1 Chronicles 12 7). No trace of this 1 name is found in the terri tory of Benjamin. It may be identical with (1).

      (3) The Simeonites are said to have- gone to the entering in of Gedor in search of pasture for their flocks. They smote and expelled the Aleunim, "and dwell, in their stead" (1 Chronicles 4 3<> IT). Here LXX reads Gerar, and this is probably correct

      (4) A family in Judah (1 Chronicles 4 4).

      (5) An ancestor of Saul (1 Chronicles 8 31).

      ,V. EWING

      GE-HARASHIM, ge-ha-ra shim (E^nn S3, gj? hurdxlntn): In 1 Chronicles 4 14, AV renders "valley of Charashim." In Neh 11 35, EV renders "valley of craftsmen"; here it is named with bod and Ono. Something of the name perhaps survives in Khirbct n/rsn, east of Lydila.

      GEHAZI, gn-ha zl (^"n 11 ? , f/c/ffc7, except in 2 Kings 4 31; 5 25; 8 4.5, where it is "THS , tjchazl, perhaps "valley of vision"): The confidential servant of Elisha. Various words are used to denote his rela tion to his master. He is generally ( ailed Elisha s "boy" (~!>I , tid f (ir), servant or personal attendant; he calls himself (5 25) his master s servant or slave ("5? *< l>h( dh), and if the reference be to him in 4 43 RVm, he receives the designation "minister" (rnipp , Wsharcth), or chief servant of Elisha.

      Mention is made of him on three different occa sions. He is first brought under notice in the story of the wealthy Shunammite (2 Kings 4 1. His 8-37) who provided in her house

      Ready special accommodation for Elisha,

      Service which suited his simple tastes, and of

      which he availed himself as often as he passed that way. By command of his master, Gehazi called the Shunammite, that she might be rewarded by the prophet for her liberal hospitality. Failing to elicit from the lady a desire for any par ticular favor, and being himself at a loss to know how to repay her kindness, Elisha consulted with his servant, whose quick perception enabled him to in dicate to his master the gift that would satisfy the great woman s heart. When on the death of her child the Shunammite sought out the man of God at Carmel, and in the intensity of her grief laid hold of the prophet s feet, Gehazi came near to thrust her away" (ver 27) perhaps not so much from want of sympathy with the woman as from a desire to protect his master from what he considered a rude importunity. Then Elisha, who had discovered of himself (ver 27), from what the woman had said (ver 28), the cause of her sorrow, directed Gehazi, as a preliminary measure, to go at once to Shunem

      and lay his staff upon the face of the dead child. Gehazi did so, but the child was "not awaked."

      In this narrative Gehazi appears in a favorable light, as a willing, efficient servant, jealous of his master s honor; a man of quick observation, whose advice was worth asking in practical affairs.

      Gehazi, however, reveals himself in a different

      character in connection with the healing of Naaman

      (2 Kings 5 20-27). As soon as the Syriac-

      2. His ian general had taken his departure Grievous with his retinue from the house of Sin Elisha, the covetous spirit of Gehazi,

      which had been awakened by the sight of the costly presents the prophet had refused, was no longer able to restrain itself. Running after Xaainan, Gehazi begged in the prophet s name a talent of silver (400 = $2, 000) and two changes of raiment, alleging, as a specious reason for Elisha s change of mind, the arrival at his master s house of two poor scholars of the prophet, who would require help and maintenance. Naaman, glad to have the opportunity he desired of showing his gratitude to Elisha, urged Gehazi to take two talents and sent two servants with him to carry the money and the garments. When they came to the hill in the neighborhood of the prophet s house, Gehazi dismissed the men and concealed the treasure. Thereafter, with a bold front, as if he had been attending to his ordinary duties, he appeared before his master who at once inquired, "Whence, Gehazi?" (Hebrews). On receiving the ready answer that he had not been anywhere, Elisha, who felt sure that the suspicion he entertained regarding his beloved servant, his very "heart" (ver 20), was well grounded, sternly rebuked him for the dishonor he had brought upon God s cause, and called down upon him and his family forever the loathsome disease of the man whose treasures he had obtained by his shameful lie. "And he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow."

      By this narrative confidence in Gehazi is somewhat unexpectedly and rudely shaken. The active, zealous servant stands confessed a liar and a thief. Gohazi s sin branched out in different directions. By his false hood he deceived Naaman and misrepresented Elisha; he not only told a lie, but told a lie about another man, and that man his master and friend. Further, he brought true religion into disrepute; for it was not a time (ver 2(1) for a servant of Cod to allow any commer cial idea to be associated with the prophet s work in the mind of the Syrian general to whom God s power had been so strikingly manifested and when many for worldly gain protended to be prophets. But while Gohazi s sin had its various ramifications, its one root was covet- ousness, " the loVe of money [which] is a root of all kinds of evil" (1 Timothy 6 10).

      Once more Gehazi is mentioned (2 Kings 8 1-6) as

      having been summoned, leper though he was, by

      King Jehorarn to give him an account

      3. His of all the great things Elisha had done. Probable And when he came to the story of the Repentance restoration of the Shunammite s child

      to life, the woman herself appeared before the king along with her son, craving to be reinstated in her house and land of which she had been dispossessed during her seven years absence from her native country in a time of famine. Genesis hazi testified to the identity of both mother and son, with the result that the king at once ordered the restoration not only of all her former possessions, but also of all the profits her land had yielded during her sojourn in Philistia.

      The appearance and conduct of Gehazi on this occasion give some ground for the hope that he had repented of his sin and could now be trusted to speak the truth; and the pleasure he seemed to take in rehearsing the wonderful deeds of a master who, though kind and indulgent to a stranger, was hard upon him, may even warrant the belief that in his earlier days there was some good thing in him




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Gederothaim Genealogy

      toward his master s God. If also, as has been indi cated above, the word used in 4 43 (m e shareth) ap plies to him the same as is applied to Eli.sha (1 Kings 19 21) -we may be the more readily inclined to see in the history of Gehazi how one besetting sin may prevent a man from taking his natural place in the succession of God s prophets. Let us hope, however, that though Gehazi became a "lost leader," "just for a handful of silver," he was yet saved by a true repentance from becoming a lost soul.


      GEHENNA, gS-hen a (-yee vva, gcenna [see Grimm-Thayer, s.v.j): Gehenna is a transliteration from the Aram, form of the Hebrews ge-hinndm, "valley of Hinnom." This latter form, however, is rare in the OT, the prevailing name being "the valley of the son of Hinnom." LXX usually translates; where it transliterates the form is different from Gehenna and varies. In the NT the correct form is (Icenna with the accent on the penult, not (iccnnti. There is no reason to assume that Hinnom is other than a plain patronymic, although it has been pro posed to find in it the corruption of (he name of an idol (EB, II, 2071). In the XT (AKVm) Gehenna occurs in Matthew 5 22.29.30; 10 2S; 18 9; 23 15.33; Mark 9 43.45.47; Luke 12 5; Jas 3 (>. In all of these it designates the place of eternal punishment of the wicked, generally in connection with the final judgment. It is associated with fire as the source of torment. Both body and soul are cast into it. This is not to be explained on the principle that the NT speaks metaphorically of the state after deatli in terms of the body; it presupposes the resur rection. In AV and RV Gehenna is rendered by "hell (see EsCHATOLOGY OF THE NT). That "the valley of Hinnom" became the technical designation for the place of final punishment was due to two causes. In the first place the valley had been the seat of the idolatrous worship of Molech, to whom children were immolated by fire; (2 Chronicles 28 3; 33 G). Secondly, on account of these practices the place was defiled by King Josiah (2 Kings 23 10), and became in consequence associated in prophecy with the judgment to be visited upon the people (Jeremiah 7 32). The fact, also, that the city s offal was collected there may have helped to render the name synonymous with extreme defilement. Topo graphically the identification of the valley of Hin nom is still uncertain. It has been in turn identified with the depression on the western and southern side of Jems, with the middle valley, and with the valley to the east Cf Eli, II, 2071; !)( (!, 1, <>3i>; RE, VI. GKKKHAKIM s Vos

      GELILOTH, ge--ll loth (rrk^ , g"liloth): This word is used for "districts" or "circuits," perhaps indicating the different parts subject, to the several lords of the Philis (Joshua 13 2, AV "borders," RV "regions"); for the quarter of the Jordan valley where the eastern tribes built the altar of Ed (22 10 f; AV "border of," RV "region about," Jordan); and apparently, for the whole of Philistia (Joel 3 4, AV "coasts of Philestina, Canaan-Land,"_ RV "regions of Philistia"). But in Joshua 18 17, it is clearly used as a place-name. Geliloth lay on the boundary between Judah and Benjamin which passed En-shemesh (probably Mm el-Hod, about 2 miles east of Jems), "and went out to Geliloth, which is over against the ascent of Adummim." From this point it "went down" toward the plain. The place cannot therefore be identified with Gilgal in the Jordan valley. Some point on the road leading from Jericho to TnVdt c,d- Ditmm, about G miles from Jerus, was probably in tended, but no identification is possible.

      west EWING

      GEM, jem (Prov 26 8, ERV "a bag of gems"). See STONES, PRECIOUS.

      GEMALLI, ge-mal I (3 , g malll, "camel owner"): Father of the spy Ammiel from the tribe of Dan (Numbers 13 12), who was one of those sent by Moses to spy out the land of Canaan.

      GEMARA, ge-ma ra. See TALMUD.

      GEMARIAH, gem-a-rl a OrP"p23, g"maryahu, JTH1C3 , g e mar yah, "JAH (Jehovah) hath accomplished"):

      (1) Son of Shaphan the scribe, one of the princes, from whose chamber Baruch read Jeremiah s prophecies to the people. He, with others, sought to stav Jehoiakim from burning the roll (Jeremiah 36 10. 11.12.25).

      (2) Son of Hilkiah, one of Zedekiah s ambassadors to Babylon, by whom Jeremiah sent his letter to the captives (Jeremiah 29 3).

      GEMATRIA, ge-ma tri-a. See NUMBERS; GAMES.

      GENDER, jen der (~~? , yuludh, "Q? , abhar; yewdo), gcnnuu): "Gender" is an abbreviation of "engender." In Job 38 29 i/al/itl/i, (common for "to bear," "to bring forth") is translated 1 "gender" (after Wicliff), RV "The hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it?" m "given it birth." In 21 10 we have *abhar (either the Piel of ,lbhar, "to pass over," etc, or of a separate word meaning "to bear," "to be fruitful"), translated 1 "gendereth," "Their bull gen- dereth, and faileth not"; in Leviticus 19 19, rabha*, "to lie down with," is used of cat tie gendering. In Gal 4 24 AV we have "Mount Sinai, which gendereth [gi-nnnu, "to beget"] to bondage," RV "bearing children unto bondage" (like Hagar, Abraham s bondwoman), and in 2 Timothy 2 23, which "gender strifes," i.e. beget them. west L. WALKER

      GENEALOGY, je-ne-al o-ji, jen-O-al 6-ji:

      1. Definition

      2. Biblical References

      ii. Importance of ( ienealonirs

      4. Their Historical Value

      r>. Principles of Interpretation

      6. Principles of Compilation

      7. Sources

      8. Principal Genealogies and Lists LITERATURE

      The C)T translated* (once, Neh 7 o) the noun ICfT,

      yahas; T2rPn ~1Ey , .sr/>/r //<;-//a//a.s, "book of the

      genealogy"; also translated H a denominate vb.

      1. Defini- in Hitlipael, TDrP , yahas, "sprout," tion "grow" (cf family "tree"); ttJrPnn,

      hithyuhes, "genealogy"; the idea is conveyed in other phrases, as tTnblO "lEp , scpher tui dhdth, "book of the generations," or simply PVlbin, tdl- dfwth, "generations." In the NT it transliterates yevea,ojia, gcnealogia, "account of descent," 1 Timothy 1 4; Tit 3 9. In Matthew, 1 1, /3i /3Xoj yevfoeus, biblos genescos, "book of the generation" of Jesus Christ, is rendered in ARVm "the genealogy of Jesus Christ"; a family register, or register of families, as 1 Chronicles 4 33, etc; the tracing backward or forward of the line of ancestry of individual, family, tribe, or nation; pedigree. In Timothy and Tit it refers probably to the gnostic (or similar) lists of successive emanations from Deity in the develop ment of created existence.

      According to the OT, the genealogical interest dates back to the beginnings of sacred history. It

      appears in the early genealogical tables

      2. Biblical of Genesis 5, 10, 46, etc; in P]x 6 14-27, References where the sons of Reuben, Simeon and

      esp. Levi, are given; in Numbers 12; 26 2-o 1, where the poll of fighting men is made on genealogical principles; in Numbers 2 2, where the posi tions on the march and in camp are determined by tribes and families; in David s division of priests




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      and Levites into courses and companies (1 Chronicles 6-9); is referred to in the account of Jeroboam s reign (2 Chronicles 12 loin, "the words of Iddo, after the manner of genealogies")? is made prominent in Hezekiah s reforms when he reckoned the whole nation by genealogies (1 Chronicles 4 41; 2 Chronicles 31 10-19); is seen in Jotham s reign when the Reubenites and Gadites are reckoned genealogically (1 Chronicles 5 17). Zerub- babel took a census, and settled the returning exiles according to their genealogies (1 Chronicles 3 19-24; 1 Chronicles 9; Ezra 2; Neh 7, 11, 12). With the rigid exclusion of all foreign intermixtures by the leaders of the Restoration (Ezra 10; Neh 10 30; 13 23-31), the genealogical interest naturally deepened until it readied its climax, perhaps in the time of Christ and up to the destruction of Jerus. Jos, in the opening of his Life, states that his own pedigree was registered in the public records. Many families in Christ s time clearly possessed such lists (Luke 1 5, etc). The affirmed, reiterated and unquestioned Davidic descent of Christ in the NT, with His explicit, genealogies (Matthew 1 1-17; Luke 3 23-38); Paul s statement of his own descent; Barnabas Levitieal descent, are cases in point. Davididae, descendants of David, are found as late as the Romans period. There is a tradition I hat Herod I destroyed the genealogical lists at Jerus to strengthen his own seat, but more probably they persisted until the destruction of Jerus.

      Genealogical accuracy, always of interest both to

      primitive and more highly civilized peoples, was

      made esp. important by the facts that

      3. Impor- the land was promised to the descend- tance of ants of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, that Genealogies the priesthood was exclusively heredi tary, that the royal succession of Judah

      lay in the Davidic house, that the division and occupation of the land was according to tribes, families and fathers houses; and for the David idae, at least, that the Messiah was to be of the house of David. The exile and return, which fixed indelibly in the Jewish mind the ideas of mono theism, and of the selection and sacred mission of Israel, also fixed and deepened the genealogical idea, prominently so in the various assignments by families, and in the rejection in various ways of those who could not prove their genealogies. But it seems extreme to date, as with many modern critics, its real cultivation from this time. In the importance attached to genealogies the Hebrews resembles many other ancient literatures, notably the Kgyp, Greek, and Arab., but also including Ro mans, Kelts, Saxons, the earliest history naturally being drawn upon genealogical as well as on annalic lines. A modern tendency to overestimate the likeness and underestimate the unlikeness of the, Scripture to its undoubtedly cognate literatures finds in the voluminous artificial genealogical inn,- terial, which grew up in Arabia after the time of the caliph Omar, an almost exact analogue to the gene alogical interest at the time of the return. This, however, is on the assumption of the late date of most of the genealogical material in the older NT books, and rests in turn on the assumption that the progress of religious thought and life in Israel was essentially the same as in all other countries; an evo lutionary development, practically, if not theoreti cally, purely naturalistic in its genesis and progress. The direct, historical value of the Scripture gene alogies is variously estimated. The critically re constructive school finds them chiefly

      4. Their in the late (priestly) strata of the early Historical books, and dates Chronicles-Kzr-Xeh (our Value fullest sources) about 300 BC, holding

      it to be a priestly reconstruction of the national history wrought, with great freedom by the "Chronicler." Upon this hypothesis the chief

      value of the genealogies is as a mirror of the mind and ideas of their authors or recorders, a treasury of reflections on the geographical, ethnological and genealogical status as believed in at their time, and a study of the effect of naive and exaggerative pa triotism dealing with the supposed facts of national life, or else, in the extreme instance, a highly in teresting example of bold and inventive juggling with facts by men with a theory, in this particular case a priestly one, as with the "Chronicler." To more conservative scholars who accept the OT at its face value, the genealogies are a rich mine of his torical, personal and ethnographic, as well as reli gious, information, whose working, however, is much hindered by the inevitable corruption of the text, and by our lack of correlative explanatory informa tion. Much interesting illustrative matter may be looked for from such archaeological explorations as those at Gezer and elsewhere under the Philestina, Canaan-Land Exodous ploration Society, the names on the pottery throw ing light on the name-lists in Chronicles, and the similar discoveries on the supposed site of Ahab s palace in Samaria, which also illustrate the conflict between Baal and JAH (Jehovah) worship by the proportion of the proper names compounded by "Baal" or ".Tali" (see Macalister, Bible Sidelights from Gczcr, 150ff; PEF, 1905, 243, 328; Harvard Theological Rerinr, 1911). In spite of all such illustrative data, how ever, the genealogies must necessarily continue to present many insoluble problems. A great de sideratum is a careful and systematic study of the whole quest ion by some modern conservative scholar endowed with the patience and insight of the late Lord A. C. Hervey, and equipped with the fruits of the latest discoveries. While much curious and suggestive information may be derived from an intensive study of the names and relationships in the genealogies (although here the student needs to watch his theories), their greatest present value lies in the picture they present of the large-hearted cosmopolitanism, or international brotherliness, in the older ones, notably Genesis 10, recognizing so clearly that God hath made of one all nations to dwell on the earth; and, as they progress, in the successive selection and narrowing as their lines converge upon the Messiah.

      In the evaluation and interpretation of the gene alogies, certain facts and principles must be held in

      mind. (1) Lists of names necessarily 6. Princi- suffer more; in t ransmission than other pies of In- literature, since there is almost no terpretation connect ional suggestion as to their real

      form. Divergences in different ver sions, or in different stages, of the same genealogy are therefore to be looked for, with many tangles hard to unravel, and it- is precisely at this point that analytic and constructive criticism needs to proceed most modestly and restrain any possible tendency unduly to theorize. (2) Frequently in the Scriptural lists names of nations, countries, cities, districts or clans are found mingled with the names of individuals. This is natural, either as the per sonification of the clan or nation under the name of its chief, or chief progenitor, or as the designation of the individual clan, family or nation, from its loca tion, so common among many nations. Many of the cases where this occurs are so obvious that the rule may not be unsafe to consider all names as probably standing for individuals where the larger geographical or other reference is not unmistakably clear. This is undoubtedly the intent and under standing of those who transmitted and received them. (3) It is not necessary to assume that the ancestors of various tribes or families are epony mous, even though otherwise unknown. The Scriptural explanation of the formation of tribes by the expansion and division of families is not im-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      probable, and is entitled to a certain presumption of correctness. Furthermore, it is extremely difficult to establish a stopping-point for the application of the eponymous theory; under its spell the sons of Jacob disappear, and Jacob, Isaac and even Abra ham become questionable. (4) The present quite popular similar assumption that personal details in the genealogy stand for details of tribal history, as, for instance, the taking of a concubine means rather an alliance with, or absorption of, an inferior tribe or clan, is a fascinating ami far-reaching general ization, but it lacks confirmation, and would make of the Scripture an allegorical enigma in which his torical personages and events, personified peoples or countries, and imaginary ancestors are mingled in inextricable confusion. (.5) Scriptural genealogies are often given a regular number of generations by omitting various intermediate steps. The gene alogies of Jesus, for instance, cover 42 generations, in 3 subdivisions of 14 each. Other instances are found in the ()T, where the regularity or sym metry is clearly intentional. Instance Jacob s 70 descendants, and the 70 nations of Genesis 10. This has in modern eyes an artificial look, but by no means necessarily involves violence done to the facts under the genealogist s purview, and is readily and creditably accounted for by his conceptions and purposes. The theory that in some cases the requisite number has been built up by the insertion of imaginary names (vide Curtis, JCC, "Chronicles, 13")) has another aspect, and does not seem neces sary to account for the facts, or to have sufficient facts to sustain it. See 21 5, (6) below. It in volves a view of the mental and moral equipment and point of view of the Chronicler in particular, which would not seem to leave him many shreds of either historical, or "religious" value, and which a sounder criticism will surely very materially modify. ((>) Much perplexity and confusion is avoided by remembering that other modes of entrance into the family, clan, tribe or nation obtained than that by birth: capture, adoption, the substitution of one clan for another just become extinct, marriage. Hence "son of," "father of," "begat," have broader technical meanings, indicating adoptive or official connection or "descent," as well as actual con sanguinity, nearer or remote, "son" also mean ing "grandson," "great-grandson," etc. Instnnce Caleb, the son of Jcphunneh, of the tribe of Judah, styled (t Chronicles 2 IS) a descendant of Hezron and son of Hur, but also, in token of his original descent, called the Kemzzite or "son of Kenaz" (Joshua 15 17), etc. Similarly, when 1 in an earlier genealogy a clan or individual is assigned to a certain tribe, and in a later to another, it has been "grafted in." But while these methods of accretion clearly obtained, the nations freely absorbing neighboring or sur rounding peoples, families, or persons, families like wise absorbing individuals, as in American Indian, and many other tribes; yet, as in them, the descent and connection by birth constituted the main line, and in any given case has the presumption unless clear fact s to t he cont rary exist. (7) The repel it ion of the s:ime name in the same genealogy, as in that of tht high priests (1 Chronicles 6 1-1")), rouses "suspicion" in some minds, but unnecessarily. It is very nat ural, and not uncommon, to find grandfathers and grandsons, esp. among the Hebrews, receiving the same name (Luke 1 f)9). This would be esp. to be expected in a hereditary caste or office like the priesthood. (8) The existence! of the same name in different genealogies is not uncommon, and neit her implies nor should cause confusion. ( .)) The omission of one or many links in the succession, often clearly caused by the desire for symmetry, is frequent where the cause is unknown, the writers being careful only to indicate the connection more

      or less generally, without feeling bound to follow every step. Tribes were divided into families, and families into fathers houses; tribe, family and fathers house regularly constituting links in a formal genealogy, while between them and the per son to be identified any or all links may be omitted. In similar fashion, there is an absence of any care to keep the successive generations absolutely dis tinct in a formal fashion, son and grandson being designated as alike "son" of the same ancestor. Genesis 46 21, for instance, contains grandsons as well as sons of Benjamin, Bela, Becher, Ashbel, Gera, Naarnan, Ehi, etc. This would be esp. true where the son as well as the father became founder of a house. Some confusion is occasionally caused by the lack of rigid attention to precise terminology, a characteristic of the Hebrews mind. Strictly the tribe, 123TP , shcbhet (in P, HI2T3 , matteh), is the larger sub division, then the clan, nnStp? , mishpahdh, "family," and then the "house" or "fathers house," rP3, buyith, or IX PP? , bcth abh, or Pi^X rP3 , bcth ubhdth; but sometimes a "fathers house" is a tribe (Numbers 17 6), or a clan (1 Chronicles 24 6). In this connection it is to be remembered again that se quence of generations often has to do with families rather than with individuals, and represents the succession to the inheritance or headship, rather than the actual relationship of father and son. (10) Genealogies are of two forms, the descending, as Genesis 10: "The sons of Japheth: Gomer," etc; "The sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz," etc; and the as cending, Ezra 7 1 ff : "Ezra, the son of Seraiah, the son of Azariah, the son of Hilkiah," etc. The de scending are the usual. (11) Feminine names are occasionally found, where there is anything remark able about them, as Sarai and Milcah (Genesis 11 29), Kebekah (22 23), etc; or where any right or property is transmitted through them, as the daughters of Zelophehad, who claimed and were accorded "a possession among the brethren of [their] father" (Numbers 2633; 27 1-11), etc. In such cases as Azubah and Ephrath, successive wives of Caleb (1 Chronicles 2 18-20), many modern critics find tribal history enshrined in this case, "Caleb" or "dog" tribe having removed from Azubah, "deserted" to Ephrathah, Bethle hem, in Northern Judah. But the principle is not, and cannot be, carried out consistently. (12) The state of the text is such, esp. in Chronicles, that it is not easy, or rather not possible, to construct a complete genealogical table after the modern form. Names and words have dropped out, and other names have been changed, so that the connection is often difficult and sometimes impossible to trace. The different genealogies also represent different stages in the history and, at many places, cannot with any knowl edge now at our command be completely adjusted to each other, just as geographical notices at different periods must necessarily be inconsistent. (13) In the present state of our knowledge, and of the text, and also considering the large and vague; chronologi cal methods of the Hebrews, the genealogies can give us comparatively little chronological assistance. The uncertainty as to the actual length of a gen eration, and the custom of frequently omitting links in the descent., increase s the; difficulty; so that unless the y possess special marks of completeness, or have outstanding historical relationships which determine or corroborate them, e>r several parallel genealogies confirm each other, the y must be used with great caution. Their interest, is historical, biographical, successional e>r hereditary, rather than chronological.

      The principal genealogical material of the OT is found in Genesis 5, 10, 11, 22, 25, 29, 30, 35, 36, 46; Exodous 6; Numbers 1, 2, 7, 10, 13, 26, 34; scattered notices in Joshua, Ruth, 1 Samuel; 2 Samuel 3, 5, 23; 1 Kings 4;




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      1 Chronicles 1-9, 11, 12, 15, 23 27; 2 Chronicles 23, 29; Ezra 2,

      7, 10; Neh 3, 7, 10, 11, 12. The genealogies of Our Lord(Matthew 1 1-17; Luke 3 23-38) arc the

      6. Princi- only NT material. The OT and NT pies of genealogies bring the record down from Compilation (he creation to the birth of Christ.

      After tracing t he descent from Adam to Jacob, incidentally (Genesis lOj giving the pedigree of the various nations within their purview, the Hebrews genealogists give the pedigree of the twelve tribes. As was to be expected, those tribes, which in the developing history assumed greater prominence, received the chief attention. Dan is carried down but 1 generation, and credited with but 1 descend ant; Zebulun 1 generation, 3 sons; Naphtali 1 generation, 4 sons; Issachar 4 generations, 15 de scendants; Manasseh 4 generations, 39 descendants; Asher 7 generations, 40 descendants; Reuben 8 (?) generations, 22 descendants; Clad 10 generations, 28 descendants; Ephraim 14 (?) generations, 25 descendants. Levi, perhaps first as the priestly tribe, Judah next as the royal, Benjamin as most closely associated with the others, and all three as the survivors of the exile (although representatives of other tribes shared in the return) are treated with the greatest fulness.

      Chronicles furnishes us the largest amount of genealogical information, where coincident with the older gene alogies, clearly deriving its data from

      7. Sources them. Its extra-canonical sources are

      a matter of considerable difference among critics, many holding that the books cited by the Chronicler as his sources ("The Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah," "The Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel," "The History of Samuel the Seer," "The History of Nathan the Prophet," etc, to the number of perhaps 16) arc 1 our canonical books, with the addition of a "Midrashic History of Israel," from which he quotes the most freely. But the citations are made with such fulness, vivid ness, and particularity of reference, that it is hard to believe that he did not have before him extensive extra-canonical documents. This is the impression he clearly seeks to convey. Torrey (AJtiL, XXV, 195) considers that he cites this array of authority purely "out of his head," for impressiveness sake, a theory which leaves the Chronicler no historical value whatever. It is extremely likely that he had before 1 him also oral and written sources that he has not (lit eel, records, private 1 or public lists, pedigrees, etc, freely using them for his later lists and descents. For the post-exilic names tmd lists, E/r-Nch also furnish us much material. In this art. no attempt is made at an exhaustive treatment, the aim being rather by a number of characteristic examples to give an idea of the quality, methods and problems of the Bible genealogies.

      In the early genealogies the particular strata to which each has been assigned by reconstructive critics is here indicated by J, P, etc. The signs " = : or ":" following individual names indicate sonship.

      (1) Genesis 4 16-24. The Cainitcs (assigned to P).

      Seven generations to Jahal, Jubal and Tubal-cain, explaining the hereditary origin of certain 8 Princioal occupations (supposed by many to be a " shorter version of ch 5).


      and Lists (2) Genesis 4 25.26. The Sclhiles (as

      signed to J).

      (3) Genesis 5 1-32. The. Book of the. Generations of Adam (assigned to P, except ver 29 J).

      Brings the genealogy down to Noah, and gives the chronology to the Flood. The numbers in the Hebrews MT, the Sam Hebrews, and the LX.X differ, MT aggregating 1 ,). r )G years, Sam 1,307 years, and LXX 2,242 years. Some scholars hold this list to be framed upon that of the ten Babylonian kings given in Bcrosus, ending with Xisuthrus, the Babylonian Noah. An original primitive tradition, from which both lists are derived, the Hebrews being the nearer,

      is not impossible. Both the "Cainite" list in Genesis 4 and this "Sethite" list end with three brothers.

      (4) Genesis 10 1-32. The Generations of the Sons of Noah, "The Table of Nations" (assigned to P, vs 1-7; J, vs 8-19; P, ver 20; J, ver 21; P, ver 22; J, vs 24-30; P, vs 31.32). Found in abridged form in 1 Chronicles 1 5-24.

      I. Japheth = Coiner, Magog, Badai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, Tiras.

      1. (Vo/mr=Ashkenaz, Riphath (1 Chronicles 1 6, Dip- hath), Togarmah.

      2. /awm = Elishah, Tarshish, Kittirn, Dodanim (Rodanim, 1 Chronicles 1 7, is probably correct, a "1, d, having been substituted by a copyist for


      II. Ham = Cush, Mizraim, Put, Canaan.

      1. Ci/,s/t = Seba, Ilavilah, Sibtah, Raamah, Sab- teca (Nimrod).

      2. Mizratm=Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim, Naph- tuhim, Pathrusim, Casluhim (whence the Philis), Caphtorim.

      3. Canaan = Zidon (Chronicles Sidon), Heth; the John- site, Amorite, Girgashite, Hivite, Arkite, Sinite, Arvadite, Zomarite, Hittite.

      4. Raantah (s. Cush) = Sheba, Dedan.

      III. Elam= Asshur, Arpachshad, Lud, Aram.

      1. ,4rrtM = Uz, Hul, Other, Mash (Chronicles Meshech).

      2. Arpachshad Shelah=Eber=Pe,eg, Joktan.

      3. Jol;tan (s. Eber) = Almodad, Sheloph. Haz- armaveth, Jerah, Hadoram, I xal, Diklah, Obal, Abimael, Sheba, Ophir, Havilah, Jobab.

      4. /Y/r<7 (s. Ebor) = Rou = Serug = Nahor = Torah = Abraham.

      Nearly all these names are of peoples, cities or dis tricts. That Noah. Shem, Ham. .lapheth, Nahor, Terah, Abraham, Nimrod, and probably Peleg, Reu, Serug, represent actual persons the general tenor of the narra tive and the general teaching of Scripture clearly indicate, although many critics consider these also as purely eponymous. The others can mostly be more or less clearly identified ethnographieally or geographically. This table represents the nations known to the writer, and in general, although not in all particulars, ex presses the ethnographical relationships as far as they are now known to modern research. It follows a partly ethnological, partly geographical scheme, the descendants of Japheth in general representing the Aryan stock settled in Asia Minor, Media, Armenia. Greece, and the islands of the Mediterranean; those of Ham representing the Hamitic races in Ethiopia, Egypt, in Southwest Arabia, and Southern Babylonia. Many modern writers hold that in making "Nimrod" the son of "Cush," the Scripture! writer has confused "Cash," the son of Ham, with another " Cush," the Cassei, living near Khun, since the later Babylonians and Assyrians were clearly Semite (Shemite, of Shem) in language and racial characteristics. Nevertheless the Scripture statement is accordant with early traditions of a Hamitic settlement of the country (Cannes the fish- god coming out of the Ked Sea, etc), and perhaps also with the fact that the earliest language, of Babylonia was non-Semite (Shemite, of Shem). The sons of Canaan represent the nations and peoples found by the Hebrews in Philestina, Canaan-Land, the Phoeni cians and the Canaanites. Hi th is the great Hittite nation, by language and racial type strikingly non-Semite (Shemite, of Shem). Among the sons of Shem, Eber is by many considered eponymous or imaginary, but the hypothesis is not nec essary. Most Assyriologists deny the connection of Elani with Shem, the later Elamites being non-Semite (Shemite, of Shem); the inscriptions, however, show that the earlier inhabit ants up to 2300 BC were Semite (Shemite, of Shem). Lud must be the Lyd- ians of Asia Minor, whose manners and older names resemble the Semite (Shemite, of Shem). Asia Minor presents a mixture of races as manifold as does Philestina, Canaan-Land. The sons of Joktan are tribes in Western and Southern Arabia. Ha, ilali is given both as a son of Cush, Hamite, and of Joktan, Semite, perhaps because the district was occupied by a mixed race. It would seem, however, that "begat" or "son of" often represents geographical as well as ethnological relations. And where the classification of the Scripture writer does not accord with the present deliverances of archaeology, it must be remembered that at this dis tance conclusions drawn from ethnology, philology and archaeology, considering the present incomplete state of these sciences, the kaleidoscopic shifting of races, dynasties and tongues through long periods, and our scanty information, are liable to so many sources of error that dogmatism is precarious. The ancient world pos sessed a much larger amount of international knowledge than w r as, until recently, supposed. A writer of 300 BC had a closer range and could have had sources of informa tion much more complete than we possess. On the




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      assumption of the Mosaic authorship, that broad, states manlike mind, learned in all the knowledge of the Egyp tians, and, clearly, profoundly influenced by Hal) law and lit., may be credited with considerable breadth of vision and many sources of information. Aside from the question of "inspiration, this Table of Nations, for breadth of scope, for inclusiveness (though not touching peoples outside of the life of its writer), for genial broad- mindedness, is one of the most remarkable documents in any literature.

      The Generations of Shcm (as-

      (5) Genesis 11 l()-27 signed to P).

      From Shem to Abraham. The list is also chronologi cal, but the versions differ, MT making 290 years, from Shem to Abraham, Sam Hebrews, 940, and LXX 1,070. LXX inserts Tainan, 180 years, otherwise agreeing with Sam to the birth of Abraham. Arpachshad may be rendered "the territory of Chesed," i.e. of the Chasdim, Chaldaeans. Kber therefore is descended from Arpach shad, Abraham, his descendant, coming from Ur-Chas- dirn.

      (6) Genesis 11 2:5-21); 22 20-24. The Children of Nahor (11 23-21) P; 22 20-24 Jj.

      l"z. Buz, Kemuel, etc. These descendants of Abra ham s brother probably represent Aramaean tribes chiefly east or northeast of Canaan. Aram may be the ancestor of the Syrians of Damascus. I z and Buz probably belong to Arabia Petraea, mentioned in Jeremiah 25 -} with the Ara bian tribes Dedan and Thema. Chesed in this list prob ably stands, not for t he ( Mialdaeans of Babylonia, but for a related tribe of Northern Syria. In Genesis 10 2:-f (assigned to P) ITz is the son of Aram, and in 10 22 Aram is a son of Shem. On the purely tribal hypothesis, this is either a contradiction, or the later statements represent other tribal relationships or subdivisions. Probably other individuals or tribes are indicated. Oh does not have this list, it being a side stream.

      (7) Gon 16 15; 21 1-3; 25 (also 1 Chronicles 1 2S-33). The Sons of Abraham by Sarah. Ha//ar, Ketiira/i (16 15 assigned to P; 21 1-3 to J, P, J, P; Genesis 25 1-6 J; 7-1 IP; llh.J; 12-17 P; 1SJ; 19.201 ; 21- 26a J; 206 P; 27-34 J).

      The descendants of Abraham through ITagar and Ishmael represent the Ishmaelite tribes of Arabia living north and northwest of the Joktanidae, who chiefly peopled Arabia. Twelve princes are named, possibly all sons of Ishmael, perhaps some of them grandsons. The number has seemed "suspicions" as balancing too ex actly the twelve tribes of Israel. But twelve is an ap proved Semite (Shemite, of Shem) number, determining not necessarily the sons born, but the "sons" mentioned. The Arabians generally were frequently given the name Ishinaclites, perhaps because of the greater prominence and closer contact of these northern tribes with the Hebrews. The sons of Keturah seem to have been chiefly Arabian tribes, whose locations are unknown. Midian, of the sons of Keturah, is the well-known and powerful tribe in the Arabian desert near the Aelanitic (iiilf, bordered by Edom on the north,V. Sheba and Dedan are also men tioned as Cushites ((ien 10 7). Very likely the tribes extensively intermarried, and could claim descent from both; or were adopted into one or the other family. Sheba was in Southwestern Arabia. Dedan lived near Edom, "where the caravan routes to various parts of Arabia converged. Asshurim arc; of course not Assyr ians, but an Arabian tribe, mentioned by the side of Egypt in Minaean inscriptions. While the two sons of Isaac are to be accepted as real persons, their typical character is also unmistakable, the history of the two nations, Israel and Edom, being prefigured in their relations.

      (8) Genesis 29 3130 24; 35 16-26. The Children of Jacob (29 31-35 assigned to P; 30 l-3a JE; 4a P; 46-24 JE; 35 16-22 JE; 23-26 P).

      The account of the parentage, birth and naming of the founders of the twelve tribes; by Leah: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun (d. Dinah); by Bilhah: Dan, Naphtali; by Zilpah: Gad, Asher; by Rachel: Joseph, Benjamin. Much modern criticism agrees that these names art; purely those of tribes, some of them perhaps derived from persons or places impossible now to trace, but mostly eponymous. Accordingly, these chapters are to be translated as follows. An Arab tribe. Jacob, wanders in Canaan, quarrels with Edom, migrates to Ilaran, forms alliances with the Aramaean clans Rachel, Bilhah, Leah, Zilpah. Rachel and Jacob constitute a new tribe, Joseph. The federation takes the name Jacob. The other allied clans divide into sub-clans, or new clans join them, until Leah has six "sons," Reuben, Simeon, etc; Zilpah, two; Bilhah, two. Zilpah and Bil hah are "concubines" because; inferior members of the federation, or else have a left-handed connection with it.

      The formation of the new tribe Benjamin broke up the old tribe Rachel, which (who) accordingly "died." Al though such are the original facts imbedded in the docu ments, they are now set in a framework of personal narrative, and were understood as narrative by the first hearers and readers. The history thus constituted is necessarily "an enigma which it is very hard to solve" (Bennett, Genesis, 2S4). and with almost as many answers as students. For critical purposes it presents a rich field for exploration, analysis and conjecture, but its edificatory value is chiefly found in reading the narratives as per sonal: a serious and reverent religious romance founded on facts or legends, whose real value lies in the sidelights it throws on national character and ethical principles, expressed in a naive, vivid, lifelike story, full of suggestion and teaching. This present article, however, proceeds on the Scripture representation of these details and in cidents as personal.

      The explanations of the names illustrate the Hcb fondness for assonances, paronomasia, coming from a time when much importance; was attached to words and sounds, but need not be considered mere popular ety mologies, the Hebrews individual mother being fully capable of them. Neither do they necessarily represent the original etymology, or reason for the name, but may give the pregnant suggestion occurring to the maternal or other imagination.

      Leah, " wild cow," is supposed by many to be so called from the "totem" of the "Leah" tribe. Reuben (r ubjit it), original meaning unknown, unless Leah s emotional explanation explains the name, rather than is explained by it: rti iih lf nni/1, "hath looked upon my affliction." Superficially, it might be re u bfn. "See, a son," as in ARVm. Others see in the second statement: "My husband will love me," still another etymology, yc thiilihani, "will love me." The lover of assonances can find more than one. The tribe is not prominent after Deborah s time. Simeon, considered by some an animal (totem) name, the Arab, xim u, cross between hyena and wolf, suggests to the mother (or is suggested by that) its likeness to xlni inn , " hear" : "JAH (Jehovah) hath heard." It is not much known after the Conquest. Levi, "ad hesion, associate": thought by many a gentilic adjective from Leah, the Leah tribe par excellence; the name is adjectival in form. Leah connects it with yilldireh, "He will join," Now will my husband be joined unto me. A similar allusion is found in Numbers 18 2.4, there applied to the "joining" of the tribe to Aaron. Judah is as sociated with the vb. hiiilln ih, "praise": "Now will I praise JAH (Jehovah)." Jacob makes the same suggestion in Genesis 49 8; no other plausible suggestion of the origin of the name can be made. The etymology and origin of Bilhah are unknown. Dan is associated with ddnah, "judge": "God hath judged"; no other etymology can be found. Naphtali is derived from niphtal, "wrestle": "I have wrestled," the only discoverable etymology. Zilpah, zilpn/i, perhaps is "dropping," "drop." Gad, (/<((//(, "fortunate," according to Leah. Gad was the well-known Syrian god of "fortune"; but there is no necessary connection here. Asher, from dshar, "happy," ashsher, "call happy"; so Leah; no connection with Asshur, Assyr god." Issachar, from siikhar, "hire," "man of hire": "God hath given me mine hire," also because Leah had "hired" Jacob with her son s man drakes: a similar allusion in (ien 49, "a servant under taskwork." ,Vellhausen would read ish-xakhar, "man of [some deity, unknown]." Zebulun, from z<-bhul, "habi tation, dwelling": Leah gives two explanations, the first assigned by critics to E (probably), connecting the name with a root found in Zebediah, Zabdi, etc, "endow": "God hath endowed me with a good dowry"; the second with zdbhal, "dwell": "Now will my husband dwell with me." Dinah, like Dan, is from dan, "judge." Supposed by some to be an old tribe of Israel, in some way associated with Dan, possibly a twin division. Rachel is "ewe," hence; identified with a "ewe" tribe. Joseph has a twofold suggestion: the first (assigned to E) from risHfih, "take away": "God hath taken away my reproach"; the second (assigned to J) from .i/ri.sup/i, "add": "JAH (Jehovah) will add to me another son." None of these three cases of double explanation would so far ex haust Hebrews maternal imagination as to require the hy pothesis of two documents, even though in the last "God" is used in the first suggestion and "JAH (Jehovah)" in the second. Benjamin is called by Rachel Benoni, "the son of my sorrow," which is supposed to be an old tribal name, per haps related to Onan, a clan of Judah, or the Benjamite city, Ono, and possibly to the Egyp On. Benjamin, Jacob s name for him, "son of the right hand," i.e. of happiness, is understood as "son of the south," because originally the southern section of the Joseph tribe. The attempts to trace these names to tribal origins, local allu sions, cognate languages, customs and religions have engaged much research and ingenuity, with results ex ceedingly diverse.

      (9) Genesis 36. The Generations of Esau (P).

      1. The descent of the Edomite chiefs and clans from Esau through his three wives, the Hittite or Canaanite Adah, the Ishmaelite Basemath, and the Horite Oholibamah (vs 1-19).



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      The wives names here differ from thoothor statements: In 26 34 and 28 !: 1. .Judith, d. of ISeeri the Hittite.

      2. Bashemath, d. of Elon, the Hittite.

      3. Mahalath. d. of Ishinael, sister of Xehaiolh.

      In (len 36: 1. Oholibamah, d. of Anah, d. of /ibeon. Hie Hivite.

      2. Adah, d. of Klon the Hittite.

      3. Bashemath, d. of Ishinael, sister of Nebaioth.

      It is not necessary to resort to the hypothesis of different traditions. Bashemath and Adah are clearly identical, Ksau perhaps having changed the name; as are Mahalath and the Ishmaelitc Uascmath. a transcriber s error being probably responsible for the change. As to Judith and Oholibamah, Anah is probably a man, identical with Beeri (yer 24), the son of Zihcon. Both "Hivite" and "Ilit tite" are apparently errors for "llorite," the difference being in only one consonant. Or "Hittite" maybe used as the larger term embracing "llorite." "Edom" ( vs l.s.l .)) is a personal name; in vs !|.43 (Hebrews ARVm) it is national, indicating that to the writer Esau was a person, not, an oponym. Nowhere are personal characteristics more vividly and unmistakably portrayed than in the accounts of .Jacob and Esau. In these Esauite names arc but two compounds of " El" Cil), none of ",Jah" d/uli >.

      II. The aboriginal leaders or chins in Edom, partly subdued by, partly allied with, the Esauitos (vs 20-30).

      These are descendants of "Seir the Horite" in seven branches, and in sub-clans. "Seir" looks like an eponym or a personification of Hie country, as no personal details have been preserved. Among these names are no "El" (77) or "Jah" (i/n/i) compounds, although they are clearly cognat e with the Hebrews. Several close similarities to names in Judali are found, esp. the Hezronite. Many animal names, "Aiah," "bird of prey," "Aran," "wild goat," etc.

      III. Eight Edomite "kings" before the Hebrew monarchy (vs 31-3 ,)).

      One el compound, "Mehitabel," one bn al compound. It is to be noted that the "crown" was not hereditary and that the "capital" shifted; the oflice was elective. or fell into the hands of the local chief who could win it.

      IV. A list of Esauite elan chiefs; "dukes" (EV), "chiefs" (AHV); "sheiks" (vs 40-43).

      Apparently arranged territorially rather than tribally. The names seem used here as either clans or places and should perhaps be read: "the chief of Teman." etc. The original ancestor may have given his name to the clan or district, or obtained it from the district or town.

      In general this genealogy of Esau shows the same sym metry and balance which rouses suspicion in some minds: excluding Amalek, the son of the concubine, the tribes number twelve. Amalek and his descendants clearly separated from the other Edomites early and are found historically about Kadesh-barnea, and later roaming from the border of Egypt to North Central Arabia.

      (10) Genesis 46 8-27 (in different form, Numbers 26 1- 51, and much expanded in parts of 1 Chronicles 28; cf Exodous 6 14-10). Jacob s posterity at the descent into E jypt (considered a late addition to P).

      A characteristic genealogy. It includes the ideal number of 70 persons, obtained by adding to the GO men tioned in (Jen 46 20, Jacob, Joseph, Epliraim and Manasseh, the two latter born in Egypt. LXX, followed by Stephen (Acts 7 14), reckons 75, adding to (ien 46 20 the names of three grandsons and two great-grand sons of Joseph, obtained from Numbers 26 29.3.5 If. Some may have been omitted to secure; the ideal number so fascinating to the Hebrews mind. It is to be noted that Leah s male descendants are double those of Zilpah, and Rachel s double those of Bilhah, showing the ideal (but not the fictitious) character of the list. The design, also, seems to be to include those descendants of Jacob from whom permanent divisions sprang, even though, like Manasseh and Ephralm and probably Hezron and Hamul, born after the migration, but before Jacob s death. A comparison with the partial parallels also illustrates the corruption of the text, and the diflicultv of uniformity in lists of names. The full list follows:

      1. Jacob.

      2. Leah s descendants.

      A. Reuben=Ha,noch, Pallu, Hezron, Carmi.

      B. Simeon = 3 emuel, Jamin, Ohad, Jachin, Zo- har, Shaul.

      C. Lei i = Gershon, Kohath, Merari.

      D. Judak = Er, Onan, Shelah, Pore/, Zerah; Pore/, Hezron, Ilamul.

      east /ssac/tar = Tolah, Puvah, lob, Shimron.

      Kings. Zeltulini = Sored, Elon, Jahleel. (1. Dinah, daughter.

      3. Zil/xi/i s descendants, 10.

      A. r/m/ = Ziphion, Haggi, Shuni, E/bon, Eri, Arodi, Areli.

      B. A slier =lim,n], Ishvah, Ishvi, Beriah, Si rah (daughter); Beriah = Hober, Malchiol.

      4. Rachel s descendants, 14.

      A. Joseph = Manasseh, E])hraim.

      B. Bery amm = Bola, Becher, Ashbel, (!era, Naa- man, Ehi, Rosh, Muppim, Hu])pin, An!.

      ">. Bilhah s descendants, 7.

      A. Dan = Husliim.

      B. Naphtali = Ja,hzeel, Guni, Josser, Shillom.

      The list <lilfers in many respects from tlios(> in Numbers and ( h. and presents some chronological and other problems. , ithout entering upon an exhaustive study, a number of names may be touched on.

      Carmi (2A), like the other names in i, might be a gentilic, "the Carmite," like "the Amorite," etc, esp. if these names are those of clans, as they are in Numbers, instead of persons, as the (ien narrative states. A town. " Beth- haccherem," is mentioned in Jeremiah 6 1. But "the vine dresser" is also a good rendering.

      Hezron (2A). Another Hezron is given as a descend ant of Judah. This duplication of names is possible in clans; see instances below, but more likely in persons

      .lemuel (215). Xemuel in Xu 26 12; l Chronicles 4 24, an easy error in transcription, 1, yfulli, and ;, nun. being easily confused. In Numbers, NVmuel is also a Keubenito name.

      Jamin (or Jachin) (2B) is Jarib in Chronicles.

      Ohad (215). Xot in Xu or ("h.

      Zohar (215) is Zerah in N T u and Chronicles.

      Gershon (2C). In 1 Chronicles 6 10 Gershom; identified by some with (iershom, son of Moses, on the theory that, the priestly family of (iershom originally traced fts de scent to Moses, but its later members were reckoned, not as priests, but as Levites, thus becoming identified with Levi; precarious; its principal foundation being similarity of name and tribe.

      Hezron and Ilamul (2D) rouse chronological or exe- getical difficulties. Pliarez ((ien 38) could not have been old enough at the migration to have two sons; but very possibly (ien 38 is introduced episodically, not chronologically, and therefore its events may have occurred before those; of (ien 37. Jacob was 130 years old at the descent, making Judah not 42 but 02," and I harez old enough for sons. And. as suggested above the writer may have done with Hezron and Hamul as with Epliraim and Manasseh included them construct ively, they having been born in Egypt, but before Jacob s death, belonging therefore to the generation of the migration and so reckoned, esp. as they founded per manent tribal divisions.

      I uvah (210 1. I uah in 1 Chronicles 7 1. In ,Igs 10 1, centuries later, Puah is father of Tola, an illustration of the descent of fathers names.

      lob (210) is Jashub (Xu, Chronicles), the latter probably cor rect. LXX has it here. A copyist, no doubt, omitted the " shin," ".s/i."

      Dinah (2(1) is thought by some to be a later insertion on account of the "awkward Hebrews," "with Dinah." Dinah and. Serah as unmarried, and no doubt because of other distinguishing facts, now unknown, are the only women descendants mentioned; married women would not be. On the clan theory of the names, the " Dinah" clan must have disappeared in Egypt, not being found in Numbers.

      like Hezron and Hamul in Judah. Copyist s error unlikely.

      Arodi (3A). In Numbers 26 17 Arod.

      Ishvah (315). Omitted in Xu; perhaps died childless, or his descendants did not constitute a tribal family.

      Beriah (313). Also an Ephraimite (1 Chronicles 7 23)- a Benjaminite (8 13.1(5); a Levite (23 10.11). The repe tition of the name indicates individuals rather than clans; but both the Asherite and Benjamite were heads of families.

      Serah (3B), JT1TZJ . serah, "abundance," not the same name as that of Abraham s wife, nilC , sdruh, "princess."

      Heber (3B), "Oil. hebher; in 1 *Chronicles 4 18, a clan of Judali; 8 17, of Benjamin. Not the same name as Eber, "Q?. ibher (5 13; 8 22; and Genesis 10 21).

      The Sons of Benjamin. The three lists, Genesis, Numbers, Chronicles, represent marked divergences, illustrating the corruption of perhaps all three texts. This list illustrates the gene alogical method of counting all descendants as sons, though of different generations. It gives Benjamin ten "sons." Numbers 26 38-40 gives five sons, Xaaman and Arc! being sons of Bela. Tin; LXX of our passage gives only three sons, Bela, Becher, Ashbel. 1 Chronicles 7 gives three




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      sons, Bela, Becher, Jediael (Ashbol), and Shuppim and Huppim are Bela s grandsons. Becher is omitted in 8 1 , probably through a copyist s error, who took "^23 bekher wc- axhbi-l, for "Becher and Ashbel,"

      V"O21. brkhord axhbt l, "his first-born, Ashbel." Jediael, both by older and newer scholars, is usually, but not with absolute certainty, identified with Ashbel. lie may be a later chief. Another explanation is that 7 is part of a Zebulunite genealogy which has been trans formed into a Benjamite list, Jediael being a remaining Zebulunite "pebble."

      Xaaman (4B) perhaps appears, by a transcriber s error in 8 2, as Nohah, Jimi for ,QSl . If Nohah is not Naaman, and not (Keil) Shephupham, or a chief who succeeded him, he may have been one who was born after the migration and not needed to make up the seventy.

      (Sera (4B) in similar fashion may appear in 8 2 as Rapha. If not, Rapha also may be one born after the migration, and did not found a family.

      Ehi (4U) is Ahiram (Numbers 26 38); Aharah (1 Chronicles 8 1). Ehi probably arises from some copyist omitting the "ram."

      Rosh (4B) is not in Numbers or Oh. He founded no family.

      Mnppim (4B) troubled the scribes greatly. In Numbers 26 39 lie is Shephupham, though as compounded iti his family name it is Shupham. In 1 Chronicles 7 12 he is Shup pim, and it is not made clear whether he is a son. or other descendant, of Benjamin. He is apparently called, with Huppim, a son of Ir (Iri), sou of Bela. In 8 Samuel he is cata logued as a son of Bela, as Shephuphan. In old Hebrews 7/1 cm "Q (m) and shin J (xh) closely resemble each other. As the sh also appears in the gentilie names, it is probably the correct form. The corrupt state of the Chronicler s text esp. is apparent, and also the fact that "son" may refer to any male descendant .

      Huppim (4B) in Numbers 26 39 is Hupham; in 1 Chronicles 8 5 is Huram.

      Ard (4B) in 1 Chronicles 8 3 is a son of Bela, Addar, the copyist having transposed ~, d, and 1, r, or mistaken one fur the other. In LXX at Genesis 46 21 Ard is son of ( iera, son of Bela.

      llushiin (r>Aj, the same in 1 Chronicles 7 12, is Shuham (Numbers 26 42), by transposition of consonants. Another Hush- im is a Henjaniinite, son of Aher, but A her may possibly be a corruption of the numeral "one." it being the Chron icler s frequent habit to add numerals. But see under Dan 21 0, (3), p. 1 l .)4.

      Jahzeel (5B) is .Jahziel in 1 Chronicles 7 13.

      (inni (5B) in 1 Chronicles 5 15 is also a Gadite name.

      Shillem (5B), in 1 Chronicles 7 13, Shallum, the commoner form.

      (11) Exodous 6 14-25 (assigned to P). Partial lixt of heails of fathers houses of Reuben, Simeon and Leri.

      Reuben and Simeon are as in Genesis. Levi follows:

      aron Nah- Eleu-



      The interest of the list is partly chronological, but chiefly to illustrate the genealogical place of Aaron and Moses. It probably exhibits the genealogical practice of omitting links, Amram the father of Moses apparently being several links from Aniram the son of Kohath. By Moses time the Amramites numbered some 2.UUO males (Numbers 3 27, etc). Jochebed (2A) is an instance of Jah in compounds before the Exodus. Putiel (2A) has been considered a partly Egyp name;, Puti or Poti, "devoted to" -El ( /); but probably Hebrews, "afflicted by Cod." Hebron is often identified with the city. It is also found in 1 Chronicles 2 42.43. as Judahite.

      (12) Numbers 1 5-54; 2 3-29; 7 12 ff; 10 4 IT. The he/uls of houses representing and leading the tribes (assigned to P).

      I. Reuben: Elizur, s. of Shcdour.

      II. Simeon: Shelumiel, s. of Zurishaddai.

      Shelumiel found in Jth.

      III. Judah: Nahshon, s. of Amminadab.

      Both found also in Exodous 6 23; Ruth 4 9-22; 1 Chronicles 2 10-12: Matthew 1 4; Luke 3 32 (genealogies of Christ).

      Shimoi. Kohath.

      A. Aniram m. Jochebed = Aaron, Mosos; in. Elisheba, d. of Amininadab, sister of shon = Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, Ithamar; zar m. d. of Putiel = Phinehas.

      B. Izhar=Korah, Nopheg, Zichri; Korah, Elkanah, Abiasaph.

      C. Hebron.

      D. [7z2ieZ=Mishael, Elzaphan, Sithri.


      IV. Issachar: Nothanol, s. of Zuar.

      Neth., name of nine persons in Oh, Neh, Ezra, same as Nathaniel.

      V. Zebulun: Eliab, s. of Hdon.

      Other Eliabs, Numbers 16 1 (Reubenite); 1 Samuel 16 6 (Jesse s son, Judah).

      VI. Joseph: Ephraim: Elishama, s. of Ammihud.

      Other Elishamas: 2 Samuel 5 10 (s. of David); Jeremiah 36 12; 2 Chronicles 17 8. Ammihuds: 2 Samuel 13 37m; Numbers 34 20. 2S; 1 Chronicles 9 4 (Judahite).

      VII. Joseph: Manasseh: Gamaliel, s. of Pedahzur.

      NT Gamaliel.

      VIII. Benjamin: Abidan, s. of Gideoni. IX. Dan: Ahiezor, s. of Ammishaddai. Another, 1 Chronicles 12 3 (Benjamite).

      X. Ashcr: Pagicl, s. of Ochran. XI. Gad: Eliasaph, s. of Deuel.

      Another, Numbers 3 24 (Levite). XII. Xaphtali.: Ahira, s. of Enan.

      Seven of these names, Amminadab, Ammihud, Abi dan, Ahirah, Ahiezer. Eliab. Elishama, are concededly early. The 5 compounded in Shaddai or Zur are said to be of a type found only in P; 9 of the 24 are ((im pounded in <"/,_ said to be a characteristic of late names. The Kl is postflxed more times, 5, than it is prefixed, 4; also a characteristic of late names. The proportion of compound names is also greater than in the older names; for these and similar reasons (Gray, ICC, "Numbers," 6; HI .V, 191-211; Espox T, September, 1S97, 173-90) it is concluded that though several of the names are, and more may be, early, the list is late. But see MIT, 74, S3 ff, S5 IT, 320. The contention rests largely on the late date of P and of Oh. But while fashions in names changed in Hebrews life as elsewhere, in view of the persistence of things oriental, the dating of any particular names is somewhat precarious. They may be anticipa tions or late survivals of classes of names principally prevalent at the later or earlier date. Two of the names, otherwise unknown, have come to us through Ruth, and indicate a source now unknown to us, from which all the names could have been drawn. The fondness for names in el very likely indicates not a late date but an early one. El is the Divine name 1 appearing in personal names previous to Moses, succeeded by Jah from Moses and Joshua on. The recurrence of <~l in the time of Ezra and later probably indicates the renewed interest in antiquity as well as the at once wider and narrower outlook brought about by the exile and return. Numbers merous south Arabian compounds both with the " ilu." " ili " ( <"/), affixed and prefixed, occur in monuments about 1000 BC (.AIIT, SI ID.

      (13) Numbers 3 1-37. The. family of Aaron, with the "princes of Levi.

      Adds nothing to list in Exodous 16 10-25 except the Levito "princes."

      I. Gershonites: Eliasaph, a. of Lad. Also a Benjaminite Eliasaph (Numbers 1 14). II. Kohathites: Elizaphan, s. of Uzzid.

      A Zebulunite Elizaphan (Numbers 34 25). Five other Uz- ziels, Benjamite, Levite, Simeonite.

      III. Merarites: Zurid, s. of Abihail.

      A Gadite Abihail (1 Chronicles 5 14); also father of Queen Esther; also two women: wife of Abishur (1 Chronicles 2 29); wife of Rehoboam (2 Chronicles 11 IS). Four el sufllxes. two prefixes.

      (14) Numbers 13 4-16. The Twelve Samuel pies (P). I. Reuben: Shammua, s. of Jacctir.

      Other Shammuas (2 Samuel 5 14; 1 Chronicles 14 4 [David s son]; Neh 11 17, Levite; 12 IS, priest). Seven other Zac- curs, Simeonites and Levites.

      II. Simeon: Shaphat, s. of Hori.

      Four other Shaphats, one Gadite, one Judahite; Elisha s father. Hori looks like; the national name of the Horites; perhaps Hori or an ancestor had been adopted, through marriage or otherwise.

      III. Judah: Caleb, s. of Jephunneh, the. Keniz- zitc (Numbers 32 12; Joshua 14 0.14).

      Another Caleb, Chelubai, s. of Hezron, brother of Jerahmeel (1 Chronicles 2 9). Either as an individual, or as




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      a clan, Caleb seems to be originally of the pre-Israelitish stock in Canaan, absorbed into the tribe of Judah. Perhaps Jephurmeh the Kenizzite married a woman of Caleb s (brother of Jerahtneel) household, and to their firstborn was given the name of Caleb, he becoming head of the house and prince of Judah. Another .Jephunneh, an Asherite (7 38).

      IV. Issachar: Igal, s. of Joseph.

      Other Igals: 2 Samuel 23 30 (one of David s heroes); I Chronicles 3 22. Note the name of another tribe given to a man of Issachar Joseph (Numbers 13 7).

      V. Ephraim: Hosliea, s. of Nun.

      Hoshea. Joshua s early name. Others: 1 Chronicles 27 20: King Hosliea, 2 Kings 15 30; Nell 10 2:1; Hebrews name of prophet Hosea.

      VI. Benjamin: Palti, s. of Raplm. See 16 IV. VII. Zehulun: daddiel, s. of Sodi. VIII. Joseph-Manasseh: (Jaddi, s. of Susi.

      A Gadcli is in 1 Mace 2 2. IX. Dan: Ammiel, s. of (lomalli. Another Aminiel (2 Samuel 9 4). X. Ashcr: Scthur, s. of Michael.

      Nine other Michaels, Gaditc, Lcvitc. Issacharite. Ben- jamite, Manassite, Judahite.

      XI. ,aphtali: Nahhi, s. of Vophsi. XII. Cad: Gfiu l, s. of Machi.

      Pour names in tl. Nine ending with /; unusual number. The antiquity of the list cannot be readily questioned.

      (15) Numbers 26 5-62 (P). The, heath of houses at the sccouil census.

      delated to Numbers 1 and 2, and closely follows Oen 46. The divergences in individual names have been noted under (10). This list adds to

      I. Reuben:

      1. Kliab, s. of Pallu (also Numbers 16 1.12).

      2. Dal han, Abirani, Nemuel, ss. of Eliab. II. Manasseh:

      1. Machir; also Genesis 50 2:5.

      2. (iilead, s. of Maehir.

      3. lezer (abbreviation for Abiezer), Ilelek (not in Chronicles), Asriel, Shechem, Shemida, ss. of Gilead.

      4. Zelophehad, s. of TIepher.

      5. Mahlah, Noah, Honlah, Milcah, Tirzah, d. of Zelophehad.

      III. Ephraim:

      1. Shuthelah; also 1 Chronicles 7 21.

      2. Beeher.

      3. Tahan (Tahath, 1 Chronicles 7 20).

      4. Eran (Elead, 1 Chronicles 7 21).

      The names of Manasseh s grandsons and great-grand sons are puzzling. Gilead is the district except in .Judges 11 1.2, where it is the father of Jephthah. Shechem sounds like the Ephraimite town. Hepher reminds of Gath-Hcphcr. In Joshua 17 1.2 the six sons of Gilead are described as sons of Manasseh: loosely, it is probable; they are to be understood as descendants. Perhaps the references may be summarized: The family of Maehir, the son of Manasseh, conquered Gilead, and took its name therefrom, either as a family or in the person of a son, Gilead, whose six sons founded clans named from or giving names to certain towns or districts.

      The daughters of Zelophehad are noted for the inter esting case at law they presented, claiming and receiving the inheritance of their father, which by Gray, ICC, " Numbers," is considered not historical but a fictitious instance, for the purpose of raising the question, these daughters being clans, and not persons.

      Among the sons of Ephraim, Beeher has perhaps been misplaced from ver 38, and possibly displaces Bered (1 Chronicles 7 20) between Shuthelah and Tahath. It is not found here in the LXX. It is possible that an alliance between the Becherites and the Ephraimitcs caused one portion of the former to be counted with Kphraim and another with Benjamin; or that at different times the clan was allied with the two different tribes. An error in trans cription is more probable. Another Shuthelah is found later in tin; line (1 Chronicles 7 21).

      (16) Numbers 34 16-28. Tribal representatives in the allotment.

      Reuben, Gad, half-Manasseh, omitted because their allotments had already been assigned east of Jordan; Levi. because receiving none. Changing to the order in (10):

      I. Reuben: None. II. tiimeon: Shemuel, s. of Ammihud.

      Shemnel is Hebrews of south Another south is of Issachar, 1 (Micah 7 2. Samuel the prophet, a Levi to.

      III. Judith: Caleb, s. of Jephunneh.

      IV. Issachar: Paltiel, s. of Azzati.

      Another Paltiel, otherwise Palti. David s wife Micah- chal s temporary husband (2 Samuel 3 15). Another Ben- jamitc spy (Numbers 13 9).

      V. Zebidun-: Elizaphan, s. of Parnach. Another east, Kohathite Levite (Kx 6 18.22).

      VI. (!ad: None. VII. Asher: Ahihud, s. of Shelomi.

      Another Ahihud, Bonjamito (1 Oh 87). VIII. Joseph-Ephraim: Kenmel, s. of Shiftan.

      Another Kemuel, s. of Nahor, an Aramaean chief (Genesis 22 21); also Levito of David s time(l Chronicles 27 17).

      IX. Joseph-Manasseh; Ilanniel, s. of Ephod.

      Hanniel, also an Asherite (1 Chronicles 7 39).

      X. lienjatnin: Elidad, s. of Chislon. XI. Dan: Bukki, s. of Jojdi.

      Bukki, abbreviation of Bukkiah; another, in high- priestly line of Phinehas (L Chronicles 6 5.51).

      XII. Xaplitali: Pedahel, s. of Ammihud.

      A Sirneonite Ammihud above. Seven "El" names, only one "Jah."

      (17) Ruth 4 20. The ancestry of David (Perez: He/ron: Ram: Amminadab: Nahshon: Salmon [SalmahJ: Boaz: Obed: Jesse: David).

      Contained unchanged in 1 Chronicles 2 9-15; also Matthew 1 1-0; also Luke 3 32. Some links have been omitted between Obed and Jesse. Salmon might be traced to the ancestor of the Bet hlchemite ( 1 Oh 2 51.54), who is, however, of Caleb s line, not Ham s; but the lines may mingle.

      (18) 2 Samuel 3 2-5; 5 14.15. David s children (also in 1 Chronicles 3 1-9; 14 4-7).

      ,.ttorn in Hebron: Amnon, Chileab, Absalom,

      Adonijah, Shephatiah, Ithroam. II. Horn in Jerus: Shamnma, Shobab, Nathan, Solomon, Ibhar, Klishua, Nepheg, Japhia, Elishama, Eliada, Eliphelet.

      Four names in fl, all prefixed. Two in "Jah." Chileab is Daniel in 1 Chronicles 3 1; uncertain which is right, but probably Daniel is a corruption. Chronicles adds Nogah to the Jerus sons, probably developed in transcription. 3 (i-Samuel has two Eliphelets; 14: <> has Elpalet in place of the first; more probable. This gives David G sons in Hebron, and, if both Nogah and Elpalct be, correct, 12 in Jerus. Eliada is Beeliada in 14 7, perhaps the original form, a relic of the time before the; Hebrews turned against the use of Baal, "lord," as applied to .Teh; in which case Baaliada, "Lord knows." was changed to Eliada, "God knows." 3 <> reads Elishama for Elishua. Japhia is also the name of a king of Lachish in Joshua s time (Joshua 10 3-7).

      (19) 2 Samuel 23 (also 1 Chronicles 11 11-41). David s knights.

      1. Josheb-bashebeth, the Tahchemonite.

      In Chronicles it is Jashobeam, and should read Ishbaal, tin; writer s religious horror of Baal leading him to substi tute the consonants of ln i.tlififi, "shame," as in Mephibo- sheth, Ishbosheth. LXX has le^-flaSti (B), Iecr<T/3aSdA, lcr,iaa/x (A), in Oh, and leHoo-flt- (B), le/Soo-flat (A) here. In Chronicles he is a Hachmonite, probably correct. "Adinp thi> Ileznite" is probably a corruption for "He wielded his spear" (Chronicles).

      2. Eleazar, s. of Dodai, the Ahohite.

      Dodo in Oh; 8 other Eleazars in the OT. Another Dodo is father of Elhanan.

      3. Shammah, s. of Agec, a Hararite.

      Omitted by Chronicles. Three other Shammahs, one of them a knight of David. "Harari" may be "mountaineer," or "inhabitant of the village Harar."




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      4. Abishai, s. of Zmiiuh, brother of Joab.

      Abshai (1 Oh 18 12m). Zeruiah perhaps David s half-sister (2 Samuel 17 25). Father never mentioned.

      5. Benaiah, s. of Jchoaida of Kabzeel.

      1 1 other OT Benaiahs, one of them also a knight. This B. succeeded Joab as commander-in-chief, 4 other Jelioi- adas, one B. s grandson, high in David s counsel, unless a scribe has inverted the order in 1 Oh 27 34, which should then read B., s. of Jehoiada.

      6. Asahel, brother of Joab. Three other Asahels.

      7. Elhanan, s. of Dodo of Bethlehem.

      Another east, slayer of the brother of Goliath (2 Samuel 21 19; 1 Oh 20 5). Perhaps the same.

      8. Shammah the Harodite.

      Chronicles, Shammoth. From Harod, near Gideon s well (Judges 7 l).

      9. Elika the Harodite.

      10. Helez the Paltite.

      Paltite perhaps local or family name from Pelet, or Palti.

      11. Ira, s. of Ikkesh the Tekoite.

      Two others, one a knight. Tekoah, Judaite town, home of Amos, etc.

      12. Abiezer the Anathothite.

      One other, a Manassite (Joshua 17 2). Anathoth an hour northeast of Jerus, Jeremiah s town.

      13. Mebunnai the Hushathite. Should read, with Chronicles, Sibbecai.

      14. Zalmon the Ahohite.

      Z., also name of mountain (Judges 9 4S). Descendant of Ahoah, Benjamite of Bela s line. See 1 Chronicles 8 14.

      15. Maharai the Netophathitc. From Netophah, town.

      16. Heleb, s. of Baanah.

      1 Chronicles 11 30, Ileled. Three other Baanahs.

      17. Ittai, s. of Ribai of Gilx ah of the children of Benjamin.

      1 Chronicles 11 31, Ithai. An Ittai of Gath also followed David.

      18. Benaiah a Pirathonite.

      Pirathon, Amalekito town in Ephrairaite territory.

      19. Hiddai of the brooks of Gaash.

      Chronicles, Hurai (~ for "^). Ga ash, a wady in Kphraim.

      20. Abi-albon the Arbathite.

      Chronicles, Abiel, perhaps corrupted from Abi-Baal; from Beth-arabah, Judah or Benjamin.

      21. Azmaveth the Barhumite.

      Three others, and a Judaite town, of the same name. Baharumite, Chronicles. B., a Benjamite town.

      22. Eliahba the Shaalbonite. south, a Danite town.

      23. The sons of Jashen (better, Hashern).

      Chronicles, "the sons of Hashem the Gizonite." "Sons of" looks like a scribal error, or interpolation, perhaps a repetition of "bni" in "Shaalboni" above.

      24. Jonathan, s. of Shammah the Hararite.

      Chronicles adds, "the son of Shagee the Hararite." Shagee should perhaps be Ageo (2 Samuel 23 11); but LXX indi cates Shammah here; both Samuel and Chronicles should read "J., s. of Shammah the Ararite."

      25. Ahiam, s. of Sharar the Ararite.

      Chronicles, Sacar the Hararite. Samuel is supported by LXX.

      26. Eliphelet, s. of Ahasvai, the son of the Maaca- thite.

      Chronicles has "Eliphal, s. of Ur," and adds " Hophor the Mecherathite." Both texts are corrupt. Chronicles should perhaps read, "Eliphelet the son of ..... the Maaca- thite, Eliarn," etc.

      27. Eliham, s. of Ahithophel the Gilonite.

      east, possibly father of Bathsheba. Ahithophel, David s counselor. Gilonite, native of Giloh.

      27. Ahijah the Pelonite (in Chronicles but not Samuel).

      Seven other Ahijahs. Pelonite uncertain, probably a corruption; perhaps inserted by a scribe who could not decipher his "copy," and means "such and such a one," as in 1 Samuel 21 2.

      28. Hezro (Hezrai) the Carmelite.

      Scribe confused "| and 1 . Carmel, near Hebron.

      29. Paarai the Arbite.

      Chronicles, "Naarai, s. of Esbai." Uncertain. Arab., a town of Judah.

      30. Igal, s. of Nathan of Zobah .

      Chronicles, Joel, brother of Nathan. Igal less common than Joel, hence more likely to be corrupted; 2 other Igals; 12 other Joels; 5 other Nathans.

      30a. Mibhar, s. of Hagri (Chronicles, not Samuel). Text uncertain as between this and 31 .

      31. Bani the Gadite (omitted Chronicles). Possibly the Geraritc.

      32. Zelek the Ammonite.

      Ammon east of Jordan and upper Jabbok .

      33. Naharai the Beerothite, armor-bearer to Joab, s. of Zeruiah.

      Beeroth, Benjamite town .

      34. Ira the Ithrite.

      Ithrites, a family of Kiriath-jearim, Judah.

      35. Gareb the Ithrite. Gareb also a hill west of Jerus.

      36. Uriah the II it the.

      Bathsheba s husband; 3 others. From some Hittito town surrounded by Israel at the Conquest.

      37. Zabad, s. of Ahlai (perhaps dropped out of Samuel). Chronicles.

      Chronicles adds 13 others. The filling of vacancies makes the number 37 instead of 30. Two names, perhaps, in bii nl, 5 in u<ih, 7 in t~l. As far as guessable, 5 from Judah, 3 from Benjamin. 2 from Hphraim, 1 from Dan, 1 from Issachar, 1 Ammonite, 1 Hittite, 2 (or 4) Hara- rites, 2 Harodites, 2 Ithrites.

      (20) 1 Kings 4 1-19. Solomon s "princes" and com missaries.

      11 princes, 12 officers. No mention of their tribal connections; assigned only partly by tribal bounds. 7 yah names, 1 tl; 5 of the officers are prefixed ben as if their own names had dropped out.

      (21) 1 Chronicles 1-9. Genealogies, with geographical and historical notices.

      By far the largest body of genealogical material, illus trating most fully the problems and difficulties. The estimate of its value depends on the estimate of the Chronicler s date, purpose, equipment, ethical and mental qualities. He uses freely all previous OT matter, and must have had in hand family or tribal songs, tra ditions; genealogical registers, as mentioned in Ezra 2 61-69; Neh 7 63-65; local traditions; official gene alogies, such as " the genealogies reckoned in the days of Jotham king of Judah, and .... Jeroboam king of Israel" (1 Chronicles 5 17); prophetic, historical and other matter now lost, "the words of Shemaiah .... after the manner of genealogies " (2 Chronicles 12 15), and elsewhere. The results of David s census seem to have been in his hands (1 Chronicles 27 24). Curtis (ICC, "Chronicles," 528) suggests that his purpose was partly to provide gene alogies for contemporary families, implying an accommo dating insertion of names "after the manner of gene alogies" today. Two main purposes, however, seem clear: the first historical, to give the historical and per sonal basis and setting to elucidate the Chronicler s main thesis, that national prosperity depended upon, and na tional character was measured by, fidelity to the law of




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      We may also credit him with

      A frw illustrative cases only are given

      1. Primeval Genealogies (1 Chronicles 1 1-54).

      To show Israel s place among the nations; follows ( .en closely, omitting only the Canutes; boldly, skilfully compressed, as if the omitted facts were well known.

      (1) The ten antediluvian Patriarchs, ;iml Xoah s three SOILS (vs 1-4).

      Follows Genesis 4 5, giving only the names.

      (2) Japheth s descendants (va 5-7) (Genesis 10 2-4 unchanged).

      (3) The Hamites (vs 8-lti) (( .en 10 6-8.13- 18 unchanged).

      (4) The Semites (vs 17-2:5) (Genesis 10 22 21); only scribal change s).

      (5) Abnun s descent (vs 24-27) (den 11 10-2(5 abridged, giving only the Patriarchs).

      (6) The sons of Abraham, Keturah, Isaac (vs 28-34).

      Genesis 25 1-4.1:5-10.25.20; 32 2S. Reverses the order of Ishmael s and Keturah s descendants.

      (7) Sons of Ksau (vs 35-52) (den 36 4-10).

      (8) Kings and sheikhs of Edom (vs 43.54) ((!en 36 31 43). Scribal changes.

      II. Descendants of Jacob (1 Chronicles 2-9).

      The tribes arranged chiefly geographically, .hidah, as the royal line, is given 100 verses. Levi, as the priestly, ,H1 verses. Benjamin 50. the other ten 50. Dan and Zebu- Inn neglected. His purpose practically confines him to the first three; and these were also the best preserved.

      (1) (W(.Samuel f I*f(H l.

      Follows substantially the order in Genesis 35. Dan is placed before Rachel s sons. 17 different orders of the tribes in Bible lists.

      (2) Gctu aliHjws of Judah (2 34 23).

      (a) Descent of Jesse s sons from Judah (2 3-17).

      Largely gleaned from the historical books. The sons of Zerah (vs (i X) are not found elsewhere. Chcluhai is Caleb. Only 7 sons of Jesse are mentioned. Abishai. .loab. Asaliel are always designated by their mother s name, Zeruiah.

      (/>) Genealogy of Bezalel (vs 18-20).

      The artificer of the tabernacle, hence greatly interests the Chronicler.

      (c) Other descendants of Hezron (vs 21

      24). (r/) The Jerahmeelites (vs 25-41).

      Concededly a very old list of this important clan not found elsewhere. Shush an (ver 35), who married his daughter to Jarha, an Egyp servant, illustrates the intro duction of a foreigner into the nation and tribe.

      (r) The Calebites (vs 41-55).

      Not elsewhere. The names are largely geographical. A subdivision of the Hezronites. Not Caleb the son of Jephunneh.

      (/) David s descendants (3 1-24).

      Gives first the sons and their birthplaces, then the kings to Jeconiah and Zedekiah, then the Uavidic line from Jeconiah to Zerubbabel, then the grandsons of Ze-

      rubbabel and the descendants of Shecaniah. Two other lists of David s sons (2 Samuel 5 14-10; 1 Chronicles 14 4-17). Kliphelet and Nogah here are thought to have developed in transcription, with some other changes. .lohanan s name (s. of Josiah) is given among the kings, though he never reigned. Zedekiah is called son (instead of brother) of Jehoiachin, perhaps a scribal error. "Jah" names extremely numerous. Names of Zerubbabel s sons are highly symbolic: Meshullam, "Recompensed"; Hananiah, "Jah is gracious"; Shelomitli, "Peace"; Hashubah, "Consideration"; Ohel, "Tent, "i.e. " Dwell ing of JAH (Jehovah)"; Herechiah, " Jah blesses" ; Hasadiah, "Jah is kind"; Jushab-hesed, "Loving-kindness returns"; characteristic of the Kxile.

      Vs 19-24, beginning with Zerubbabel s descendants, are obscure, and a battleground of criticism on account of their bearing on the date of Chronicles. There; are three pos sible interpretations: (1) Following the Ileb, Zerubbabel s descendants stop with Pelatiah and .leshaiah, his grand sons. Then follow throe, unclassified sets of "sons." No connection is shown between Jeshaiah and these. Then follows Shecaniah s line with four generations. There are several other instances of unrelated names thus being thrown in. This gives tiro generations after Zerubbabel. (2) Still following the Hebrews. assume that Shecaniah after Obadiah is in Z. s line. This gives nix generations after Z. (3) Following LXX. Syriac. Vulg (but the two hitler are of very small critical weight), read in ver 21, " Hephaiah his son, Arnan his son," etc a very possible change: </<(< generations after Z. According to (3), Chronicles was written at least 25:1 years (allowing 23 years to a generation; more probable than 30 or 40) after Zerubbabel (515), hence after 202 BC; (2) makes it after 373; (I) makes it 459, during Ezra s life. The book s last recorded event is Cyrus decree (53S), which indicates the earliest date. The XT casts no light here, none of these names appearing in the gene alogies in Ml or Luke. If LXX is correct. Keil suggests that it is a later insertion, a critical device too frequently used to nullify inconvenient facts. The passage itself justifies the statement that "there is no shadow of proof that the families enumerated in ver 21, latter part, were descendants of Hananiah the son of Zerubbabel." Against this, and the other indications, the admittedly faulty LXX furnishes an insufficient basis for so far- reaching a conclusion.

      (</) Fragmentary genealogies of families of Judah (4 1-23).

      Contains (1) "sons" of Judah, four or five successive generations; (2) sons of Shobal and Hur; (3) sons of Chelub; (4) sons of Caleb, s. of Jephunneh; (5) son.-- of Jehaleel; (0) sons of Kzra (of course, not the priest-scribe of the return); (7) sons of "Bethiah the daughter of Pharaoh whom Mered took"; (Samuel) sons of Shimon; (9) sons of Ishi; (10) sons of Shelah. It is Iwu to trace the law of association here; -which fact has its bearing on the discussion under (/) above. Chelub may be another Caleb. Vs 9-11 give an interesting name-study, where Jabex by prayer transforms into prosperity the omen of his sorrowful name: "Because I bare him with sorrow," a characteristic note. Vs 21-23 speak of the linen- workers and potters. Similar, even identical, names have been found on pot-handles in Southern Philestina, Canaan-Land.

      (3) Genealogy of Simeon (4 24-43).

      (a) Simeon s sons. Genealogy of Shimei.

      After Genesis 46 10; Exodous 6 15; Numbers 26

      12-14. (6) Dwelling-places of Simeon. After Joshua

      19 2-8. (c) Princes and conquests (vs 34-43).

      Source unknown, but considered old. Gray, however, thinks the names of late formation. Meshobab. Jam- lech. Joshah, Ama/,iah, Joel, Jehu, Josibiah, Seraiah, Asiel, Klioeiiai, Jaakobah, Jeshohaiah, Asaiah, Adiel, Jesimiel. Benaiah, Zi/a, Shiphi, Allon. Jedaiah, Shimri, Shemaiah. Ishi. Pelatiah. Neariah, Rephaiah, Uzziel; many undoubtedly old ones; 11 in unh, 5 in f-l. Elioenai sounds post-exilic. The section mentions several exploits of Simeon.

      (4) Easl-Jordanic tribes (5 1-24).

      As in Simeon above, the usual order, deviated from in instances, is (1) Introductory: Sons and immediate descendants; (2) Territory; (3) Princes or Chiefs; (4) Incidents.

      (a) Reuben (vs 1-10).

      Partly follows Genesis, Numbers; but only as to first generation. Very fragmentary and connections obscure.

      (b) Gad (vs 11-17).

      First generation omitted. Chronicler draws from genealogies "in the days of" Jotham and Jeroboam.

      (c) Half-Manassch (vs 23.24).




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      The whole tribe is treated of (7 14 tf). Here only the seats and heads of houses.

      (5) Lcri (6 1-81).

      Illustrates more fully the Chronicler s attitude and methods.

      (a) High priests from Levi to Jehozadak

      (the Exile) (vs 1-15).

      (a) Levi s sons: Gershon, Kohath, Merari (Genesis 46 11; Exodous 6 16).

      (/3) Kohath s sons: Amram, Izhar, Hebron, Uzziel (Exodous 6 18).

      (7) Amram s "sons": Aaron, Moses, Miriam (Exodous 6 20.23 [except Mir iam]; Numbers 26 59 f).

      (5) High priests from Eleazar. Also (partly) Ezra (7 1-5):

      Wo have threo pedigrees of Samuel, all suffering in transcription :

      1. Eleazar

      2. Phinehas

      3. Abishua

      4. Bukki

      5. I zzi

      (i. Zerahiah

      7. Meraiuth

      8. Amariah

      9. Ahitub

      10. Zadok

      11. Ahimaaz

      12. 13.

      I I. 15. 16.






      17. Zadok

      18. Shallum IS). Hilkiah

      20. Azariah

      21. Seraiah

      22. Jehozadak

      Noteworthy omissions: Eli s house, Eli, Phinehas, Ahitub, Ahimelech, Abiathar, because set aside for Zadok s in Solomon s time; Bnkki to Zadok being their contemporaries; but the list also omits Amariah in the reign of Jehoshaphat (perhaps), Jehoiada. Joash s "power behind the throne," Urijah in Ahaz day, Aza riah in Hozekiah s. It has been thought that this was done in the interests of a chronological scheme of the Chronicler, making 23 generations of 40 years from the Kxodus to the Captivity, or 920 years. The Hebrews gen eration, however, was as likely to bo 30 as 40 years, and as a matter of fact was nearer 20. The apparent number of generations from Aaron to the Captivity, adding the data from the historical books, is 29, making a generation about 24 years. The reasons for the omission here, as for many others, are not apparent. Outside of Chronicles and Kzr wo know nothing of Abishua, Bukki, Uzzi, Zerahiah, Moraioth, the first Amaziah, Johanan, Amariah, Ahitub, Zadok 2, Shallum, Azariah 3. The list touches his torical not ices in Aaron, Eleazar, Phinehas, Zadok. Ahima az, Azariah 2, contemporary of Solomon, perhaps Amariah, contemporary of .Jehoshaphat, Azariah, con temporary of Uzziah, Hilkiah, contemporary of Joshua, Seraiah slain by the Chaldaeans, and Jehozadak. The recurrence of similar names in close succession is char acteristically Jewish (but compare names of popes and kings). It is seen in the list beginning with Jehozadak: Joshua, Joiakim, Eliashib, Joiada, Jonathan, Jaddua, Onias, Simon, Eleazar, Manasseh. Onias, Simon, Onias, Joshua. Also about Christ s time: Eleazar, Jesus! Annas, Ismacl, Eleazar, Simon, Joseph, Jonathan. The- ophilus, Simon, although these latter do not succeed in a genealogical line.

      (b) The three Levitical clans (vs 10-19) After Exodous 6 17-19; Numbers 3 17-20.

      (r) Lineal descendants of Gershom : seven, vs 20.21; thirteen, vs 39-43. See also I Chronicles 23 7. two lists (vs 20.21 and vs 39-43 j are clearly the

      The same:

      (iershom (Jershom

      Lihni Jahath

      Zimmah Zimmah

      Joah Ethan

      Iddo Adaiah

      Zerali Zerah

      Jeatherai Ethni







      Jahath, Zimmah, Zerah are in both. By slight changes Joah, nSC"P . is Ethan, jrPX : Iddo, -j-jy , is rPTP. Adaiah; Jeathorai, "HriX" 1 is Kthni, i;nX- Shimei may have dropped from one and Libni from the other. Jahath and Shimei have been transposed. In 1 Chronicles 23 7 Libni is Ladan.

      (<l) Pedigrees of Samuel (vs 27.28; 33-35). See also 1 Samuel 1 1 ; 8 2.

      ill ! Chronicles li :J-J-J4.- Samuel

      i. i 1 Chronicles fi::i:!-:is







      Assir, Elkanah,

































      Joel (Vashni) and











      The text is obscure. LXX reads (ver 20), "Elkanah his [Ahimoth s] son, Zophai his son." It has Izhar in (1) for Amminadab, as has Hebrews in Exodous 6 IS. 21. Uriel for Zephaniah is unexplainable. Uzziah and Azariah are exchangeable. The other variations are transerip- tional. Joel has dropped out of the first list, and the following words, now in 1 Samuel 8 2, and the Syriac here: and the second," v-sk-n, have been read "Vashni." 1 Samuel 1 1 calls Zuph an Ephraimite. The Chronicler s claiming him (arid Samuel) seems to some another in stance of Levitical bias and acquisitiveness. The gene alogy is also found "clearly artificial," Zuph being a territory, and Toah, Tohu, Nahath, a family. But "Ephraimite" is either merely local, the family having been assigned residence there (Joshua 21 5; 1 Chronicles 6 (Hi), or (Hengstenberg, Ewald) because, being thus assigned! it has been incorporated into the tribe. Hannah s vow to devote him to JAH (Jehovah) is said (Curtis, Moore, ICC in lor.) to show that he was no Levite, in which case no vow was necessary. But Elkanah s Ephraimitish citizenship may have obscured in Hannah s mind the Levitical de scent. In the disorganized times of the Judges an Eph raimitish woman may well have been ignorant of, or indifferent to, the Levitical regulation, She, or the author of 1 Samuel 1 1, must also have forgotten that every male that openeth the womb from any tribe is equally (iod s property A mother s vow to "devote her first born son to JAH (Jehovah), beyond recall or redemption, and to seal his consecration by the significant symbol of the unshorn head, is not hard to imagine in either a Levito or an Ephraimite, and equally "unnecessary" in either case. Heman, ending the pedigree (2), was David s contemporary.

      (e) Pedigree of Asaiuh the Merarite (1 Chronicles 6 29.30).

      Merari: Mahli: Libni; Shimei: Uzzah: Shimea: Haggiah: Asaiah. Hard to adjust or place. Libni and Shimei are elsewhere Gershonites, but the same name is frequently found in different tribes or clans. Informa tion below Mahli is entirely wanting.

      (J) Descent, of David s three singers, He- man, Asaph, Ethan (vs 33-47). (a) Heman has been given under (d);

      20 links.

      (P) Asaph: Gershom: Jahath: Sliimei: Zimmah: Ethan: Adaiah: Zerah: Ethni (Jeatherai): Malehijah: Ba aseiah: Michael: Shimea: Berech- iah: Asaph; 15 links. (7) Ethan: Merari: Mushi: Mahli: Shemer: Hani: Amzi: Hilkiah: Amaziah: Hashabiah: Malluch: Abdi: Kishi: Ethan; 12 links.

      Hardly anywhere is the Chronicler s good faith more questioned than in these lists. Finding in his day the three guilds of singers claiming descent from David s three, and through these from Levi, he fits them out with pedigrees, borrowing names from vs 10-20, and filling out with his favorite names, or those of his own invention, or from current lists. To make Asaph contemporary with David, he adds Malchijah, Maaseiah. Michael Shimei, Berechiah. He helps out Ethan with Bani, Amzi Hilkiah, Amaziah, Hashabiah, Malluch, Abdi, Kishi. The names added are very frequent in Chronicles and Ezra, not frequent in older writings. Aside from the general ob jection to this thoroughgoing discredit of Chronicles, and the theory of religious development in Israel on which it is




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      based, it may ho said: (1) The Chronicler s failure to give his three families nearly the same number of links is suspicious, but if he took an old list, as it came to him, it is natural. (2) The fact that these added names occur many more times in (Micah. Ezra. Xeh indicates simply that Levitical names occur frequently in a writer and among a people whose interests are Levitical. Xo one would look among the Roundheads for either classical or aristo cratic names. (3) In no tribe would such names be more likely to recur, naturally or purposely, than in the Leviti cal. (4) The Chronicler has inserted among his new names in yah and only 1 in <"/. and that far down the list. (/>) Of the "added" names Malchijah occurs in JIT 21 1; Masseiah, in 29 21.25; 35 4, in every case priestly or Levitical. Michael occurs in Numbers 13 13. Bereehiah is the name of the prophet Zeeha- riah s father. Hilkiah is the name of Joshua s high priest. Ama/.iah reigned SOO BC. Bani is mentioned in 2 Samuel 23 30 (though this is thought to be copied from Chronicles). Shimea is coucededly early. Of the 13 "added names" 8 are found elsewhere. Of the others, Amzi, Abdi, Kishi (Kish, Kushaiah) have an early look. Mallueh might be late. If Ilashabiah is late the author has scat tered it well through the history, 1 several generations before David, 3 in David s time, 1 in Josiah s, 1 in Ezra s, 3 in Nehemiah s, in every case a Leyite. (7) While these "added" names occur more times in Chronicles, Ezra, Xeh. than elsewhere, and f> of the 13 occur nowhere else, it is also true that more than ">()() other names also occur only in these three books, and that the total names in these, to say nothing of the " I " portions elsewhere, outnumber the names in the other books about three to one. Other things being equal, three mentions of any common name ought to be found in these books to one in the others. Of all names applied to more than four persons the usual proportion in these books by count is four, to one else where.

      (g) Pedigree of Ahimaaz (vs f>0-.")3). Parallel with 6 4-8.

      (h) Dwelling-places of Levi. (6) The six remaining tribes. (a) Issachar (7 1-5).

      Ver 1 derived from Genesis 46 13; Numbers 26 23.24. The rest peculiar to Chronicles. Closes with a record of lighting men, instead of the usual statement of dwelling-places.

      (6) Benjamin (7 6-13).

      A very difficult section. It is considered a Zebulunite genealogy which has been Benjaminized, because (1) there is a Benjamite list elsewhere; (2) Benjamin is out of place, here, while in 13 out of 17 tribal lists /ebulun comes at this point, and in this list has no other place; (3) the numbers of Benjamin s sons differ from other Benjamite genealogies; (4) the names of Bela s and Becher s sons are different here; (">) many names are not Benjamite; ((>) Tarshish, in this list, is a sea-coast name appropriate to Zebulun. but not Benjamin. But (1) it is called Benjamite; (2) doublets are not unknown in Chronicles; (3) Dan is also neglected; (4) many Benjamite names are found; (5) both the Zebulunite material and the Benjamite material elsewhere is too scanty for safe conclusions.

      (c) Dan, ver 12, from Genesis 46 23.

      Aher ("another") is a copyist s error or substitute for Dan.

      ((/) Naphtali, vcr 13, from On 46 21

      (transcript ional changes). (c) Alanasseh, Kings. and west (vs 14-19).

      The text of vs 14.1"> very corrupt. No other notice is found of the sons in vs 10.17: Peresh, Sheresh, I lam, Kakem, Bedan.

      (/) Ephraim to Joshua (vs 20-29).

      Contains an interesting personal note in the mourning of Ephraim over his sons Ezer and Elead. and the sub sequent birth of Beriah. Interpreted to mean that the clans Ezer and Elead met with disaster, on which the clan Beriah became prominent.

      (y) The scuts of Joseph s sons (vs 28.29). Hard to say why this has been placed here, (/i) Ashcr (vs 30-40).

      The earliest names derived from Genesis 46 17. Gray considers the others ancient.

      (i) Benjamin (8 1-40).

      (a) Sons of Benjamin. After Genesis 46

      21, with variations. See (6) (6). (P) Descendants of Ehud (vs 6-28).

      Text very corrupt, obscure.

      (7) The house of Saul (vs 29-38) ; re peated (9 35-44).

      In this passage two exceptions to the usual treatment of Baal compounds. Ishbaal and Meribbaal here are Ishbosheth and Mephibosheth in south

      (7) The inhabitants of Jerusalem (9 1-34).

      "With variations in Xeh 11 1-13. This passage has been thought an interpolation, but it is the Chronicler s custom to give dwelling-places. Perhaps this and Neh are two independent abridgments of the same document. This probably describes post-exilic conditions. Vs 1 and 2 here, and Xeh 11 seem conclusive on this point. Kour classes of returning exiles;

      (a) The children of Judah, Benjamin, Ephraim, Manasseh.

      Constituting "the laity," "Israel."

      (b) The priests. Agreeing with Neh, but abridged.

      (c) The Levites. Paralleling Neh, but not exact ly.

      (d) Nethinim or porters. Fuller than Neh,

      and different.

      (Samuel) The house of Saul (9 35-44, repeating 8 29-38).

      (22) David s knights (I Chronicles 11 10-47).

      Discussed under (10). Adds to the list, Adina, s. of Shi/a, Keubenite; Hanan, s. of Maacah. Joshaphat the Mithnite, I zziah the Ashterathitc, Shama and Jeiel the sons of Ilotharn the Aroerite. Jediael the son of Shiinri, and Joah his brother, the Tizite, Eliel the Mahavite, and Jeribai and Josliaviah. the sons of Elnaatn, and Ithmah the Moabite, Eliel, and Obed, and Jaasieh the Mezo- balte.

      (23) Darid s recruits at Z iking (1 Chronicles 12-22).

      Found only here. Contains 23 names from Benjamin (some may be Judahite); 11 from (lad; 8 from Manas seh; nothing to show that the names are not old.

      (24) Daria s musicians and porters at the bring ing of the ark (, Chronicles 15 16-24).

      Also 16 5.0.37-43. Each division of the Levites rep resented by a chief musician.

      (25) David s organization of the kingdom (1 Chronicles 23-27).

      I. The Levites (eh 23).

      (1) The family of Cershon (vs 7-11); 9 houses.

      (2) The family of Kohath (vs 12-20); 11 houses.

      (3) The family of Meruri (vs 21-23) ; 4 houses.

      II. The. priests (ch 24).

      24 divisions; 10 divided among descendants of Eleazar, headed by Zadok; s among those of It ha mar, headed by Aliimeleeh (perhaps an error for Abiathar); but perhaps Ahimelech s. Abiathar, s. of Ahimelech, was acting for his father.

      (1) Eleazar s courses: Jehoiarib, Harim, Mal chijah, Hakkoz, Joshua, Kliashib, Hup- pah, Bilgah, Hezer, Aphses, Pethahiah, Jchezekel, Jachin, Gamul, Delaiah, Ma- aziah.

      (2) Itharnar: Jedaiah, Seorim, Mijamin, Abijah, Shecaniah, Jachim, Joshebcab, Immer.

      Jos gives the same names of courses (Ant, VII, xiv, 7; , itn, 1). Several are mentioned in Apoc, Talm, and the NT. Jehoiarib, Jedaiah, Harim, Malchijah, Mija min, Abijah, Shecaniah, Bilgah, Maaziah, are found in one or both of Nehemiah s lists.

      (3) Supplementary list of Levites (1 Chronicles 24 20-31).

      Repeats the Levitical families in 1 Chronicles 23 6-23, omitting the Gershonites, adding to the Kohathites and Merarites.

      III. The singers (1 Chronicles 25).

      (1) Their families, classified under the three great groups, descendants of Asaph, Jedu- thun (Ethan), Heman.




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      A curious problem is suggested by the fact that the names in ver 4, beginning with Hanani, with a few very slight changes, read: " Hanan ( Have mercy ) -iah ( 6 Jehovah ); Hanani ( Have mercy ); Eli-athah ( Thou art my God ); Giddalti ( I have magnified ) (and) Ro- mamti ( exalted ) (thy) Ezer ( help ); Joshua-bekashah ( In the seat of hardness ); Mallothi ( I spake of it ); Hothir ( Gave still ); Mahazioth ( Visions )." How, or why, this came among these names, cannot be said.

      (2) The 24 courses of 12 singers each, of which courses nos. 1, 3, 5, 7 fell to Asaph; nos. 2, 4, 8, 10, 12, 14 fell to Jeduthun; nos. 6, 9, 11, 13, 15-24 fell to Heman. IV. Gatekeepers and other officers (1 Chronicles 26).

      (1) Genealogies and stations of the gate keepers (vs 1-19).

      (2) Those in charge of the temple treasury (vs 20-28).

      (3) Those in charge of the "outward busi-

      Subordinate magistrates, tax-collectors, etc.

      V. The army, and David s officers (I Chronicles 27).

      (1) The army (vs 1-15).

      12 officers, each commanding 24.000 men, and in charge for one month; chosen from David s knights.

      (2) The tribal princes (vs 16-24).

      After the fashion of Xu 1 2-15. Gad and Asher are omitted. The 12 are made up by including the Levites and the Aaronites.

      (3) The king s twelve stewards (vs 25-31).

      (4) The king s court officers (vs 32-34).

      Counselor and scribe: Jonathan, the king s uncle. otherwise unknown; tutor: Jehiel; counselor: Ahitho phel; " the king s friend" (closest confidant ?): Hushai. Possibly two priests are next included: Jehoiada the son of Benaiah, and Abiathar, high priest of the Ithamar branch. But perhaps it should read, "Benaiah. the son of Jehoiada." If two priests are intended, it seems strange that Zadok is not one. The list ends with the commander-in-chief, Joab.

      This elaborate organization in every part and branch of the kingdom is looked upon as the Chronicler s glow ing Utopian dream of what must have been, underrating the organizing power of the great soldier and statesman.

      (26) Ezra 2 1-63. The exiles who returned with Zerubbabel.

      Paralleled in Xeh 7 6-73. 9 "Jah," 4 "El" names in 107.

      (1) The leaders (ver 2).

      (2) Numbers, according to families (vs 3-19). 18 of Ezra s numbers differ from Nehcmiah s.

      (3) Numbers according to localities (vs 20-35). 10 towns probably Judahite, 7 Benjamite.

      (4) The priests (vs 39.42).

      Only 4 families, representing 3 Davidic courses.

      (5) The Levites (vs 43.44). Among the singers, only Asaphites.

      (6) The porters (ver 45). 3 old names, 3 new ones.

      (7) The "Nethinim" (temple-slaves) (vs 46-56).

      (Samuel) The children of Solomon s servants (slaves) (vs

      57-59). (9) Those who could not prove their descent.

      (a) General population.

      Three families, children of Delaiah, Tobiah, Nekoda.

      (b) Priestly families.

      Hobaiah, Ilakkoz, Barzillai. Ilakkoz, the seventh of the Davidic courses, perhaps succeeded later in estab lishing their right (Neh 3 21).

      (27) Ezra 6 1-5. Ezra s genealogy.

      An ascending genealogy : Ezra, s. of Seraiah, s.of Azariah, s. of Hilkiah, s. of Shallum, s. of Zadok, s. of Ahitub, s. of Arnaraiah, s. of Azariah, s. of Meraioth, s. of Zerahiah. s. of Uzzi, s. of Bukki, s. of Abishua, s. of Phinehas, s. of

      Eleazar, s. of Aaron; 16 links. Follows 1 Chronicles 6 7-10 down to Zadok, then omits 7 to Shallum, besides the 7 omitted in Chronicles.

      (28) Ezra 8 1-20. Numbers and leaders of those who returned with Zerubbabel.

      Numbers much smaller than in Zerubbabel s list (Ezra 2 1-14). Perhaps 3 new families, Shecaniah, Shelomith, Joah; 7 more leaders. A much smaller proportion of Levites; among them a "man of discretion," perhaps a name, "Ishsecel," of the sons of Mahli, therefore a Me- rarite, with other Merarites, 39 in all.

      (29) Ezra 10 18-44. Jews who had married for eign women.

      (1) The priests (vs 18-22).

      17 in all; members of the high priest s family, and of the Davidic courses of Immer and Harim, besides the family of Pashhur.

      (2) The Levites (ver 23); 6 in all.

      (3) Singers and porters (ver 24) ; 4 in all.

      (4) "Israel" "the laity 1 (vs 25-43).

      16 families represented; 86 persons. Out of a total of 163 names, 39 yah compounds, 19 el compounds, 8 prefixed.

      (30) Neh 3 1-12. The leaders in the repair of the wall.

      38 leaders; in 30 instances the father s name also given. As far as mentioned, all from Judah and Jerus.

      (31) Neh 7 7-63. Those who returned with Zerub babel.

      Follows Ezra 2 1-63, with transcriptional variations in names and numbers.

      (32) Neh 8 4-7. Levites and others who assisted Ezra in proclaiming the law.

      (33) Neh 10 1-27. The sealers of the Covenant.

      22 priests, 17 Levites, 20 heads of families already mentioned, 24 individuals.

      (34) Neh 11 3-36. Chief dwellers in Jerusalem

      and vicinity.

      Parallels in 1 Chronicles 9 9-22. Some omissions and vari ations; 5 priestly courses given, Joiarib, course no. 1 ; Je- daiah, no. 2; Jachin, no. 23; Malchijah, no. 5; Immer, no. 6. 24 "Jah," "El" names out of 82.

      (35) Neh 12 1-8. Priests and Levites who went

      up u ilh Zcriihhnlx l.

      Compare with priests lists in Neh 10 2-8 (33), and with priests under Joiakim (Xeh 12 12-21 [36]). They are names of families. See Neh 12 12.

      (36) Neh 12 10.11. High priests from Jeshua to Jaddua.

      (1) Jeshua, 538 to 520 BC.

      (2) Joiakim.

      (3) Eliaahib, 446 till after 433.

      (4) Joiada, about 420.

      (5) Jonathan, Johanan, 405 to 362.

      (6) Jaddua, to 323.

      This list bears upon the date of Ezra-Neh. Jaddua was high priest when Alexander visited Jerus, 335 BC. If the Darius of ver 22 is Darius Nothus (425 to 405 BC), and Jaddua, a young boy, is mentioned as the heir to the high-priesthood, this passage was written before 400. If Jadciua s actual high-priesthood is meant, and Darius Codomannus (336 to 330 BC) is the Darius here, the date may be about 330. The enumeration of families here is assigned to the time of Joiakim, before 405, and the latest recorded events to the time of the high priest before Jaddua (Xeh 12 23; 13 28), hence before 362. The hypothesis of an addition by some scribe after 350 is possible, but not necessary.

      (37) Neh 12 12-21. Heads of priestly families.

      (38) Neh 12 22-26. Levites and porters under high priest Johanan.

      (39) Neh 12 31-42. Princes and priests at dedi cation of the wall.

      (40) Matthew 1 1-17. The genealogy of Jesus Christ (see separate article).

      (41) Luke 3 23-38. The genealogy of Jesus (see separate article).

      Geneal. of Christ



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      LiTBRATtTUeast Oomm. in Inc., osp. on Genesis, Exodous, Nn, Chronicles. Kzr-Noh, esp. C. F. Keil, Bible Comm., 1S72; Kings. Bertheau, in Kurzycf. cxeyet. Handb. zum AT, 1873; Hi Me, ("Speaker s") Comm. (Browne, Genesis; (Hark, Kx; Kspin, Xu; Hawlinson, Oh, etc); west B. Barnes, Cnm- brifli/u liihlr. Chronicles; Kings. Kittel, Die liiicher tier Chronicles: Driver, Westminster Comm., Genesis; ICC (Gray, Numbers; Moore, .IKS; Curtis, Chronicles. etc); Pulpit Comm.; west R. Harvey-Jellie, Chin Centura liilile; south Oettli, Kings,jf. Kings,m., 1SS9; () . Zocck- ler. Lunge s Comm., etc.

      Encyclopaedia arts., osp. IIDB. east L. Curtis, "Gene alogies"; SHI), A. C. Hervev. "Genealogies"; Eli. south A. Cook. "Genealogies"; EH. llthcd, south A. Cook. "Gene alogies"; other encyclopaedia arts., under specific books, tribes, names, genealogies.

      General works: Gray, Stuilirs in Ffcb Proper N mm-x; Hommcl. Tin- Ancient Hebrews Tradition; A. C. Hervey, The (!cncril<>!/i> x f Our I. or,/; Sprenger, Dux I. <>!,< it. il. I.chrril. Muhammad; ",V. Kings. Smith, Kinalii / ami Murrimif. in Earlij Arabia; J. Wellhausen, DC Gentibus ct Familiis Jiitiacix; J. Wellhausen, Prolegomena, 1SS3 (ET), 177- 277; McLennan, Stmlicx in Am-. Ilixt.

      Magazine arts.: H. west Hogg, "Genealogy of Ben jamin." JQR, XI, 1S99, 9(1-133, 329-44; M. Berlin, "Xoteson Genealogies of Levi. 1 Chronicles 23-26." JQR. XII, 1900, 291 -OS; M. Berlin, " Gershonite and Merarite Genealogies," JQR. XII, 1001. 291 ff; H. ,V. Hogg, " Kphraimito Genealogy." JQR. XIII, 1900-1901. 147-54; J. Marquart, "Genealogies of Benjamin." JQR, XIV, 1902,343-51; J. west Rothstein, Die Genealogie d^s Kiiniim J ojachin und seiner ,nchk<nini ingeschichtlicher Hi/iurli- tung, Berlin: Keutheru. Heichold, 1902; R. Samuel Macalister, "The Royal Potters, 1 Chronicles 4 23," Kj-pon T, XVI, 1905, 379 If; R. south Macalister, "The Craftsmen Guild of the Tribe of Judah." J EI- Samuel, 1905, 243-53. 32S-42; C. C. Torrey. "The Greek VSS of Chronicles, Ezra, and Noli," 1 mr-crdinti* of the Sorifti/ of Biblical Archacoloyy, XXV 1903, 139 IT, and many others.




      1. The Problems Involved

      !. Nature and Importance of the Issue

      II. TlIK ( i F.N i: A I.OCI KS Samuel Kings I A H A T Kings ]. Y

      1. Peculiarities of Matthew s Genealogy

      2. Explanation of the Foregoing

      3. Peculiarities of Luke s Genealogy

      4. Explanation of the Foregoing

      III. TlIK G KNKALOGIE8 Co.M I A Kings Kings I)

      1. Divergences

      2. Correspondence


      1. Text of Matthew 1 Hi

      2. General Conclusions LITERATURE

      /. Introduction. The genealogy of Jesus as con tained in the First and Third Gospels presents three special problems which lie somewhat

      1. The apart from general questions of NT Problems criticism: (1) the construction and Involved purpose of each list taken separately;

      (2) the relation of the two lists, in their coincidences and variations, to each other; (3) the relationship of both lists to the statement concern ing the virgin birth of Our Lord with which they are directly connected. These questions necessarily involve the conclusion to be arrived at concerning the trustworthiness of the list of names as forming an actual historical connection between Jesus and His ancestors according to the flesh.

      Before these problems are dealt with, it would be

      well to consider the kind and degree of importance

      to be attached to the question at issue.

      2. The As we see it, the only vital point at Nature and stake is the balance, sanity and good Importance judgment of the evangelists.

      of the Issue (1) That Jesus had a line of ances tors by His human birth may be taken for granted. The tradition, universal from the earliest times among believers and granted even by the bitterest opponents, that He was connected with the line of David, may also readily be accepted. The exact line through which that connection is traced is, on general principles, of secondary im portance. The fact is that, while natural sonship to David on the part of the Messiah was of vital im portance to many Jewish inquirers, it failed of any very enthusiastic endorsement on the part of Jesus Himself (see the truly remarkable interview record

      ed in Mark 12 35-37). The expressions of Paul in this connection will be referred to later; at this point it is sufficient to say that physical kinship to David cannot be insisted upon as the only justi fication for his words.

      (2) If, then, the purpose of the evangelists in having recourse to these lists is worth while, the question of their correctness need not even be raised. Unless some vital issue is involved, the supposition of a special inspiration to go behind lists currently accepted is gratuitous. No such issue seems to be presented here. The Davidic kinship of Jesus, in any sense essential to His Mes- siahship, is independent of the lists which arc used to justify it. This is preliminary to the actual dis cussion and need not prevent us from giving all due credit to lists which could not have been carelessly compiled nor lightly used.

      //. The Genealogies Separately. (1) The con struction and incorporation of Joseph s genealogi cal tree is, in the light of all the facts,

      1. Peculiar- the primary consideration.

      ities of Matthew s (2) The artificial division into three Genealogy groups of fourteen generations each. The apparent defect in this arrange ment as it actually stands (the third group lacks one member) is probably traceable to a defect of the LXX version of 1 Chronicles 3 11, which is reproduced in the Greek gospel (see Zahn, Intro to the NT, KT, 564, n. 4). This arrangement into groups is the more striking because it makes 14 generations from the captivity to Joseph, where Luke makes 20 or 21, and because the first group of 14 is formed by the omission of three names. It is perfectly clear, therefore, that this artificial grouping is essential to the purpose of the evangelist.

      (3) The insertion of the names of brothers, thus following the historical lists and broadening the genealogy by including collateral lines.

      (4) The insertion of the names of women a practice not only foreign but abhorrent, to ordinary usage. This peculiarity is the more marked when we notice that these names introduce what would be considered serious blots in the family history of the Davidic house (see vs 5.7).

      (5) The principle upon which the division into periods is constructed: (a) from Abraham to David, (6) from David to the Captivity, (c) from the Cap tivity to Jesus. Attention has repeatedly been called to the fact that this gives a definite historical movement to the genealogy. It involves the origin, the rise to power, the decay and downfall of the house of David (see Allen, ICC, "Matthew," 2: cf Zahn, NT, KT, I, 535).

      Of the many theories which have been constructed to explain the foregoing six peculiarities of the gene alogy of Matthew, altogether the most sat-

      2. Explana- isfactory is that of Professor Zahn. tion of the His contention is that the list was Foregoing framed not to prove the natural con nection of Jesus with the house of

      David a fact which no one doubted but to defend the one vital point where attack had been made, namely, the legitimacy of Jesus connection with David. No one seems to have questioned that Jesus was born of Mary and was closely connected with the royal house. The question was whether He was of legitimate birth. It was charged and the slander which was very early in origin and cir cumstantial in character obtained an extraordinary hold upon the hostile Jewish mind that Jesus was the illegitimate offspring of Mary. The Gospel of Matthew meets that slander by giving a bird s-eye view of the movement of the history from Abraham to the Messiah in the form of a genealogy of Joseph, who in the light of all the facts concerning the origin of Jesus marries Mary and gives her the protection




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Geneal. of Christ

      of his stainless name and royal lineage. The ex traordinary boldness and brilliancy of this apolo getic method ought not to be overlooked. The; formal charge that Jesus is son of Mary, not of Joseph, is admitted the slander involved is re futed by bringing Joseph forward as a witness for Mary. Nothing could have been more natural for a man fearless in the confidence of truth; nothing could have been more impossible for one insecure in his hold upon the facts. So far as the genealogy is concerned, just the moment we realize that the pur pose is not to prove the natural sonship of Jesus to David, but to epitomize the history, all hesitancy and apprehension concerning the historicity of the successive names disappear. The continuity of blood relationship through these successive gen erations becomes of no essential importance. Zahn s explanation (the argument in full should be read by every student), simple in itself, explains all the facts, as a key fits a complicated lock. It ex plains the choice of a genealogy as a method of epit omizing history and that genealogy Joseph s, the artificial grouping at the expense of changing the traditional lists, the inclusion of the names of brothers and of women.

      (1) The choice of Joseph s genealogical tree on

      the part of one who is so deeply interested in Mary.

      (2) The reversal of order in going

      3. Peculiar- back from Joseph to his ancestors, ities of Luke s Godet emphasizes the fact that, in the Genealogy nature of the case, a genealogy follows

      the order of succession, each new indi vidual being added to the roll of his family. Luke s method indicates that his genealogy has been con structed for a special purpose.

      (3) The carrying of the line back of the history of the covenant, which begins with Abraham, to Adam, who represents the race in general. This fact, together with another, that the line of Joseph is traced to David through Nathan who was not David s heir, proves that Luke was not concerned with establishing the Davidic standing of Jesus.

      (4) The placing of the genealogy, not at the be ginning of the Gospel, but at the beginning of tin; ministry, between the baptism and the tempt alii in.

      (5) The omission of the article before the name of Joseph.

      (1) In his comment upon the fourth peculiarity enumerated above, namely, the placing of the gene alogy at the beginning of the ministry,

      4. Explana- Godet ((loHpel of St. Luke, Am. ed, tion of the 126) has this to say: "In crossing the Foregoing threshold of this new era, the sacred

      historian casts a general glance over the period which thus reaches its close, and sums it up in this document, which might be called the mortuary register of the earlier humanity." In other words, in connecting the genealogy directly with the ministry, Luke exhibits the fact that his in terest in it is historical rather than antiquarian or, so to say, genealogical. As Matthew summarizes the history of the covenant people from the days of Abraham by means of the genealogical register, modified so as to make it graphic by its uniformity, so Luke has written the story of the humanity Jesus, as the Second Adam, came to save, by the register of names summarizing its entire course in the world. It has recently been commented upon that gene alogical lists such as those of Genesis and the NT are not infrequently used to convey ideas not strictly germane to the matter of descent or the cognate; notion of chronology. For example, the statements as to the longevity of the patriarchs are of historical interest only they are not and could never have; been of value for chronological purposes (see War- field, "Antiquity and Unity of Human Race," Princeton Review, February, 1911).

      (2) In commenting upon the order which Luke adopts, Godet (who has thrown more light upon this portion of the Gospel than anyone else) says: "The ascending form of genealogy can only be that of a private instrument, drawn up from the public docu ment with a view to the particular individual whose name serves as the starting-point of the whole list" (127).

      (3) From the fact that the name of Joseph is introduced without an article Godet draws three conclusions: (a) that this name belongs rather to the sentence introduced by Luke; (6) that the gene alogical document which he consulted began with the name of Heli; (c) and consequently, that this piece was not originally the genealogy of Jesus or of Joseph, but of Heli (ib, 128).

      (4) (a) The importance of these considerations is twofold. In the first place it indicates that Luke is bringing together two separate documents, one of which contained a statement of the foster-father hood of Joseph, while the other contained the gene alogy of Heli, between whom and Joseph there existed a relationship which made Luke desirous of connect ing them, (b) In addition, the absence of the arti cle serves to call attention to something exceptional in the relationship of Joseph to the rest of this ancestral line which is brought into connection with his name. To this point we shall recur later. We have an explanation for all the suggested prob lems except one, and that one, in a sense, the most difficult of all, namely, the choice of Joseph s genealogy.

      ///. The Genealogies Compared. In order, how ever, to discuss this question intelligently, we must enter upon the second stage of our

      1. Diver- inquiry as to the relationship be- gences tween the two lists.

      (1) The most notable fact hen 1 is of course the widcness of the divergence together with the contrasted and unintelligible fact of minute correspondence. Between Abraham and David the two lists agree. Between David and Joseph there is evident correspondence in two (see Matthew 1 12 ; Luke 3 27), and possible correspondence in four names (that is, if Abiud [Matthew 1 13] and Judah [Luke 3 30] are the same). This initial and greatest, diffi culty is of material assistance to us because it makes one "conclusion certain beyond peradventure. The two lists are not divergent attempts to perform the same task. Whatever difficulties may remain, this difficulty is eliminated at the outset. It is impossi ble that among a people given to genealogies two lists purporting to give the ancestry of a man in the same line could diverge so widely. There is, there fore, a difference between these lists which includes the purpose for which they were compiled and the meaning which they were intended to convey.

      (2) Two of the most striking points in the lists

      as they stand may be brought into connection and

      made to explain each other. The two

      2. Corre- lists coincide in the names of Zerub- spondence babel and Shealtiel they differ as to

      the name of Joseph s father, who is Jacob according to Matthew and Heli according to Luke. As to the second of these two important items this much is clear. Either these two lists are in violent contradiction, or else Joseph was in some sense son of both Jacob and Heli. Now, in connection with this seeming impossibility, turn to the other item. The names of Shealtiel and Zerubbabel belong to the captivity. Their being common to both lists is easily explained by the fact that during that troubled period a number of collateral family branches might be narrowed down to one or two common representatives (see Zahn, op. cit., 535). In the NT genealogies Zerubbabel is the son of Shealtiel according to 1 Chronicles 3 19 he is the nephew

      Genesis f



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      of Shealtiel and the son of Pedaiah. He is, there fore, at one and the same time heir and, legally, son of two men and would appear as such on two col lateral lists.

      Shcaltiel himself appears in Matthew (1 12) as the son of Jcchoniah and in Luke (3 27) as the son of Xeri. In 1 (Micah 3 17 he appears as son of .Jechoniah. The name of Xeri is peculiar to Luke, so that we cannot check his use of it and discover the actual parentage of Shealtiel. His appearance in two lists with a double reference of parent age is not surprising in view of what we have already seen. Besides this, a reasonable explanation at once appears. In Jeremiah 36 30 it is asserted that Jehoiakim should have "none to sit upon the throne, of David," and of his son (Jchoiachiti, Jechoniah. Coniah) it is said (Jeremiah 22 W)), " VVrite ye this man childless," etc. It has been rightly pointed out (see JIDH. II. 557) that this means simply legal proscription, not actual childlessness. It suggests, however, that it might be. thought necessary to provide in the genealogy an heir not of their blood for the two disgraced and proscribed members of the royal house. In view of these facts the contradictory references as to Joseph s parentage present no difficulty.

      Joseph may easily have been and undoubtedly was, legally, son and heir of both Jacob and Heli. (Jodet s objection to this is based upon the suppo sition that Heli and Jacob were brothers, which leaves the divergence beyond these two names un explained. It is evident, however, that the kin ship between Jacob and Heli might have been more distant than this supposition calls for.

      (3) When we come to explain how it happened that Joseph was connected with both these lines and that Matthew chose one list and Luke the other we are necessarily shut up to conjecture. There is one supposition, however, which is worthy of very care ful consideration because it solves so many and such difficult problems. The authorities have been divided as to whether Luke s genealogy is Joseph s, as appears, or Mary s. Godet makes a strong showing for the latter, and, after all has been said per contra, some of his representations remain un shaken (cf Godet and Plumrner sub loc.). Most of the difficulties are removed at one stroke, and the known facts harmonized, by the simple supposition that Luke has given us the meeting-point of the lineage both of Joseph and Mary who are akin. This explains the apparent choice of Joseph s list; the peculiar position of his name in that list; the reversal of the order; the coincidences and discrep ancies with reference to Matthew s; the early tradition of Mary s Davidic origin; the strange reference in the Tafm (H&ghlgha 77 4) to Mary as the daughter of Heli; the visit of Mary with Joseph to Bethlehem at the time of the registration; the traditional discrepancy of ages between Joseph and Mary, such that (apparently) Joseph disappears from the scene before Jesus reaches maturity. Against this not hing of real weight can be urged (the kinship with Elisa beth is not such: see Edersheim, LTJM, I, 149) except that it is too simple and too felicitous. Its simplicity and felicitous adjustment to the whole complex situation is precisely its recommendation. And there we may let the matter rest.

      IV. The Genealogies and the Virgin Birth. We have now to deal with the relationship of the gene alogies to the virgin-birth statement which forms the vital center of the infancy narratives and to the general question of the Davidic origin of Jesus. See VIRGIN BIRTH.

      The first part of this question may be most di rectly approached by a brief consideration of the text of Matthew 1 16. The text upon 1. Text of which RV is based reads: "And Jacob Matthew 1 : 16 begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ." Beside this there are two readings, one contained in the so-called Ferrar group of MSS, and the other in the Sinaitic which, differing among themselves, unite in ascribing the parentage of

      Jesus to Joseph. This has been seized upon by negative critics (see for list and discussion Machen, Princeton Review, January, 1906, 63; cf Bacon, HDB, art. "Genealogy of Jesus Christ," Am. Jour. Ttieol., January, 1911, who long ago gave in his advocacy to the supposition that the evangelists could easily reconcile the supernatural birth with the actual paternity of Joseph) to support the idea of a primitive Christian tradition that Joseph was the father of Jesus. Of this contention Zahn leaves nothing, and concludes his argument with this statement: "The hope of finding indications in old MSS and VSS that the authors of lost Gospels or brief writings which may have been worked over in our Matthew and Luke regarded Joseph as the physical father of Jesus, should at last be dismissed. An author who knew how to make even the dry ma terial of a genealogy to its least detail contribute to the purpose of his thought concerning the slan dered miracle of the Messiah s birth, cannot at the same time have taken over statements from a gene alogy of Joseph or Jesus tised by him which directly contradicted his conception of this fact. Any text of Matthew which contained such statements would be condemned in advance as one altered against the author s interest" (op. cit., 5(57). It is interesting to note that Allen (ICC, "Matthew," 8), starting from the extreme position that the Sinaitic form of statement, of all extant texts, most nearly represents the original, reaches the same conclusion as Zahn, that Matthew s Gospel from the beginning taught the virgin birth.

      (1) It is clear, therefore, from the general trend as well as from specific statements of both Gospels,

      that the genealogies and the birth- 2. General narratives were not floating traditions Conclusions which accidentally touched and coa lesced in mid-stream, but that they were intended to weld inseparably the two beliefs that Jesus was miraculously conceived and that He was the heir of David. This could be done only on the basis of Joseph s genealogy, for whatever the lineage of Mary, Joseph was the head of the family, and the Davidic connection of Jesus could only be established by acknowledgment of Him as legal son by Joseph. Upon this basis rests the common belief of the apostolic age (see Zahn, ib, 567, note references), and in accordance with it all statements (such as t hose of Paul, Romans 1 3; 2 Timothy 2 8) must be interpreted.

      (2) For it must be remembered that, back of the problem of reconciling the virgin birth and the Davidic origin of Jesus, lay the far deeper problem to harmonize the incarnation and the Davidic origin. This problem had been presented in shadow and intimation by Jesus Himself in the question: "David himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he his Son?" It is further to be noticed that in the an nunciation (Luke 1 32) the promised One is called at once Son of God and Son of David, and that He is the Son of God by virtue of His conception by the Spirit leaving it evident that He is Son of David by virtue of His birth of Mary. With this should be compared the statement of Paul (Romans 1 3.4): He who was God s Son was "born of the seed of David according to the flesh, and declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead." This is at least most suggestive (see Orr, Virgin Birth of Christ, 119, with note, p. 121), for it indi cates that as Paul and Luke were in very close sympathy as to the person of Our Lord, so they are in equally close sympathy as to the mystery of His origin. The unanimity of conviction on the part of the early church as to the Davidic origin of Jesus is closely paralleled by its equally firm conviction as to His supernatural derivation. The meeting-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      of Christ

      point of these two beliefs and the resolution of the mystery of their relationship is in the genealogies in which two widely diverging lines of human ancestry, representing the whole process of history, converge at the point where the new creation from heaven is introduced.

      LITERATUReast The lit. on this subject is very copious. The works referred to in the text will serve to introduce the reader to more extensive investigations. The whole situation is well summarized by Plummer (ICC, "Luke, sub loc.).


      GENERAL, jcn er-al, GENERALLY, jen er-al-i (H33 , kullah; iravrryvpis, paneguris):

      (V) General is the translated of sar, "master," "head," "chief" ; used once in AV in the sense of commander- in-chief, "the general of the king s army" (1 Chronicles 27 34), usually in this connection translated d "captain," RV "the captain of the king s host."

      (2) As an adj. "general assembly" is the translated of /Htnfyiiris (whence we have p/incgi/ric), "an assembly or convocation of the whole people to celebrate any public festival or solemnity, as the public games or sacrifices, hence a high festival, public convocation, joyful assembly" (Robinson); the word occurs in the NT only in He 12 23, "to the general assembly and church "of the firstborn"; ptincguris is LXX for mu edh (Ezekiel 46 11; Hosea 2 11), "solemn assembly," and for agtirtlh (Am 5 21), with the same meaning. The (ir words translated 1 "and to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn" (AV) have been variously arranged and translated 1 ; Robinson gives "and to countless throngs [even] the joyful asscmblyof angels, i.e. as hymning the praises of God around Hig throne"; cf The Revelation 5 11 f; Psalm 148 2; Daniel 7 10). From both Hebrew and Greek analogies, this is probably correct; similarly, Alford, Delitzsch and others have "festival assembly"; Weymouth translated d "to countless hosts of angels, to the great festal gathering and church of the first-born."

      (3) Generally, advb.. occurs in Jor 48 3S AV as the translated of kullah (Pual of kaldli), "the whole of it," "There shall be lamentation generally [univer sally] upon all the housetops of Moab," RV "every where"; in 2 Samuel 17 11,, "to be gathered," is translated 1 "to be generally gathered," RV "gathered to gether."

      In Apoc we have "general" in the sense of "com mon," "universal" (Ad Est 15 10 m, koinos; 2 Mace 3 IS, i>dtidemon); "in general" (2 Esdras 8 15, "man in general"; Ecclus 18 1, "all things in gen eral," koinos. RV "in common").

      west L. WALKER

      GENERATION, jen-er-a shun (Lat generality, from gcncro, "beget"):

      (1) The translated (a) of 1Y1 , dor, "circle," "generation," hence "age," "period," "cycle": "many genera tions" (Deuteronomy 32 7); (6) the people of any particular period or those born about the same time: "Right eous before me in this generation" (Genesis 71); "four generations" (Job 42 16); (c) the people of a particular class or sort, with some implied ref erence to hereditary quality; the wicked (Deuteronomy 32 5; Prov 30 11); the righteous (Psalm 14 5; 112 2).

      (2) rvn rn, tdl r dholh, "births," hence (a) an account of a man and his descendants: "The book of the generations of Adam" (Genesis 6 1); (6) succes sive families: "The families of the sons of Noah, after their generations" (Genesis 10 32); (c) genealogi cal divisions: "The children of Reuben .... their generations, by their families" (Numbers 1 20); (d) fig., of the origin and early history of created things: "The generations of the heavens and of the earth" (Genesis 2 4).

      (3) yeved, gcned, "a begetting," "birth," "na tivity," therefore (a) the successive members of a genealogy: "All the generations from Abraham

      unto David" (Matthew 1 17); (b) a race, or class, dis tinguished by common characteristics, always (in the NT) bad: "Faithless and perverse generation" (Matthew 17 17); (c) the people of a period: "This gen eration shall not pass away" (Luke 21 32); (d) an age (the average lifetime, 33 years): "Hid for [Greek "from the"] ages and [from the] generations" (Col

      1 2(5). The term is also by a figurative trans ference of thought applied to duration in eternity: "Unto all generations for ever and ever" (Kph 3 21) (Greek "all the generations of the age of the ages").

      (4) jevfCTLs, genesis, "source," "origin": "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ" (Matthew 1 1; ARVm "The genealogy of Jesus Christ").

      (,">) y^wrj/jLa, gcnnc/na, "offspring," "progeny"; figurative: "() generation of vipers" (Luke 3 7 AV).

      (( )) ytvos, gcnos, "stock," "race," in this case spiritual: "But ye are a chosen generation" (1 Pet

      2 9; ARV "an elect race").



      1 . The Name

      2. Survey of Contents

      :{. Connection with Succeeding Books II COMPOSITION OF(!KNI-:SIS IN GKNKHAL 1 Unity of the Biblical Text

      (1) tin- ToUdhoth

      (2) Further Indication of Unity

      2. Rejection of the Documentary Theory

      (1) In (ieneral

      Statement of Theory

      Reasons Assigned for Divisions

      Examination of the Documentary


      (a) Style and Peculiarities of Language

      (ft) Alleged Connection of Matter

      (y) The Biblico- Theological Data

      (5) Duplicates

      (f) Manner in Which the Sources Are

      Worked Together () Criticism Carried to Extremes

      (2) In View of the Names for Ciod

      i,<i) Error of Hypothesis in Principle (/<) False Basis of Hypothesis (<) Improbability That Distinction of Di vine Names Is without Significance

      (d) Heal Purpose in Use of Names for God (a) Decreasing Use of Jehovah

      () Reference to Approach of Man to (iod. and Departure from Him

      (y) Other Reasons

      (Samuel) Systematic Use in History of Abra ham

      (e) Scantiness of the Materials for Proof (/) Self- Disintegration of the Critical Po sition

      (-/) Different Uses in the LXX III. STurcTrui; OK TIIIO INDIVIDUAL PKKICOPES

      1. The Structure of the Prooemium ((Jen 1 2 3)

      2. Structure of the 10 Tdbdhnth

      (1) The Unity of the Biblical Text

      (2) Rejection of the Division into Sources Under Abraham, Discussion of So-called Duplicates


      1. History of the Patriarchs (Genesis 12-50)

      (1) Unfounded Attacks on the History

      (a) From General Dogmatic Principles (6) From Distance of Time

      (c) From Biblical Data

      (<l) From Comparison with Religion of Arabia

      (2) Unsatisfactory Attempts at Explaining the Patriarchal Age

      (a) Explanation Based on High Places (6) The Dating Back of Later Events to

      Karlier Times (r.) The Patriarchs as heroes eponymi

      (d) Different Explanations Combined

      (3) Positive Reasons for the Historical Charac ter of Cienesis

      Individuality of Patriarchs, etc

      2. The Primitive History of Genesis 1-11

      (1) Prominence of the Religious Element

      (2) Carefulness as Regards Divergent Results of Scientific Research

      (3) Frequent Confirmation of the Bible by Science

      (-1) Superiority of the Bible over Heathen My thologies

      Babylonian and Biblical Stories V. ORIGIN AND AUTHORSHIP OF GENESIS

      1. Connection with Mosaic Times

      2. Examination of Counter-Arguments




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      (1) Possibility of Later Additions

      (2) " Prophecy after the Event" Idea

      (3) Special Passages Alleged to Indicate Later Date

      Examination of These


      1. Lays Foundation for the Whole of Revelation Creation, Fall, Man in Image of (lod, Sin, etc

      2. Preparation for Redemption Promises and Covenants


      /. General Data. The first book of Moses is

      named by the Jews from the first word, viz.

      rPTP&na, Irre shUh, i.e. "in the be-

      1. The ginning" (cf the Bpi?<ri0 of Origen). In Name the LXX it is called lYveo-ts, G i m .s/ .s,

      because it recounts the beginnings of the world and of mankind. This name has passed over into the Vulg (Liber Genesis). As a matter of fact the name is based only on the beginning of the book.

      The book reports to us the story of the creation

      of the world and of the first human beings (ch 1);

      of paradise and the fall (chapters 2f); of

      2. General mankind down to the Deluge (chapters 4 f ; Survey of cf ch 4, Cain and Abel); of the Deluge Contents itself (chapters 6-9); of mankind down to

      the ago of the Patriarchs (10 111 26; cf 11 1 ff, the building of the tower of Babel); of Abraham and his house (11 27 25 IS); of Isaac and his house (25 19 37 2); of Jacob and of Joseph (37 250 2(5). In other words, the Book of Genesis treats of the history of the kingdom of God on earth from the time of the creation of the world down to the beginning of Israel s sojourn in Egypt and to the death of Joseph; and it treats of these subjects in such a way that, it narrates in the 1st part (1 1 11 2(5) the history of mankind; and in the 2d part (11 27 50 2(5) the history of families; and this latter part is at the same time the beginning of the history of the chosen people, which history itself begins with Exodous 1. Though the introduction, chapters 1-11, with its universal character, includes all mankind in the promise, given at the beginning of the history of Abraham (12 1-3), it is from the outset distinctly declared that God, even if He did originally set apart one man and his family (Genesis 12-50), and after that a single nation (Exodous Iff), nevertheless in tends that this particularistic; development of the plan of salvation is eventually to include all man kind. The manner in which salvation is developed historically is particularistic, but its purposes are universal.

      By the statements just made it has already been indi cated in what close connection Genesis stands with the sub sequent books of the sacred Scriptures.

      3. Connec- The history of the chosen people, which tion with begins with Exodous 1 ff, at the very outset and

      with a clear purpose, refers back to the Succeeding history as found in Genesis (cf Exodous 1 l-o.s Books with Genesis 46 27; 50 24 ff; and see Exodous-

      OIH-Samuel, I, 3), although hundreds of years had clasped between these events; which years are ig nored, because they were in their details of no importance for the religious history of the people of God. But to Abraham in Genesis 12 1-3 the promise had been given, not only that he was to be the father of a mighty nation that would recognize him as their founder, and the earliest, history of which is reported in Kx and the following books of the Pent, but also that the Holy Land had been prom ised him. In this respect, the Book of Joshua, which gives the story of the capture of this land, is also a contin uation of the historical development begun in Genesis. The blessing of God pronounced over Abraham, however, con tinued to be efficacious also in the later times among the people who had descended from him. In this way Genesis is an introduction to all of the books of the OT that follow it, which in any way have to do with the fate of this people, and originated in its midst as the result of the special relation between God and this people. But in so far as this blessing of God was to extend to all the na tions of the earth (12 3), the promises given can be entirely fulfilled only in Christ, and can expand only in (he work and success of Christian missions and in the blessings that are found within Christianity. Accord ingly, this book treats first of beginnings and origins, in which, as in a kernel, the entire development of the king

      dom of God down to its consummation is contained (cf VI below).

      //. The Composition of Genesis in General.

      The, lol r dhdth. The fact that Genesis is characterized by a far-reaching and uniform scheme has, 1. Unity of at least in outline, been already indi- the Biblical cated (see I, 2 and 3). This impression Text is confirmed when we examine matters a

      little more closely and study the plan and structure of the book. After the grand introitus, which reports the creation of the world (1 1 2 3) thero follows in the form of 10 pericopes the his torical unfolding of that which God has created, which pericopes properly in each case bear the name tdl"dhdth, or "generations." For this word never signifies creation or generation as an act, but always the history of what has already been created or be gotten, the history of generations; so that for this reason, 2 4a, where mention is made of the tdl e dhoth of heaven and of earth, cannot possibly be a super scription that has found its way here from 1 1. It is here, as it is in all cases, the superscription to what follows, and it admirably leads over from the history of creation of the heavens and the earth in ch 1 to the continuation of this subject in the next chapter. The claim of the critics, that the redactor had at this place taken only the superscription from his source P (the priestly narrator, to whom 1 2 3 is ascribed), but that the section of P to which this superscription originally belonged had been sup pressed, is all the more monstrous a supposition as 2 4a throughout suits what follows.

      (1) Only on the ground of this correct explana tion of the term tol dhoth can the fact be finally and fully explained, that the tol e dhoth of Terah contain also the history of Abraham and of Lot; the tol dhoth of Isaac contain the history of Jacob and Esau; the tol dhoth of Jacob contain the history of Joseph and his brethren. The ten tol dhoth are the following: I, 2 4 4 2(5, the tol dholh of the heavens and the earth; II, 5 1 6 8, the tol dhoth of Adam; HI, 6 99 29, the tul dhoth of Noah; IV, 10 111 9, the tol dhoth of the sons of Noah; V, 11 10-26, the tol dhoth of the sons of Shein ; VI, 11 2725 11, the tol dhoth of Terah; VII, 25 12-18, the tol dhoth of Ishmael; VIII, 25 1 .) 35 29, the tol dhoth of Isaac; IX, 36 137 1, the tol dhoth of Esau (the fact that 36 9, in addition to the instance in ver 1, contains the word tol dhoth a second time, is of no importance whatever for our discussion at this stage, as the entire chapter under any circumstances treats in some way of the history of the generations of Esau; see III, 2 9); X, 37 2 50 2(5, the tol dhoth of Jacob. In each instance this superscription covers everything that follows down to the next superscription.

      The number 10 is here evidently not an accidental matter. In the arts. EXODUS, LEVITICUS, DAY OF ATONEMENT, also in KZEKIEL, it has been shown what role the typical numbers 4, 7, 10 and 12 play in the struc ture of the whole books and of the individual pericopcs. (In the NT we meet with the same phenomenon, par ticularly in the Apocalypse of St. John; but compare also in Matthew s Gospel the 3X 14 generations in 1 1 If, the 7 parables in 13 1 ff, the 7 woes in 23 13 ff.) In the same way the entire Book of Leviticus naturally falls into 10 pericopes (cf LEVITICUS, II, 2, 1), and Leviticus 19 contains 10 groups, each of 4 (possibly also of 5) commandments; cf possibly also 18 6-18; 20 9-18; see LEVITICUS, II. 2, 21, VI. Further, the number 10, with a greater or less degree of certainty, can be regarded as the basis for the construction of the pericopes: Exodous 1 8 7 7; 7 8 13 10 (10 plagues); 13 1718 27 (see EXODUS, II. 2 1-3); the Decalogue (20 1 ft) ; the first Book of the Covenant (21 1 23 13; 23 14-19), and the whole pericope 19 1 24 ISd, as also 32 1 35 3 (see EXODUS, II, 2, 4, 6). In the. Book of Genesis itself cf further the 10 members from .Shem to Abraham (11 ll-2(i), as also the pericopes 25 1935 29; 37 250 20 (set; III, 2. Samuel, 10 below), and the 10 nations in Genesis 15 19 If. And just as in the cases cited, in almost every instance, there is to be found a further division into 5X2 or 2X5 (cf, e.g. the two tables of the Decalogue) ; thus, too, in the Book of Genesis in each




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      case, 5 of the 10 pericopes are more closely combined, since 1-V (tdl dhoth of Shorn inclusive) stand in a more distant, and VI-X (treating of the tol dhoth of Terah, or the history of Abraham) in a closer connection with the kingdom of God; and in so far, too, as the first series of tdl e dhotk bring into the foreground more facts and events, but the second scries more individuals and persons. Possibly in this case, we can further unite 2 tol dhoth; at any rate I + II (the primitive age), III+IV (Noah and his" sons), VII+VIII (Ishmael and Isaac), IX+X (Esau and Jacob) can be thus grouped.

      (2) Further indication of unity. -In addition to the systematic scheme so transparent in the entire Biblical text of the Book of Genesis, irrespective of any division into literary sources, it is to be noticed further, that in exactly the same way the history of those gener ations that were rejeeted from any connection with the kingdom of God is narrated before the history of those that remained in the kingdom of God and continued its development. Cain s history (4 17 ff) in J stands before the history of Seth (4 25 f J; 5 3 fT P) ; Japheth s and Ham s genealogy (10 1 fT P; lOSffP+J) before that of Shorn (10 21 ff J + P), although Ham was the youngest of the three sons of Noah (9 24); the further history of Lot (19 29ffP+J) and of Ishmael s genealogy (25 12 fT P+J) before that of Isaac (26 19 ff P+J+E); Esau s descendants (36 1 ff R+P) before the to l dhoth of Jacob (37 2 ff P+J+E).

      In favor of the unity of the Biblical text we can also mention the fact that the Book of Genesis as a whole, irrespective of all sources, and in view of the history that begins with Exodous Iff, has a unique character, so that e.g. the intimate communion with God, of the kind which is reported in the beginning of this Book of Genesis (cf, e.g. 3 Samuel; 7 Hi; 11 5 J; 17 1.22; 35 9.13 P; 18 1 ff; 32 31 J), afterward ceases; and that in Exodous, on the other hand, many more miracles are reported than in the Book of Genesis (see Exoors, 111,2); that Genesis contains rather the history of man kind and of families, while Exodous contains that of the nation (see I, 2 above); that it is only in Exodous that the law is given, while in the history of the period of the patriarchs we find only promises of the Di vine grace; that all the different sources ignore the time that elapses between the close of Genesis and the beginning of Kx; and further, that nowhere else is fouTid anything like the number of references to the names of persons or things as are contained in Genesis (cf, e.g. 2 23; 3 20; 4 1.25, etc, in J; 17 5.15.17-20, etc, in P; 21 9.17.31, etc, in E; 21 6; 27 36, etc, in J+E; 28 19, etc, in R; 49 8. 10. 19, etc, in the blessing of Jacob); that the changing of the names of Abram and Sarai to Abraham and Sarah from 17 5.15 goes on through all the sources, while be fore this it is not found in any source. Finally, we ,ould draw attention to the psychologically finely drawn portraits of Biblical persons in Genesis. The fact that the personal pronoun hu and the noun na ar are used of both masc. and fern, genders is charac teristic of Genesis in common with all the books of the Pent, without any difference in this regard being found in the different documents, which fact, as all those cited by us in number 1 above, militates against the division of this book into different sources. Let us now examine more closely the reason assigned for the division into different sources.

      (1) In general. (a) Statement of the theory: OT scholars of the most divergent 2. Rejection tendencies are almost unanimous in of the dividing the Biblical text of Genesis into the

      Documen- sources P, J and E, namely Priest tary Theory Codex, Jahwist, and Elohist. To P are attributed the following greater and connected parts: 1 1 2 4a; 5; a part of the story of the Deluge in chapters 6-9; 11 10 ff; 17; 23; 25 12 ff; 35 226 ff ; the most of 36. As examples of the parts assigned to J we mention 2 46 4 20; the

      rest of the story of the Deluge in chapters 6-9 ; 11 1 ff ; 12 f ; 16; 18 f, with the exception of a few verses, which are ascribed to P; ch 24 and others. Connected parts belonging to E are claimed to begin with chapters 20 and 21 (with the exception of a number of verses which are attributed to P or J or R), and it is thought that, beginning with ch 22, E is frequently found in the history of Jacob and of Joseph (25 1950 26), in part, however, interwoven with J (details will be found under III, in each case under 2). This docu mentary theory has hitherto been antagonized only by a few individuals, such as Klostermann, Lep- sius, Eerdmans, Orr, Wiener, and the author of the present article.

      (b) Reasons assigned for the customary division into sources: As is well known, the theory of a separation of certain books of the OT into different sources began originally with the Book of Genesis. The use made of the two names of God, namely Jehovah and Elohim, caused Astruc to conclude that two principal sources had been used in the compo sition of the book, although other data were also used in vindication of the theory; and since the days of Ilgen the conviction gained ground that there was a second Elohist (now called E), in con tradistinction to the first (now called P, to whom, e.g., Genesis 1 is ascribed). This second Elohist, it was claimed, also made use of the name Elohim, as did the first, but in other respects he shows greater similarity to the Jahwist. These sources were eventually traced through the entire Pent and into later books, and for this reason are discussed in detail in the art. PENTATEUCH. In this article we must confine ourselves to the Book of Genesis, and limit the discussion to some leading points. In addi tion to the names for God (see under 2), it is claimed that certain contradictions and duplicate accounts of the same matters compel us to accept different sources. Among these duplicates are found, e.g., Genesis 1 1 2 4a P, and 2 4b ff J, containing two stories of creation; Genesis 129 ff J; 20 1 ff E; 26 Iff J; with the narrative of how Sarah and Rebckah, the wives of the two patriarchs, were endangered; chapters 15 J and 17 P, with a double acccount of how God concluded His covenant with Abraham; 21 22 ff E and 26 12 ff J, the stories of Abimelech; chapters 16 J and 21 E, the Hagar episodes; 28 10 ff J+E and 35 1 ff E + P, the narratives concerning Bethel, and in the history of Joseph the mention made of the Midianites E, and of the Ishmaelites J, who took Joseph to Egypt (37 25 ff; 39 1); the intervention of Reuben E, or Judah J, for Joseph, etc. In addi tion a peculiar style, as also distinct theological views, is claimed for each of these sources. Thus there is found in P a great deal of statistical and systematic material, as in 5 1 ff; 11 10 ff; 25 12 ff; 36 6 ff (the genealogies of Adam, Shem, Ishmael, Esau); P is said to show a certain preference for fixed schemes and for repetitions in his narratives. He rejects all sacrifices earlier than the Mosaic period, because according to this source the Lord did not reveal himself as JAH (Jehovah) previous to Exodous 6 1 ff . Again, it is claimed that E describes God as speaking to men from heaven, or through a dream, and through an angel, while according to J JAH (Jehovah) is said to have conversed with mankind personally. In regard to the peculiarities of language used by the different sources, it is impossible in this place to enumerate the different expressions, and we must refer for this subject to the different Introductions to the OT, and to the commentaries and other literature. A few examples are to be found under (c) below, in connection with the discussion of the critical hy pothesis. Finally, as another reason for the division of Genesis into different sources, it is claimed that the different parts of the sources, when taken together, can be united into a smooth and connected story.




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      The documents, it is said, have in many cases been taken over word for word and have been united and interwoven in an entirely external manner, so that it is still possible to separate them and often to do this even down to parts of a sentence or to the very words.

      (c) Examination of the documentary theory: (a) Style and peculiarities of language: It is self- evident that certain expressions will be repeated in historical, in legal, and in other sections similar in content; but this is not enough to prove that there have been different sources. Whenever J brings genealogies or accounts that are no less systematic than those of P (cf 4 17 ff; 10 Samuel ff; 22 20-24); or accounts and repetitions occur in the story of the Deluge (7 2fT.7ff; or 7 4.12.17; 8 6; or 7 4; 8 8. 10.12), this is not enough to make the division into sources plausible. In reference to the linguistic peculiarities, it must be noted that the data cited to prove this point seldom agree. Thus, e.g. the vb. bard , "create," in Genesis 1 1 is used to prove that this was written by P, but the word is found also in 6 7 in J. The same is the case with the word r khush, "possession," which in 12 5; 13 6; 36 7 is regarded as characteristic of P, but in 14 11 f.16.21 is found in an unknown source, and in 15 14 in J. In 12 5; 13 12a; 16 3; 17 8 it is said that ereg k na^an, "land of Canaan," is a proof that this was written by P; but in chapters 42, 44 f, 47, 60 we find this expression in J and I ], in Numbers 32 32 in J (R); ef also Numbers 33 40 (PR) where Numbers 21 1-3 (JE) is quoted; shiphhdh, "maid servant," is claimed as a characteristic word of J in contrast to E (cf 16 1 ff); but in 16 3; 29 24.29 we find this word not only in P but in 20 14; 30 4.7.18; in E Mln, "kind," is counted among the marks of P (cf e.g. 1 11 ff), but in Deuteronomy 14 13.14.18 we find it in Deuteronomy; rather remarkably, too, in the latest find on the Deluge made by Hilprecht and by him ascribed to 2100 BC. Cf on this subject my book, Wid<r den liann dcr Quettenscheidung, and ()rr, POT, ch vii, sec. vi, and ch x, sec. i; perhaps, too, the Concord ance of Mandelkern under the different words. Even in the cases when the characteristic peculiari ties claimed for the sources are correct, if the problem before us consisted only in the discovery of special words and expressions in 1 lit 1 different sources, then by an analogous process, we could dissect and sever almost any modern work of literature. Particu larly as far as the pieces are concerned, which are assigned to P, it must be stated that Genesis 1 and 23 are, as far as style and language are con cerned, different throughout. Genesis 1 is entirely unique in the entire OT. Chronicles 23 has been copied directly from life, which is pictured with exceptional fidelity, and for this reason cannot be claimed for any special source. The fact that the story of the introduction of circumcision in ch 17 in many parti culars shows similarities to the terminology of the law is entirely natural. The same is true when the chronological accounts refer one date to another and when they show a certain typical character, as is, e.g., the case also in the chronological parts of any modern history of Israel. On the other hand, the method of P in its narratives, both in matter and in form, becomes similar to that of J and E, just as soon as we have to deal with larger sections; cf 28 1 ff ; 35 9 ff ; 47 5 ff, and all the more in Exodous and Numbers.

      Against the claim that P had an independent existence, we must mention the fact of the uneven- ness of the narratives, which, by the side of the fuller accounts in chapters 1, 17 and 23, of the genealogies and the story of the Deluge, would, according to the critics, have reported only a few disrupted notices about the patriarchs; cf for this in the story of Abraham, 11 27.31 f; 12 46 f; 13 6a.116.12a;

      16 l.3.15f; 19 29; 21 16.26-5; 25 7-lla; and in its later parts P would become still more incom prehensible on the assumption of the critics (see III below). No author could have written thus; at any rate he would not have been used by any body, nor would there have been such care evinced in preserving his writings.

      (/3) The alleged connection of matter: The claim that the different sources, as they have been sep arated by critics, constitute a compact and con nected whole is absolutely the work of imagination, and is in conflict with the facts in almost every instance. This hypothesis cannot be consistently applied, even in the case of the characteristic ex amples cited to prove the correctness of the docu mentary theory, such as the story of the Deluge (see III, 2, in each case under [2]).

      (7) The biblico-theological data: The different Biblical and theological data, which are said to be characteristic in proof of the separation into sources, are also misleading. Thus God in J communes with mankind only in the beginning (Genesis 2 f ; 7 16 ff; 115; 18 f), but not afterward. In the be ginning He does this also, according to P, whose con ception of God, it is generally claimed, was entirely transcendental (cf 17 1.22; 35 9.13). The media- torship of the Angel of JAH (Jehovah) is found not only in E, (21 17, Elohlm), but also in J (16 7.9-11). In 22 11 in E, the angel of JAH (Jehovah) (not of the Slohlm) calls from heaven; theophanies in the night or during sleep are found also in J (cf 15 12 ff; 26 24; 28 13-16; 32 27). In the case of P, the cultus- theory, according to which it is claimed that this source does not mention any sacrifices before Exodous 6 1 ff, is untenable. If it is a fact that the theocracy, as it were, really began only in Exodous 6, then it would be impossible that P would contain anything of the cultus before Exodous 6; but we have in P the intro duction of the circumcision in ch 17; of the Sab bath in 2 1 ff; and the prohibition against eating blood in 9 1 ff; and in addition the drink offerings mentioned in 35 14, which verse stands between vs 13 and 1.5, and, ascribed to P, is only in the interests of this theory attributed to the redactor. If then the theory here outlined is not tenable as far as P is concerned, it would, on the other hand, be all the more remarkable that in the story of the Deluge the distinction between the clean and the un clean (7 2 ff.8) is found in J, as also the savor of the sacrifice, with the term re"h ha-niho"h, which occurs so often in P (cf Genesis 8 21 with Numbers 16 f. 24; 18 17); that the sacrifices are mentioned in 8 20 ff, and the number 7 in connection with the ani mals and days in 7 4; 8 8.10.12 (cf in P, e.g. Leviticus 833; 13 5f.21.26f.; 148f.38f; 14 7.51; 16 14 f; Numbers 28 11; 29 8, etc); further, that the emphasis is laid on the 40 days in 7 4.12.17; 8 6 (cf in P, Exodous 24 1-8; Leviticus 12 2-4; Numbers 13 25; 14 34), all of which are ascribed, not as we should expect, to the Levitical P, but to the prophetical J. The document P, which, according to a large number of critics, was written during the Exile (see e.g. LEVITICUS, III, 1, or EZEKIEL II, 2) in a most surprising manner, instead of giving prominence to the person of the high priest, would then have declared that kings were to be the greatest blessings to come to the seed of Abraham (17 6.16); and while, on the critical assumption, we should have the right to expect the author to favor particular istic tendencies, he, by bringing in the history of all mankind in Genesis 1-11, and in the extension of cir cumcision to strangers (17 12.23), would have dis played a phenomenal universality. The strongest counter-argument against all such minor and in correct data of a Biblical and a theological character will always be found in the uniform religious and




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      ethical spirit and world of thought that pervade all these sources, as also in the unity in the accounts of the different patriarchs, who are pictured in such a masterly, psychological and consistent manner, and who could never be the result of an accidental working together and interweaving of different and independent sources (see III below r ).

      (5) Duplicates: In regard to what is to be thought of the different duplicates and contradictions, see below under III, 2, in each case under (2).

      (e) The manner in which the sources are worked together: But it is also impossible that_ these sources could have been worked together in the manner in which the critics claim that this was done. The more arbitrarily and carelessly the redactors are thought to have gone to work in many places in removing contradictions, the more incom prehensible it becomes that they at other places report faithfully such contradictions and permit these to stand side by side, or, rather, have placed them thus. And even if they are thought not to have smoothed over the difficulties anywhere, and out of reverence for their sources, not to have omitted or changed any of these reports, we cer tainly would have a right to think, that even if they would have perchance placed side by side narratives with such enormous contradictions as there are claimed to be, e.g. in the story of the Deluge in P and J, they certainly would not have woven these together. If, notwithstanding, they still did this without harmonizing them, why are we asked to believe that at other places they omitted matters of the greatest importance (see III, 2, 3)? Further, J and E would have worked their materials together so closely at different places that a separation be tween the two would be an impossibility, something t hat is acknowledged as a fact by many ( )T students ; yet, notwithstanding, the contradictions, e.g. in the history of Joseph, have been allowed to stand side by side in consecutive verses, or have even inten tionally been placed thus (cf, e.g. 37 25 ff). Then, too, it" is in the nature of things unthinkable that three originally independent sources for the history of Israel should have constituted separate currents down to the period after Moses, and that they could yet be dovetailed, often sentence by sentence, in the manner claimed by the critics. In conclusion, the entire hypothesis suffers shipwreck through those passages which combine the peculiarities of the different sources, as e.g. in 20 18, which on the one hand constitutes the necessary conclusion to the preceding story from E (cf ver 17), and on the other hand contains the name Jehovah; or in 22 14 ff, which contains the real purpose of the story of the sacrificing of Isaac from E, but throughout also shows the characteristic marks of J; or in 39 1, where the so-called private person into whose house Joseph has been brought, according to J, is more exactly described as the chief of the body-guard, as this is done by E, in 40 2.4. And when the critics in this passage appeal to the help of the redactor, this is evidently only an ill-concealed example of a "begging of the question." In ch 34, and esp. in ch 14, we have a considerable number of larger sections that contain the characteristics of two or even all three sources, and which accordingly furnish ample evidence for protesting against the whole documentary theory.

      (f) Criticism carried to extremes: All the diffi culties that have been mentioned grow into enor mous proportions when we take into consideration the following facts: To operate with the three sources J, E and P seems to be rather an easy pro cess; but if we accept the principles that underlie this separation into sources, it is an impossibility to limit ourselves to these three sources, as a goodly number of OT scholars would like to do, as Strack,

      Kittel, Oettli, Dillmann, Driver. The stories of the danger that attended the wives of the Patriarchs, as these are found in Genesis 12 i)ff and in 26 1 ff, are ascribed to J, and the story as found in Genesis 20 1 ff to east But evidently two sources are not enough in these cases, seeing that similar stories are always regarded as a proof that there have been differ ent authors. Accordingly, we must claim three authors, unless it should turn out that these three stories have an altogether different signification, in which case they report three actual occurrences and may have been reported by one and the same author. The same use is made of the laughter in connection with the name Isaac in 17 17; 18 12; 21 6, viz. to substantiate the claim for three sources, P and J and east But since 21 9E; 26 8 J also contain references to this, and as in 21 6 JK, in addition to the passage cited above, there; is also a second refer ence of this kind, then, in consistency, the critics would be compelled to accept six sources instead of three (Sievers accepts at least 5, Gunkel 4); or all of these references point to one and the same author who took pleasure in repeating such references. As a consequence, in some critical circles scholars have reached the conclusion that there are also such further sources as J 1 and J 2 , as also E 1 and E 2 (cf Budde, Baudissin, Cornill, Holzinger, Kautzsch, Kuenen, Sellin) . But Sievers has already discovered five subordinate sources of J, six of P, and three of E, making a total of fourteen independent sources that he thinks can yet be separated accurately (not taking into consideration some remnants of J, E and P that can no longer be distinguished from others). Gunkel believes that the narratives in Genesis were originally independent and separate stories, which can to a great extent yet be distin guished in their original form. But if J and E and P from this standpoint are no longer authors but are themselves, in fact, reduced to the rank of col lectors and editors, then it is absurd to speak any more of distinct linguistic peculiarities, or of certain theological ideas, or of intentional uses made of certain names of God in J and E and P, not to say anything of the connection between these sources, except perhaps in rare cases. Here the founda tions of the documentary theory have been under mined by the critics themselves, without Sievers or Gunkel or the other less radical scholars intending to do such a thing. The manner in which these sources are said to have been worked together nat urally becomes meaningless in view of such hy potheses. The modern methods of dividing be tween the sources, if consistently applied, will end in splitting the Biblical text into atoms; and this result, toward which the development of OT criticism is inevitably leading, will some day cause a sane reaction; for through these methods scholars have deprived themselves of the possibility of explaining the blessed influence which these Scriptures, so acci dentally compiled according to their view, have achieved through thousands of years. The success of the Bible text, regarded merely from a historical point of view, becomes for the critic a riddle that defies all solutions, even if all dogmatical consider ations are ignored.

      (2) Rejection of documentary theory in view of the names for God. (a) An error of the hypothesis in principle: The names of God, Jehovah and Elohim, constituted for Astruc the starting-point for the division of Genesis into different sources (sec [1] above). Two chief sources, based on the two names for God, could perhaps as a theory and in themselves be regarded as acceptable. If we add that in Exodous 6 1 ff, in P, we are told that God had not revealed Himself before the days of Moses by the name of Jehovah, but only as "God Almighty," it seems to be the correct thing to separate the text, which




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      reports concerning the times before Moses and which in parts contains the name Jehovah, into two sources, one with Jehovah and the other with Elohim. But just as soon as we conclude that the use made of the two names of God proves that there were three and not two sources, as is done from Genesis 20 on, the conclusive ground for the division falls away. The second Elohist (E), whom Ilgen was the first to propose (see [1] above), in principle and a priori dis credits t ho whole hypothesis. This new source from the very outset covers all the passages that cannot be ascribed to the Jehovah or the Elohist portions; whatever portions contain the name Elohim, as P does, and which nevertheless are prophetical in character after the manner of J, and accordingly cannot be made to fit, in either the Jahwistic or the Elohist ic source, seek a refuge in this third source. Even before we have done as much as look at the text, we can say that according to this method everything can be proved. And when critics go so far as to divide J and E and P into many sub- parts, it becomes all the, more impossible to make the names for God a basis for this division into sources. Consistently we could perhaps in this case separate a Jehovah source, an Elohim source, a. ha- Elohim source, an El Shaddny source, an Adhonay source, a Mal akh Yahwch source, a Mal- akh Elohim source, etc, but unfortunately these characteristics of the sources come into conflict in a thousand cases with the others that an; claimed to prove that there are different sources in the Book of Genesis.

      (6) The false basis for the hypothesis: But the basis of the whole hypothesis itself, viz. Exodous 6 1 ff P, is falsely regarded as such. If Jehovah had really been unknown before the days of Moses, as Exodous 6 1 ff P is claimed to prove, how could J then, in so important and decisive a point, in the history of the religious development of Israel, have told such an entirely different story? Or if, on the other hand, Jehovah was already known before the time of Moses, as we must conclude according to J, how was it possible for P all at once to invent a new view? This is all the more incredible since it is this author and none other who already makes use of the word Jehovah in the composition of the name of the mother of Moses, namely Jochcbcd (cf Exodous 6 20 and Numbers 26 59). In addition, we; do not find at all in Exodous 6 1 ff that God had before this revealed Himself as Elohim, but as El Shadday, so that this would be a reason for claiming not an Elohim but an El Shaddmj source for P on the basis of this passage (cf 17 1; 28 3; 35 11; 48 3 P 43 14 E! cf also 49 25 in the blessing of Jacob). Finally, it is not at all possible to separate Exodous 6 1 ff P from that which immediately precedes, which is taken from JE and employs the name Jehovah; for according to the text of P we do not know who Moses and who Aaron really were, and yet these two are in Exodous 6 1 ff regarded as well-known persons. The new revelation of God in Exodous 6 1 ff (P) by the side of 3 1 ff (JE and E) is also entirely defensible and rests on a good foundation; for Moses after the failure of Exodous 5 needed such a renewed encourage ment (see EXODUS II, 2, 1). If this is the case, then the revelation of the name of Jehovah in Exodous 6 1 ff cannot mean that that name had before this not been known at all, but means that it had only been rela tively unknown, i.e. that in the fullest and most per fect sense God became known only as Jehovah, while before this He had revealed His character only from certain sides, but esp. as to His Almighty Power.

      (c) Improbability that the difference in the use of the names for God is without significance: In view of the importance w r hich among oriental na tions is assigned to names, it is absolutely unthink

      able that the two names Jehovah and Elohim had originally been used without any reference to their different meanings. The almost total omission of the name Jehovah in later times or the substitution of the name Elohim for it in Pss 42-83 is doubtless based in part on the reluctance which gradually arose in Israel to use the name at all; but this cannot be shown as probable for older times, in which it is claimed that E was written. In the case of P the rule, according to which the name Elohim is said to have been used for the pre-Mosaic period, and the reason for the omission of Jehovah would have been an entirely different one. Then, too, it would be entirely inexplicable why J should have avoided the use of the name Elohim. The word Elohim is connected with a root that signifies to fear," and characterizes God from the side of His power, as this is, e.g., seen at once in Genesis 1. Jeho vah is splendidly interpreted in Exodous 3 14 ff, and the word is connected with the archaic form hairnh for haydh, " to be," and the word characterizes God as the being who at all times continues to be the God of the Covenant, and who, according to Genesis 2 4 3 24, can manifestly be none other than the Creator of the universe in Genesis 1 1 2 3, even if from Genesis 12 on He, for the time being, enters into a special relation to Abraham, his family and his people, and by the use of the combined names Jehovah-Elohim is declared to be identical with the God who created the world, as e.g. this is also done in the section Exodous 7 813 16, where, in the 10 plagues, Jehovah s omnipotent power is revealed (cf EXODUS, II, 2, 2); and in 9 30 it is charged against Pharaoh and his courtiers, that they did not yet fear Jehovah-Elohim, i.e. the God of the Covenant, who at the same time is the CJod of the universe (cf also 1 Kings 18 21.37.39; Jon 4 (J).

      (d) Real purpose in the use of the names for God: But now it is further possible to show clearly, in connection with a number of passages, that the different names for God are in Genesis selected with a perfect consciousness of the difference in their mean ings, and that accordingly the choice of these names does not justify the division of the book into various sources.

      (a) Decreasing use of name Jehovah: The fact that the tdl dhdth of Terah, of Isaac, and of Jacob begin with the name Jehovah but end without this name. In the history of Abraham are to be noted the following passages: 12; 13; 14 22; 15 1.2.8; 16 2.5-; 17 1; in 1 he history of Isaac: 25 21.22.23; 26 28.29; and in the tdl dhdth of Jacob 38 7.10; 39 2.3.5. In these passages the beginnings an; regu larly made with the name Jehovah, although wit h decreasing frequency before the name Elohim is used, and notwithstanding that in all these sections certain selections from P anil E must also be con sidered in addition to J. Beginning with Genesis 12, in which the story of the selection of Abraham is narrated, we accordingly find emphasized, at the commencement of the history of each patriarch, this fact that it is Jehovah, the God of the Covenant, who is determining these things. Beginning with Genesis 40 and down to about Exodous 2 we find the oppo site to be the case, although J is strongly repre sented in this section, and we no longer find the name Jehovah (except in one passage in the blessing of Jacob, which passage has been taken from an other source, and hence is of no value for the dis tinction of the sources J, E and P; this is the remarkable passage Genesis 49 18). In the same way the story of Abraham (25 1-11) closes without men tion being made of the name of Jehovah, which name is otherwise found in all of these histories, except in ch 23 (see below). The tol dhoth of Isaac, too, use the name Jehovah for the last time in 32 10;




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      and from this passage down to 37 2 the name is not found. It is accordingly clear that in the his tory of the patriarchs there is a gradual decrease in the number of times in which the name Jehovah occurs, and in each case the decrease is more marked ; and this is most noticeable and clearest in the his tory of Joseph, manifestly in order to make all the more prominent the fact that the revelation of God, beginning with Exodous 3 1 ff, is that of Jehovah. These facts alone make the division of this text into three sources J, E and P impossible.

      () Selection of the names of God with reference to the approach of man to God and of his departure from God: The fact, further, that the approach of an individual to God or his departure from God could find its expression in the different uses made of the names of God is seen in the following. In con nection with Ishmael and Lot the name Jehovah can be used only so long as these men stood in con nection with the kingdom of God through their relation to Abraham (cf 16 and 13 10; 19 13 f.16), but only the name Elohim can be used as soon as they sever this connection (cf 21 12.17. 19.20 and 19 29). On the other hand, Elohim is used in the beginning of the history of the Gentile Abimelech (20; 21 22 f); while after ward, when he has come into closer relations to the patriarchs, the name Jehovah is substituted (26 2S. 29). A similar progress is found in separate nar ratives of the patriarchs themselves, since in 22 1 ff and oh 28 the knowledge of Elohim is changed into that of Jehovah (cf 22 1.3.9 with 22, and 28 12 with 28 13.16).

      (y) Selection of the names for God for other reasons: Elohim can, further, in many cases be ex plained on the basis of an implied or expressed con trast, generally over against men (cf 22 8.12; in the second of these two passages the fear of God is placed in contrast to godlessness) ; 30 2; 31 50; 32 2f; cf with vs 4 and 8; 32 29; 35 5; or on the basis of an accommodation to the standpoint of the person addressed, as in 3 1-5 (serpent); 20 3.6. 11.13.17; 23 6; 39 9 (Gentiles); or on the basis of grammar, as in 23 6; 32 3; 28 17.22; because the composition with the proper name Jehovah could never express the indefinite article (a prince of God, a camp of God, a Bethel or house of prayer); or finally in consequence of the connection with earlier passages (cf 5 1 ff with ch 1; 21 2.4; 28 3 ff; 35 9 ff wit h ch 17) . A comparison of these passages ,-ho,vs that, of course, different reasons may have induced the author to select the name Elohim, e.g. 23 6; 28 12; 32 12.

      (5) Systematic use of the names of God, particu larly in the history of Abraham : That the names for God are systematically used is finally attested by the fact that in the history of Abraham, after the extensive use of the name Jehovah in its beginning (see above under [a]), this name is afterward found combined with a large number of other and differ ent, names; so that in each case it is Jehovah of whom all further accounts speak, and yet the name of Jehovah is explained, supplemented and made clear for the consciousness of believers by the new appellations, while the full revelation of His being indeed begins only in Exodous 3 and 6 1 ff, at which place the different rays of His character that appeared in earlier times are combined in one brilliant light. The facts in the case are the following. In the story of Abraham, with which an epoch of fundamental importance in the history of revelation begins, we find Jehovah alone in 12 f . With the exception of ch 23, where a characteristic appellation of God is not found, and 25 1-11, where we can claim a de cadence in the conception of the Divinity (concern ing 23 6; 26 11; see above [7] + [<*]), the name of Jehovah is retained in all of these stories, aa these

      have been marked out (III, 2, 6); but beginning with ch 14 they do not at all use any longer only one name for God. We here cite only those pas sages where, in each case, for the first time a new name for God is added, viz. 14 18, El *Elyon; 14 19, Creator of heaven and of earth; 15 2, Adhondy; 16 7, the Angel of Jehovah; 16 13, the God that seeth; 17 1, El Shadday; 17 3, Elohim; 17 18, ha- Elohim; chapters 18 f, special relation to the three men (cf 18 2 and 19 1); 18 25, the Judge of the whole earth; 20 13, Elohim constructed as a pi.; 21 17, the Angel of God; 24 3, the God of heaven and the God of the earth; 24 12, the God of Abraham.

      (e) Lack and weakness in the materials needed to prove the case: If we add, finally, that to prove the hypothesis we are limited to the meager materials found in Genesis 1 1 Exodous 6 1 ff; that in this compara tively small number of chapters Genesis 40 to Exodous 2 cannot be utilized in this discussion (see above under [d] [a]); that all those passages, in which J and E are inseparably united must be ignored in this discussion; that all other passages in which J and E are often and rapidly interchanged from the very outset are suspiciously akin to begging the question; that Genesis 20 18, which with its "Jehovah" is as cribed to R, is absolutely needed as the conclusion of the preceding Elohim story; that in 21 33 with its "Jehovah" in J, on the other hand, the opening Elohim story from E, which is necessary for an ex planation of the dwelling of Abraham in the south country, precedes; that the angel of Jehovah (22 11) is found in E; that 2 4 3 24 from J has be sides Jehovah the name Elohim, and in 3 16-5 only Elohim (see above) ; that in 17 1 ; 21 1 P Jehovah is found; that 5 29, which is ascribed to J, is sur rounded by portions of P, and contains the name Jehovah, and would be a torso, but in connection with ch 5 P, in reality is in its proper place, as is the intervening remark (ver 24 P); that, on the other hand, in 4 25; 6 2.4; 7 9; 9 27; 39 9 Elo him is found in view of all these facts it is impossi ble to see how a greater confusion than this could result from the hypot hesis of a division of the sources on the basis of the use made of the names of God. And then, too, it is from the very outset an impossi bility, that in the Book of Genesis alone such an arbi trary selection of the names for God should have been made and nowhere else.

      (/) Self-disintegration of the critical position: The modern critics, leaving out of consideration entirely their further dissection of the text, them selves destroy the foundation upon which this hypothesis was originally constructed, when Sievers demands for Genesis 1 (from P) an original Jehovah- Elohim in the place of the Elohim now found there; and when others in Genesis 18 f J claim an original Elohim; and when in 17 1 21 1 the name Jehovah is said to have been intentionally selected by P.

      (g) Different uses in the LXX: Naturally it is not possible to discuss all the pertinent passages at this place. Even if, in many cases, it is doubtful what the reasons were for the selection of the names for God, and even if these reasons cannot be de termined with our present helps, we must probably, nevertheless, not forget that the LXX in its translated of Genesis in 49 passages, according to Eerdman s reckon ing, and still more according to Wiener s, departs from the use of the names for God from the Hebrews original. Accordingly, then, a division of Genesis into different sources on the basis of the different names for God cannot be carried out, and the argument from this use, instead of proving the documentary theory, has been utilized against it.

      ///. The Structure of the Individual Pericopes. In this division of the article, there is always to be




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      1. Struc ture of the Prooemium

      found (under 1) ;i consideration of the unity of the Biblical text iui(l (under 2) the rejection of the custom ary division into different sources.

      The conviction of the unity of the text of Genesis and of the impossibility of dividing it according to different sources is strongly confirmed and strengthened by the examination of the different pericopes. Here, too, we liiul the division on the basis of the typical numbers 4.7.

      10 12. It is true that in certain cases we should be able to divide in a different way; but at times the intention of the author to divide according to these numbers prac tically compels acceptance on our part, so that it would bo almost impossible to ignore this matter without detriment, esp. since we were compelled to accept the same fact in connection with the articles KXODTS (II); LEVITKTS (II. 2); I),v OF ATONKMKNT (I, 2, 1), and also KZKKIKI, (I, 2, 2). But more important than these numbers, concerning the importance or unimportance of which there could possibly be some controversy, are the fundamental religious and ethical ideas which run through and control the larger pericopes of the tol dhoth of Terah, Isaac and Jacob in such a way that it is im possible to regard this as merely the work of a redactor, and we urr cmn /x-lli-d to cunxidi-r tin buok as the product of a single i/ i iter.

      The structure of the prooemium (Genesis 1 l 2 3) is generally ascribed to P. Following the. introduction (vs 1.2; creation of chaos), we have the creation of the seven days with the Sabbath as a conclusion. The lirst and the second three days correspond to each other (1st day, the light; 4th day, the lights; 2d day, the air and water by the separation of the waters above and the waters below; 5th day, the animals of the air and of the water; 3d day, the dry land and the vegetation; (>th day, the land ani mals and man; -f also in this connection that there are two works on each day). We find Kx also divided ac cording to the number seven (see Kxonus, IT, 1; cf also Exodous 24 1* 31 IS; see Kxonrs, 11.2, 5. where we have also the sevenfold reference to the Sabbath idea in Kx, and that, too, repeatedly at the close of different sec tions, just as we find this here in (!en); and in Leviticus cf chapters 23, 25, 27; see LKVITHTS, II, 2, 2; the VIII, IX, and appendix; and in (!en 4 ITff.J; 5 1-24 P; 6 9 9 29; 36 137 1 (see under 2, 1.2.. 1.9).

      The ten tul ilhoth are found in On 2 450 26.

      1. The tdl /lhuth of the heavens and the earth (2 4 1 2(i):

      (1) The Biblical t< iL(<i) 2 4-2o, Paradise and the first human beings; (b) 3 1-24, the Fall; (c)

      4 1-16, Cain and Abel; (<l) 4 17-26, 2. Structure the Canutes, in seven members (see of the Ten under 1 above) and Seth. The number T6l e dhoth 4 appears also in 6 1 6 8 (.see under

      2); 10 1 11 9 (see under 4) ; and esp.

      11 2725 11 (under 6). Evidently () + (&) and (c) + (d) are still more closely connected.

      (2) Rejection of the dirisioninto sources (11 2 4a P and 2 464 21) .1). rh 2 does not contain a new account of creation with a different order in the works of creation. This section speaks of animals and plants, not for their own sakes, but only on account of their connection with man. The creation of the woman is only a further de velopment of ch 1. While formerly the critics divided this section into 2 4 4 2(1 .1, they now cut it up into J 1 and J 2 (see under II, 2, 1 M []), because, they say, the tree of life is mentioned only in 2 9 and 3 23, while in 2 17 and 3 3 ff the Divine command is restricted to the tree of knowledge of good and evil. But it is impossible to see why there should be a contradiction here, and just as little can we see why the two trees standing in the midst of the garden should not both have had their significance (cf 2 9; 3 :i). It is further asserted that a division of J is demanded by the fact that the one part of J knows of the Fall (6 9 if), and the other does not know of sucli a break in the; development of mankind (4 17 If). But the civilization attained by the Cainites could certainly have passed over also to the Sethites (see also 6 2); and through Noah and his sons have been continued after the Deluge. Then, too, the fact that Cain built a city (4 17), and the fact that he became a fugitive and a wanderer (4 12), are not mutually exclusive; just as the beginnings made with agriculture (4 12) are per fectly consistent with the second fact.

      2. The tvl tlhoth of Adam (5 16 8) :

      (1) The Biblical text. (a) 5 1-24, seven gen erations from Adam to Lamech (see under 1, and Jude ver 14) ; (b) 5 25-32, four generations from the oldest of men, Methuselah, down to the sons of Noah; (c) 6 1-4, intermingling of the sons of God and the sons of men; (d) 6 5-Samuel, corruption of all

      mankind. Evidently at this place (a) + (b) and correspond with each other.

      (2) Rejection of the division into sources (ch 5 P with the exception of ver 29 [see II, 2, 2 (r) ]; 529;6 1-8J). 6 7J presupposes eh 1 P; as, on the other hand, the fact that the generations that, according to ch 5 P, had in the meanwhile been born, die, presupposes the advent of sin, concerning which only J had reported in ch 3. In the case of P, however, in 1 31 it is said that everything was very good.

      3. The tdhlhoth of Noah (6 99 29):

      (1) The Biblical text. Seven sections (see 1 above) viz: () 6 9-22, the building of the ark; (b) 7 1-9, entering the ark; (c) 7 10-24, the increase of the Flood; (d) 8 1-14, the decrease of the Flood; (e) 8 lf>-19, leaving the ark; (/) 8 229 17, declara tion of a covenant relation between God and Noah; (g) 9 18-29, transfer of the Divine blessing upon Shem.

      (2) Rejection of the, division into sources (7 1-5.7-10. f; 8 26. 3o.6-12. 136.20-22; 9 20-27 J, the rest from P). In all the sources are found the ideas that the Deluge was the punishment of God for sin; further, the deliverance of the righteous Noah and his wife and three sons Shem, Ham and Japheth and their wives; the deliverance of the different kinds of animals; the announcement of the covenant relations between (Jod and mankind after the Deluge; the designation of the Deluge with the term rnabhul and of the ark with tebhdh. In the Babylonian account, which without a doubt stands in some connection with the Biblical, are found certain meas urements of the ark, which in the Bible are only in P, as also the story of the sending out of the birds when the flood was decreasing, and of the sacrifices of those; who had been delivered, which in the Bible are said to bo found only in J; and these facts are a very powerful argument against the division into sources. Further, P, in case the critics were right, would have contained nothing of the thanks of Noah for his deliverance, although he was a pious man; and in the case of J we should not be informed what kind of an ark it was into which Noah was directed to go (7 1 If ) ; nor how he can already in 8 20 build an altar, as he has not yet gone out of the ark; and, further, how the determination of Jen, that He would not again curse the earth but would bless it, can be a comfort to him, since only P has reported concerning the blessing (9 1 If). Even if the distinction is not always clearly made between clean and unclean animals, and different numbers are found in the case of each (6 19 f; 7 14-1(5 P, over against 7 2 f in J), yet this is to be regarded merely as a lack of exactness or, perhaps better, rather as a summary method of pro cedure. The difficulties are not even made any easier through the separation into sources, since in 7 8 f in J both numbers and the distinction between the two kinds of animals are used indiscriminately. Hero, too, in J wo find the name Klohim used. The next contradiction that is claimed, namely that the Deluge according to J lasted only (>1 days, and is arranged In 40 days (7 4.12.17; 8 (5) plus 3X7 =21 days (8 south10.12), while in P it con tinues for 1 year and 11 days (7 11.24; 8 3-5.14), is really a self-inflicted agony of the critics. The report of the Bible on the subject is perfectly clear. The rain descends for 40 days (7 12 J) ; but as in addition also the fountains of the deep are broken up (7 11 P), we find in this fact a reason for believing that they increased still more (7 24 P and 7 17 J). The 40 days in 8 6 J cannot at all be identified with those; mentioned in 7 17; for if this were the case the raven would have. been sent out at a time when the waters had reached their highest stage, and even according to J the Deluge covered the entire world. In general see above, II, 2, 1 (c) (y).

      4. The foW^of A of the sons of Noah (10 111 9):

      (1) The Biblical text. (a) 10 2-5, the Japhe- thites; (b) 10 6-20, the Karaites; (c) 10 21-32, the Shemites; (d) 11 1-9, the Babylonian confusion of tongues. Evidently (a) to (c) is to be regarded as in contrast to (d) (cf also 11 1.9 J in addition to 10 32 P).

      (2) Rejection of the division into sources (10 17.20. 22 Mil f P, the rest belonging to J). The distribution of ch 10 between P and J is actually ridiculous, since in tiiis case J does not speak of .Japheth at all, and the gene alogy of the Hamites would connect directly with P, a phenomenon which must have been repeated in vs 24 ff. The Jewish Midr, in addition, and possibly correctly, counts 70 peoples (cf 46 27; Exodous 1 5; Numbers 11 16.25; Luke 10 1).

      5. The tol e dhoth of Shem (11 10-26) : 10 genera tions (see under II, 1).

      6. The tol dhoth of Terah (11 2725 11):




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      (1) The Biblical text. After the introduction (11 27-32), the theme of the history of Abraham is given in 12 1 la (ver 1, the promise of the holy land; ver 2, of many descendants; ver 3, announcement of the double influence of Abraham on the world; ver 4a, the obedience of Abraham s faith in his trust upon the Divine promise). In contrast to the first three thoughts which character ize God s relation to Abraham, the fourth is placed, which emphasizes Abraham s relation to God (see under [<l]). But both thoughts give complete expres sion to the intimate communion between God and Abraham. On the basis of these representations, which run through the entire story and thus con tribute materially to its unification, this section can also be divided, as one of these after the other comes into the foreground. These four parts (12 4b - 14 24; 15 118 15; 18 10 21 34; 22 125 11) can each be divided again into four subdivisions, a scheme of division that is found also in Exodous 35 4 40 3S Leviticus 11-15, 16 (cf EXODUS, II, 2, 7; LEVITICUS, II, 2, 2, III and IV; DAY OF ATOXeastMENT, I, 2, 1), and is suggested by Deuteronomy 12-26 (cf also my book, Wider den Bonn der Quettenscheidung, the results of the investigation of which work are there reproduced without entering upon the details of the argument).

      (a) 12 4b 14 24, in which the reference to the promised land is placed in the foreground; see 12 1, and the passages and statements in parentheses in the following: (a) 12 4/;-Samuel, Abraham s journey to Canaan (vs 5 P, 6.7.8 J); (/3) 12 9 13 4, descent to Egypt from Canaan, and return (12 9.10; 13 1-4J); (7) 13 5-18, separation from Lot (vs 6 P, 7.0 J, l-2a P, 14M7.1S.I); (5) ch 14, expedition against Chedorlaomer, etc, (Abraham is blessed by the priest-king of the country, and receives as hom age from the products of the country bread and wine [vs 18 f], while he in return gives tithes [ver 20]). The division of this section (12 4/> 14 24) is to be based on the similarity of the closing verses (12 8; 13 4; 13 18).

      (b) 15 1 18 15, unfolding of the promise of descendants for Abraham by this announcement that he is to have a son of his own; cf 12 2 and what is placed in parentheses in the following: (a) ch 15, JAH (Jehovah) s covenant with Abraham (vs 2.3 JE, 4 J, 5 E, 13. 14. 16.18 J). The promise is not fulfilled through Elie/er, but only through an actual son (vs 3.4); (P) 16 1-16, Hagar gives birth to Ishmael as the son of Abraham. Hagar s son, too, namely Ishmael, is not the genuine heir, notwithstanding the con nection between 16 10 and 12 2 (cf 17 18-20 P); (7) ch 17 P, promise of the birth of Isaac given to Abraham (vs 2-17.19.21); (5) 18 1-15, Sarah also hears that Isaac is promised (vs 10.12-15).

      (c) 18 1(521 34, the double influence of Abra ham on the world; cf 12 3 and what is in paren theses in the following: (a) 18 1(5 19 38, the pericope dealing with Sodom; (i) 18 10-33, Abra ham s petition for the deliverance of Sodom; (ii)

      19 1-11, the sin of the Sodomites, while Lot shows some of the characteristics of Abraham; (iii) 19 12-28, story of the destruction, in connection with which Lot receives the benefit of his relation to Abraham (vs; (iv) Lot ceases to be a part of this history after this destruction; (/3) 20 1-18, Abraham with Abimelech (vs 6.9 E, 18 R, punishment; vs 7.17, intercession); (7) 21 1-21, Ishmael ceases to be part of this history (vs 13.18.

      20 E); (5) 21 22-34, Abraham s agreement with Abimelech (the latter seeks Abraham s friendship and fears his enmity, vs 27.23 E).

      (d) 22 125 11 ff, Abraham s faith at its culmi nating point; cf 12 4a and what is in parentheses in the following: (a) 22 1-19, the sacrifice of Isaac (vs 2.12 E, 10.18 R); (/3) ch 23, purchase of the place to bury the dead, which act was the result of

      his faith in the promised land; (7) ch 24 is intro duced by 22 20-24, which has no independent char acter. With the twelve descendants of Nahor cf the twelve sons of Jacob, the twelve of Ishmael (25 12 ff; 17 20), and on the number 12 see Exodous 24 1830 10, under EXODUS, II, 2, 5; Leviticus 1-7 under LEVITICUS, II, 2, 2, i, and under EZEKIEL, I, 2, 2. Chronicles 24 itself contains the story of how a wife was secured for Isaac from among his relatives (the faith in the success of this plan is transmitted from Abra ham to his servant); (5) 25 1-11, the sons of the concubine of Abraham (J+ll) cease to be a part of this history; transfer of the entire inheritance to the son of promise (J); burial in the ground bought for this purpose (P) (all of these concluding acts stand in close connection with Abraham s faith). In reference to the force of the names of God in connecting Genesis 11 2725 11, see above under II, 2, 2 (d).

      20 IS; 22 14-1S; 25 R; all else belongs to J). Through the passages ascribed to P breaks are caused in file text of J in 11 2S f ; 12 4u (Lot) ; in ch 16, where the conclusion is lacking; in 18 1 (the reference of the pro noun); in 24 07 (Sarah s death); in 25 1 if (no mention of Abraham s death). On the other hand P presupposes the text of J in 11 :U f; 12 46; 16 Ib; 19 2{>. In the ease" of Kings ,ve need mention only the abrupt break in 20 1 ; and, finally, the text of P, leaving out of consideration the larger sections (chapters 17 and 23), is entirely too meager to constitute an independent document.

      We will here discuss also the so-called duplicates (see under II, 2, 1, u+c, 5). The different stories concerning the danger in which the wives of Abra ham and Isaac were involved in 12 Off J; 20 1 ff E; 26 1 ff J directly presuppose each other. Thus in 20 13 !] Abraham regards it as a fact that such situations are often to be met with, and conse quently the possibility of an occurrence of such an event could not have appeared so remarkable to an Oriental as ii does to a modern critic; ch 26 1 suggests the story in 12 9 ff. The words used here also show that the three stories in question did not originate independently of each other (cf 26 7; 20 5; 12 1026 7; 20 l l; 12 1226 10; 20 9; 12 1826 3; 20 1; 12 10 [gur]; see under II, 2, 1, c, f). The two Ishmael pericopes (chapters 16 J+P+21 E) differ from each other throughout, and, accordingly, are surely not duplicates. The two stories of the conclusion of a covenant in chapters 15 J and 17 P are both justified, esp. since in 17 7 the author speaks of an "establishment" of the covenant which already existed since ch 15. Chronicles 17 P+18 Iff J are cer tainly intended to be pendants, so that it is im possible to ascribe them to different authors; cf the analogous beginning of the theophanies of JAH (Jehovah) in 17 1 and 18 1 (even the pronoun referring to Abraham in 18 1 J, unless taken in connection with ch 17 P, is without any context), also the laughing of Abraham and of Sarah (17 17; 18 12 f; see under II, 2, 1 [c] [f]), the prominence given to their age (17 17; 18 1 1 f), and the designation of the time in 17 11; 18 10.14.

      Nor can we quote in favor of a division into sources the; passage 21 14 f E, on the ground that Ishmael is de scribed here as being so small that he could be laid upon thi! shoulder of his mother and then be thrown by her under a shrub, while according to the 1Mb. text he must have been 15 years of age (16 It}; 21 5P). For the origi nal does not say that lie was carried on her shoulders; and in Matthew 15 30 it is even said of adults that they were thrown down. On the other hand, also according to Kings, Ishmael could not have been so small a child, for in 21 1S6 he is led by the hand, and according to ver 9 ho al ready mocks Isaac, evidently because the latter was the heir of the promise.

      Sarah s age, too, according to ch 20 E, does not speak in favor of a division into sources. That she was still a beautiful woman is not claimed here.




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      Evidently Abimeleeh was anxious only for a closer connection with (ho powerful Abraham (cf 21 23. 27). Then, too, all the sources ascribe an ad vanced age to Sarah (cf 21 G J+E; 18 12 fj; 17 17 P).

      7. ThvtdMhothot Ishmael (25 12-1S): 12 princes descended from Ishmael (see under 6 [<l] [7] ).

      8. The lohlliutli of Isaac (25 1935 29): The correct conception of the fundamental thought can be gained at once in the beginning of this section (25 22 f): JAH (Jehovah) s oracle to Rebekah, that the older of (ho twins, with whom she was pregnant, should serve the younger; also in Romans 9 10 i f with refer ence to M al 1 2f; and finally, the constant refer ence made to Esau in addition to Jacob until the former ceases to be a factor in this history in ch 36. Accordingly in the end everything is made depend ent on the one hand on Jacob s election, notwith standing his wrongdoings, on t he _ other hand, on Esau s rejection notwithstanding his being the first born, or in other words, upon (he perfectly free grace of (!od; and all (he different sources alike share in this fundamental thought. But in dividing between (he different parts of (his section, we must particu larly draw attention to this, that in all of these parts both thoughts in some way or other find (heir ex pression.

      (1) The Biblical text. Containing 10 parts (sec under 11, 1), namely (a) 25 19-21), the birdi of Esau and Jacob; (b) 25 27-34, Esau despises and loses his birthright ; (c) 26 1-3"), Isaac receives (he bless ing of Abraham, which afterward is transmitted to Jacob, while Esau, Ihrough his marriage with heathen women, prepares (lie way for his rejection (vs 3-4 f); (d) 27 1-40, Jacob steals the blessing of the first bom; (r) 27 41-45, Jacob s flight out of fear of Esau s vengeance; (/) 27 4(528 9, Jacob is sent abroad out of fear of his brother s bad example; (g) 28 10 32 33, Jacob in a strange 1 land and his fear of Esau, which is overcome in his contest of prayer in 1 eniel on his return: (a) 28 10-22, the ladder reaching to heaven in Bethel when he went abroad; (P) 29 1 30 43, twenty years with Laban (see 31 3S); (7) 31 1-54, Jacob s departure from Mesopotamia; (5)32 1 33, his return home; (/i^ch 33, reconciliation with Esau, who returns to Seir (ver 10; cf 32 4), while Jacob becomes the owner of property in the Holy Land (vs 19f); (/) 34 135 22, Jacob remains in this land, notwithstanding the slaughter made by his sons Simeon and Levi (cf 34 30; 35 f>); the new appearance of (iod in Bethel, with a repetition of (ho story of the changing of Jacob s name, with which the story of Jacob s youth is dosed, and which presupposes the episode at Bethel (cf 35 l.G/>.9-15 with 28 10 ff), and which is not in contradiction with the first change in (he name of Jacob in ch 32 (cf the twofold naming of Peter in John 1 43 and Matthew 16 IS). Esau is yet mentioned in 35 1.7, where (here is a reference made to Jacob s flight before him; (j) 35 23-29, Jacob s 12 sons as the bearers of the promise; while Esau is mentioned only as participating in Isaac s burial, but inwardly he has no longer any part in the history of the king dom of God, as is seen from ch 36, and in 32 4; 33 16 is already hinted at. In this section, too, evi dently there are groups, each of two parts belong ing together, namely (a) + (6) describing the earliest youth; (c) + (d) in which Isaac plays a prominent part; (e) + (/) both of which do not exclude but supplement each other in assigning the motives for Jacob s flight; (g) + (fi) Jacob s flight and recon ciliation; (i) + (j) Jacob both according to family and dwelling-place as the recognized heir of the promise.

      (2) Rejection of the division into sources. As 25 29 f 266,- 2634f; 27 46 28 9; 2924.29; 31 18; 35 Go. 9-12.15; 35 226-29; 36 G-3G.40-43 are ascribed to P,

      it is clear that these arc in part such ridiculously small extracts, that we should bo justified in attributing them to a sensible author. The whole sojourn in Mesopo tamia is ignored in P, according to the (Titles, except the brief notices in 29 24.29; 33 18. Further, the parts of the rest of the text cannot in many cases be dispensed with; as, e.g. we do not know in 25 2<>/; who was born; nor in 26 34 f who Ksau was; nor in 27 4(> who Jacob was; nor in 29 24 who Laban was; nor in 29 24.29 in what connect ion and for what purposes Leah and Rachel are mentioned. P makes no mention of any promise given to Isaac, which is, however, presupposed in 35 12 and later in Kx. 2 24. In 28 1 ff P is most closely con nected with .1 (cf 12 1-3, the blessing of Abraham, and ch 24). It is, further, impossible to separate the sources E and Jin ch 28 (ladder reaching to heaven) ; cf 28 10-12. 17 f.20-22 Kings. vs 13-1(1 .1, ver 19, and the name of God in ver 21 R, and this proposed division actually becomes absurd in chapters 29 f in the story of the birth of Jacob s children, which are said to be divided between the sources J and east

      9. The tdl dlwth of Esau (36 137 1): In 7 di visions (see under 1), namely (a) 36 1 -5 R, Esau s family; the different names for Esau s wives, as compared with 26 34 f; 28 7-9 P, are doubtless based on (he fact that oriental women are apt to change their names when they marry; and the fact that (hose names are without further remark men tioned by the side of the others is rather an argu ment against the division into sources than for it; (b) 36 0-8, Esau s change of abode to Heir, winch, according to 32 4; 33 14.10, already took place before Jacob s return. Only in case that Esau (35 29) would have afterward remained for a longer period in Canaan, could we think of a new separa tion in this connection. It is more probable that at this place all those data which wen; of impor tance in connection with (his separation are once more given without any reference to their differ ence in point of time; (c) 36 9-14, Esau_as (.lie founder of the Edomites (in ver 9 the word tdl e dhoth is repeated from ver 1, while the narrative of the descendants of Esau begins only at this later pas sage in so far as those were from Seir; cf ver 9 with ver 5. and above, under II, 1); (<l) 36 15-19, the leading line of the sons of Esau; (<) 36 20-30, gene alogy of the original inhabitants of the country, mentioned because of their connection with Esau (cf ver 25 with ver 2); (/) 36 31-39, the elective kingdoms of Edom; (g) 36 40-43, the Edomites chief line of descent , arranged according to localities. We have here accordingly geographical accounts, and not historical or genealogical, as in 36 15 ff. 20 ff (30) ; cf also vs 40.43, for which reason we find also names of women.

      10. The toldhdth of Jacob (37 250 20): (1) The Biblical text. The key to the history of Joseph is found in its conclusion, viz. in 50 14-21, in the confession of Joseph, in the light of his past, namely, that God has ended all things well; and in 50 22 if, in his confidence in the fulfilment of the Divine promise in the lives of (hose God has chosen; cf also Psalm 105 10 ff. According to the two view points in 50 14-20, and without any reference to the sources, (his whole pericope (37 2 50 15) is divided into two halves, each of five subdivisions, or a total of ten (see under II, 1). In the exact demonstration of this, not only the contents them selves, but also regard for the different names for God will often render good service, which names, with good effect, are found at the, close and in har mony with the fundamental thought of the entire section, viz. (a) 37 2 39 Ga, Joseph enters Poti- phar s house (4 pieces, see under G, 1, namely [a] 37 2-11, the hatred of the brethren, [/3] 37 12-36, selling Joseph, [7] 38 1 ff, the Jehovah-displeasing conduct in the house of Judah, cf 38 7.10, [5, 39 1-6, JAH (Jehovah) s pleasure in Joseph, in contrast to [7]); (b)_39 66-23, Joseph is cast into prison, but JAH (Jehovah) was with him (vs 21.23); (c) 40 141 52, the exaltation of Joseph, which at the end esp. is shown by the nam-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      ing of Ephruim and Manasseh as caused by God, but which for the present passes by the history of his family (4 pieces, viz. [a] 40 1, interpretation of the dreams of the royal officials, [/8] 41 1-36, interpreta tion of the two dreams of Pharaoh, [7] 41 3746a, the exaltation of Joseph, [5] 41 406-52, Joseph s activity for the good of the country); (d) 41 55

      46 7, Joseph becomes a blessing to his family; cf the promise of God to Jacob in Beersheba to be with him in Egypt in 46 2 f f with 45 6-9 (in four pieces, viz. [a] 41 53-57, the general famine, [/3] 42 1-3S, the first journey of the brothers of Joseph, [7] 43 14 4 34, the second journey fin four sub divisions, (i) 43 1-14, the departure, (ii) 43 14-34, the reception by Joseph, (iii) 44 1-17, final trial of the brethren, (iv) 44 18-34, the intercession of Judah]; [5] 45 1 46 7, Joseph makes himself known and persuades Jacob to come to Egypt) ; (c) 46 8

      47 26, Joseph continues to be a blessing to his family and to Egypt (in 4 subdivisions, of which the 4th is placed in contrast to the first 3 exactly as this is done in 10 111 9 and 11 2725 11, viz. [a] 46 8-27, list of the descendants of Jacob, [/3] 46 28-34, meeting with Joseph, [7] 47 1-12, Jacob in the presence of Pharaoh, [5] 47 13-26, the Egyptians who have sold themselves and their pos sessions to Pharaoh laud Joseph as the preserver of I heir lives). From this point on the attention is now drawn to the future: (/) 47 27-31, Jacob causes Joseph to take an oath that he will have him buried in Canaan (cf ver 30 J with ch 23 P) ; in (e) + (/) there is also lacking a designation for God; (g) ch 48, Jacob adopts and blesses Ephraim and Manasseh (cf also the emphasis placed on the providential guidance of God in vs 8 f.11.15 f, esp vs 16 and 20 ff); (/<) 49 1-27, Jacob blesses his 12 sons and prophesies their future fate (here, 49 18, appears the name of JAH (Jehovah), which had disappeared since ch 40; see under II, 2, 2 (d) (a), and other designations for God, vs 24 f); (i) 49 28-33, Jacob s death after he had again expressed the wish, in the presence- of all his sons, that he should be buried in Canaan; (j) 50 1-13, the body of Jacob is taken to Canaan. In these 10 pericopes again we can easilv find groups of two each, viz. (a)H-(fe), Joseph s hu miliation (sold, prison); (c) + (d), Joseph becomes a blessing to Egypt and to his family; (g) + (h), blessing of the grandchildren and the sons of Jacob; (i) + (j), Jacob s death and burial; here too the name of God is lacking as in (c) and (/).

      (2) Rejection of the division into sources. Here, too the separation of P from the rest of the text as a dis tinct source is untenable, since in the section from 37 2 46 34, after 37 2, only the following fragments are at tributed to this source, viz. 41 40a; 46 Of (according to some also to ver 27). In the same way P abruptly sets in at 47 5.276; 49 286. Further, 48 3 if knows nothing of Ephraim or Manasseh, of whom P reports nothing so that 50 13 f are the only verses that could naturally connect with the; preceding statements of P. In 47 r> ft P reports entirely in the manner of ordinary narratives, and there is no sign of any systematic arrangement. But the separation between J and E cannot be carried out either. In the first place, when these two sources are actually separated by the critics, innumerable omissions in the story arise, which we cannot at this place catalogue The contradictions which are claimed to exist hire are the products of the critics imagination. It is claimed that according to J it is Judah who plays a prominent role, while according to E it is Reuben; but in 37 21 Reuben is mentioned by J, and the role played by Judah in ch 38 J is anything but creditable. Why cannot both of these brethren have played a prominent role as this was also with Simeon (42 24 30- 43 14) and Benjamin (42 13.20.32 ff. 30. 38; 43 3 if - 44- 45 14) ? Just as little are the Midianites in 37 28 30 E and the Lshrnaelites of 37 25.27.28; 39 1 J mutually exclusive or contradictory, since the Midianites in the Gideon story, too, in Judges 7 f ; 8 24 are called Ishmaelites (ef m the German the name Prayer for traveling musicians whether they are frorn Prague or not). In J it is further 9ln m tnat - Jose P n s master was a private gentleman (39 1 ff), while in E he was the captain of the body guard (40 3f). But in this instance the documentary theory can operate only when it calls in the assistance

      of R in ch 39 1. The fact that in ch 39 1 the name of the nationality is added to that of the office, is explained on the ground of the contrast to the Ishmaelites who sold Joseph. Finally, it is claimed to have been caused by the combination of the different sources in such a way that Benjamin in 43 8.2 .); 44 30.31.33 J is described as a boy, but in 46 21, R or P, as the father of ten children But evidently the author of ch 46 has in view the number 70 (cf ver 27; see Exodous 1 5; Xu 11 1(5.25; Luke 10 1 Exodous 15 2< ; Judges 12 13; and in Genesis 10 above, under 4 2) and for this reason, e.g. in ver 17, he mentions only one granddaughter of Jacob; and for this he mentions all of the descendants of Jacob, even those who were born, later in Egypt, but who already, as it were, had come to Egypt in the loins of their fathers, according to the view of the author. It certainly would be remarkable if no more grandchildren had been born to Jacob in Egypt since Numbers 26 does not mention a single son of any of the sons of Jacob later than those reported in Genesis 46. In 46 27 Joseph s sons, too. who were born in Egypt are included in the list, entirely in harmony with I)t 10 22. For such an arrangement and adjustment of a genealogy cf the 3X14 generations in Matthew 1. From this point of view no conclusions, as far as the documentary theory is concerned, can be drawn from the ten sons of Benjamin.

      IV. The Historical Character. (I) Unfounded attacks upon the historical character. (a) Proofs from general dogmatic principles: In 1. History order to disprove the historical char- of the Pa- acter of the patriarchs, the critics are triarchs: accustomed to operate largely with Genesis 12-50 general dogmatic principles, such as this, that no nation knows who its original founder was. In answer to this it can be said that the history of Israel is and was from the beginning to the end unique, and cannot be judged by the average principles of historiography. But it is then claimed that Abraham s entire life appears to be only one continuous trial of faith, which was centered on the one promise of the true heir, but that this is in reality a psychological impossibility. Over against this claim we can in reply cite con trary facts from the history of several thousands of years; and that, too, in the experience of those very men who were most prominent in religious develop ment, such as Paul and Luther.

      (b) Argument, based on the time that elapsed between these; events and their records: Secondly, crit Irs emphasize the long period of time that elapsed between these events themselves and their first records, esp. if these; records can be accredited to so late a period as the 9th or the 8th cent. BC. In consequence of this, it is claimed that much of the contents of Genesis is myth or fable; and Gunkel even resolves the whole book into a set of unconnected little myths and fables. Over against this claim we can again appeal to the universal feeling in this matter. I do not think that it can be made plausi ble, that in any race fables and myths came in the course of time more and more to be accepted as actual facts, so that perchance we should now be willing to accept as historical truths the stories of the Nibelungenlied or Red Riding Hood. But this, according to the critics, must have been the case in Israel. Prophets accepted the story of t he destruc tion of the two cities in the Jordan valley, as record ed in Genesis 19, as correct (cf Am 4 11; Isaiah 1 9; 3 9; IIos 11 8); also Abraham as a historical person (Isaiah 29 22; 41 8; 51 1 ff; Micah 7 20; Jeremiah 33 26; Ezekiel 33 24; and possibly Mai 2 15); then Isaac (Am 7 9.16; Jeremiah 33 26); also Jacob (IIos 12 3 ff ; Am 9 8; Jeremiah 33 26); also Joseph (Am 5 6.15); and these prophets evidently thought that these events and persons were regarded as historical by the people in general. In the NT we can cite, for Abraham, Matthew 3 9; Gal 3; 4 21 ff; Romans 4 9 ff; 9 7 ff; He 7 1 ff; 11 8ff; Jas 2 21 ff, and esp. the words of Jesus in Matthew 8 11; Luke 16 22 ff; John 8 52 ff; finally in Matthew 22 31 f, the whole argument for the resurrection of the dead is without a foundation if the patriarchs are not historical personages. Over against this, there was no period in the history of




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      Israel in which it can be shown that those stories of Cen were reminded only as myths. If those events were actual occurrences, then those things which the patriarchs experienced were so unique that these experiences were not forgotten for a, long time. Then, too, we can also refer to the strength of the memory of those nations that were not accustomed to have written records of their history.

      (r) Proofs from the Bible itself: Finally, the attempt has boon made to discover in the Bible it self a pro-Mosaic stage in its ideas of man concern ing (lod, which is claimed to contradict the higher development of Divine ideas in the patriarchs, for which purpose the critics appeal to Ezekiel 23 3.Samuel; 20 7 IT- Joshua 24 14 ff. But at .those places it is evident that the idolatry of the people is pictured as apos tasy. And when in Exodous 6 2 ff the name of JAH (Jehovah) is as a, matter of fact represented as something new, it is nevertheless a fact that in these very passages the revelation given is connected with the history of the patriarchs. The same is true of Exodous 3 1 ff. The whole hypothesis that the religion before the days of Moses was polytheistic has not been derived from the Bible, but is interpreted into it, and ends in doing violence to the facts there recorded (of my book, Die Kntiricklung dcr alttcstamcnllichcn Gottcsidee in vorexiHscher Zcit).

      (d) Comparison with the religion of Arabia: Ine critics further compare the pro-Mosaic, religion of Israel with the low grade of religion in Arabia in the f)th cent, after Christ ; but in order to do this, they mu-t isolat e Israel ent ircly, since all t he surrounding nations at the time of the Am Tab had attained -to an altogether different and higher stage of religious development and civilization.

      (2) I nx<i(i4<ictri/ (titi tit/it* at explaining inc. pa- triniTlitil age.- (a) The explanation based on the "high places": In denying the historical character of the account of the patriarchs in (ion, the critics are forced to contrive some scheme in explanation of the existence of those stories, but. in doing this they make some bad breaks. Thus, e.g., they say that the Israelites when they entered Canaan found there the high places of the heathen peoples; and since if they wanted to make use of these in the serv ice of .JAH (Jehovah) they must first declare them legitimate places of worship, this was done by inventing the history of the patriarchs, who long before this are said to have already consecrated all these places to the JAH (Jehovah) worship. Hut how is it possible on this supposition to explain the story of Joseph, which transpired in Egypt? Then, too, the reasons for the origin of the other stories of the patriarchs would 1)0 enshrouded in a remarkable mystery and would l)e of very inferior character. Again, it is nowhere declared in the passages of (Ion that here come into consideration that they are reporting the begin nings of a permanent cult us when they give an account of how (lod appeared to the patriarchs or when t hoy erect ed alt ars in His honor. And, finally, while it is indeed true that the cult us localities of the patriarchs are in part identical with those of later limes (o,f Bethel, Beersheba) and this is from the outset probable, because certain places, such as hills, t roes, water, etc, as it wore, of themselves were suit able for purposes of the cultus yet such an identi fication of earlier and later localities does not cover all cases. And can we imagine that a prophetical method of writing history would have had any occa sion in this manner to declare the worship of calves in Bethel a legitimate service?

      (6) Explanation based on dating back later events to earlier times: But we are further told that the pro-prophetic condition of affairs in Israel was in general dated back into the primitive period, and this was done in such a way that the character of Abraham was regarded as reproducing ideal Israel,

      and the character of Jacob the empirical Israel in the past ; something that certainly is from the out- sot an odd speculation of too much learning! If this explanation is correct., what shall we then do wit h Isaac and Joseph? And why is the whole story of the condition of civilization pictured in Genesis so mtirely different from that of later times? And is Abraham really a perfect ideal? Is he not rather, notwithstanding his mighty faith, a human being of flesh and blood, who can even doubt (15 2f; 17 17); who can make use of sinful moans to realize the promise (ch 16, Hagar); who tells a falsehood, although for the best of purposes, viz., to protect his wife (12 Off), and for this reason must accept the rebuke of the heathen Abimelech (20 9f)? In addition, Abraham is married to his half-sister (20 12), which, according to Deuteronomy 27 22; Leviticus 18 <). 11; 20 17, is forbidden with the penalty of death for the transgressor. In the same way Jacob, according to Genesis 29 f, has two sisters as wives, which is also declared by Leviticus 18 IS to be a crime.

      (r) The patriarchs as eponymous heroes: In the third place, it is said that the people have in the per sons of the patriarchs made for themselves eponymous heroes. But why did they make so many at one t ime? In addition, Abraham cannot possibly be regarded as such a hero as Jacob or Israel is, and in excep tional cases also Isaac and Joseph (Am 7 9.10; 5 t; lf>) It is not correct to place genealogies like those in Genesis 10 1 ff ; 25 1 iT.i:J if on a level with the stories concerning the patriarchs. In the latter case we are dealing with individualities of pronounced character, who in the experiences of their lives repre sent great fundamental principles and laws in the kingdom of God Abraham, 1 he principle of t he grace of God, to which faith on the part of man is the counterpart ; Jacob, the principle of Divine election; Joseph, that of the providential guidance of life; while Isaac, it is true, when he becomes prominent in the history, evinces no independent character, but merely follows in the footsteps of Abraham (of 26 1 ff.3 ff. 15. IS. 24 ff), but is in this very imita tive life pictured in an excellent way.

      (d) Different explanations combined: If we com bine two or more of those different and unsatis factory attempts at an explanation of the history of the patriarchs, we must become all the more dis trustful, because the outcome of this combination is such an inharmonious scheme.

      (3) I ositirc rcdsons for the historical character of (Icnesis.Thc individuality of the patriarchs as well as their significance in the entire development of the history of the kingdom of God, and their different missions individually; further, the truth ful portraiture of their method of living, which had not yet reached the stage of permanent settlement ; and, finally, the fact that the prophets, the NT and above all Jesus Himself regard their historical char acter as something self-evident (see [Ib] above), make the conviction a certainty, that we must insist upon their being historical personages; esp., too, because the attacks on this view (see [1] above), as also the efforts to explain these narratives on other grounds (see [2] above), must be pronounced to be failures. To this we must add the following: If Moses were the founder of the religion of Israel, it would scarcely have been possible that a theory would have been invented and have found accept ance that robs Moses of this honor by the invention of the story of the pat riarchs. Rather the opposite would be the case. Besides, this older revelation of God is absolutely necessary in order to make Moses work and success intelligible and possible. For he himself expressly declares that his work is based on the promises of God given to the fathers. Through this connection with the older revelation it was possible for Moses to win the attention and the con-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      fidence of the people (cf Exodous 2 24; 3 6.13 ff; 4 f>; 6 3.8; 15 2; 32 13 f; 33 1; cf also my book, Die Entwicklung dcr altlestamentlichen Gottesidee in vorexilischcr Zcit, 117ff; and Strack, (lettexix, 93 ff). Individuality of patriarchs: In so far as the his tory of the patriarchs contains miracles, they are in perfect harmony with the entire character of sacred history (cf EXODUS, III, 2); and as far as the num ber of miracles is concerned, there are in fact fewer reported in the days of the patriarchs than in the times of Moses. On the view that the history of the patriarchs, which is earlier than the period of Moses, was an invention and not history, the opposite con dition of affairs could be expected. Leaving out of consideration the unsatisfactory instances cited under V, 2, below, there is to be found also in the Book of Genesis absolutely no reference to indicate events of a later period, which would throw a doubt on the historical character of what is here reported. In every direction (e.g. in connection with the theophanies and the cult us worship), tin-re is a noticeable progress to be seen in going from Genesis to Exodous, a fact which again is an important argument for the historical reliability of the contents of both books. Finally, we add the following. Chronicles 14 (the Chedorlaomer and the Melchizedek episodes) has through recent archaeological researches been bril liantly confirmed as far as the names are concerned, as also in reference to the political conditions of the times, the general historical situation and the chronology. In the same way the religious condi tions of Egypt, as described in Genesis 12, and in the entire history of Joseph, are so faithfully pictured that it is absolutely impossible to regard these ac counts as the work of imagination. These accounts must be the outcome, on the part of the author, of a personal knowledge of these things and conditions, as they are absolutely correct, even to the details of the coloring.

      (1) Prinninrnri <>f tlr rrli </iii* rlt mrnt.-Il, tin 1 primi tive history as recorded in the opening chapters of <;en

      we must yet emphasize, more than is done o _. . elsewhere, that the chief interest for the

      i. Primitive Christian is found in the religious and History of moral teachings of this account; and that Q. en 1_11 these teachings remain unshaken, even when chronological, historical, archaeo logical, physical, geographical or philologi cal sciences would tempt us to reach negative conclusions. It is a wise thing, from the outset, not to be too timid in this direction, and to concede considerable liberty in this matter, when we remember that it is not. the purpose of the Bible to give ns scientific knowledge in scientific forms, but to furnish us with religious and ethical thoughts in a language which a childlike, mind, that is open to Divine; things, can understand.

      (2) Currfulni xft x ri i/tinln dicer ye nt results of scientific research. On the other hand, it is right over against the so-called "results" of these different sciences to he. very critical and skeptical, since in very many cases science retracts today what with a flourish of trumpets it, declared yesterday to bo a "sure" result of investi gations; e.g. as far as the chronology is concerned, the natural and the historical sciences often base their com putations on purely arbitrary figures, or on those which are constructed entirely upon conclusions of analogy, and are far from conclusive, if perchance the history of the earth or of mankind has not at all times developed at the same pace, i.e. has moved upward and downward, as e.g. a child in its earlier years will always learn more rapidly than at any later period of its life.

      (3) Frequent confirmations of the Bible by science. But finally the Holy Scriptures, the statements of which at this period arc often regarded slightingly by the theologians, are regarded much more highly by men of science. This is done, e.g., by such scien tists as Iteinke and Kings. east von Baer, who declare that Moses, because of his story of the creation, was a man of unsurpassed and unsurpassable scientific thought; or when many geological facts point to such an event as the Deluge in the history of the earth. The history of languages, as a whole and in its details, also furnishes many proofs for the cor rectness of Genesis 10, and that chapter has farther

      been confirmed in a most surprising manner by many other discoveries (cf the existence of Babel at a period earlier than Nineveh, and the colonizing of Assur by Babel). Then facts like the following can be explained only on the presupposition that the reports in Genesis are correct, as when a Dutchman in the 17th cent, built an ark after the measure ments given in Genesis and found the vessel in every particular adapted to its purposes; and when today we again hear specialist s who declare t hat t he modern ocean sailing vessel is being more and more con structed according to the relative proportions of the ark.

      (4) The Kii/Hriorily of the Bible over henl-lien i/iij- tholoyivs. Finally, the similarity of the Biblical and the Babylonian accounts of the creation and the Deluge, as these have been discovered by learned research (and we confine ourselves to these two most, im portant reports) although this similarity has been misinterpreted and declared to be hostile to the historical reliability and the originality of Genesis 1 and 6-9 does not prove what, critics claim that it does. Even if we acknowledge that the contents of these stories were extant in Babylon long before the days of Moses, and that, these facts have been drawn from this source by Israel, there yet can be no question that the value of these accounts, the fact that they are saturated with a monotheistic and ethical spirit, is found only in Israel and has been breathed into them only by Israel. For the inner value of a story does not depend upon its antiquity, but upon its spirit. But even this con ception of the matter, which is shared by most theologians, cannot satisfy us. When we remem ber how Babylonian mythology is honeycombed by the grossest superstition and heathenism, and that our ethical feelings are often offended by it in the most terrible manner, it is really not possible to see how such a system could have had any attraction for Israel after the Spirit, and how a man who thought as a prophet could have taken over such st ories. If Israel has been a pat hfinder in t he sphere of religion, as is acknowledged on all hands, why do the critics always talk of their borrowing from others? And then, since similar stories are found also among other nations, and as the natural sciences are anything but a unit in hostility to the: Biblical narra tives, all these factors can find a satisfactory explana tion only on the supposition that there existed an original or primitive revelation, and that in Israel this revelation was transmitted in its greater purity, while among the other nations it was emptied of its contents or was perverted. In this way the uni versality of these stories can be explained, as also the inferiority in character of similar stories among the other nations.

      The particularly close connection that exists between the Babylonian and the Biblical versions of these stories is in perfect harmony with the fact that it was from Babylon that the dispersion of mankind set in. The purity of the Biblical tradition is further attested by the fact that it reports the actual his tory of all mankind (see under I, 2), while the my thologies of other nations are restricted nationally and locally, i.e. the beginnings of the history of the individual nations and the beginnings of the history of mankind are identical, and the earliest history is always reported as taking place in the native land of the people reporting it. The fact that in earlier times there prevailed in Babylon too a purer knowl edge of God, which, however, steadily degenerated, is proved by many data, and esp. by the recently discovered fragment of a Deluge story, according to which the God who destroyed the world by the Flood and the God who delivered the one family is the same God, which is in perfect agreement, with the Bible, but is in contradiction to the later Babylonian




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      story. That in earlier times a purer conception of God prevailed, seems to he confirmed also by the experiences of the missionaries. Evolutionism, i.e. the development of a higher conception of God out of a lower, is nothing hut an unproved theory, which at every step is contrary to actual facts. Cf also my hook, Die Entiricldnnij der d ottcsidce in vorexilischer Zcit, 129 IT, and Schmidt, Die babylonische Religion: d ctlaiikctt iiber Hire Enlwicklung, a dissertation in which the fact that religion naturally degenerates is proved also as far as the Giveks, the Egyptians, the East Indians and the Chinese are concerned.

      V. Origin and Authorship of Genesis. That the Book of (Jen stands in some kind of literary

      connection with the succeeding hooks 1. Connec- of the Pent is generally acknowledged. tion with But if this is the case, then the qucs- Mosaic tion as to the origin and the time of the

      Times composition of this whole hody of

      hooks can be decided only if we take them all into consideration. In this article* we have only to consider those facts which are found in (Jen for the solution of this problem. It is self- evident that the conclusion we have reached with reference to the literary unity of the book is of great importance for this question (see under II and III above). The historical character of the hook, as demonstrated under IV above, also speaks em phatically for this claim that the literary composi tion of the hook must have taken place when the memory of these events was still trustworthy, and the impression and experiences were still fresh and had not yet faded. Such individualistic and vivid pictures of historical personages as are reported by ( Jen, such a faithful adherence to the accounts of the civilization in the different countries and districts and at different times, such detailed accounts of foreign customs, conditions and historical events, could scarcely have been possible, if the Mosaic age with its powerful new impressions, the period of the Judges, with its characteristic apostasy, or even the division of Israel into two kingdoms, with its dire effects on (he external union of the people, had all passed by before these accounts were actually written down. On the other hand, the highly de veloped prophetic conception of these events, and the skilful plan of the hook demand that the author must have been a religious and ethical personality of the first rank. And as, finally, it is scarcely cred ible that Moses would have failed to provide for a systematic report of the great past of the people, for which account, before this and as long as only family histories were involved, there was no need felt, and as the subsequent books of the Pent, which are acknowledged in a literary way to he connected with (Jen, in many of their parts expressly declare that Moses was their author (cf Exoms, IV), the Mosaic authorship of this book is as good as proved. This is not to deny that older sources and docu ments were used in the composition of the book, such as perhaps the genealogical tables or the events recorded in (Jen 14, possibly, too, some referring to the history of the times before the Deluge and before Abraham. This is probable; but as all the parts of the book have* been worked together into a literary unity (see under II and III above), and as such sources are not expressly mentioned, it is a hopeless task to try to describe these different sources in detail or even to separate them as inde pendent documents, after the manner refuted under II and III above, as a theory and in its particulars. And for the age of (Jen, we can refer to the fact that the personal pronoun here is still used for both genders, masculine and feminine, which is true also of the word ntfar ("youth"), a peculiarity which is shared also by the other books of the Pent almost throughout.

      (1) Possibility of later additions. In itself it would be possible t hat from time to time some ex planatory and interpreting additions

      2. Exami- could have been made to the original nation of text, in case we find indications of a Counter- later period in some statements of the Arguments hook. But that in this case these addi tions could not have been made by any unauthorized persons, but only officially, should, in the case of a hook like Genesis, be regarded as self-evident. But in our times this fact must be emphasized all the more, as in our days the most radical ideas obtain in reference to the way in which sacred books were used in former times. And then it must be said that we cannot prove as an absolute certainty that there is a single passage in Genesis that originated in the post-Mosaic period.

      (2) Rejection of the "prophecy-after-the-event" idea. It is self-evident also that the fulfilment of a prophecy is not an evidence of a prophecy after the event" (valicinium post evcntinn), altogether independently of the fact that in this case (Jen 12 1-3, which is still in process of fulfilment, could not have been written down even today (cf on this matter, perhaps, Noah s prophecy [9 25 ff]; or the prediction of the career of Esau [25 23; 27 40]; or of Ishmael [16 10 ff; 21 IS]; or Jacob s blessing [Genesis 49]). The last -mentioned case cannot in any way be interpreted as the product of a later time; cf the curse of Levi in vs 5-8 as compared with the honor bestowed on this t rihe already in the Mosaic period (Exodous 32 20-29; Deuteronomy 33 8-11), and in the time of the Judges (Judges 17 7-13; 1 Samuel 2 27 f). Zehulun, too, according to 49 13 is regarded as being settled on the coast, which is not in agree ment with historical reality (cf .Joshua 19 10-10.27). In the same way the curse on Simeon in 49 5-7, which declared that his tribe should be distributed among Israel, was not fulfilled in the time when the people entered Canaan (cf Joshua 19 1 and 2 Chronicles 34 0). In 49 10 Shiloh" cannot refer to the coming of the tabernacle to Shiloh (cf Joshua 18 1); for Shiloh is, on the 1 other hand, to be interpreted personally and Messianically. As long as Shiloh was of any im portance (cf 1 Samuel 1 ff), Judah was not in the pos session of (he scepter; but when this scepter did come into the control of Judah, Shiloh had long since ceased to be of any significance (cf my book, Die messianische Erwartung der vorexilischen Prophe- ten, 300 f).

      (3) Special passages alleged to indicate a later date ((Jen 12 0; 13 7; 22 2; 36 31 ff; 13 IS; 23 2; 14 14). In Genesis 12 0; 13 7, it is claimed that it is presupposed that at the time of the author there were no longer any Canaanitcs in the country, so that these; verses belong to a mue;h later period than that of Moses. But on this supposition these verse -s woulel he altogether superfluous and therefore unintelligible adelitions. For that in the time of Abraham the Canaanites had not yet been expelled by Israel, was a self-evident matter for every Israel ite. As a matter of fae-t, the statements in both verses can easily be inte>rpreteel. Abraham leaves his native country to ge> into a strange land. When he comes to Canaan, he finds it inhabited by the Canaanitcs (cf 10 0.15; 9 25 ff). This could have made his faith to fail him. Goel, accordingly, repeats His promise at this very moment and does so with greater exactness (cf ver 7 with ver l),and Abraham shows that God can trust his faith (vs 7 f). The question whether the Canaanites no longer existed at the time the book was written, has nothing at all to do with the meaning of these verses. The same is true of 13 7, on account of the presence of the Canaanites and of the Perizzites, which latter tribe had probably come in the meanwhile and is not yet mentioneei in Genesis 10, but is mentioned in




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      16 20, and which makes the separation of Abraham and Lot only all the more necessary.

      That in Genesis 22 2 the land of Moriah is mentioned is claimed by the critics to be a proof that this pas sage was written after the times of David and even of Solomon, because according to 2 Chronicles 3 1 the temple stood on Matthew. Moriah. But as in this latter passage one particular mountain is called Moriah, but in Abraham s time a whole country was so called, it is scarcely possible that Genesis 22 2 could have been written at so late a period.

      Usually, too, the list of 8 Edomite kings, who ruled before there was a king of Israel, according to 36 31 ff, is cited as a proof that this part was written only after the establishment of the kingdom in Israel, although the time down to the age of Saul would be entirely too long for only eight kings, as already in Ihc Mosaic period there were kings in Edom (Numbers 20 14). Then, too, we find in the days of Solomon a hereditary kingdom in Edom (1 Kings 11 14), while in Genesis 36 31 ff we have to deal with an elective kingdom. Also it would be impossible to understand why this list of kings is carried down only so far and no farther, namely down to the time when there were kings in Israel. This statement can properly be interpreted only in the light of 17 6. 1C), where the promise is given to Abraham that kings should be found among his descendants Of also 17 20 with 25 1(5); and in the light of ch 14, where Abraham is explicitly brought into connec tion with kings in a number of ways (with the four kings of the East, whom lie conquers; with the five kings of the Jordan valley, whom he assists; with the King s Vale [ver 17], which prepared the way for the Melchizedek episode; and with this Priest- King himself, who blesses him and to whom he gives tithes [vs 18 ff]; with the king of Sodom, whom he rebukes [vs 21 ff]). Accordingly, the statement in 36 31 is not merely a dry historical notice, but is a reference to the blessing of God, which is realized in Israel at a much later time than in the kindred tribe of Esau, and which puts the faith of Israel to a new lest. As the death of the last Edomite king is not mentioned (cf 36 39 in contrast to the pre ceding passage and to 1 Chronicles 1 50 f), but as de tailed family data are given, we are doubtless dealing here with living contemporaries of Moses, in whose time already the Edomites possessed a kingdom (Numbers 20 14; Judges 11 17), just as this was the case with Amalek (Numbers 24 7), with Moab (21 26; 22 4) and Midian (Numbers 31 8). And why would a later writer have mentioned neither Selah (Petra), so important in later times (cf Isaiah 16 1; Judges 1 3(3; 2 Kings

      14 7), nor Ezion-Geber (1 Kings 9 2(5; 2 Chronicles 8 17 f), among the places given in Genesis 36 40 ff ? In Moses time, however, the last-mentioned place was only prairie (Numbers 33 35 f).

      Just as little is it an argument against the Mosaic- times that Hebron is mentioned in Genesis 13 IS; 23 2, which city, according to Joshua 14 15; 15 13, is called Kiriath-arba, a name which Genesis also is acquainted with (cf 23 2), and which in its signifi cation of "city of Arba" points to an originally proper name. Hebron is the older name, which was resumed at a later period, after it had in the mean while been supplanted by the Canaanitic name, just as the name of Salem, which occurs already in the Am Tab, for a period of time gave way to the name of Jebus, but was afterward resumed. That Hebron was an old city and that it existed at a period earlier than the Arba mentioned in Joshua 14 15;

      15 13, and from whom its later name was derived, can be concluded from Numbers 13 22.

      Further, the mention of Dan in 14 14 does not necessarily favor the view that this chapter did not originate until after Joshua 19 47. Judges 18 29, where Leshem or Laish is changed into Dan (2 Samuel

      24 6; cf vs 2 and 15), does make the existence of another Dan probable. Since in Genesis 14 so many ancient names are mentioned, and as the author is most fully informed as to the conditions of the political complexion of the old nations of that time (vs 5-7), it would be incomprehensible if he should not have made use of the ancient names Laish and Leshem. However, if this Dan was really meant, we should at most have to deal with a revision, such as that pointed out above. Some other less important arguments against the origin of Genesis from the Mosaic times we can here ignore. The most important argument for the Mosaic origin of the book, in addition to those mentioned under 1, will now be discussed.

      VI. Significance. In the history of the creation the most important feature for us is the fact that

      the world was create* 1 out of nothing 1. Founda- (cfl 1 and the word6rd ), which guar- tion for the antees the absoluteness of God and His Whole of perfect control of the entire material Revelation world; further, the creation of man, as

      the crown of all creation, for which all things previously created prepare, and who is to rule over them, but who most important of all is created after the image of God (1 26 f), and whose body has been created by the hand of God and his soul breathed into him by God (2 7). _ On this fact, too, in the end, is founded the possibility of man s redemption even after the Fall (5 1.3; cf Col 39; Eph 4 24), as also the possibility of the incarnation of Jesus Christ, who also is the image of God (Col 1 15; 2 Corinthians 4 4). Then, too, another all-important factor for us is the unity of the human race, for thereby is made possible and can be understood the fact that all men have become subject to sin and all can be the recipients of grace 1 (Romans 5 12 ff; 1 Corinthians 15 22f.45f). Also the need of redemption is brought out strongly in the Book of Genesis. Cf, in connection with the Fall, the pains that shall attend the birth of a child, the cursing of the land, death (3 15ff), which finds its first victim in Abel, and the monotonous and emphatic repetition of the formula, "and he died," in Genesis 5, as character izing the dismal fate of mankind, and which finds its expression in the rapid decrease of the length of life in the genealogies and in the ages of the pa triarchs (5 1 ff; 11 1 Off; 25 7; 35 28; 47 28; 50 2(5; Psalm 90 10), and in the irresistible and in creasing power of death. By the side of this, sin at once assumes its mosl horrible form (Genesis 3, doubt, pride, fear, boldness of Eve and Adam), and is propagated and increases; cf the murder and the despair of Cain (Genesis 4 1 ff), which is still surpassed by the defiant blasphemy of Lamech (4 23 f); and in the same way, death, which is coining more and more rapidly (see above), is a proof for this, that sin is being more and more intimately inter woven with the human race. Cf, further, the cor ruption of the whole earth, which brings with it as a consequence the judgment of the; Deluge (6 5 ff), after the period of grace extending over 120 years had fruitlessly passed by; the lack of reverence on the part of Ham (9 22); the arrogance in connec tion with the building of the tower of Babel (11 1 ff) ; the Sodomitic sin in 18 1(5 19 15; the daughters of Lot (19 30 ff). Still worse is it, that the elect also are not without blame. On Abraham, see IV, 1, 2b; then concerning Noah (9 21) and Lot s fearful drunkenness (19 32 ff) ; Isaac s and Rebekah s preference for Esau or Jacob (25 28) ; Jacob s de ceptions of various kinds, his preference for Joseph (37 3); the horrible deeds of Simeon and Levi (34

      25 ff; 49 off); Reuben s incest (35 22; 49 3 f); the cruelty of the brethren of Joseph toward him and his father (ch 37); finally, Joseph s pride and his reporting his brethren (37 2.5 ff). In short,

      Genesis Geology of Philestina, Canaan-Land



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      wherever we look, we see in Genesis already a proof for the truth of Romans 3 23, "All have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God."

      By the side of this need of salvation there is to be found also the longing for salvation; of the name of Noah (5 2!)), ami the word of bless- 2. Prepara- ing from the lips of Jacob (49 isi; tion for and, further, the fact that Abraham

      Redemption reaches out after the promised heir in Genesis 15-18, and his desire for the possession of the land (12-14; 23; 28 20 ff; 33 19 f); and esp. from 47 27 on. And in harmony with this need and this longing for redemption we find above all other things the saving and the prom ising grace of God. He does not cause the bodily death to follow immediately upon the Fall in Genesis 3 (although the beginning of the spiritual death sets in at once with the separation from God); He pro vides for mankind by Himself making garments for them put of skins (3 21); even the expulsion from Paradise is not merely a punishment; God fears that man might live forever if he should eat from the tree of life (3 22 ff). He sets enmity between the human race and the seed of the serpent, so that at least, the possibility of a moral contest yet exists; He strengthens the good in Cain (4 7); He removes the pious Enoch (5 24); He saves Noah and his family and makes a covenant with him (8 21 ff); lie gives His promise to Abraham (12 1-3) and makes a covenant with him (chapters 15, 17); lie de livers Lot (19 K5 ff); He is willing even to preserve Sodom at Abraham s prayer, if there are as many aslO just men in the city (18 32); He bestows a bless ing on Ishmael also (16 10 iT; 17 20; 21 13 ff), and permits Isaac to bless Esau (27 39 ff); but above all He is with Isaac, Jacob and Joseph. It is indeed true that the thought runs through Genesis that not all men are capable of receiving His grace, and that not all an; drawn to the Father. Cain s sacrifice is not acceptable before God, as was Abel s; the Canutes with their advance in civilization (4 17 ff), to whom Lamech also belonged, are different fromSeth (4 2*1; 6 1 ff), who continues the line of the elect. Finally, the godly, too, permit themselves to be deceived (6 1 if), and Noah stands alone in his piety. After that Ham is cursed in his youngest son, Canaan (9 22; cf 10 6); but Shorn is blessed to such a degree that his blessing is to extend to Japheth also; cf, further, the elimination from sacred history of Lot (19 29ff); ( of Ishmael (25 12 ff), and of Esau (36 1 ff); of Sodom and Gomorrah (eh 19); then the choice of Jacob in preference to Esau (25 19 37 1) ; the preference of Ephraim over Manasseh (48 17 ff); the transmission of the Messianic promises to Judah (49 10; cf my book, Messianische Erwartung, 3(50 f), HO that at the close of Genesis we find already the hope of a personal Messiah expressed, in whom also the word (3 15) that was originally spoken to all mankind is to be entirely fulfilled, and in whom also the blessing given to Abraham shall find its significance and realization for the benefit of all mankind (12 3, and see above, I, 2 and 3). But in the history of Abraham this fact also becomes clear, that in the end this was all grace on the part of God, and faith on the part of man; and because both grace and faith are in Genesis placed and empha sized at the very beginning of the history of man kind, and before the giving of the law (Exodous 19 ff); then this grace and faith cannot be abrogated through the latter or made ineffective. Not by works but by faith is man saved (cf Gal 3 2; Romans 4; He 11 8ff; Jas 2 21 ff). But the guidance of individuals and of His people by God, the ways which Re took with His elect, become clear and in telligible ultimately in the history of Joseph; and all and everything must in the end serve the good of those who are His.

      LITERATUReast Against the separation into documents wo mention, of older works: Havernick, Specielle Ein- le.ituna in den Pent; Hengstenberg, Beitrage zur Einleitung, II, III; Keil, Einleitung in das AT, and his Comm. on Genesis; Ewald, Die Komposition tier Genesis. Of later works: Orr, PnihlKin of the OT ; Eerdmans, Die Komposition der (Irn; Moller, Wider denBann der Quellenscheidunff. Against (lie evolutionary theory: Orr, Problem of the OT; Wiener EPC and OP; Green, Unity of Book of Genesis; Moller, Die Kntn icklungderalttestnmentliche.n Gottenideeinvorexilischer Zeit (here also further lit.). On modern archaeological researches: Orr, Problem of the OT; Jeremias, Das A T im Lichte dcs alien Orients; Urquhart, Die neueren Entdeck- unuen mid die Bibel (to be used with caution; the work is reliable in the facts but not careful in its conclusions and in its account of OT criticism). Further, cf the histories of Israel by Kohler, Konig, Kittel, Oettli, Klostermann, stade, Wellhausen: the Commentaries on Genesis by Keil, Delitzsch, Dillmann, Lange, Straek, Gunkel Holzinger; the Introductions to the OT by Kuenen, struck. Baudissin, Kiinig, Oornill, Driver;" the Biblical Theologies by Marti, Smend, Budde, Schulz, Oehler. Finally compare Sievers, Metrische titudien, II: "Die hebraische Genesis."


      GENNAEUS, ge-ne us, GENNEUS, ge-ne us (TtvvaXot, Gennaios): Father of Apollonius, one of the Syrian generals who troubled the Jews while Lysias was governor for Antiochus Eupator (2 Mace 12 2). The description is added to distin guish the Apollonius here mentioned from several others of the same name. See APOLLO.MPS. There is no need with Luther to take the name simply as an adj. "des edlen Apollonius." The name occurs elsewhere as a proper name.

      GENNESARET, go-nos a-ri-t, LAKE OF. See GALILKK, SKA OF.

      GENNESARET, LAND OF, ge-nes a-ret ft yf,

      revvT]o-ape T, he </f Gennesaret) : The first syllable of t he

      name Gennesaret is evidently the Hebrews

      1. The (/an, "garden"; while the second may Name be a proper name. Possibly, however,

      the name may represent the Hebrews (/an ne snrim, "princely gardens." It is applied to a district on the X.,V. shore of the Sea of Galilee (Alt 14 31; Mark 6 .">:!), now known as d-Ghuweir, "little Ghor." It curves round from d-.Mcjdd in the south, to *Ain ct-Tlneh, or Khan Minydi, in the X., a distance of over 3 miles, with an average breadth from the sea to the foot of the mountains of about a mile. The soil is deep, rich loam, of amazing fertility. In the south it is watered by the

      stream from ,Yady d-lhundm, the

      2. Water gorge that opens to the ,V. of d-Mcjdd.

      The middle portion is supplied from Ain d-Madawwcrah, a copious fountain near the western edge of the plain, round which a wall has been built, to raise the level of the water; and from the perennial stream, }Vady cr-Rubadlydi, which drives a mill before starting on its work of irrigat ion. Fart her X ., Wudy d-* A mild brings down much water in_ the rainy season. The water from Micah/i ct- Tabgha was brought round the promontory at *Ain et-Tmch by a conduit cut in the rock. It was used to drive certain mills, and also to refresh the neighboring land. This seems to be the fountain called "Capharnaum" by Jos (BJ, III, x, 8). This writer extols the productiveness of the plain. He says the "soil is so fruitful that all sorts of trees can grow upon it." The walnut, the palm, the olive

      and the fig, which usually require

      3. Fertility diverse conditions, flourish together

      here. "One may call this place the ambition of nature; .... it is a happy contention of the seasons, as if each of them claimed this country; for it not only nourishes different sorts of autumnal fruit beyond men s expectation, but preserves them a great while." He says that it supplies grapes and figs through ten months of the year, and other fruits as they ripen together through out the year (ib). The fruits of Gennesaret had




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Genesis Geology of Philestina, Canaan-Land

      such high repute among the rabbis that they were not allowed in Jerus at the time of the feasts, lest any might be tempted to come merely for their en joyment (Neubauer, Geog. du Talm, 45 f).

      Centuries of neglect made a sad change in the plain. It was largely overgrown with thorn-bushes, and it yielded one of the finest crops of thistles in the country. Cultivation was confined to the southwest part; and the rest furnished grazing ground for a tribe of nomads. Recently the German Catholics made extensive purchases, including the village of el-Mejdel. Considerable portions have also passed into the hands of Jews. The land is almost entirely cleared, and it rewards the toil of the husbandman with all its ancient generosity. west EWING

      GENTILES, jen tilz pIS, goy, pi. DT13, goyim; 9vos, ethnos, "people," "nation"): Goy (or Goi) is rendered "Gentiles" in AV in some 30 passages, but much more frequently "heathen," and oftener still, "nation," which latter is the usual rendering in RV, but it is commonly used for a non-Israelitish people, and thus corresponds to the meaning of "Gentiles." It occurs, however, in passages refer ring to the Israelites, as in Genesis 12 2; Deuteronomy 32 28; Joshua 3 17; 4 1; 10 13; 2 Samuel 7 23; Isaiah 1 4; Zeph 2 9, but the word *am (C7) is the term commonly used for the people of God. In the NT ethnos is the word corresponding to goy in the OT and is rendered "Gentiles" bybothVSS, while laos (Xa6) is the word which corresponds to am. AV also renders "EX- XTJI-CJ, Hellenes, "Gentiles" in six passages (John 7 35; Romans 2 9.10; 3 9; 1 Corinthians 10 32; 12 13), but RV renders "Greeks."

      The Gentiles were far less sharply differentiated from the Israelites in OT than in NT times. l nder OT regulations they were simply non-Israelites, not from the stock of Abraham, but they were not hated or despised for that reason, and were to be treated almost on a plane of equality, except certain tribes in Canaan with regard to whom there were special regulations of non-intercourse. The Genesis tile stranger enjoyed the hospitality of the Israelite who was commanded to love him (Deuteronomy 10 19), to sympathize with him, "For ye know the heart of the stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt" (Exodous 23 9 AV). The Kenites were treated almost as brethren, esp. the children of Rechab (Judges 1 16; 5 24; Jeremiah 35). Uriah the Hittite was a trusted warrior of David (2 Samuel 11); Ittai the Git- tite was captain of David s guard (18 2); Araunah the Jebusite was a respected resident of Jerus. The Gentiles had the right of asylum in the cities of refuge, the same as the Israelites (Numbers 35 15). They might even possess Israelitish slaves (Leviticus 25 47), and a gentile servant must not be defrauded of his wage (Deuteronomy 24 15). They could inherit, in Israel even as late as the exile (Ezekiel 47 22.23). They were allowed to offer sacrifices in the temple at Jerus, as is distinctly affirmed by Jos (BJ , II, xvii, 2-4; Ant, XI, viii, 5; XIII, viii, 2; XVI, ii, 1; XVIII, v, 3; CAp, II, 5), and it is implied in the Levitical law (Leviticus 22 25). Prayers and sacrifices were to be offered for gentile rulers (Jeremiah 29 7; Bar 1 10.11; Ezra 6 10; 1 Mace 7 33; Jos, BJ, II, x, 4). Gifts might be received from them (2 Mace 5 16; Jos, Ant, XIII, iii, 4; XVI, vi, 4; BJ, V, xiii, 6; CAp, II, 5). But as we ap proach the Christian era the attitude of the Jews toward the Gentiles changes, until we find, in NT times, the most extreme aversion, scorn and hatred. They were regarded as unclean, with whom it was unlawful to have any friendly intercourse. They were the enemies of God and His people, to whom the knowledge of God was denied unless they became proselytes, and even then they could not, as in

      ancient times, be admitted to full fellowship. Jews were forbidden to counsel them, and if they asked about Divine things they were to be cursed. All children born of mixed marriages were bastards. That is what caused the Jews to be so hated by Greeks and Romans, as we have abundant evidence in the writings of Cicero, Seneca and Tacitus. Something of this is reflected in the NT (John 18 28; Acts 10 28; 11 3).

      If we inquire what the reason of this change was we shall find it in the conditions of the exiled Jews, who suffered the bitterest treatment at the hands of their gentile captors and who, after their return and establishment in Judaea, were in constant con flict with neighboring tribes and esp. with the Greek rulers of Syria. The fierce persecution of Antiochus IV, who attempted to blot out their religion and Hellenize the Jews, and the desperate struggle for independence, created in them a burning patriotism and zeal for their faith which culminated in the rigid exclusiveness we see in later times. II . POUTER



      GENTLENESS, jen t 1-nes (n;y , *anah; eimCicua, epieikeia, ,P 1 1 " r< TT l s > chrestotes) : In 2 Samuel 22 36 dnah, "to bend low," "to condescend," is translated d "gentleness," "Thy gentleness hath made me great," RVm "or condescension"; so also Psalm 18 35, where the word is *anwah, "humility," "gentleness," or "condescension." In the NT epieikeia ("fair ness," "moderation," in Acts 24 4 translated d "clemency") is in 2 Corinthians 10 1 translated 1 "gentleness," "the meekness and gentleness of Christ" (2 Mace 2 22 "favour," RV "forbearance"); chrestotes, "kindness," "use fulness," is translated d "gentleness" in Gal 5 22 AV, RV "kindness"; chrestos is the word translated d "kind" (to the unthankful and evil, Luke 6 35), and chrestotes seems to carry in it a similar idea of active Jciiiilness.

      Gentle occurs in the OT only in RV of Jeremiah 11 19, "I was like a gentle lamb" (kebhes). In the NT it is the translated of epios, "mild," "gentle" (1 Thessalonians 2 7; 2 Timothy 2 24), and of epiciMs, "fitting," "proper," etc (1 Timothy 3 3 RV; Tit 3 2; Jas 3 17; 1 Pet 2 18); also, with art., Phil 4 5 (AV "moderation," RV "forbearance"). In 2 Mace 15 12 Onias is said (AV) to be "gentle [prdos] in condition," RV "in manner." west L. WALKER

      GENUBATH, ge-nu bath (ra:a, g nubhath, "theft"): Son of Hadad, the fugitive Edomite prince, born and brought up at the court of Egypt, windier Hadad had fled when David conquered Edom (1 Kings 11 20). His mother was a sister of Tahpenes, queen of the Pharaoh who ruled Egypt at that time, and who belonged to the notoriously weak and uninfluential 21st dynasty.


      GEOLOGY, je-ol o-ji, OF PALESTINE: The

      geology of Philestina, Canaan-Land cannot be discussed intelligently without taking into consideration the surrounding regions. The accompanying map shows, with con siderable freedom, the distribution of the super ficial strata of Syria, Philestina, Canaan-Land and Sinai, with parts of Asia Minor, Arabia and Egypt. (Data for this map were obtained from the "Geological Map of Egypt" [1:1,000,000] and from the "Carte geologi- que Internationale de 1 Europe" [1:1,500,000].) It will be noted that Crystalline, or Archaean, rocks (A) occupy extensive areas in Asia Minor, and that they arc found in the south in Sinai, Western Arabia, and Eastern and Southern Egypt. Relatively

      Geology of Philestina, Canaan-Land Gerasa



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      small areas of Palcozenc rocks (P) adjoin the Crys talline rocks in Sinai anel Arabia anel east of Caesarea in Asia Minor. A notable area of Paleozoic occurs southKings. e>f the Dead Sevi. This is also adjacent to Crystalline rocks, which could not be indicateel on the - map on aceemnt of their slight superficial ex- tent. Bordering either the Crystalline or the Pale e)ze>ic rocks in Egypt, Sinai anel Arabia are large areas of Nubian Sandstone (N). The Numbers bian Sanelstone in turn is generally bounded by Upper Cretaceems lime stone (C), and the last by Tertiary deposits (T). The Quaternary, or Recent, ele-posits (II) and also the Eruptive 1 re>e-ks (E) sus tain ne> constant re-latiems te> any particular ones of the 1 other feirmat iems. The Quaternary follows the great rive rs and the 1 se-ae-eiasts. The Eruptive roe-ks usually overlie 1 the others. _ They oce-upy ex tensive areas in Asia Minor, Syria anel Arabia.

      If we 1 e-emcentrate emr attention upon the Crys talline 1 , Cretaceous, anel Tertiary, which are the most e-xtensive format ie>ns, we find that the Crys talline rocks arc abundant in the south and in the north, that the Cretaceous are most wide-ly spread in Philestina, Canaan-Land

      This name was given by Russegger, who in the middle of the 19th cent, followed and studied this

      formation from the Sudan to Syria. 4. Nubian Wherever the Nubian Sandstone is Sandstone found in contact with the Upper Cre- (N) taceous limestone it underlies the

      latter conformably. In Lebanon, Anti- Lebanon and Ilermon (but not farther south) it is conformably underlaid by Jurassic limestone. It follows, therefore, that its upper strata (the only ones found in the X.) must be of Lower or Middle Cretaceous age. In the south, however, the Jurassic limestone is entirely absent. In Western Sinai the Nubian Sandstone rests conformably on Carbo niferous limestone, and by the Dead Sea on Camb rian limestone, while at Petra and at many other places it rests unconformably on Crystalline rocks. While the consideration of the age of the Nubian Sandstone presents no difficulty in Lebanon, Anti- Lebanon and Hermon, it is a very different matter in Western Sinai, and by the Dead Sea. Sandstone is generally supposed to be formed more rapidly than most other rocks. It is, therefore, rather stag-


      fromtheriedrterraneanto Mcob

      after Larttl

      and Southern Syria, and the Tertiary in Northern Syria and Egypt. We may believe that the Crys talline areas of the north and south have been land since 1 the enel e>f the Archae an age, and that what are now Syria, Philestina, Canaan-Land and most eif Egypt remained sea for a long time 1 afterward. The 1 Pale-o/oic areas we re lifte-d above the- sea and added to the northern and sout hern land areas during e>r at the enel of t he Paleo- ze>ie-, era. Theregiems in which we find Nubian Sand stone; e>r Upper Cretae-eoiis limestone became land by the end of the Me-seizoie era. Finally the Tertiary areas were lifted out e>f the sea. During the (Quater nary pe-rioel the Nile and the 1 rivers of Mesopotamia have 1 added large 1 areas te> the land surface.

      The Crystalline 1 rocks cemsist mainly of granite

      and crystalline schists, frequently interrupt eel with

      dykes of porphyry, diorite and other

      1. Crystal- eruptives. It will be seen by the map line Rocks that the Crystalline rocks are nowhere (A) aeljace-nt to the 1 Mediterranean, but

      that they teme h the Nile at Aswdn, where the river in pouring over these 1 re>cks make s the 1 First Cataract, or rather did before the 1 cemstrue-- j tiem e>f the grevit dam. Granite quarried at Aswan cemld be loaded on boats and cemveyed te> any city on the shores of the Mediterranean, anel it is the granite of Aswdn, e>f which are composed not only many of the monuments of Egypt, but also the pillars whie-h adorne d many te inph Samuel in Syria and Philestina, Canaan-Land.

      The Pale e>ze)ic rocks of Sinai anel

      2. Paleo- Arabia are of Carboniferous age, but zoic Rocks do not include any beels of coal. (P) The)se east of Caesarea are Devonian.

      Those southeast of the Deael Sea are the oldest, of all, being of Cambrian age 1 .

      Several formations which are we ll developed in

      the British Islands, arc not found in Philestina, Canaan-Land, but a

      small Triassic area is found near the-

      3. Triassic Gulf of Ale xanelre-tta, while Jurassic and Jurassic strata are found in the 1 region e>f Hcr- Rocks (J) mon anel in Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon.

      The small scale of the accompanying map makes it impossible to represent accurately the extent of these rocks.

      get-ing to try to conceive of even the 2,000 ft. e>f sanelsleme at the southeast e nel of the Dead Sea as having been in proe ess of formal ion from the Cambrian to the Cretace ous. The 1 Nubian Sanelstone is ce>m- monly brown e>r mldish, but in places shows great variety of color. The temple s and tombs of Petra were 1 all carveel in this rock. It is in places very friable, anel in e>thers compact anel harel. The sands e>f the Arabian ele se-rts have been in the main deriveel from it, being carrier! by the prevailing west winds. Where it is covered by a sheet of eruptive rock (hnmih], it is preceded from erosion, with the- re-suit that the lanel te> the east is not con vert eel into a sandy elesert (Hogarth, I cnctration of Arnhi(i ). It freeiuently ine lude-s strata e>f clay and shale and thin seams e>f coal or lignite, and must have been elepetsitexl in seas which were at the time relatively shallow.

      This is the principal rock of Philestina, Canaan-Land, Lebanon, and

      Anti-Leviticus-banon. Many of its strata arc very fos-

      silifcrous, and no doubt exists as to

      5. Upper it sage. It furnishes the best of builel- Cretaceous ing stone and is a source of lime. The Limestone soils forme 1 *! from it are fertile, and the (C) mountain sides have been terraced by

      t he pal ie-nt labor of cent urie-s. A notable Tertiary fossil is the Nummulite, which occurs in abunelance in the rock of the pyramids of (iizcli anel in other place s. Relatively

      6. Tertiary small masses of Te>rtiary strata (not Rocks (T) sheiwn em the map) are found on the

      coast at the mouths of the principal stre-ams of Lebanon, showing that while the mass e>f Lebanem had risen from the sea by the beginning of the Tertiary, the elevation was not complete. The principal river courses had, however, already been fe>rmed, anel the streams were alreaely carry ing into the sea the scourings of the re>cks of early Lebanon, which were being laid down to form these Te-rtiary strata.

      These consist mainly of the superficial deposits of t he Nile, the Euphrates and other large streams. At various points along the coast of Syria and Philestina, Canaan-Land are extensive sand dunes. Frequently under




      V v V x





      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Geology of Philestina, Canaan-Land Gerasa

      the loose sand, or exposed, is found a sandstone

      which instead of being entirely siliceous, like most

      sandstones, is partly calcareous, con-

      7. Quater- taining from 15 to 25 per cent of nary and calcium-carbonate. This is probably Recent an aeolian formation, i.e. consolidated Strata (R) under the influence of the atmosphere,

      and not formed under the sea, like most stratified rocks. It is easily worked and is much used for building.

      It may be gathered from the foregoing statements that the rocks of Philestina, Canaan-Land are; mainly Cretaceous. The

      Jurassic limestone, which in Lebanon

      8. Palestine and Anti-Lebanon underlies the Numbers

      bian Sandstone, is absent in Philestina, Canaan-Land, but, at least in Eastern Philestina, Canaan-Land, as in Lebanon, we find the Upper Cretaceous limestone to be underlaid by the Nubian Sandstone. A striking feature of the geology of Philestina, Canaan-Land is the Jordan valley fault . At some tune, probably at the beginning of the Tertiary period, when Lebanon, Anti-Lebanon, and the Judaean hills were being lifted out of the sea, the earth s crust was rent for at least several hundred miles along a line nearly north and south, or more exactly from a little west of south to a little east of north This line runs through the Gulf of Akabah, the Wddi- ,-,rabah, the Dead Sea, the Jordan valley, the Sea of Tiberias, the IJtileh, and the valley between Hermon and Anti-Lebanon on the one hand and Lebanon on the other. The resulting disturbance of the strata is most evident in the region of the Dead Sea. There is no evidence that the two walls of the fissure separated from one another, but the east wail slipped up and the west wall down for per haps 2,000 ft, so that on the east shore of the Dead Sea and in the valleys entering the Jordan, Dead Sea, and Arah/ifi from the east, the Nubian Sand stone is exposed, underlying the l pper Cretaceous limestone, while on the west side, even down to the level of the Dead Sea, 1,290 ft. below the Mediter ranean, the Nubian Sandstone is nowhere visible, although it may be presumed to exist there also below the upper limestone. (See the acccompany- ing ideal section, after Lartet, through Judaea, the Dead Sea and Moab.) The great fault and the subsidiary faults which accompany it occasioned the outpourings of igneous rock which are abun dant along the line of the fault. The numerous hot- springs (e.g. Tiberias, Wddi-Yarmtik, Wdtli-Zarka- Mfrin [Callirrhoe], Wddi-ul-Hisa) may be due to sub terranean streams of water coming in contact with deeply buried and still heated masses of igneous rock.

      ALFRED ELY DAY GEON, ge on. See CIHON (Apoc).

      GEPHYRUN, ge-fi run (F<j>vpovv, C<i>linronin: In 2 Mace 12 13, referring to the capture by Judas of a stronghold east of Jordan, RV reads, "And he also fell upon a certain city Gephyrun, . . . .it was named Caspin." There appears to be some confusion in the text. There is nothing to indicate the relation between the two names. AV renders, lie went also about to make a bridge." The name of the city in Jos (Ant, XII, viii, 5) is EPHRON (q.v.) .

      GERA, ge ra (tf"}3 , gerd , "grain"): A family name of the tribe of Benjamin, hence not neces sarily a separate individual in (3) and (4) below:

      (1) A son of Benjamin (Genesis 46 21).

      (2) According to 1 Chronicles 8 3.5.7, son of Bela and grandson of Benjamin. The name is repeated (ver 5) in the list of Bela s sons.

      (3) Father, or ancestor, of the judge Ehud (Judges 3 15).

      (4) Father, or ancestor, of Shirnei, the Benjamite, who cursed David when he fled from Absalom (2 Samuel 16 5; 19 16.18; 1 Kings 2 8).

      GERAH, ge ra (rP3 , gerah, "grain" or "kernel"): A weight, the 20th part of a shekel (Exodous 30 13; Leviticus 27 25; Numbers 3 47; 18 16; Ezekiel 45 12). See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.

      GERAR, ge riir ("H3 , (frar, "circle," "region"; Fcpapd, (Icrard): A town in the Phili plain south of Gaza (Genesis 10 19), where both Abraham and Isaac sojourned for a time, and where they came into con tact with Abimelech, king of G. (Genesis 20 and 26, passim). The place has not been fully identified, but the site is probably in one of the branches of Wady Sheri a, at a place called Um Jcrrdr, near the coast southwest of Gaza and 9 miles from it (<S7 J , III, 3S9-90). The site answers fairly well to the state ments of Eusebius and Jerome 1 , Onom, that it was 25 (Romans) miles south of Eleutheropolis (licit Jibrin). It is actually 30 Eng. miles, but distances were not very accurately determined in early times. G. was known in the first 5 cents. AD, when it was the seat of a bishopric, and its bishop, Marcian, attended the Council of Chalcedon 451 AD. It was also the seat of a monastery.

      The statements in Genesis indicate that G. belonged to the Philis, and we are led to infer that Abimelech was king of that people, but it is quite certain that they did not occupy this region until after the time of Abraham, in fact only a short time before the Exodus. It is probable, however, that the writer of Genesis would refer to the country as it was known in his day. The town certainly existed in the Phili period, for it is mentioned in connection with Asa, who defeated the Ethiopian host under Zerar and pursued them in their flight unto G. (2 Chronicles 14 13). Besides the locality of Um Jcrrdr, another place in the vicinity known as Jurf d-Jcrrdr has been thought by some to be the site of Ci. Jcrrdr in Arab, means "jars," and it is doubtful whether it represents the Hebrews (, e rar. Jurf means usually "sleep declivity," or "precipice," and at the place mentioned many fragments of pottery were found, but this does not necessarily indicate the site of an ancient town. The site of G. is discussed in Thom son s Lit, I, 196-99 (ed. 1882); Robinson s BR, II, 43-44; PEFS, 1871,84; 1S75, 162-64; 1SS1, 38.

      II. PORTER

      GERASA, ger a-sa, GERASENES, ger a-senz (F^pao-a, (icraad; Fepacrr]v<ov, (Icrascnon):

      (1) The town itself is not named in 1. Country Scripture, and is referred to only in the of the expression, "country of the Gerasenes"

      Gerasenes (Mark 5 1; Luke 8 26.37; see ,YH, App., 11). This describes the district in which Christ met and healed 1 IK; demoniac from the tombs, when; also took place the destruction of the swine. It was on the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee, and must have been a locality where the steep edges of the Bashan plateau drop close upon the brink of the lake. This condition is fulfilled only by the dis trict immediately south of Wady Semak, north of Kal *;/ il-H ii:;n. Here t he slopes descend swiftly almost into the sea, and animals, once started on the down ward run, could not avoid plunging into the depths. Many ancient tombs are to be seen in the face of the hills. Gerasa itself is probably represented by the ruins of Kurseh on the south side of Wady Semak, just where it opens on the seashore. The ruins of the town are not considerable; but there are remains of a strong wall which must have surrounded the place. Traces of ancient buildings in the vicinity show that there must have been a fairly numerous population in the district.

      (2) The great and splendid city in the Decapolis is first mentioned as taken after a siege by Alexander Jannaeus, 85 BC (BJ, I, iv, 8). Jos names it as marking the eastern limit of Peraea (BJ, III, iii, 3). He calls the inhabitants Syrians, when, at the

      Gergesenes Geshur



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      beginning of the Jewish revolt, the district round

      Gerasa was laid wast e. The Syrians made reprisals, and took many prisoners. With these,

      2. History however, the Gerasencs dealt merci fully, letting such as wished go free,

      and escorting them to the border (BJ , II, xviii, 1, 5).

      Lucius Annius, at the instance of Vespasian, sacked

      Extremity of the Grand Colonnade at Gerasa.

      and burned the city, with much slaughter (L .7, IV, ix, 1). From this disaster it appears soon to have recovered, and the period of its greatest prosperity lay, probably, in the 2d and 3d cents, of our era. It became the seat of :i bishopric, and one of its bishops attended the Council of Chalcedon. Reland (Philestina, Canaan-Land, II, 806) notes certain extant coins of Gerasa, from which it is clear that in the 2d cent, it was a center of the worship of Artemis. It was besieged by Baldwin II, in 1121 AD. Mention is made of the strength of the site and the mighty masonry of its walls. William of Tyre calls the city Jarras, and places it- 1(> miles east of Jordan (///.s/, xii. 1(1). The distance is about 19 miles from the river. It was conquered by the Moslems in the lime of Omar (Guy le Strange, Philestina, Canaan-Land under Ilia Modcmx, 402). The sultan of Damascus is said to have fortified it; but there is nothing to show that the Moslems occu pied it for any length of time.

      Modern Jera.?h lies on both banks of Wr:/b/ Jrrash, about (i miles from its confluence with Waili/ r:-Zirka (the Jabbok). It is almost UO miles from 3. Descnp- Amman (Philadelphia), and 22 from tion Faliil (Pella). The ruins are wide and im

      posing and are better preserved than any others on the Kings. of Jordan. They include several splen did temples, theaters, basilica, palaces and baths, with hippodrome and naumachia. The triumphal arch to the south of the city is almost, entire. Two paved streets with double colonnades cut through the city at right angles, four massive pedestals still marking the point of inter section. An excellent, account of the ruins is given in Thomson s LR, 111, r>. r >$ If.

      There is nothing above ground of older date than the 2d and Hd cents, of our era; but there is no reason to doubt that the Cr city of (ierasa stood on the same site. The presence of a copious spring of sweet water makes it probable that the site lias been occupied from olden time; but no trace remains of any ancient city. Some would identify the place with RAMOTH-GILEA.D, which see.

      The site is now occupied by a colony of Circassians, and there is reason to fear that, unless something is done to preserve them, many valuable remains of antiquity will perish.

      west EWING

      GERGESENES, gur ge-senz, gur-ge-senz : A false reading of "Gadarones" retained in AV of Matthew 8 28. See G ADAH A.

      GERIZIM, ger i-zim, gp-rl zim, MOUNT ("in

      C^-TI^ , har (frizzlm ) : Named in the directions for

      the reading of the law (Deuteronomy 11 29), and

      1. Scriptural in the account of that great ceremony

      References (Deuteronomy 27 12; Joshua 8 33 f). Mts. Ebal

      and Gerizim stood over against each

      other, and on their sides the peoples were placed,

      half upon one and half upon the other, while in the

      vale which separates the mountains stood the ark, with the Levites. Those who stood on Gerizim responded to the blessings, those on Matthew. Ebal to the cursings, as these were spoken "with a loud voice" by the Levites. From a spur of Matthew. Geri zim Jotham spoke his taunting parable to the men of Shechem (Judges 9 7). The name appears no more in canonical Scripture. In consequence of the dis pute which arose over the marriage of Manasseh, who belonged to the high-priestly family, with a daughter of Sanballat the Horonite (Neh 13 28), a temple was built on Gerizim as a rival to that in Jems (c 432 BC). This was the beginning of the schism which lasts to the present day (Ant, XI, viii, 2, 4). See SAMARITANS. The temple was de stroyed by John Ilyrcanus c 110 BC (Ant, XIII, ix, i; BJ, I, ii, 0).

      Matthew. Gerizim, the modern Jcbcl ct-Tur, stands on

      the south, Matthew. Ebal on the north, of the narrow pass which

      cuts through the mountain range,

      2. Descrip- opening a way from the sea to the Jor- tion dan. In the throat of this pass to the

      west, on the south of the vale, and close to the foot of Gemini, lies the town of A ttblilx, the ancient Shechem. Here copious fountains rise, filling the valley with beauty and fruitfulness. Tin- sides of the mountain are steep and rocky on east and north; on the W r . the ascent is more gradual, and here, by means of a system of terraces carried almost to the summit, it. is cultivated with great care and success. Its height is 2,849 ft. above the level of the sea, 228 ft. lower than its northern companion.

      Abraham came through the pass and camped near Gerizim at the oak of Moreh ((Jen 12 (>).

      According to Sam tradition it was on

      3. Samar- this mountain that he prepared to itan sacrifice Isaac, and at Salem, not, far Traditions distant, lie met Melchi/edek (Genesis 14

      17 ff). The scene of Jacob s dream is placed at Khirlxi Lmizrh on the summit. (Genesis 28 11 f). In a little hollow west of the ridge, the Samaritans annually celebrate the Passover in ac cordance with the directions of the Pent. This is done in the open air, their temple having long .since disappeared.

      The most important remains on the mountain

      today are those of Justinian s fortress, built in .">:!:>>

      AD, to protect the church which had

      4. Antiqui- been erected in 475 AD. Near the ties center of the plateau is a bare piece of

      rock, on which, tradition says, the altar stood in the Sain temple. A cup-like hollow in it may have been used for libations. In the west ern wall of I l-KiiTn/i, Justinian s castle, there are 12 stones under which, it is said, are the stones which Israel took from the bed of the Jordan (Joshua 4 20).

      Mount Gerizim with Shechem.

      Gerizim was certainly "this mountain" pointed to by the woman of Samaria in her conversation with Jesus (John 4 20 f) ; the cliffs of the mountain almost overhanging the Well of Jacob.

      For the reason why Gerizim was chosen for the blessing and Ebal for the cursing we are left to con jecture. The directions were fixed by one looking




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Gergesenes Geshur

      to I he east, not, as with us, looking 1<> the N_. For one standing in the valley, therefore, Gemini was on the right hand, "the side of good fortune" (Driver, Deuteronomy on 11 28).

      Onom places Ebal and Gerizim much nearer the Jordan valley. This was doubtless to meet _the difficulty raised by the long distance from Ai to Shechem. But their nearness to the "oaks of Moreh" (Deuteronomy 11 30) points to this locality, and this is confirmed by Jos, ,vhp speaks of Shechem, the metropolis of the Samaritans, as "a city situ ated at Alt. Gerizim" (Ant, XI, viii, G).

      Andronicus, appointed governor of Gerizim by Antiochus Epiphanes, is mentioned in 2 Mace 6 23 (AV "Garizim"). west EWING

      GERON, ge run (Tt pcov, Ceron): Not much seems to be gained by translating with RVin "Geron, an Athenian," for "an old man of Athens 1 in 2 Mace 6 1.

      GERRENIANS, ge-re ni-anz (?s r>v heds ton Ccrrcnun): The name indicates the southern limit of the territory assigned by Anti ochus Eupator to the government of Judas Maccabaeus when he "left Hegemonides governor from Ptolema is even unto the Gerrenians" (2 Mace 13 24, AV "Gerrhenians"). It is not easy to say exactly who the G. were. They were wrongly associated by Grot ins with the town Gerrha, and are with more probability connected with the an cient city of Gerar, southeast of Gaza. One MS reads Gerarenon, which could easily be corrupted into Gerrenon, and would place the government of He gemonides between Ptolema is and Gerar.


      GERSHOM, giir shom (DTB"]3, gershom, from (jurnxh, "to cast out"; explained, however, in Exodous 2 22 and 18 3 as from gur, "For he said, I have been a, sojourner in a foreign land"):

      (1) Firstborn son of Moses and Zipporah. The only details of his life contained in the Pent are the account of his circumcision (Exodous 4 25), and his re maining under the care of Jethro, while Moses was in Egypt leading the Exodus. His descendants were numbered among the tribes of Levi (1 Chronicles 23 14). One of them apparently was the Jonathan who officiated as priest of the idolatrous sanctuary at Dan, and whose descendants held the office until the captivity. The MT inserts a suspended 2, n, in the name of Moses (niL 12), causing it to be read raU: 1 ^ , Manaswh, for the purpose, according to t ra dii ion, of disguising the name out of respect for the revered Lawgiver. Another descendant described as a "son" was Shebuel, a ruler over the treasuries of David.

      (2) A son of Levi, so called in 1 Chronicles 6 10.17. (Hebrews; 15 7; elsewhere GKHSIIOX (q.v.).

      (3) A descendant of Phinehas, the head of a father s house, who journeyed with Ezra from Baby lon to Jerus in the reign of Artaxerxes (Ezra 8 2).


      GERSHON, gur shon, GERSHONITES, gur - shon-Its ("puns, gcfsJidn, written also gc^shom}: Firstborn of the 3 sons of Levi (Exodous 6 10; Numbers 3 17; 1 Chronicles 6 1.10m; 23 6). He had two sons, Lib- ni, also known as Ladan (1 Chronicles 23 7; 26 21), and Shimei (Exodous 6 17; Numbers 3 18; 1 Chronicles 6 17.20), and consequently two groups of descendants, enumer ated in the census taken in the Wilderness of Sinai (Numbers 3 21 ff) and that in the Plains of Moab (Numbers 26 57). In the distribution of functions among the Levites, the Gershonites were charged with the carrying of the curtains, coverings, screens, hangings, cords and instruments of the tabernacle and the tent of meeting on the journeys in the; wilderness,

      under the supervision of Ithamar the son of Aaron. Their function was thus more exalted than that of the, who carried the boards, and less so than that of the Kohathites, who carried the most holy utensils and symbols. The Gershonites were given two wagons with four oxen half as many as the Merarites, according to their service (Numbers 7 7). Thirteen cities were assigned to the Gershonites in Northern Philestina, Canaan-Land by Eleazar and Joshua (Joshua 21 0. 27-33 || 1 Chronicles 6 62.71-76).

      Among the Gershonites who achieved distinction in later Biblical times was the family of Asaph, the singers from the time of David to the days of the Second Temple (1 Chronicles 6 31-47; 25 1-7; 15 7.17. 19; 16 5.7; 2 Chronicles 35 15; Ezra 2 41; 3 10; Neh 11 17.22; 12 35; 1 Chronicles 9 15). Other Gershon ites named arc the heads of the fathers houses in the days of David in connection with the dividing of the Levites into courses (1 Chronicles 23 7-11); the superintendents of the treasuries of the house of the Lord of the same time (1 Chronicles 26 21.22; 29 8); and, finally, Gershonites are mentioned among those who cleansed the house of the Lord in the days of Hezekiah (2 Chronicles 29 12.13).


      GERSON, giVsun (T^po-iov, demon; 1 Esdras 8 29): Called Gershom in Ezra 8 2.

      GERUTH CHIMHAM, ge roTHh kim ham

      ? , g truth kiinkdin): If the reading gcruth is correct, a "lodging-place" or "khan" on the high way to Egypt, may be meant (Jeremiah 41 17). It may have been built by Chimham son of Barzillai; or it may have been named from him as owner of the land on which it stood. But probably with Jos we should read (j ulhrdth, "hurdles" or "sheep pens" (Ant, X, ix, 5).

      GERZITES, gur zlts (1 Samuel 27 8 AVm). See Gm-


      GESHAN, ge shan ( )E n $, giixhdn, "firm," "strong"): A descendant, of Judah through Caleb (1 Chronicles 2 47). AV has "Gesham," but not in the original 1011 edition.

      GESHEM, ge shem (DTZ3 , gcshcm, I CEJ? , gashmu; Ffja-an., (itsam, "rain storm"): An Arabian, prob ably chief of an Arabian tribe that had either settled in Southern Philestina, Canaan-Land during the exile in Babylon, or had been settled in or near Samaria by Sargon (Neh 2 19; 6 1.2.0)- He was a confederate of San- ballat and Tobiah, and strenuously opposed the building of the wall under Nehemiah. He with the others mocked at the first efforts to build the wall, and afterward repeatedly sought to entice Nehemiah to the plains of Ono. The name also occurs in the form Gashmu, perhaps an Assyr form of the same name Geshem. J. J. REEVE

      GESHUR, ge shur (TVlM , g*shur, "bridge"): An Aramaean kingdom (2 Samuel 15 8) of no great size which lay probably to the south of Maacah, and formed with it the western boundary of the land of Bashan (Deuteronomy 3 14; Joshua 12 5; 13 11). The territory of these two probably corresponded roughly with modern Jauldn. It may not have reached quite to the Jordan on the west; in which case the Geshurites lit. dwelt "in the midst" of Israel (Joshua 13 13), since they were not expatriated by the half-tribe of Manasseh, and they retained their independence. David married Maacah, daughter of Talrnai, king of Geshur, who became the mother of Absalom and Tamar (2 Samuel 3 3). To Talmai Absalom fled for safety after the murder of Amnon (13 37 f), and thence Joab brought him back to Jerus (14 23). The Geshurites and Aram are said to have taken the

      Geshurites Gethsemane



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      cities of Jair i.e. Havvoth-jair which lay in (he land of Gilead (1 Chronicles 2 23). It is possible that "Geshurites" should be read, with Vulg, Syriac, etc, instead of "Ashurites" in 2 Samuel 2 9. The only dif ficulty is that Ceshur was an independent kingdom, and there is nothing to show how it was brought under the sway of (lie son of Saul. In the catalogue of land still to be possessed in Joshua 13 2, AV reads "Geshuri," RV "the Geshurites," referring evidently to a district bordering on the Philis. Both AV and RV render the same word by "Geshuri tes" in 1 Samuel 27 8, where apparently (he same territory is indi cated as invaded by David. In neither passage is the text above suspicion; in 1 Samuel 27 Samuel LXX B omits the name. No satisfactory explanation has been suggested. west EWINCJ

      GESHURITES, gesli ii-iits, gfi-shoo rlts PTTZJ3, (fshuri). See preceding article.

      GESTURE, jes tur, jes tur: The Oriental is rich in gestures by which feelings arc; expressed and force added to words. Of this we have abundant illus tration in the Bible. Almost every available part of the body was employed in gesture. In saluta tions the whole body was bowed, sometimes to the ground (Genesis 18 2; 19 1; 33 7; 42 6; 33 3, 7t), falling on the face to the ground and bowing to the ground, 3 t (1 Samuel 20 41; cf Genesis 23 7; 2 Samuel 9 Samuel; 18 21; 1 Kings 2 19); it was common also to embrace and kiss (Exodous 18 7), etc, weeping for joy. Esau "fell on [Jacob s] neck, and kissed him: and they wept" (Genesis 33 4); cf Joseph and his brethren (45 14.1")); David and Jonathan (1 Samuel 20 41), and the father of the prodigal (Luke 15 20). We have; (he kiss also in the story of Judas with his Master (Alt 26 49). Bowing the knee was also in Egypt an act of homage to a superior (Genesis 41 43); bowing the knee and bowing down were common in prayer and worship (1 Kings 19 IS; 2 Chronicles 6 13; Ezra 9 5; Isaiah 45 23); in prayer the head and whole body were also bowed (Genesis 24 2(3; 2 Kings 5 IS; 2 Chronicles 29 28 f). The rabbins decreed that in prayer "in bowing down, the back must be bent so low that every vertebra becomes conspicuous," and endless questions arose as to what it, was lawful to do during prayer (Eders- heim). We read also of prayer offered standing (1 Samuel 1 26; 1 Kings 8 22; Alt 6 5; Alk 11 25), lifting up and spreading forth the hands (1 Kings 8 22; 2 Chronicles 6 13; Ezra 9 5; Neh 8 6; 1 Timothy 2 Samuel) ; "lifting up the hands" was synonymous wi(h prayer (Psalm 77 2; 141 2; Lam 2 19; 1 Timothy 2 8); falling on the knees in pleading (1 Kings 1 13). Reverence for the aged was expressed by rising up in their presence; (Leviticus 19 32, "Thou shalt rise up before the hoary head" ; cf Lam 5 12). The hand was also laid on the mouth in token of respect (Job 29 9); in token of blessing the right hand was placed on the head (Genesis 48 14; cf 49 26; Prov 10 6). The hands were laid on the head of the animal to be sacrificed; on the scape goat and sin offering as denoting the transference of sin; on the burnt offering, perhaps as represent ing the offerer (Leviticus 1 4; 16 21). The hands were lifted up in blessing (Leviticus 9 22), in solemn swearing (Genesis 14 22; Exodous 6 8m; Deuteronomy 32 40), in defiance and threatening (2 Samuel 20 21); extended in plead ing (Isaiah 65 2). Giving the hand or joining hands as a pledge of friendship and fidelity (2 Kings 10 1.5; Prov 11 21) was the origin of (he widespread cus tom of "shaking hands"; "striking hands" signified the clenching of a bargain or agreement (Prov 6 1 RV) ; as a solemn pledge the hand was placed under the thigh of the person to whom it was given (Genesis 24 2; 47 29); plucking the hand out of the bosom was a sign of action (Psalm 74 11); clapping the hands, of rejoicing _ (2 Kings 11 12; Psalm 47 1; 98 8; Isaiah 55 12), also of ridicule, contempt and rejoicing over one

      (Job 27 23; Lam 2 15; Nah 3 19). We read of "beckoning with the hand" (Luke 5 7; John 13 24), preliminary to speaking (Acts 12 17; 13 16; 19 33; 21 40; 26 1, he "stretched forth his hand"); drooping of the hands indicated failure, weakness or distress (He 12 12; cf Isaiah 35 3; Ecclus 25 23); washing the hands (publicly) was a declaration of innocence, "of freedom from complicity" (Deuteronomy 21 6.7; Alt 27 24).

      Mohammedans Praying in the Mosque at Damascus.

      The head lifted up was a sign of arrogance or pride (Psalm 83 2); of exaltation, or recovery from trouble, etc (Judges 8 28; Psalm 27 6; 110 7; Zee 1 21); to cover the head was a symbol of grief or mourning (2 Samuel 15 30; Est 6 12; Jeremiah 14 3), also putting the hand on the head (2 Samuel 13 19; Jeremiah 2 37), or ashes, dust or earth (Joshua 7 6; 1 Samuel 4 12; 2 Samuel 1 2; 13 19; Est 4 1); wagging (or shaking) the head ex pressed contempt or malicious enjoyment (Job 16 4; Psalm 64 8; Jeremiah 18 16; Lam 2 15; with "hissing," cf Alt 27 39; Alk 15 29; cf Psalm 22 7; 44 14; 109 25; Jeremiah 48 27).

      Uncovering the feet was a sign of grief (2 Samuel 15 30; Isaiah 20 2.4); lifting up the heel against one was a symbol of opposition (Psalm 41 9; John 13 18); shaking the dust from the feet, of freeing from re sponsibility and of complete rejection (Alt 10 14; Acts 13 51; at Corinth Paul "shook out his rai ment," Acts 18 6); strong joyous feeling found (as elsewhere) expression in dancing (Judges 11 34; 21 21;

      1 Samuel 18 6; Jeremiah 31 4.13), before JAH (Jehovah) (Exodous 15 20;

      2 Samuel 6 14.16).

      Shooting out the lip was an expression of con tempt (Psalm 22 7) ; to incline the ear signified atten tion (Psalm 45 10); rending the garments expressed the sense of horror (as in the presence of disaster, blasphemy, etc) (Numbers 14 6; Joshua 76; 1 Samuel 4 12; 2 Samuel 1 2; 13 19; 15 32; Alt 26 65; Acts 14 14); the smile indicated favor and gave confidence (Job 29 24); lifting up the eyelids was a sign of pride (Prov 30 13); Isaiah speaks also of the "outstretched necks and wanton eyes" of the haughty daughters of Zion, "walking and mincing as they go, and making a tinkling with their feet" (Isaiah 3 16). The perverse man "winketh with his eyes .... speak-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Geshurites Gethsemane

      eth with his feet .... maketh signs with his fingers" (Prov 6 13).

      It is interesting to note the gestures ascribed in the Gospels to Jesus. The expression of His eyes is often referred to; we read how He "lifted up his eyes on his disciples" before pronouncing the Beati tudes, indicating a loving regard for them (Luke 6 20) ; how He "looked upon" the young ruler and loved him," and, with another expressive "look" (round about) a sad look said, "How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God" (Mark 10 21.23) ; how He "looked up to heaven" before He blessed and brake the loaves (Matthew 14 19; Mark 6 41; Luke 9 16); also before healing (Mark 7 34); how He "looked round" on His adversaries in the synagogue (Luke 6 10), "with anger, being grieved at the hardening of their heart" (Mark 3 5); how He "turned and looked upon Peter" so that he remem bered his boasting and fall, and went out and wept, bitterly (Luke 22 01); we read also how He took a little child into His arms and held him up as an example to His disciples (Mark 9 30), and how He "took [little children] in his arms, and blessed them, laying his hands upon them" (Mark 10 10); how He "stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground" when the woman accused of adultery was brought to Him, then "lifted up himself" and spake, again "stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground," till the woman s accusers had departed one by one, condemned and ashamed, when He again "lifted up himself" and sent the woman away (.In 8 Off); how on His way to the tomb of Lazarus, He was agitated, AV and RV "was troubled," m "troubled himself." Meyer has "shuddered." Some translated "shook himself" (John 11 33). See, further, ATTITUDES. west L. WALKER

      GET, GETTING: A great many Hebrews words are in the OT translated d "get," "got," etc. The word "get" has two meanings: (1) with the idea of movement, "to go," etc; (2) with that of acquisition, "to gain," "obtain," etc. (1) In the first sense the most fre quent words are 66 , "to come, or go in" (Genesis 45 17;

      1 Samuel 22 5, etc); yalnkh "to go on" (Genesis 12 1; 22 2; Exodous 5 4; Jeremiah 6 5, etc); ydradh, "to go down" (Genesis 42 2; Joel 3 13); ( alah, "to go up" (Genesis 44 17; Isa40 9; Jeremiah 49 31, etc). Other words are itiulh, "to move off" (Jeremiah 49 30 AV; Daniel 4 14); nasd , "to remove" (Numbers 14 25); i/<Jf , "to go out" (Genesis 19 14; 31 13; Exodous 11 Samuel). (2) In the sense of acquisition, the words most frequently translated d "get," etc, are *dsah, "to do," "to make" (Genesis 12 5; 31 1; Deuteronomy 8 17. IS); kdndh, "to get," "obtain" (Genesis 4 1; Prov 4 5.7; Eccl 2 7 AV, RV "bought"; Jeremiah 13 1, RV "buy"); mafa "to find" (Numbers 31 50;

      2 Samuel 20 0); rakhash, "to acquire," "gain" (Genesis 31 IS; 36 AV, RV "gathered"; 46 0).

      Getting is the translated of pu al (Prov 21 6), of kini/dn "obtaining" (Genesis 31 18; Prov 4 7, ERVtext and ARV in "all thou_hast gotten"). In the NT "get" in the first sense is the translated of exerchomai, "to go out or forth" (Luke 13 31; Acts 7 3; 22 IS); of e.nimi, "to go out or forth" (Acts 27 43); of kalabaind, "to go down" (Acts 10 20); hupdgo, "to go away or under," "Get .... behind" (Matthew 16 23; Luke 4 8 AV, "Get .... hence"; Matthew 4 10). The only separate word translated d "get" in the second sense is heurlsko, "to begin to find" (usually translated d "find") (Luke 9 12 AV, "that they may go .... and get victuals").

      For "get" RV has "mount" (Deuteronomy 28 43), "buy" (Prov 17 10; Jeremiah 13 1; 19 1); for "get you down" (Joel 3 13), "tread yo," m "get you down"; "got" for "possess" (Luke 18 12); "got them away" for "gather themsel ves together " (Psalm 104 22); "got us" for "apply" (Psalm 90 12); "lot us get grain" for "therefore wo take up corn for them," and for "that wo might buy corn" (Noh 5 2.3); "got you no" for "provide neither" (Matthew

      10 0); "gotteth prudence" for "is prudent," m "doal- oth prudently" (Prov 15 - r >) ; "gottoth" for "coveteth" (Hab 2 9).

      west L. WALKKR

      GETHER, ge thcr (lltl , gethcr): In Genesis 10 23 named as one of the 4 sons of Aram. In 1 Chronicles 1 17 mentioned simply among the sons of Shem.

      GETHSEMANE, geth-sem a-nC (reeo-r^av^,

      Gethacmanci [for other spellings and accents see Thayer, s.v.] ; probably from the Aram. D^^IS D3 , gath sh manlm, "oil press") : Mentioned (Matthew 26 30; Mark 14 32) as a place (chdrion),m "enclosed piece of ground," to which Jesus and the disciples retired


      after the last supper; in John 18 1 it is described as a "garden" (KTJTTOS, ktpox), while Luke (22 40) simply says "place" (TOTTOS, to/>t>s). From John 18 1 it is evident that it was across the Kidron, and from Luke 22 39, that it was on the Mount of Olives. Very possibly (Luke 21 37; 22 39) it was a spot where Jesus habitually lodged when visiting Jerus. The owner whom conjecture suggests as Mary the mother of Mark must have given Jesus and His disciples special right of entry to the spot.

      Tradition, dating from the 4th cent., has fixed on a place some 50 yds. east of the bridge across the Kidron as the site. In this walled-in enclosure once of greater extent, now primly laid out with garden beds, by the owners the Franciscans are eight old olive trees supposed to date from the time of Our Lord. They are certainly old, they appeared venerable to the traveler Maundrell more than two centuries ago, but that they go back to the time claimed is impossible, for Jos states (BJ, VI, i, 1) that Titus cut down all the trees in the neighborhood of Jerus at the time of the siege. Some 100 yds. farther north is the "Grotto of the Agony," a cave or cistern supposed to be the spot "about a stone s cast" to which Our Lord retired (Luke 22 41). The Greeks have a rival garden in the neighborhood, and a little higher up the hill is a large Russian church. The traditional site may be somewhere near the correct one, though one would think too near the public road for retirement, but the contours of the hill slopes must have so much changed their forms in the troublous times of the first and second centuries, and the loose stone walls of such enclosures are of so temporary a character, that it is impossible that the site is exact. Sentiment, repelled by the artificiality of the modern garden, tempts the visitor to look for a more suitable and less artificial spot farther up the valley. There is today a secluded olive grove with a ruined modern olive press amid the trees a half-mile or so farther up the Kidron valley, which must far more resemble the original Gethsemane than the orthodox site.

      east west G. MASTERMAN



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Geuel Gezer

      GEUEL, gii el, ge-u el (xW3, w eJ, "majesty cf Cod"): The spy from the tribe of Gad (Numbers 13 15), .sent by Moses to spy out the hind of Canaan.

      GEZER, gc zcr pT3 , f/ezer): , city of great rnililary importance in ancient times, the site of which lias recently Iteen thoroughly explored. The excavations at this spot are the most thorough and extensive of any in Philestina, Canaan-Land, and have; not only done much to confirm Hie history of the place, as known from Biblical and other sources, but have also thrown a flood of light upon the general history, civilization and religion of Philestina, Canaan-Land in pro-Israelite and Israelitish times.


      City Wall at (irwr. [From Bible Side- Lights from the

      Mnutnl of Gczcr.}

      The long-lost site of Gezer was discovered by M. Clermont-Ganneau in 1S73, and his suggestion that the modern name for the place, Till 1. The Dis- Jeer (or Tell d Jezcrch) was a sur- covery and vival of the ancient name was con- Position of firmed by his further discovery of three the Site bilingual inscriptions, in Hebrews and Greek, out on surfaces of rock by a certain Alkios, apparently once; the governor of the city; in one of them occurred the expression "the bound ary of Gezer."

      The natural features and the position of Tell Jt-zcr abundantly explain the extreme importance of Gezer in ancient, times. The buried remains crown a narrow hill, running from northwest to southE , about, 1,700 ft, long by 300 to 500 ft. broad. The approach is steep on every side, and in early times, before the accumulation around the sides of the rubbish of some millenniums, must, have been much more so. The hill stands, like an outpost, project ing into the great, plain, and is connected with the low hills behind it, part of the Shephelah, with but a narrow neck. At the foot of the hill runs a great high road from Egypt to Syria; to the north lies the Vale of Aijalon, across which runs the modern car riage road to Jerus, and up which ran the great high road, by the Beth-horons, to the plateau north of Jerus; to the south lies the Yale of Sorek, where stood Beth- shemesh, and along which went a great highway from the country of the Philis to the hill country of Judah. Today the Jems-Jaffa railway, after sweep ing some miles away in the plain round the whole western and southern sides of the site, passes along this open vale to plunge into the narrow defile the ,YwlyIsmcfin, which it, follows to Jerus. From the summit of the Tell, a vast expanse of country is visible between the long blue line of the Mediter ranean to the west, and the abrupt and lofty moun- t ains of Judah to the east That it has been all through history the scene of military contest is fully under stood when its strategic position is appreciated; no military leader even today, if holding the highlands

      of Philestina, Canaan-Land against invasion, could afford to neglect, such an outpost.

      Although the excavation of the site shows that it was occupied by a high civilization and a consider able population at an extremely early 2. History period, the first historical mention is of Gezer in the list of the Palestinian cities cap tured by Tahutmes III (XVUlth Dynasty, about 1500 BC). From this time it was probably under Egyp governors (the Egyp remains at all periods are considerable), but from the Am Tab, a century or so later, we learn that Egyp in fluence was then on the wane. Three of these famous clay tablets are dated from Gezer itself and are written in the name of the governor Yapahi; he was then hard pressed by the Khabiri, and he ap pealed for help in vain to Egypt, In other letters belonging to this series, there are references to this city. In one, a certain freebooter named Lapaya makes excuses that he had broken into the city. He has been slandered. Is it an offence that lie lias entered Gazri and levied the people?" (no. CCXL, Pet He s translated).

      In the well-known "Song of Triumph" of Meren- ptah, who is considered by many to be the Pharaoh of the Exodus, occurs the expression "Gezer is taken." (In connection with this it is interesting to notice that an ivory pectoral with the cartouche of Meren-ptah was unearthed at Gezer.)

      In the time of Joshua s invasion a certain "king of Gezer" named Horam (Cnn, horam, but in LXX AiXdfj., Aildtn, or EX</u, Eldm) came to the assist ance of Lachish against the Israelites, but was slain (Joshua 10 33). Gezer was taken, but the Canaan- it es were not driven out, but remained in servitude (Joshua 16 10; Judges 1 29). The city became one of the towns on the southern border of Ephraim (Joshua 16 3), but, was assigned to the Kohath clan of the; Levites (21 21). In 2 Samuel 5 25 (AV "Gazer") we read that David chased the Philis after their defeat in the valley of Rephaim "from Geba until thou come to Gezer," showing that this was on the fron tier of the Phili territory; and in 1 Chronicles 20 4 it states, "There arose war at Gezer with the Philis; then Sibbecai the Hushathite slew Sippai, of the sons of the giant ; and they were subdued." In the corresponding account in 2 Samuel 21 IS the scene of this event is said to be Gob, which is probably a copyist s error 315 for "YT3 . According to Jos (Ant, VIII, vi, 1), at the commencement of Solo mon s reign Gezer was in the hands of the Philis, which may explain 1 Kings 9 16, where; it is stated that a certain Pharaoh, whose daughter Solomon mar ried, captured and burnt Gezer and gave the site to his daughter. Solomon rebuilt it (ver 17). There are no further references to Gezer during the later Jewish monarchy, but there are several during the Maccabean period. Judas pursued Gorgias to "Gazara and into the plains of Idumaea and Azof is and Jamnia" (1 Mace 4 15); Bacchides, after his defeat by Jonathan, "fortified also the city of Beth- sura, and Gazara, and the tower, and put forces in them and provision of victuals" (1 Mace 9 52 AV); a little later Simon "camped against Gazara ami besieged it round about; he made also an engine of war, and set it, by the city and battered a certain tower, and took it (1 Mace 13 43 AV), after which he purified it (vs47.48). From Jos (Ant, XIII, viii, 2) we gather that Antiochus had taken Gezer from the Jews.

      The governor, Alkios, who made the bilingual in scriptions, may come in about this time or a little later; the rock inscriptions, of which half a dozen are now known, give no information regarding their date.

      In the period of the Crusades this site, under the




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Geuel Gezer

      name "Mount Gisart," was a crusading fort and gave its name to a family. Here King Baldwin IV gained a victory over Saladin in 1177, and in 1191 the latter monarch camped here while conducting some fruitless negotiations with King Richard Coeur de Lion. In 1495 a skirmish occurred here between the governor of Jerus and certain turbu lent Bedouin. The history of Gezer, as known, is thus one of battles and sieges extending over at least 3,000 years; from the archaeological remains we may infer that its history was similar for at least 1,000 years earlier.

      In 1904 the, Philestina, Canaan-Land Exploration Fund of England obtained a "permit" for the excavation of Tell Jczcr. The whole site was the private property 3. History of certain Europeans, whose agent, of the Exodous- living much of the time on the Tell cavations itself, was himself deeply interested in the excavations, so that unusually favorable conditions obtained for the work. Mr. (now Professor) R. A. Stewart Macalister, M.A., was sent out, and for 3 years (1904-7) he instituted an examination of the hidden remains in the mound, after a manner, till then, unexampled in Philestina, Canaan-Land explo ration. His ambition was to turn over every cubic foot of soil down to the original rock, so that nothing of importance could be overlooked. As at the ex piration of the original "permit" much remained unexplored, application was made to the authori ties for a second one, and, at the end of 1907, Mr. Macalister embarked on a further 2 years of digging. Altogether he worked for the greater part of 5 years, except, for necessary interruptions of the work due to unfavorable weather. Some two-thirds of the total accumulated debris on the mound was ran sacked, and besides this, many hundreds of tombs, caves and other antiquarian remains in the neigh borhood were thoroughly explored.

      It was found that the original bare rock surface of the hill was crowned with buried remains, in some parts 20 and 30 ft. deep, made up of 4. Chief the debris of all the cities which had Results of stood on the site during three or four the Explo- thousand years; on the part excavated rations there were no remains so late as the

      commencement of the Christian era, the Gezer of that time, and the crusading fort, being built on a neighboring site. The earliest inhabit ants were Troglodytes living in the many caves which riddled the hill surface; they were apparently a non-Semite (Shemite, of Shem) race, and there was some evidence that they at least knew of cremation. These, or a race soon after the earliest Semites inclosed the hill top with high earth rampart faced with rough stones -the earliest "walls" going back at least before 3000 BC. At an early period probably about, 3000 BC a race with a relatively high civilization fortified the whole hilltop with a powerful and remarkably well-built, wall, 14 ft. thick, with narrow towers of short projection at intervals of 90 ft. At a point on the south skle of this was unearthed a very remarkable, massive, brick gateway (all the other walls and buildings are of stone), with towers on each side still standing to the height, of 1(5 ft., but evidently once much higher. This gate showed a strong Egyp influence at work long before the first historic reference (XVII 1th Dynasty), for both gateway and wall to which it belonged had been ruined at an early date, the former indeed, after its destruction, was overlaid by the buildings of a city, which from its datable objects scarabs, etc must have belonged to the time of Amenhotep 111, i.e. as early as 1500 BC.

      The later wall, built, we may conclude, soon after the ruin of the former, and therefore about 1500 BC, was also a powerful construction and must have existed considerably over a thousand years, down,

      indeed, till 100 BC at least, when Genesis/er disappears from history as a fortified site. These walls in closed a larger area than either of the previous ones; they show signs of destruction and repairs, and Mr. Macalister is of the opinion that some of the ex tensive repairs in one place a gap of 150 ft. and the J2S inserted towers are the work of Solomon (1 Kings 9 17). This wall must, have existed in use through all we know of Genesis/er from Bible sources. When, from the ruined remains, we reconstruct in imagination these mighty ramparts, we need not wonder that the Hebrews, fresh from long wander ings in the wilderness, found it no easy task to capture cities so fortified as was this (Numbers 13 28; Deuteronomy 1 2S).

      Scarab with Xame of Amenhotep III. from Oezer. [From Iii/,l< Side-Lights from il,< Mound of Gezer. ,

      The foundations of a powerful building, which were found inserted in a gap in the southern walls, turned out conclusively to be the palace of Simon Maccabaeus who captured the city (1 Mace. 13 43) a graffito being found upon one of its stones running thus:

      Ila^Trpafs) Si/xcSvos Karen d~frj (?) ir(vp) (3a<ri,eiov l dmiira(s) SimOnos katepdge(f) p(ur) baxilciun,

      which seems to mean, "Pamphras, may he bring down [fire] on the palace of Simon."

      Within the city walls the foundations of some seven or eight cities of various successive periods were found, superimposed one above the other. The city s best days appear to have been shortly before the time of Joshua; the next, perhaps, at the time of the Judges. With the period to which we should probably assign the arrival of the Hebrews, there is a great, increase in the population, the hitherto inviolate environs of the "temple" being encroached upon by private dwellings: an inter esting commentary on Joshua 16 10.

      The great "High Place" which was uncovered is one of unique interest, and its discovery has thrown a flood of light upon the religion of the early Ca- naanites, that religion "the worship of Baal and Ashteroth" which was the great rival of the purer religion of Israel. This Ba al temple, or bainoth, consisted of a row of Samuel mii^cbholh or rude stone pillars ranging in height from 5 ft. 5 in. to 10 ft. 9 in. (see HIGH PLACK; PILLAR), together with a curious trough which may have been a socket for the: Asherah (see ASHKUAH), or some kind of a-ltar. The area around these pillars had a kind of rough floor of consolidated earth under which were found a number of large jars containing infant bones, considered to be the remains of infant, sacrifice. In close proximity to this "temple" was a double cave, the construction of which strongly suggested that it had been arranged for the giving of oracles. This high place had been used for very many centuries; the ma^ebhoth were not all of one period but had gradually been increased from one to seven, and an eighth of a more definitely sculptured form as a simulacrum priapi had been added some time

      Gezrites Gib eon



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      later. In the accumulated rubbish around these pillars were found enormous numbers of small stone phallic images, together with pottery plaques of Astarte, made with rude exaggeration of the sexual organs (sec BAAL; ASHTKKOTII).

      Another monument of great interest and high antiquiU was the great rock-cut tunnel. It is about. 23 ft. high, and 13 ft. wide, and descends by SO steps, 94 ft. through the solid rock, to a cave in which there is a spring. It is very similar to the grent tunnel known as "Warren s tumid and shaft" which was clearly constructed by the early Jebusites to reach from within the city s walls to the fountain of (iihon (see SILOAM; Ziox). This Gezer tunnel must, date at- least, to 2000 HC; it is evident, from the nature of the accumulated debris which blocked its mouth that it was actually abandoned about 1400 BC. Its antiquity is confirmed by the fact that it was evidently excavated with flint knives.

      At a much later period in history, in that of the Maccabees, the water supply of the city, in time of siege, at any rate, was largely dependent on an enor mous open cistern which Mr. Macalister cleared of earth and found capable of containing 2,000,000 gallons of water. Among the smaller "finds" which throw light upon the Bible history may be men tioned two much broken, cuneiform tablets, both referring to land contracts, which, from the names of the eponyms, can be dated to 051 and 649 BC respectively. They therefore belong to the time of the last, and one of the greatest, of the Assyr mon- archs, Ashurbanipal, the "noble Osnappar" of Ezra 4 10, and they show that, he was not only a great conqueror, but that in Philestina, Canaan-Land he had an organ ized government and that legal civil business was transacted in the language of Assyria.

      The illumination of OT history which the excava tions of Gezer have afforded can here be only hinted at, but references to it will occur in many of the articles in other parts of this Encyclopaedia.

      LITI:R.,TFKK. In Bible Side- Lights from the Mound of Gezer Professor R. A. south Macalister has described in a. popular form with illustrations some of his most remark able discoveries; while in the Memoirs of the Excavations at Gezer (1912), published by the Palestine Exploration Fund, Professor Macalister deals with the subject exhaustively.

      east west (1. MASTEBMAN GEZRITES, gez rlts. See GIRZITES.

      GHOST, gost (fl}B3, ncphcsh; irvtvfxa, pneuma): "Ghost," the middle-Eng. word for "breath," "spir it," appears in AV as the translated of ncphcsh ("breath," "the breath of life," animal soul or spirit, the vital principle, hence "life"), in tw r o places of the OT, viz. Job 11 20, "the giving up of the ghost" (so RV), and Jeremiah 15 9, "She hath given up the ghost"; gawa , "to gasp out," "expire" (die), is also several times so translated d (Genesis 26 8.17; 35 29; 49 33; Job 3 11;

      10 18; 13 19; 14 10; Lam 1 19). In Apoc (Tob 14 11) psiichf- is translated d in the same way as ncphcsh in the OT, and in 2 Mace 3 31, en cschdte pnot is rendered "give up the ghost," RV "quite at the last gasp."

      In the NT "to give up the ghost," is the translated of ckpned, "to breathe out" (Mark 15 37.39; Luke 23 46; soRV); of ckpsiicho, "to breathe out," "expire" (Acts 5 5.10; 12 23); in Matthew 27 50, aphtkcn to [>n< tit/in, and in John 19 30, pamlokcn to pneuma, are rendered respectively, "yielded" and "gave up the ghost," RV "yielded up his spirit," "gave up his spirit."

      "The Holy Ghost," is also frequent in AV; in ARV it is invariably changed to "Holy Spirit," in EHV sometimes only, chiefly in the Gospels. See HOLY SPIKIT; SPIRIT. west L. WALKER


      GIAH, gl a (rP3 , gl a h) . An unidentified place on the route followed by Abner in his flight, pur sued by Joab (2 Samuel 2 24). LXX renders Gal, cor responding to the Hebrews gc, "valley." The form gi"h may be due to corruption of the text.

      GIANTS, ji ants: The word appears in AV as the translated of the Hebrews words D" 1 *?" 1 ?: , n r phlllm (( ien 6 4; Numbers 13 33); D^XS"], r pha lm (Deuteronomy 2 11.20; 3 11. 13; Joshua 12 4, etc) ; S5E1 , rapJia (1 Chronicles 20 4.6.Samuel), or r,L~, rap/iuk (2 Samuel 21 16. IS. 20. 22); in one in stance of "V133, gibbor, lit. "mighty one" (Job 16


      In the first, two cases RV changes "giants" into the Hebrews words "Nephilim," n r phlllm, and "Re- phaim," r phalm, respectively (see these words). The "Nephilim" of Genesis 6 4 are not to be con founded with the "mighty men" subsequently de scribed as the offspring of the unlawful marriages of "the sons of God" and "the daughters of men." It is told that, they overspread the earth prior to these unhallowed unions. That, 1 he word, whatever its etymology, bears the sense of men of immense stature is evident from the later passages, Numbers 13 33 The same is true of the "Rephaim," as shown by the instance of Og (Deuteronomy. 3 11; Joshua 12 4). There is no doubt about the meaning of the word in the case of the giants mentioned in 2 Samuel 21 and

      1 Chronicles 20. See also ANTEDILUVIANS.



      GIBBAR, gib iir ("133, gibbar, "hero"): In Ezra

      2 20 the "children of Gibbar" are mentioned among those who returned with Zerubbabel. The |] pas sage (Neh 7 25) has "children of Gibeon."

      GIBBETHON, gib e-thon CpTl!^, giblfthdn): A city in the territory of Dan in the plain named with Eltekeh and Baalath (Joshua 19 44), and assigned to the Kohathite Levites (21 23). Later we find it in the hands of the Philis; and it was while be sieging the city that Nadab was slain by Baasha (1 Kings 15 27). After 25 years Omri, the general of Baasha, was here made king of the army when news reached them of Zimri s regicide (1 Kings 16 15 ff). It may possibly be identified with Kibbiah, which lies about 16 miles southeast of Jaffa; but no certain identification is possible. west EWINO

      GIBEA, gib e-a (S533, giWa , "hill"): A grand son of Caleb (1 Chronicles 2 49). His father was Sheya, whose mother was Maacah, Caleb s concubine (ver48).




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Gezrites Gibeon

      GIBEAH, gib g-a (H^ , gibWah, "hill"): The Hebrew word denotes generally an eminence or hill, in distinction from liar, which is used for mountain, or mountain range. It occurs, however, in two in stances, as a place-name. Under GEBA (q.v.) we have seen that Geba, Gibeah, and Gibeon are liable to be confused. This arises from their resemblance in form and meaning.

      (1) An unidentified city in the territory of Judah (Joshua 15 57). It is named in the group containing Carmel, Ziph and Kain; it is therefore probably to be sought to the southeast of Hebron. It may be one of the two villages mentioned by Onom (s.v. "Ga- bathon"), Gabaa and Gabatha, in the east of the Daroma. It is probably identical with Gibeah mentioned in 2 Chronicles 13 2.

      (2) A city described as belonging to Benjamin (Joshua 18 28; Judges 19 14), Gibeah of Benjamin (1 Samuel

      13 2.15; 14 16), Gibeah of the chil- 1. History dren of Benjamin (2 Samuel 23 29), Gibeah of Saul (1 Samuel 11 4; Isaiah 10 29), and possibly, also, Gibeah of God (1 Samuel 10 5m); see GIBEATH, 4. The narrative in which it first appears is one of extraordinary and tragic interest, casting priceless light on the conditions prevailing in those days when "there was no king in Israel" (Judges 19 ff). A Levite sojourning on the farther side of Matthew, Ephraim was deserted by his concubine who re turned to her father s house in Beth-lehem-judah. Thither he went to persuade her to return. Hosea pitably entertained by her father, he tarried till the afternoon of the fifth day. The evening was nigh when they came over against Jebus Jerusa lem but, rejecting his servant s suggestion that they should lodge in this "city of a stranger" i.e. the Jebusite the Levite pressed on, and when they were near to Gibeah the sun set. They entered the city and sat down in the street. The laws of hos pitality today do not compel the entertainment of strangers who arrive after sunset. But it may have been through disregard of all law that they were left unbefriended. An old man from Matthew, Ephraim took pity on them, invited them to his house, and made himself responsible for their necessities. Then follows the horrible story of outrage upon the Levite s concubine; the way in which he made known his wrongs to Israel; and the terrible revenge exacted from the Benjamites, who would not give up to justice the miscreants of Gibeah.

      Gibeah was the home of Saul, the first king of Israel, and thither he returned after his election at Mizpah (1 Samuel 10 20). From Gibeah he summoned Israel to assemble for the relief of Jabesh-gilead, which was threatened by Nahash the Ammonite (1 Samuel 11 4 ff). In the wars of Saul with the Philis, Gibeah seems to have played a conspicuous part (1 Samuel 13 15). Here were exposed the bodies of the seven sons of Saul, slain by David s orders, to ap pease the Gibeonites, furnishing the occasion for Rizpah s pathetic vigil (2 Samuel 21 1 ff). Gibeah is mentioned in the description of the Assyr advance on Jerus (Isaiah 10 29).

      The site now generally accepted as that of Gib eah is on Teleil el-Ful, an artificial mound about 4 miles north of Jerus, a short distance 2. Identi- east of the high road to Shechem. A fication little way north of Teleil el-Ful, the high

      road bifurcates, one branch turning eastward to Jeba, i.e. Geba (which should be read instead of "Gibeah" in Judges 20 31); the other con tinuing northward to Bethel. Not far from the parting of the ways, on the road to Jehu* lies er- Ram, corresponding to Rarnah (Judges 19 13). At Gibeah, about 30 furlongs from Jerus, Titus en camped for the night on his advance against the city from the north Tdeil el-Ful quite satisfactorily suits all the data here indicated.

      The words in Judges 20 33 rendered by AV "the meadows of Gibeah," KV "Maareh-geba" simply transliterating and RVm the meadow of Geba" (or Gibeah), by a slight emendation of the text , read "from the west of Gibeah," which is certainly correct. west EWIXG

      GIBEATH, gib c--ath (n^ , oiWath): This is the status constructus of the foregoing (Gibeah). It is found in several compound place-names.

      (1) Gibcath-ha-araloth (nibnrn PSIS , giWath htfaraldth). EV translated s lit. "hill of the foreskins"; but the margins suggest the proper name. Here the Israelites were circumcised after the passage of the Jordan (Joshua 5 3). The place was therefore be tween that river and Jericho.

      (2) Gibeatk Phinehas (CHpE nyna , giWath pln e has), the burial place of Elea/ar the son of Aaron in Matthew, Ephraim (Joshua 24 33 AV "a hill that pertained to Phinehas," RV "the hill of Phinehas," RVm "Gibeah of Phinehas"). Coiuler would iden tify it with Awertah in the plain of Makhneh, not far from Nablils, where "the Samaritans show the tombs of Phinehas and Eleazar, Abishuah and Itha- mar" (Tent Work, 41 f). The "tomb of Elea/ar" is IS ft, long, plastered all over and shaded by a splendid terebinth." Guerin places it at Jlbia, 3 miles north of Karyat el-* A nab (Judee, III, 37 f; Sam- aril , lOOff). There is no certainty.

      (3) Gibi-ath hiuninnrch ("H SH P"33 , gibWaih ha lt/drill), a hill on the north side of the valley from the camp of Gideon, beside which lay the Midianites (Judges 7 1, EV "the hill of Moreh"; the Hebrews is lit, "hill of the teacher"). It is probably identical with Jebel Dulia, which rises on the north of the Vale of Jezreel. Moore (J wives, 200) mistakenly calls the mountain Nabl Dahl. This is, of course, the name of the "prophet" whose shrine crowns the hill. See MOKEH.

      (4) Gilxath Jm-Elohim (D^n 3$n ny^}, gibh- *alh hd- Slohlm), the place where Saul, after leaving Samuel, met the company of prophets, and prophe sied with them (1 Samuel 10 5.10). It is defined as the place "where is the garrison for pillar] of the Philis." This may be intended to distinguish it from GIBEAH (2), with which it is often identified. In this case it may be represented by the modern Itamallah, about 10 miles north of Jerus. See also TAHOK.

      (5) Gibeatk lia-IIaehilak (1 Samuel 23 19; 26 1) is identical with HACHILAH (q.v.).

      (6) Gibealh Anunah (2 Samuel 2 24) is identical with

      A.MMAH (q.V.).

      (7) Gibealh Gareb (Jeremiah 31 39) is identical with GAKEB (q.v.). ,V. EWINU

      GIBEATH (Joshua 18 28). See GIHEAH (2). GIBEATHITE, gib C-ath-It, See SHEMAAH.

      GIBEON, gib fe-un Op^na , gibbon): One of the royal cities of the Hivites (Joshua 9 7). It was a greater city than Ai; and its inhabitants were re puted mighty men (10 2). It fell within the terri tory allotted to Benjamin (18 25), and was one of the cities given to the Levites (21 17).

      By a stratagem the Gibeonites secured for them selves and their allies in Chephirah, Bee roth and Kiriath-jearim immunity from attack 1. The by the Israelites. Terrified by the fate

      Gibeonites of Jericho and Ai, a company disguised as ambassadors from a far country, their garments and shoes worn, and their provisions moldy as from the length of their journey, went to Joshua at Gilgal, and persuaded him and the princes of Israel to make a covenant with them. Three days later the deception was discovered and

      Gibeon Gideon



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      the wrath of the congregation of Israel aroused. In virtue of the covenant ihcir lives were secured; hut for their duplicity Joshua cursed Ilieiu, and con demned them to be bondmen, "hewers of wood and drawers of water for the house of my God" (.Joshua 9 23), "for the congregation and for the altar of the Lord (ver 27 AV). This points to their employ ment in the sanctuary; and possibly may shed some light on the massacre of the Gibconitcs by Saul (2 8 21 1 f). The rest of the Canaanites resented the defection of the Hivites which so greatly weakened the forces for defence, and, headed by Adoni-zedek of Jerus, they assembled to wreak vengeance on Gibeon. The threatened city appealed to Joshua, who made a swift night march, fell suddenly upon the confederates, routed them, and chased them by the way of the ascent of Beth-horon, and smote them to Azekah, and unto Makkedah" (Joshua 10 1 ff).

      A three years famine in the days of David was attributed to (Jod s anger at the unexpiated crime of Saul in slaying the Gibeonites. He did this "in his x.eal for .... Israel and Judah," who may have fretted at the inconvenience of having the Gibcon- ites among them. The latter believed that. Saul s desire was to destroy them utterly. When David tried to arrange mat ters with them they stood upon their ancient rights, claiming life for life. They would lake no blood money: they demanded blood from the family of the slayer of their people. This demand David could not resist, and handed over to them seven sons of Saul (2 Samuel 21 1 ff).

      The army of Ishbosheth under Aimer, and that

      of David under Joab, met at the pool of Gibeon.

      An attempt to settle the quarrel, by

      2. The means of 12 champions on either side, Champions failed, as each man slew his fellow, and

      the 24 perished side by side. A "sore battle" ensued in which Aimer was beaten; lie was pursued by the fleet-footed Asahel, brother of Joab, whom he slew. See HKI.KATII-II A/.zrimi.

      Po*sibly we should read "Gibeon" instead of "Geba" in 2 Samuel 5 2~>, as in the l| passage, 1 Chronicles 14 16 (III)}}, s.v.) From Baal-perazim David was to make a circuit, and fall upon the I hilis who were encamped in the plain of Rephaim ,Y. of_ Jerus. Perhaps, however, we should read "( libeah" in bot h places. Cheyne (Eli, s.v.) thinks the hill town of Baal-perazim may be intended.

      When, after the death of Absalom and the sup pression of his rebellion, Bichri raised the standard of revolt, Amasa was sent, to call out

      3. Murder the men of Judah against him. Tarry- of Amasa ing longer than the time appointed,

      there was danger lest Bichri might, have opportunity to strengthen his position; so David dispatched Abishai and the troops that were with him to attack Bichri at once. Joab went with this expedition. Obviously he could never be con tent with a second place. The force of Amasa was met at the great stone; of Gibeon." There Joab treacherously slew that unsuspecting general, and, himself assuming command, stamped out the rebel lion with his accustomed thoroughness (2 Samuel 20 4 IT). "The great stone" appears to have been well known, and may have; possessed some religious character.

      Gibeon was the seat of an ancient, sanctuary, called in 1 Kings 3 4 "the great high place." Here,

      according to 2 Chronicles 1 3, was the taber-

      4. The nacle made in the wilderness but see Sanctuary 1 Kings 8 1. it was the scene of Solo mon s great sacrifice after which he

      slept in the sanctuary and dreamed his famous dream (1 Kings 3 4 IT; 9 2; 2 Chronicles 1 3.13, etc).

      By "the great waters that are in Gibeon" Johanan overtook Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, and freed the captives he had taken from Mizpah (Jeremiah 41 11 ff). Among those who returned with Zerubbabel

      were <>f> "children of Gibeon" (Neh 7 2f>; cf 3 7). At Gibeon Cestius Gallus encamped when marching against Jerus from Antipatris (h.l, II, xix, 1).

      The ancient, city is represented by t he modern village fl-Jlh. It is fully o miles northwest of .Jerus, and about a mile north of Ncby tiumwll, on a 5. Identifi- double knoll, with terraced slopes, but cation and rocky and precipitous to the 10. The Description village stands amid striking remains of antiquity. About a hundred paces from the village to the east is a large reservoir with a spring. Lower down, among the olives, are the remains of another and larger reservoir, which col lected the overflow from the first. This is probably the "pool" of 2 Samuel 2 13, and "the great waters" of Jeremiah 41 12. Kl-Jlh stands in the midst of a rich upland plain not far south of the great pass which goes down by way of the Beth-horons into the vale of Aijalon.

      west 10wi,(;

      GIBEONITES, gib r-un-its. Inhabitants of

      GliiKON (q.V.).

      GIBLITES, gib lits. See CKBAUTKS.

      GIBDALTI, gi-dal tl (^ "^ , <i><l,ldUl, "I mag nify [Godl"): A son of Ileman (1 Chronicles 25 4.2!)), one of David s musicians.

      GIDDEL, gid el ( ""}, f/iddcl, "very great," "stout"):

      (1 ) The name of the head of a family of Nethinim (Kxr2 17 = Neh 7 49=1 Esdras 5 30 [here as Cat hua]).

      (2) The name of the head of a family of Solomon s servants lE/r 2 f>(i = Neh 7 ">Samuel=l Esdras 5 33 [here Isdael]).

      GIDEON, gid e-un (T2"3 , giiU/ on, "cutter

      down" "feller" or "hewer"): Also named Jerub-

      baal (Judges 6 32) and Jerubbcshefh (2

      1. His Samuel 11 21), youngest son of Joash, of Family and the clan of Abiezer in the tribe of Home Manassch. His home was at, Ophrah,

      and his family an obscure; one. He became the chief leader of Manassch and the fifth recorded judge of Israel. The record of his life is found in Judges 68.

      Joash was an idolater, and sacrifices <o Baal were common among the entire clan. Gideon seems to have held this worship in contempt, and to have pondered deeply the causes of Israel s reverses and the injuries wrought upon his own family by the hand of the Midianites.

      The Midianites under Zebah and Zalmunna, their

      two greatest chiefs, accompanied by other wild

      tribes of the eastern desert, had grad-

      2. The ually encroached on the territory of Midianite Israel in Central Philestina, Canaan-Land. They came Oppression first as marauders and pillagers at the

      time of the harvests, but later they forcibly took possession of lands, and thus inflicted permanent injury ami loss, esp. upon Manassch and Ephraim. The conflicts became so numerous, the appropriation of land so flagrant, that the matter of sustenance became a serious problem (6 4). The. mult it tide of these; desert hordes and the cruelty of their depredation rendered defence difficult, and, lacking in the spirit of national unity, the Israelites were 1 driven to dens, caves and rocky strongholds for safet y (6 2). After seven years of such invasion and suffering Gideon comes upon the scene.

      It is probable that Gideon had already distin guished himself in resistance to the Midianites (6 12), but he now receives Divine

      3. The Call commission to assume the leadership. of Gideon Having taken his own little harvest to

      a secret place for threshing, that it might escape the greed of the Midianites, he is sur-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Gib eon Gideon

      prised while at- work by a visit from the Lord in the form of an angel. However this scene (6 11 IT) and its miraculous incidents may be interpreted, there can be no question of the divineness of Gid eon s call or that the voice which spoke to him was the voice of God. Neither the brooding over the death of his brothers at Tabor (8 18) nor the pa triotic impulses dwelling within him can account for his assumption of leadership. Nor did he be come leader at, the demand of the people. He evi dently had scarcely thought of himself as his country s deliverer. The call not only came to him as a surprise, but found him distrustful both of himself (6 15) and of his people (ver 13). It found him too without inclination for the task, and only his conviction that, the command was of God per suaded him to assume leadership. This gives the, note of accuracy to the essential facts of the story. Gideon s demand for a sign (ver 17) being answered, the food offered the messenger having been con sumed by fire at the touch of his staff, Gideon acknowledged the Divine commission of his visitor, and at the place of visitation built an altar to JAH (Jehovah) (vs 19 if).

      The call and first commission of Gideon are eloselv

      joined. He is at. once commanded to destroy the

      altars of Baal set up by his father at

      4. His First Ophrah, to build an altar to JAH (Jehovah) at the Commission same place and thereon to offer one of

      his father s bullocks as a sacrifice (vs 25 f). There is no reason to look on this as a second version of Gideon s call. It is rather the beginning of instruction, and is deeply significant, of the accu racy of t lie story, in that it follows t he line of all reve lation to God s prophets and reformers to begin their work at home. Taking ten men, under the cover of darkness, Gideon does as commanded (ver 27). The morning revealed his work and visited upon him the wrath of the people of Ophrah. They demand of Joash that he put his son to death. The answer of Joash is an ironical but valid defence of Gideon. Why should the people plead for Baal A god should be able to plead his own cause (vs 2,8 ff). This defence gained for Gideon the name Jerubbaal (y e rubba*al, i.e. yarcbh bo ha-ba aL "Let Baal plead," 6 32 A, r ).

      The time intervening between this home scone and the actual campaign against, the Midianites cannot definitely be named. 1). is probable that it took months for Gideon even to rally the people of his own clan. The fact is that all the subsequent, events of the story are somewhat confused by what looks like a double narrative in which there are ap parent but not vital differences. Without ignoring this fact it is still possible to get a connected account of what actually transpired.

      ,hen the allied invaders were in camp on the

      plain of Jezreel, we find Gideon, having recruited

      the Abie/rites and sent, messengers to

      5. Gideon s the various tribes of Israel (6 3lfj, Army pitching his camp near the Midianites.

      The location of the various camps of Gideon is difficult, as is the method of the recruiting of the tribes. For instance, 6 35 seems to be in direct contradiction to 7 23, and both are consid ered of doubtful origin. There was evidently, however, a preliminary encampment at the place of rallying. While waiting here, Gideon further tested his commission by the; dry and wet fleece (6 37 ff) and, convinced of God s purpose to save Israel by his leadership, he moves his camp to the southeast edge of the plain of Jezreel nearby the spring of Harod. From his point of vantage here he could look down on the tents of Midian. The account of the reduction of his large army from 32,000 to 300 (7 2 ff) is generally accepted as belonging to a later tradition. Neither of the tests, however, is un

      natural, and the first, was not unusual. According to the account, Gideon at the Lord s command first excused all the fearful. This left him with 10,000 men. This number was reduced to 300 by a test of their method of drinking. This test can easily be seen to evidence the eagerness and courage of men for battle (Jos).

      Having thus reduced the army and having the assurance that, the Lord would deliver to him and his little band the forces of Midian, 6. The Gideon, with a servant, wont by night

      Midianites to the edge of the camp of his enemy, Discom- and there heard the telling and inte r- fiture and protation of a dream which greatly Flight encouraged him and led him to strike

      an immediate blow (7 !)iT). Again ,ve find a conflict of statement, between 7 20 and 7 22, but the conflict is as to detail only. Dividing his men into three equal bands, Gideon arranges that with Irumpets, and lights concealed in pitchers, and with the cry, "The sword of JAH (Jehovah) and of Gideon!" they shall descend and charge the Midianites: simul taneously from three sides. This stratagem for concealing his numbers and for terrifying the enemy succeeds, and the Midianites and their allies flee in disorder toward the Jordan (7 18 ff). The rout was complete, and the victory was intensified by the fact that in the darkness the enemy turned their swords against, one another. Admitting that we have two narratives (of 7 24; 83 with 8 -1 ff) and that there is some difference between them in the details of the attack and the progress of the conflict, there is no need for confusion in the main line of events. One part of the fleeing enemy evi dently crossed the Jordan at Suceoth, being led by Zebah and Zalmunna. The superior force followed the river farther south, toward the ford of Beth- barah. Gideon sent messengers to the men of Ephraim (7 24), probably before the first attack, asking them to intercept the Midianites, should they attempt to escape by the fords in their terri tory. This they did, defeating the

      7. Death of enemy at Beth-barah and slaying the Oreb and princes Oreb and Zeeb ("the Raven" Zeeb and "the Wolf"). As proof of their

      victory and valor they brought the heads of the princes to Gideon and accused him of having discounted their bravery by not calling thorn earlier into the fight. But Gideon was a master of diplomacy, as well as of strategy, and won the friend ship of Ephraim by magnifying their accomplish ment in comparison with his own (8 1 ff).

      Gideon now pursues Zebah and Zalmunna on the east side of the river. The people on that side are still in great, fear of the Midianites and refuse even to feed his army. At Succoth they say to him, "Are the hands of Zebah and Zalmunna now in thy hand, that we should give bread unto thine army? " (8 ()). At Penuel he meets with the same refusal (8 8). Promising to deal with Succoth and Penuel as they deserve when he is through with his present task, Gideon pushes on with his half-famished but courageous men, overtakes the Midianites, defeats t hem, capt ures Zebah and Zalmunna, and, ret urning, punishes, according to his promise, both Succoth and Penuel (8 7.9.13 ff).

      Thus was the power of the Midianites and the

      desert hordes broken in Canaan and a forty years

      peace came 1 to Israel. But the two

      8. Death of kings of Midian must now moot their Zebah and fate as defeated warriors. They had Zalmunna led their forces at Tabor when the

      brothei s of Gideon perished. So Gid eon commands his young son Jether to slay them as though they were not worthy of death at a war rior s hand (8 20). The youth fearing the task, Gideon himself put them to death (8 21).

      Gideoni Gilead



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      The people clamored to make Gideon king. Ho

      refused, being moved possibly by a. desire to main

      tain the theocracy. To this end he

      9. Gideon s asks only the jewelry taken as spoil Ephod in the battles (8 24 ff), and with it

      makes an ephod, probably an image of JAH (Jehovah), and places it in a house of the Lord at Ophrah. By this act it was later thought that Gideon con tributed to a future idolatry of Israel. The narra tive properly closes with 8 2S. The remaining

      verses containing the account of Gid-

      10. His eon s family and death (8 30 ff) and Death the record of events immediately

      subsequent to Gideon s death (8 33 IT) come from other sources than the original narrators.

      C. east SCHKNK

      GIDEONI, gid-C-o m C 1 ^""* , f/idh onl): The father of Abidan who was prince of Benjamin, men tioned only in connection with the son (Xu 1 11; 2 22; 7 60.65; 10 24).

      GIDOM, gl dom (DIP"}, gidVom): The limit eastward, from Gibeah toward the wilderness, of the pursuit of Benjamin by Israel (.)gs 20 45). No name suggesting tin s has yet been recovered. It is not mentioned elsewhere.

      GIER-EAGLE, jer -e-g l (2HT , rdhdm; kukttox, in Leviticus, -rropcjjvpicov, por/ili /ir ioit , in Deuteronomy ) : The name applied to one of the commonest of the vul tures, and not an eagle at all. The word is derived from a lleb root, meaning "to love," and was ap plied to the birds because mated pairs seldom sepa rated. These were smaller birds and inferior to the largest members of the family. They nested on a solid base, lived in pairs, and not only flocked over carrion as larger species permitted, but also ate the vilest offal of all sorts, for which reason they were protected by a death penalty by one of the Pharaohs.

      Gier-Eagle (Neophron percnop/erus).

      Because of this the birds became so frequent and daring around camps, among tent-dwellers, and in cities, that they were commonly called "Pharaoh s chickens." They are mentioned in the Bible in the lists of abominations found in Leviticus 11 13 and Deuteronomy 14 12 (AV "ossifrage"); 14 17 AV (RV "vulture").


      GIFT, gift (HiWa , matldndh, ^~^"Q , rninhdh, "IlTiS , shdhadh; Swpov, doron, 8ped, dorcd, ,o.- pio-|ia, charisma): In Genesis 25 G; Exodous 28 38; Numbers

      18 6.7.29; Ezekiel 20 26, etc, malldndh, "a gift," is so rendered; minhdh, an offering or present, used esp. of the "meat offerings," is translated d "gift" (2 Samuel 8 2.6 AV; 2 Chronicles 26 8), in which passages "tribute" is meant, as RV; 32 23; Psalm 45 12. A few other words occur singly, e.g. cshkar, "a reward" (Psalm 72 10); mas eth, "lifting up" (Est 2 18); nalhun is translated d "gifts" (Numbers 8 19; RVm "Hebrews n thunlm, given"); Hctl/ich, ndiUidu, "impure gifts" (Ezekiel 16 33); nis- xe lh, "a thing lifted up" (2 Samuel 19 42); shdhadh means "a bribe" (Exodous 23 8; Deuteronomy 16 19; 2 Chronicles 19 7; Prov

      6 3f>; 17 8.23; Isaiah 1 23; Ezekiel 22 12); in each instance ARV has "bribe" except Prov 6 35, "gifts"; t e rumah, "a present" (Prov 29 4), may also mean a bribe, AV "he that receiveth gifts," RV "he that exacteth gifts," m "imposeth tribute, Hebrews a man of offerings."

      In the NT (l/lrou, "a present," "gift" (from didomi, "to give"), is translated d "gift" (Matthew 2 11; 5 23.24 bis; Mark

      7 11 AV; He 5 1; The Revelation 11 10, etc, referring chiefly to gifts or offerings to God); dorca, "a free gift" (.In 4 10; Acts 2 38; Romans 5 15.17; 2 Corinthians 9 15; He 6 4, etc, referring to the gifts of God); dorcma, "a free gift" (Romans 5 16; Jas 1 17, ERV "boon"); //o.s/.s, "a giving" (Jas 1 17, "every good gift," RVm "giving"); charisma, "grace," "favor," a benefit, or good conferred, is also used of Divine gifts and favors, esp. of the supernatural gifts imparted by the Holy Spirit (charismata) enumerated in Romans 12; 1 Corinthians 12; the, word occurs translated d "gift, gifts" (Horn 1 11), "some spiritual gift" (5 15.16, "free gift"; 6 23, "The gift of God is eternal life," RV "free gift"; 11 29; 1 Corinthians 1 7; 7 7; 2 Corinthians 111; 1 Timothy 4 14; 2 Timothy 1 6; 1 Pet 4 10); char/*, "grace," "favor" (2 Corinthians 8 4, RV "grace"); mcriamos, "distribution," "parting" (He 2 4, RVm "distributions"); anathema, "a thing devoted to God," is once (Luke 21 5) used of "the goodly gifts" (HV "offerings") which adorned the Temple at Jems.

      In RV "gift" is substituted in the text of Genesis 33 1 1 for blessing, in "Hebrews blessing"; "boasteth himself of his gifts falsely" (Prov 25 1-t) for "boasteth himself of a false gift," in "Hebrews in a gift of falsehood"; "a part ing gift" for "presents" (Micah 1 14); "Given to God" for "a gift" (Mark 7 11).



      GIHON, gi hon CJTP3, glhon; Ti,<av, (Icon): One of the four rivers of Eden (Genesis 2 13). It is said to compass the whole land of Gush (Ethiopia), prob ably a province 10. of the Tigris. The Gihon is thought by Sayce to be the Kerkha, coming down from Luristan through the province known in the cuneiform texts as Kassi, probably the Gush of the Bible. See EUEX.

      I sed fig. of wisdom in Sir 24 27, "as Gihon [AV Geon] in the days of vintage."

      GIHON CjTPJ, glhon, Vina, gihon [in 1 Kings], from root H" 1 } , "to burst forth"):

      (1 ) See preceding article.

      (2) The Nile in Jeremiah 2 18 LXX (T-r,^, Gedn); in Hebrews "limp , shihor (see SHIHOR).

      (3) A spring in Jems, evidently sacred, and, for that reason, selected as the scene of Solomon s coronation (1 Kings 1 38). It is without doubt the spring known to the Moslems as *Ain Umm ed dcraj ("the spring of the steps") and to the Chris tians as *Ain Sitti Miriam ("the spring of the lady Mary"), or commonly as the "Virgin s Fount." It is the one true spring of Jerus, the original source of attraction to the site of the early settlers; it is sit-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Gideoni Gilead

      uated in the Kidron valley on the east side of "Ophel," and due south of the temple area. See JERUSALEM. The water in the present day is brackish and im pregnated with sewage. The spring is intermittent in character, "bursting up" at intervals: this feature may account for the name Gihon and for its sacred characters. In NT times it was, as it is today, credited with healing virtues. Sec BETJI- KSDA. Its position is clearly defined in the OT. Manasseh "built an outer wall to the city of David, on the west side of Gihon, in the valley" ( = Nahal, i.e. the Kidron; 2 Chronicles 33 14). From (Jihon Ileze- kiah made his aqueduct (2 Chronicles 32 30), now the Siloam tunnel. See SILOAM.

      Thi; Virgin s Fount.

      The spring is approached by a steep descent down 30 steps, the water rising deep underground; the condition is due to the vast accumulation of rub bish the result of the many destructions of the city which now fills the valley bed. Originally the water ran down the open valley. The water rises from a long deep crack in the rock, partly under the lowest of the steps and to a lesser extent in the mouth of a small cave, 11 , ft. long by "> ft. wide, into which all the water pours. The village women of Siloam obtain the water at the mouth of the cave, but when the supply is scanty they ac tually go under the lowest step where there is a kind of chamber and fill their vessels there. At the farther end of this cave is the opening leading into the aqueduct down which the water flows to emerge after many windings at the pool of Siloam. The first part of this aqueduct is older than the lime of Hezekiah and led originally to the perpendicular shaft, connected with "Warren s tunnel" described elsewhere (see SILOAM; ZION).

      The preeminent position of importance which Gihon held in the eyes of the earlier inhabitants of Jerus is shown by the extraordinary number of passages, rock cuttings, walls and aqueducts which exist all about the spring. Walls have been made at different periods to bank up the waters and direct them into the channels provided for them. Of aque ducts, besides the "Siloam aqueduct," two others have been formed. One running from the source at a considerable lower level than that of Hezekiah was followed by the present writer (see PEFS, 1902, 35-38) for 176 ft. It was very winding, fol lowing apparently the west side of the Kidron valley. It was a well-cemented channel, about 1| ft. wide and on an average of 4k ft. high, roofed in with well- cut stones. There are no certain indications of age, but in the writer s opinion it is a much later con struction than Hezekiah s aqueduct, though the rock-cut part near the source may be older. It was discovered by the Siloam fdlahin, because, through a fault in the dam, all the water of the "Virgin s Fount" was disappearing down this channel. A

      third aqueduct has recently been discovered run ning off at a higher level than the other two. It is a channel deeply cut in the rock with curious trough- like stones all along its floor. It appears to be made for water, but one branch of it actually slopes up ward toward its end. The pottery, which is early Hebrew, shows that it is very ancient. The whole accumulated debris around the source is full of pre- Israelite and early Israelite pottery.

      east west G. MASTERMAN

      GILALAI, gil a-li, gi-la li pbba , gilalay): A musician in the procession at the dedication of the wall, son of a priest (Neh 12 36).

      GILBOA, gil-bo a, MOUNT (rsban "in , bar ha- gilbo a *, "Mount of the Gilboa"): Unless we should read "Gilboa" for "Gilead" in Judges 7 3 (see GILEAD, 2) this mountain is mentioned in Scripture only in connection with the last conflict of Saul with the Philis, and his disastrous defeat (1 Samuel 28 4; 31 1. Samuel; 2 Samuel 1 6.21; 21 12; 1 Chronicles 10 1.8). If Zer*ln be identical with Jezreel a point upon which Professor R. A. south Macalister has recently cast some doubt Saul must have occupied the slopes on the northwest side of the mountain, near "the fountain which is in Jezreel" (1 Samuel 29 1). The Philis attacked from the plain, and the battle went sore against the men of Israel, who broke and fled; and in the flight Jonathan, Abinadab and Malchi-shua, sons of Saul, were slain. Rather than be taken by his lifelong foes, Saul fell upon his sword and died (1 Samuel 31 1 ff).

      The modern name of the mountain is Jcbel Fak Sa. It rises on the eastern edge of the plain of Esdraelon, and, running from Zcr*ln to the southeast, it then sweeps southward to join the Samarian up lands. It presents an imposing appearance from the plain, but the highest point, Sheikh Burkdn, is not more than 1,696 ft. above sea level. In the higher reaches the range is rugged and barren; but vegetation is plentiful on the lower slopes, esp. to the west The Kishon takes its rise on the mountain. Under the northern clifTs rises Am Jalud, possibly identical with HAROU, WELL OF, which see. In J el- bun, a village on the western declivity, there is per haps an echo of the old name. west EWING

      GILEAD, gil p-ad O^an, ha-gil<adh, "the Gil ead"): The name is explained in Genesis 31 46 ff.51, as derived from Hebrews gul, "a cairn," and *edh, "wit ness," agreeing in meaning with the Aram. y e ghar- stihadhulhtf . The Arab, jil ad means "rough," "rugged."

      (1) A city named in Hosea 68; 12 11, possibly to be identified with Gilead near to Mizpah (Judges 10 17). If this is correct, the ancient city may be represented by the modern J-iTad, a ruin about 5 miles north of es-Xalt.

      (2) A mountain named in Judges 7 3. Gideon, ordered to reduce the number of men who were with him, commanded all who were "fearful and trem bling" to "return and depart from Matthew. Gilead." RVm reads "return and go round about from Matthew. Gilead." Gideon and his army lay to the south of the plain of Jezreel on the lower slopes of Gilboa. It has been suggested (Studer, Comm., ad loc.) that, as the Midianites lay between the men of the north ern tribes and their homes, they were told to cross the Jordan, make a detour through Gilead, and thus avoid the enemy. Possibly, however, we should read Gilboa for Gilead; or part of the mountain may have borne the name of Gilead. The last sug gestion is favored by the presence of a strong spring under the northern declivity of Gilboa, nearly 2 miles from Zer*ln, possibly to be identified with the Well of Harod. In the modern name, * Ain Jalud, there may be an echo of the ancient Gilead.

      Gilead Gin


      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      (3) The name is applied firm-rally to the mountain

      mass lying between the Yarmuk on (he north, und

      Wdtlij Ili-xhan on the south; the Jordan

      1. The Land being the boundary on (lie west, while of Gilead on (ho east it marched with the desert.

      Mount Gilead lit. Mount of the Gilead" may refer (o some particular height which we have now no means of identifying (Genesis 31 23). The name Jtbd JiTail is still, indeed, applied to a. mountain south of Nd/ir cz-Zcrkd and north of e.s-/v;/(; but this does not meet (he necessities of the passage as it stands. The same expression in Deuteronomy 3 12 ob viously stands for the whole country. This is prob ably true also in Cant 4 1. The name Gilead is sometimes used to denote the whole country east of the. Ionian (Genesis 37 25; Joshua 22 9; 2 Samuel 2 9, etc). Again, along with Bashaii, it indicates the land east

      of Jordan, as distinguished from the

      2. Bashan Moab plateau (Deuteronomy 3 10; Joshua 13 11;

      2 Kings 10 33). In (he X. Gilead bor dered upon Geshur and Maacah (Joshua 13 11.13); and here the natural boundary would be formed by the deep gorge of the Ynrnnl.k and ,Vwly cxlt- Hhi lldlrfi. In pre-Israelite (imes the Jabbok (Xuhr cz-Zcrkd), which cuts the country in two, divided the kingdom of Sihon from that of Og (Deuteronomy, 3 lt>; Jcxsh 12 2). The frontiers between the tribes of Reuben, Gad and Manasseh cannot, be indicated with any certainty. Probably they varied at differ ent times (cf Joshua 13 2HT; 1 Chronicles"6 southD.I 1.16). It greatly increases the difficulty that so many of the cities named are still unidentified. But in any case it is clear that the bulk of Gilead fell to Gad, so that Gilead might stand for Gad (Judges 5 17). HAVVOTH- .IAIII (which see), "the villages of .lair," lay in Gilead (Judges 10 4). The modern division of the country follows the natural features. From the Yarwuk to ,iihr < :-Z* rka is the district of *Ajlun; and from the Zrrkd to the Arnon is <l-l>ilka.

      The geological formation is the same as that of Western Philestina, Canaan-Land, but tin- underlying sandstone, which

      does not appear west of the Jordan,

      3. Geology forms the base slopes of the chain of

      Moab and Gilead, and is traceable as far as the Jabbok. It is covered in part by the more recent white marls which form the curious peaks of the foothills immediately above the Jordan valley; but reaches above them to an elevation of 1,000 ft. above the Mediterranean on the 8., and forms the bed of the linkci^a basin farther east, and 1,000 ft. higher. Above this lies the hard, imper vious dolomite limestone which appears in the rug ged hills round the Jabbok and in Jcbcl *Ajliln, rising on an average l,f>00 ft. above the sandstone and forming the bed of the copious springs. It also dips toward the Jordan valley, and the water from the surface of the plateau, sinking down to the sur face of their formation, bursts out of the hill slopes on the west in perennial brooks. It was from the ruggedness of this hard limestone that. Gilead ob tained its name. Above this again is the white chalk of the desert plateau, the same as that found in Samaria and Lower Galilee, with bands of flint or chert in contorted layers, or strewn in pebbles on the surface. Where this formation is deep the country is bare and arid, supplied by cisterns and deep wells. Thus the plateau becomes desert, while the hill slopes abound in streams and springs; and for this reason Western Gilead is a fertile country, and Eastern Gilead is a wilderness (Conder, DB,s.v.~). The uplands of Gilead may be described as the crumpling of the edge of the great eastern plateau ere it plunges into the Ghor. The

      4. Moun- average height of the range is about tains 4,000 ft. above the Jordan valley, or

      3,000 ft. above the Mediterranean. The greatest height is toward the south, where it cul

      minates in Jcbcl O.s7/ a (3,597 ft.), to the north of cs- Salt. This mountain commands a most spacious view. To the east of it lies the hollow (an old lake bottom) of cl-Bukci^a, fully 1,500 ft. lower. In the north we have Jebel Hakart (3,408 ft.), west of Reimun. Almost, as high (3,430 ft.) is Jcbcl Kafkafah, about 12 miles to the northeast A striking point (2,700 ft.) fully 2 miles northwest of *Ajliin, is crowned by Kid* at cr-ltabail, whence again a view of extraordinary extent is gained.

      The Yarmuk and the Zcrkd see JABBOK arc

      the main streams, but almost every valley has its

      perennial brook. While not so rich

      5. Streams as the volcanic loam in the north and in and the south, the soil of Gilead amply repays Products the labor of the husbandman. Of

      flowers the most plentiful are the phlox, the cist us and the narcissus. Hawthorn, mastic and arbutus abound, while many a glen and slope is shady with shaggy oak woods, and, in the higher reaches, with pines. The streams are fringed with oleander. The monotony of the stony plateau is broken by clumps of the hardy white broom. In the lower ground are found the tamarisk and the lotus, with many a waving cane-brake. The scenery is more beautiful and picturesque than that of any other district, of Philestina, Canaan-Land. The soil is not now cultivated to any great, extent; but it furnishes ample pasture for many flocks and herds (Cant 6 5).

      The ishmaelites from Gilead (Genesis 37 25) were carrying "spicery and balm and myrrh." From old time Gilead was famed for its BALM (q.v.). The lot, translated (i "myrrh" in the above passage, was probably the gum produced by the Cist us ladaniferus, a flower which still abounds in Gilead.

      After the conquest, as we have seen, Gilead passed mainly into the hands of Gad. An Ammon ite attack was repulsed by the prowess

      6. History of Jephthah (Judges 11 Iff); and the

      spite of the Ephraimites was terribly punished (12 1 f f). Gilead at first favored the cause of Ishbosheth (2 Samuel 2 9), but after the murder of that, prince the Gileadites came with the rest of Israel to David (6 1). By the conquest of the fortress Rabbali, which the Ammonites had con tinued to hold, the land passed finally under the power of David (12 215 IT). David fled to Maha- naim from Absalom, and that rebel prince perished in one of the forests of Gilead (2 Samuel 17 24; 18 <> ff). Joab s census included Gilead (24 6). Solomon had two commissariat districts in Gilead (1 Kings 4 13f.l9). Before Kamoth-gilead, which he sought to win back from the Syrians who had captured it, Ahab received his death wound (22 1 ff). The Syrians asserted their supremacy in Gilead (2 Kings 10 32 f) where Moab and Israel had contended with varying fortune (M Samuel). At length Tiglath- pileser overran the country and transported many of the inhabitants (2 Kings 15 29). This seems to have led to a reconquest of the land by heathen ism, and return to Gilead was promised to Israel (Zee 10 10).

      At a later time the Jewish residents in Gilead were exposed to danger from their heathen neigh bors. On their behalf Judas Maccabaeus invaded the country and met with striking success (1 Mace 6 Off). Alexander Jannaeus, who had subdued Gilead, was forced to yield it again to the king of Arabia (Ant, XIII, xiv, 2; BJ,I, iv, 3). During the Roman period, csp. in the 2d and 3d cents. AD, the land enjoyed great prosperity. Then were built such cities as Gadara and Gerasa, which are still imposing, even in ruins. The appearance of the Moslem armies was the signal for its decay. At tempts were made to recover it for Christianity by Baldwin I (11 IS AD) and Baldwin II (1121 AD); and the Crusaders left their mark in such strong-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Gilead Gin

      holds as KaVat cr-Rabad, and the castle at cs-Salt. With the reassertion of Moslem supremacy a cur tain falls over the history of the district; and only in comparatively recent times has it again become known to travelers. The surveys directed by the Philestina, Canaan-Land Exploration Fund, in so far as they have been carried out, are invaluable. north of the Jabbok are many villages, and a fair amount of cultivation. Es Salt is the only village of any importance in the south It is famous for its raisins. Its spacious up lands, its wooded and well-watered valleys have been for centuries the pasture-land of the nomads.

      LITERATUReast Useful information will bo found in Merrill, East of tin- Jordan; Oliphant, Land of (Ulead; Thomson, LB; and esp. in Condor, I/eth and Moalt, and in Memoirs of the Surrey of Eastern Philestina, Canaan-Land.

      west Ewixo GILEAD r&ty, gil ddh):

      (1) A son of Machir, grandson of Manasseh (Xu 26 29.30).

      (2) The father of Jephthah (Jga 11 1.2).

      (3) A (Indite, the son of Michael (1 Chronicles 6 14).


      GILEADITES, gil o-ad-!ts:

      (1) A branch of the tribe of Manasseh (Nil 26 29).

      (2) Natives of the district of Gilead (Judges 10 3; 11 1, etc).

      GILGAL, gil gul (~3~3 , gilgdl, "circle"; G dlgula): The art. is always with the name except in .Joshua 5 9. There arc three places to which the name is at (ached:

      (1) The first camp of Israel after crossing the Jordan (Joshua 4 19; 5 9.10; 9 6; 10 7; 14 G; 16 7; Deuteronomy 11 30). According to Joshua 15 7 it lay to the north of the valley of Aohor, which formed the border between Judah and Benjamin. Here 12 memorial stones taken from the bed of the river were set up by Joshua, after the miraculous crossing of the Jordan; and hero (Joshua 5 5 ff) the people were circumcised preparatory to their possession of the land, when it is said in josh, with a play upon (lie word, This day have I rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off you." Whereupon the Passover was celebrated (ver 10) and the manna ceased (ver 12). To Gilgal the ark returned every day after having compassed the city of Jericho during its siege (6 11). Hither the Gibeonites came to make their treaty (9 3 ff), and again (10 6) to ask aid against the Amorites. Gilgal was still the head quarters of the Israelites after the battle with the Amorites (ver lf>); again after Joshua s extensive victorious campaign in the hill country of Judaea extending to Kadesh-barnea and Gaza (10 15 ff); and still later upon his return from the great battle at the Waters of Merom (14 6). At the conclu sion of the conquest (18 1), the headquarters were transferred to Shiloh on the summit of the moun tain ridge to the west

      Gilgal reappears frequently in subsequent his tory. Samuel (1 Samuel 7 16) made it one of the three places where he annually held circuit court, the other places being Bethel and Micah/pah. The LXX text adds that these were holy places. The place continued as one of special resort for sacrifices (10 8; 13 8.9.10; 15 21), while it, was here that Samuel hewed Aga-g to pieces before the Lord (15 33), and that Saul was both crowned (11 14.15) and rejected as king. It was at Gilgal, also (2 Samuel 19 15), that the people assembled to welcome David as he returned from his exile beyond Jordan during Absalom s rebellion. The early prophets refer to

      Gilgal as a center of idolatry in their day (Hosea 4 15; 9 15; 12 11; Am 4 4; 5 5). Micah (6 5) represents Gilgal as at the other end of the Dead Sea from Shittim.

      In 1874 Condor recognized the name Gilgal as surviving in Birket Jiljulich, a pool beside a tam arisk tree 3 miles east of old Jericho. The pool meas ures 100 ft. by 84, and is surrounded with a wall of roughly hewn stones. north of the pool Bliss dis covered lines of masonry 300 yds. long, representing probably the foundations of an ancient monastery. south of the pool there are numerous mounds scattered over an area of one-third of a sq. mile, the largest being 50 ft. in diameter, and 10 in height. On ex cavation some pottery and glass were found. Those ruins are probably those of early Christian occu pation, and according to Condor there is nothing against their marking the original site. lp to the Middle Ages the 12 stones of Joshua were referred to by tradition.

      (2) According to 2 Kings 2 1 ; 4 38, Elisha for a time made his headquarters at Gilgal, a place in the mountains not far from Bethel identified by Condor as Jiljilia, standing on a high hill on the X. side of the Wddij el- Jib. It is lower than Bethel, but the phrase in 2 Kings 2 2, they went down to Beth-el," may refer to their initial descent into the -irddij. It could not have been said that they went down from Gilgal to Bethel in the Jordan valley. The place seems to be referred to in Nch 12 29 as Beth- gilgal.

      (3) Gilgal of the nations: In Joshua 12 23 Gilgal is mentioned as a royal city associated with Dor, evidently upon the maritime plain. Dor is identified with Tiinlnrn, while Condor identifies this Gilgal with Jiljulich, 30 miles south of Dor and 4 miles north of Anti-pat ris. GEORGE FREDERICK WRIGHT

      GILOH, gl ld (n 2-i, </ilr>h): A town in the hill country of Judah mentioned along with Jattir, Socoh, Debir, Eshtemoa, etc (Joshua 15 51). Ahitho- phel came from here (2 Samuel 15 12) and is called the Gilonite (2 Samuel 23 34). Driver infers from this last that the original form was Gilon, not Giloh. Prob ably the ruins A7/. Jtild, in the hills 3 miles northwest of Hulhul, mark the site (1>EF, III, 313, Sh XXI).

      GILONITE, gi 16-mt. Sec preceding article.

      GIMEL, ge mel, gim el (3, j) : The 3d letter of the Hebrew alphabet, and used a.s such to designate 1 the 3d part of Psalm 119; transliterated in this Ency clopaedia with the dagesli as g, and without as gh (aspirated g). It came also to bo used for the num ber three (3), and with the diorosis for 3,000. For name, etc, see ALPHABET.

      GIMZO, gim zo 01)23 , yinizo; Ta^ci, (!a>zo): A town of Judah on the border of the Phili plain, captured by the Philis in the days of Ahaz (2 Chronicles 28 18). It is the modern Jiinzu, a small mud vil lage about 3i miles southeast of Ludd (Lydda), on the old mule road from there to Jerus (Robinson, BR, II, 248-49; SWP, II, 297).

      GIN, jin (tpTa,, FIB, pah): A noose of hair or wire for snaring wild birds alive. There are over half a dozen traps and net devices indicated by different terms in the Bible. The gin was of horse-hair for small birds and wire for larger ones. It is mentioned in Am 3 5: "Can a bird fall in a snare upon the earth, where no gin is set. for him? shall a snare spring up from the ground, and have taken nothing at all?" Job writing in mental and physical discomfort on the ash heap included all methods mentioned in one outburst :

      Ginath Glass



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      "For ho is cast into a net by his own feet, And he walketh upon the toil*. A gin shall take him by the heel, And a snare, shall lay hold on him, A tu uxf is hid for him in the ground, And a trap for him in the way" (Job 18 SIT).


      GINATH, gl nath (nra , gltuilh): Father of Tilmi, the unsuccessful rival of Oinri (1 Kings 16 21.


      GINNETHOI, gin-e-thd I (AV Ginnetho), GIN- NETHON, gin 0-thon (" I "iri23 , giuu thoy, and "jTiit , giiin thon): The head of a priestly family. Ginnethoi (Ginnetho) is found in Neh 12 4, and Ginnethon in 10 6; 12 16.

      GIRDLE, gur d l. See ARMOR; DKKSS.

      GIRGASHITE, gur ga-slut pT3~|a , girgasln; Fep-yecraios, (!< rgesaiox; also punctuated [?] Gir- gasite [Genesis 10 16 AV]): A son of (the land of) Canaan (Genesis 10 16), and accordingly enumerated along with the Canaanite in tlie list of tribes or nationalities inhabiting that country (Genesis 15 21; Deuteronomy 7 1; Joshua 3 10; 24 1 1 ; Neh 9 Samuel). It ha* been supposed that the name survived in that of "the Gergesenes," AV (II V "the Gadarenes"), of Matthew 8 2S, on the east side of the Sea of Galilee; Jos (Ant, I, vi, 2), however, states that nothing was known about it. The inscriptions of the Egyp king, Ramses 1 L, mention the Qarqish who sent, help to the llittites in their war with Egypt; but Qarqish was more probably in Asia Minor than in Syria. Pinches (The OT in Hi/ Light of I In: Historical Records, 324) would identify the Girgashites with the Kirkishati of an Assyr tablet ; the latter people, however, seem to have lived to the east of the Tigris, and it may be that, as in the ease of the llittites, a colony of the Qarqish, from Asia Minor, was established in Philestina, Canaan-Land. A. II. SAYCB

      GIRL, gurl: Twice in the OT as the rendering of T^i^-, yrtldtlh (Joel 3 3; Zee 8 5), in both cases in association with boys. Same word rendered "damsel" in Genesis 34 4. See DAUGHTER; MAID, MAIDEnorth

      GIRZITES, gur zits. See GI/IUTKS.

      GISHPA, gish pa (AV Gispa; SECa , gishpa ): An officer of the Nethinim (Neh 11 21). A com parison with Ezra 2 43 makes it probable that he is to be identified with Ilasupha, and quite possible that this word is a corruption of Ilasupha.

      GITTAH-HEPHER, git-a-he fer p?n nn3, gilldh hep/in-): AV (Joshua 19 13) for Gath -hepher. Git- tah is correctly Gath with he (!"!) locale, meaning "toward Gath."

      GITTAIM, git a-im ("7E3 , giltayim): The town to which the Beerothites fled, and where they lived as gerlrn, or protected strangers (2 Samuel 4 3). The place need not have been beyond the boundaries of Benjamin, so it may be identical with Gittaim of Neh 11 33, winch was occupied by Benjamites after the exile. It is named with Hazor and Ramah; but so far the site has not been discovered.

      GITTITES, git its (D^nS. , ^ , giltnti, pi. ofgiltl): The inhabitants of Gath. They are mentioned. along with the inhabitants of the other chief Phili cities in Joshua 13 3. It would seem that numbers of them emigrated to Judah, for we find 600 of them acting as a bodyguard to David with Ittai at their head (2 Samuel 15 18 ff; 18 2). Obed-edom, to whom David intrusted the ark when he was frustrated

      in bringing it into the city of David, was a Gittite (2 Samuel 6 11 f; 1 Chronicles 13 13). The Gittites seem to have been remarkable for their great stature (2 Samuel

      21 19; 1 Chronicles 20 5ff).

      GITTITH, git ith. See Music; PSALMS.

      GIVE ("~5, nathan, 1PP , yahabh, C^f , sum; Samuel(Su>|xi, <l iddmi^): "Give" is a very common word in the OT. It is most the translated of nathan, "to give" (Genesis 1 29; 3 G; Exodous 2 9; Deuteronomy 1 8.20, etc, over 800 instances); nut/Kin is also translated d "to give up" (Deuteronomy 23 14; Isaiah 43 6; Hosea 11 8); of ydhahh, "to give" (Genesis 30 1; 1 Chronicles 16 28 AV). In Psalm 55 22 we have the perfect, with suffix, "Cast thy burden upon JAH (Jehovah)," m "what he hath given thee"; elsewhere it is the imperative "Give!" (AV in Genesis, "Go to"); silm, "to put," "place" (Numbers 6 26; Prov 8 29); rum, "to lift up," "exalt" (2 Chronicles 30 24 bi.s; 35 7.8.9, "to give to"); slnllih, "to cause to turn back" (Leviticus 25 51.52; 2 Kings 17 3, "to give again"); various other words are in .single, instances translated d "give."

      In the NT, the common word is didomi, "to give" (Matthew. 4 9; John 1 12; The Revelation 1 1 ; 21 6, etc); we have also apoilidrnni, "to give away [from one s self]" (Alt. 12 36; Luke 16 2; Acts 4 33; 19 40; The Revelation 22 12); dind nlomi, "to give throughout" (The Revelation 17 13); c/i/iUdomi; "to give upon or besides" (Matthew 7 9.10; John 13 26); meiadidomi, "to give a share" (Romans 12 Samuel); paradldonii, "to give over to" (Romans 1 28; 1 Corinthians 13 3; Gal 2 20, etc); prodidomi, "to give forth or foremost" (Romans 11 35); aponcmo, "to apportion" (1 Pet 3 7); ddreomai, "to give as a gift" (Mark 15 45, RV "granted"; 2 Pet 1 3.4 AV); itHirhtiro, "to give testimony or witness" (1 John 5 10); punixpherd, "to bring forward therewith" (2 Pet 1 5); parccho, "to hold near by" (Col 4 1; 1 Timothy 6 17); katapln ro, "to bear against or down" (Acts 26 10); charizonmi, "to grant as a favor" (Luke 7 21; Acts 27 24; Romans 8 32; Gal 3 18; Phil 2 9; Philem ver 22 AV). A few other words mostly occurring singly are translated d "give."

      Of the many changes in RV, the following are among the most important : for "Thou hast also given me the necks of mine enemies," "Thou hast also made mine enemies turn their backs unto me" (2 Samuel

      22 41; Psalm 18 40); for "He that made him can make his sword to approach unto him" (Job 40 19), ARV has "He only that made him giveth him his sword," KR.Vm "furnished"; for "hasten after another god" (Psalm 16 4), ARV has "give gifts for" (ERVm); for "give" (Psalm 29 1.2, etc), ARV has "ascribe"; for "give myself unto wine" (Eccl 2 3), "cheer my flesh with wine"; for "giveth his life" (John 10 11), "layeth down"; "given" is supplied (Acts 19 2), where we read instead of "We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost," "We did not so much as hear whether the Holy Spirit was given," m "there is a Holy Spirit"; for "Christ shall give thee light " (Eph 5 14), "Christ shall shine upon thee"; for "give in charge" (1 Timothy 5 7), "com mand"; for "not given to wine" (1 Timothy 3 3; Tit 1 7), "no brawler," m "not quarrelsome over wine"; for "she that liveth in pleasure" (1 Timothy 5 6), "giveth herself to"; for "All scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Timothy 3 16), "Every scripture inspired of God," m "Every scripture is inspired of God"; for "given to filthy lucre" (Tit 1 7), "greedy of"; in He 2 16, ARV has "For verily not to angels doth he give help," m "For verily not of angels doth he take hold, but he taketh hold," etc (cf Isaiah 41 9; Ecclus 4 11; 8 9 [in the Greek] ERV, "not of angels doth he take hold") (the idea is that of taking hold of to lift up or help); in 13 15 for "giving thanks to his name 1 ," RV reads "make con fession to his name"; for "giving all diligence" (2 Pet 1 5), "adding."




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Ginath Glass

      The prominence of "give" in the Bible reminds us that God is the great Giver (Jas 1 5), and of the words of the Lord Jesus, "It is more blessed to give than to receive" (Acts 20 35), "Freely ye received, freely give" (Matthew 10 8). west L. WALKER

      GIZONITE, gl zon-it : This gentilic name in 1 Chronicles 11 34, "Hashem the Gizonite," is probably an error for "Gunite" (cf Numbers 26 48), and the passage should be corrected, after 2 Samuel 23 32, into "Jashen the Gunite."

      GIZRITES, giz rlls OnW , gizrl [Kings-thibn]; AV Gezrites): Inhabitants of GKZER (q.v.). Kings ( re reads T;;*, (jirz t, Girzitcs (1 Samuel 27 8).

      GLAD TIDINGS, tl dingz (tia-yveXiSw, cunrj- gelizo): "Glad-tidings" occurs in AV in the translated of the vb. euaggelizo, "to tell good news" (Luke 1 19;

      8 1; Acts i3 32; Romans 10 15); in each instance, except the last, RV translated s "good tidings." The vb. is also very frequently translated 1 in AV "to preach the gospel," the original meaning of which word (god-spell) is "good news or tidings" (Alt 11 5; Luke 4 18; 7 22;

      9 G; 20 1); in the first two passages RV substi tutes "good tidings," m "the gospel"; in the last two instances "the gospel" is retained, ARVrn "good tidings" the gospel or good tidings being the announcement of the near approach of the promised, long-looked-for salvation and kingdom of God; in Romans 1 15; 15 20; 1 Corinthians 1 17, etc, AV has "the gospel," viz. that of God s reconciliation of the world to Himself in Christ; RV in some passages substitutes "good tidings," or gives this in the mar gin; but "glad tidings" stands only in Romans 10 15.

      west L. , ALKER

      GLASS, glas (n^? ? *T, z r khii-JcJnt/i; ,5a,os, In tulox): Glass is of great antiquity. The story of its dis

      covery by accident, as related by Pliny 1. History (XII, xxxvi.65), is apocryphal, but it

      was natural for the Greeks and Romans to ascribe it to the Phoenicians, since they were the producers of the article as known to them. The Egyp monuments have revealed to us the manu- facture in a time so remote that it must have pre ceded that of the Phoenicians. A representation of glass-blowing on monuments of the Old Empire, as formerly supposed, is now regarded as doubtful, but undoubted examples of glazed pottery of that age exist. A fragment of blue glass has been found inscribed with the name of Antef III, of the Xlth

      Glass Bottles.

      Dynasty, dating from 2000 or more BC (Davis, Ancient Egypt, 324). The oldest dated bottle, or vase, is one bearing the name of Thothmes III, 1500 or more BC, and numerous examples occur of later date. The close connection between Egypt and Syria from the time of Thothmes on must have made glass known in the latter country, and the Phoeni

      cians, so apt in all lines of trade and manufacture, naturally seized on glass-making as a most profit able art and they became very proficient in it. The earliest glass was not very transparent, since they

      did not know how to free the materials used from impurities. It had a greenish or purplish tinge, and a large part of the examples we have of Phoen glass exhibit this. But we have many examples of blue, red and yellow varieties which were purposely colored, and others quite opaque and of a whitish color, resembling porcelain (Perrot and Chipiez, Art in Ancient Phoenicia and Its Dependencies). But both they and the Egyptians made excellent transparent glass also, and decorated it with brilliant coloring on the surface (ib; Beni Hasan, Archcol. Xurrci/ of Egypt, Pt IV). La yard (Niwtvh and Babylon) mentions a vase of transparent glass bear ing the name of Sargon (522-505 BC), and glass was early known to the Babylonians.

      Phoenicia was the great center, and the quanti ties found in tombs of Syria and Philestina, Canaan-Land go to confirm

      the statement that this was one of the 2. Manu- great industries of this people, to which facture ancient authors testify (Strabo, Gcog.;

      Pliny, Nil). Jos refers to the sand of the Belus as that from which glass was made (BJ, II, x, 2). It seems to have been esp. adapted for the purpose, but, there are other places on the coast where plenty of suitable sand could be obtained. The potash required was obtained by burning certain marine and other plants, and saltpetre, or nitre, was also employed. The manufacture began centuries BC on this coast, and in the 12th cent. AD a factory is mentioned as still being worked at Tyre, and the manufacture was later carried on at Hebron, even down to recent times (Perrot and Chipiez).

      Both the Egyptians and Phoenicians gained such pro ficiency in making transparent and colored glass that they imitated precious stones with such skill as to deceive the unwary. Necklaces are found composed of a mixture of real brilliants and glass imitations. Cut glass was manu factured in Egypt as early as the XVIIIth Dynasty, and diamonds were made use of in the art. Glass com posed of different colors in the sarno piece was made by placing layers of glass wire, of different colors, one above the other and then fusing them so that they been, mo united in a solid mass without intermingling. Colored designs on the surface were produced by tracing the pat terns, while the glass was still warm and plastic, deep enough to receive the threads of colored glass which were imbedded in them. The whole was heated again suffi ciently to fuse the threads and attach them to the hotly. The surface ,vas then made even by polishing. By this process vessels and ornaments of very beautiful design were produced. Alany of the specimens, as found , arc; covered by an exquisite iridescence which is due wholly to the decomposition of the surface by chemical action, from lying buried for centuries in the soil which thus acts upon it. This is often lost in handling by the scaling oil of the outer surface.

      Glass, in the strict sense, is rarely mentioned in Scripture, but it was certainly known to the He-

      Glass Glory



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      brews, and occurs in .Job 28 17 (translated (1 "crystal" in AV). Bottles, cups and other vessels in glass must have been in use to some extent. The wine cup of Prov 23 31 Mid the bottle for tears mentioned in Psalm 66 8 were most likely of glass. Tear bottles are found in great quantities in the tombs throughout the land and were undoubtedly connected with funeral rites, the mourners collecting their tears and placing them in these bottles to be buried with the dead. As mourners were hired for the purpose, the number of these bottles would indicate the extent to which the deceased was honored. These were, of course, small, some (mite diminutive (see illustration), as also were the vials or pots to contain the ointment, for the eyebrows and eyelashes, used to heighten the beauty of the women, which was probably a custom among the Hebrews as well as their neigh bors. Rings, bracelets and anklets of glass are very common and were doubtless worn by the lleb women (see Isaiah 3 ISf). In the NT the (lr hunlns occurs in The Revelation 21 IS. 21, and the adj. derived from it (hun- Zmos)in4 and 15 2. In the other passages, where in AV "glass" occurs, the reference is to "looking- glass," or mirror, which was not made of glass, but of bronze, and polished so as to reflect the light simi lar to glass. The lleb word for this is "1^?, gil- laijmi (Isaiah 3 23), or nX"lTG , inaruh (Exodous 38 8), and the (ir fffoirrpov, CNoplron. (1 Corinthians 13 12; Jas 1 23; cf ,isd 7 2(i; Sir 12 11).

      The composition of the Phoen glass varies con siderably. The analysis shows that, besides the ordinary constituents of silica, lime, lead, potash or soda., other elements are found, some being used for the purpose of coloring, such as manganese to give the purplish or violet hue, cobalt for blue, copper for red, etc. The articles illustrated above are of ordinary transparent, glass with an iridescent sur face, caused by decomposition, as mentioned above, indicated by the scaly appearance. Nos. 1, 4 and

      Mirror of Polished Bronze.

      f) are tear bottles, no. 4 being only 1 :] in. in height ; nos. 2 and 3 are ointment vases which were used for the ointment with which ladies were accustomed to color their eyebrows and eyelashes to enhance their beauty. This custom still prevails in the East . The small ladle by the side of the larger vase is of bronze, used in applying the ointment. This vase is double and 6f in. high, ornamented with glass wire wound upon it while plastic. The larger vases (nos. G and 7) are about G in. in height . The hand- mirror ("looking-glass" AVj is bronze, and had originally a polished surface, but is now corroded.

      H. PORTER

      GLASS, SEA OF (6d,ao-(j-a vaXivti, tMlaxxu. h un it nc; The Revelation 4 G; 15 2): In the vision of heaven in these two apocalyptic passages a glassy sea" is seen before the throne of (Jod. The pure trans- lucency of the sea is indicated in the former reference by the words, "like unto crystal"; and the fiery element that may symbolize the energy of the Di vine holiness is suggested in the latter passage by the trait, mingled with fire." On the margin (if this sea on the inner side stood the victorious saints, with harps, singing the song of Moses and of the Lamb (15 2-4). The imagery here points to a relation with the triumphal song in Exodous 15, after the deliverance from Pharaoh at the Red Sea. H is not easy to define the symbolism precisely. The sea, reflecting in its crystalline depths the purify and holiness of the Divine character and adminis tration, speaks at the same time of difficulties sur mounted, victory obtained and safety assured, the after-glow of the Divine judgments by which this result has been secured still illuminating the glassy expanse that has been crossed. JAMES OUR

      GLEANING, glen ing (^p_b , Meat, bb? , <//): The custom of allowing the poor to follow the reap ers in the field and glean the fallen spears of grain is strikingly illustrated in the story of Ruth (Ruth 2 2-23). This custom had back of it one of the early agricultural laws of the Hebrews (Leviticus 19 <>; 2322; Deuteronomy 24 19-21). Breaking this law was a punishable offence. The generosity of the master of the crop determined the value of the gleanings, as the story of Ruth well illustrates (Ruth 2 1G). A reaper could easily impose upon the master by leaving too much for the gleaners, who might be his own children. The old Levitical law no longer holds in the land, but the custom of allowing the poor to glean in the grain fields and vineyards is still practised by generous landlords in Syria. The writer has seen the reapers, even when they exer cised considerable care, drop from their hands fre quent spears of wheat. When the reapers have been hirelings they have carelessly left bunches of wheat standing behind rocks or near the boundary walls. The owner usually sends one of his bov or girl helpers to glean these. If he is of a generous disposition, he allows some needy woman to follow after the reapers and benefit by their carelessness. It is the custom in some districts, after the main crop of grapes has been gathered, to remove the watchman and allow free access to the vineyards for gleaning the last grapes.

      Gideon touched the local pride of the men of Ephraim when he declared that the glory of their conquest surpassed his, as the gleanings of their vineyards did the whole crop of Abiezer (.Igs 82). Gleaned is used of a captured enemy in Judges 20 45.

      Figurative: Israel, because of her wickedness, will be utterly destroyed, even to a thorough glean ing and destruction of those who first escape (Jeremiah 6 0). The same picture of complete annihilation is given in Jeremiah 49 9.10. JAMICS A. PATCH

      GLEDE, gled (HSH , ra uft; yvty, gups): A mem ber of the hawk species. It is given among the list of abominations in Deuteronomy 14 13, but not in the Leviticus list (Leviticus 11 14). The kite is substituted. The Arabs might have called one of the buzzards the glede. In England, where specimens of most of these birds appear in migration, the glede is synony mous with kite, and was given the name from glide, to emphasize; a gliding motion in flight. See illus tration, j). 1235.

      GLISTERING, glis ter-ing (TpS , pilkh, "dye" [spec, "stibium"), "fair colors"; crriXpovra, bonta): " Glistering stones (1 Chronicles 29 2) is better




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      than the inlaid of RV; for .some kind of colored, brilliant stone seems meant" (lll)B, II, 182); cf Lsa 64 11 RVm. The term is employed in Mark 9 3 to denote the white, lustrous appearance of Christ s garments at the transfiguration. It occurs nowhere; else in t lie NT. For once the Divine effulgence shone through the veil of the humiliation (cf John 1 14).

      (iledo (Butco frrox).

      GLITTER, glit er, GLITTERING, glit er-ing (p7 2 , barak, "lightning"): The word is used in sense of "glittering" in the OT with "sword," "spear" (1)1,3241; Job 20 2o; E/k 21 10.2S; Xah 3 3; Hub 3 11). In E/k 21 10 RV changes "glitter" to "as lightning," and in l)t 32 41 RVm gives, "the lightning of my sword." In Job 39 23, where the word is different (lahabh), RV has "flash ing."

      GLORIFY, glr/ri-fl: The Eng. word is the equiva lent of a number of Hebrews and Greek words whose essen tial significance is discussed more fully under the word GLORY (q.v.). The word "glorious" in the phrases "make or render glorious" is used most frequently as a translated of vbs. in the original, rather than of genuine adjs. In dealing with the vb. it will be sufficient to indicate the following most important uses.

      (1) Men may glorify God, that is, give to Him the worship and reverence which are His due (Isaiah 24 i:>; 25 3; Psalm 22 23; Daniel 5 23; Sir 43 30; Matthew 5 10, and generally in the Synoptic Gospels and in some other passages of the NT).

      (2) God, Yahwoh (Jehovah), glorifies His people, His house, and in the XT, His Son, manifesting His approval of them and His interest in them, by His interposition on their behalf (Isaiah 55 . r >; Jeremiah 30 lit; Wisdom 18 8; Sir 45 3; John 7 39, and often in the Fourth Gospel).

      (3) By a usage which is practically confined to the OT, JAH (Jehovah) glorifies Himself, that is, secures the recognition of His honor and majesty, by His di rection of the course of history, or by His interpo sition in history, cither the history of His own peo ple or of the world at large (Leviticus 10 3; Isaiah 26 15; E/k 28 22; Hag 1 8). WALTER R. BETTERIDGE

      GLORIOUS, glo ri-us: The adj. "glorious" is used in the majority of cases as the translated of one of the

      Glass Glory

      nouns which an- fully discussed in the article GLORY, and the general meaning is the same, for the glorious objects or persons have (he quality which is described by the word "glory," that is, they art- honorable, dignified, powerful, distinguished, splen did, beautiful or radiant. It is worthy of note that in many passage s in the NT where AV has "glo rious," RV has the noun "glory." So among others in Romans 8 21, AV has "glorious liberty," RV "lib erty of the glory of the sons of God." The obsolete use of the word glorious in the sense of "boastful," "vain-glorious," "eager for glory," as it is used in Wycliffe, Tindale and Bacon, and once or twice in Shakespeare, as in Cymbdinc, I, 7, in the first speech of Imogen, "Most miserable is the desire that s glorious," and in power s Prologue to Pericles, 1.9, "The purchase of it is to make men glorious" occurs at least once in the apocryphal books, Ad Est 16 4 AV, "but also lifted up with the glorious words of lewd persons." WALTER R. BETTKRIIH;E

      GLORY, glo ri (subst.):


      II. (iKXEKAI, I sE OF THE T Kings H M

      1. As Applied to External Things

      2. As Applied to Jehovah

      III. Tin: USES OF Kabhudk

      1. Material Wealth

      2. Human Dignity and Majesty It. "My Soul": the Self

      4. Self-Manifestation of < iod (.Jehovah)

      (1) Exodous 23 IN translated

      (2) Isaiah 6

      (3) Psalm 19 1

      (4) Sinai and the Temple

      (5) Ezekiel s Visions (<i) Messianic Ideal

      (7) Its Ethical Content

      IV. I>r Ai>oc AND NT

      1. In the Apoc:

      (1) As Applied to External Things

      (2) As Applied to God

      2. In the NT:

      (1) As Applied to Mon

      (2) As Applied to Cod

      (:}) As Applied to the Saints (4) As Applied to the Messianic Kingdom . ?. Its Kthieul Signilieaiice LITERATURE

      /. Method of Treatment. In this art. we deal, first, with a group of words, translated d "glory" in the EV, and in which the ideas of size, rarity, beauty and adornment are prominent, the emphasis being laid in the first instance in each case upon some external physical characteristic which attracts the attention, and makes the object described by the word sig nificant or prominent.

      These arc addereth (rn~X). perhaps to be connected with the Assyr root mlaru, moaning "wide," "great"; hddkur, hwlhdrdh (.~,~n . m~ii~i,>. perhaps with root- moaning of "brightness"; hfxllt (Tin), with essentially the same meaning of "brightness," "light"; t iiar ("IPO, Psalm 89 44, translated<i "glory" in AV, in RV rendered "brightness"; yckdrd (Xlp* 1 ), an Aram, root meaning "rare"; tiph drdh (("HXEFO, with the root-meaning of "beauty"; and finally f.cbhl (1521). perhaps on the basis of the Assyr sabu, meaning "desire," "desirable."

      Secondly, this art. will discuss the most common and characteristic word for "glory" in the OT, the Hebrews kubhudh (~23) including the special phrase "the glory of God" or "the glory of JAH (Jehovah)." In deal ing with the OT usage, attention will also be called to the original Hebrews of the Book of Ecclus or Wis dom of Jesus the Son of Sirach, cited in this art. as Sir. Thirdly, with the Greek word doxa (56<x) in the Apoc and in the NT. The nouns kauchema, kauchesis, translated d "glory" or "glorying" in the NT, will be dealt with in the concluding paragraphs in which the use of the word glory as a vb. will briefly be discussed. It will be possible within the limits of this art. to give only the main outlines of the sub-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      ject as illustrated by a few of the most significant references. The lexicons and the commentaries must be consulted for the details.

      //. General Use of the Term. In the first group,

      as has already boon stated, the ideas of beauty,

      majesty and splendor are prominent.

      1. As Ap- And these qualities are predicated first plied to of all, of things. David determines External to make the temple which Solomon is Things to build "a house of fame and of

      glory" (1 Chronicles 22 5). Then, and more commonly, glory belongs to men, and esp. to men of prominence, like kings. This glory may consist in wealth, power, position, or even in the inherent majesty and dignity of character of its possessor. The reference is most- frequently, however, to the external manifestations. Physical power is sug gested in Deuteronomy 33 17, where "glory" of AV is replaced by "majesty" in RV. The king s glory consists in the multitude of his people (Prov 14 2S). The glory and the pomp of the rebellious people shall descend into Sheol (Isaiah 5 14). Here the reference is clearly to those external things upon which the people depend, and the possession of which is the ground of their confidence.

      But chiefly glory is the possession and character istic of JAH (Jehovah), and is. given by Him to His people or

      to anything which is connected with

      2. As Ap- Him. In Isaiah 60 7 the Lord promises plied to to glorify the house of His glory, and Jehovah the meaning is clearly that He will

      impart to His house something of the beauty and majesty which belong to Him. Glory is one of the qualities which are distinctive of JAH (Jehovah) (1 Chronicles 29 11); and Isaiah, in one of his earliest utterances, uses the word "glory" to describe JAH (Jehovah) s self-manifestation in judgment to bring to naught the pride and power of men (Isaiah 2 10.19.21). The use of the word in Psalm 78 61 is not quite certain. The most natural interpretation would perhaps be to refer it to the ark as the symbol of the presence of JAH (Jehovah), but in view of the ]| word "strength," it is perhaps better to interpret glory as meaning power, and to suppose that the Psalmist moans that JAH (Jehovah) allowed His power to be temporarily obscured, and Himself to be seemingly humiliated on account of the sin of His people.

      ///. The Uses of Kabhodh. The use and signifi cance of kdbhodh in the ()T and in Sir: The funda mental idea of this root seems to be "weight," "heaviness," and hence in its primary uses it con veys the idea of some external, physical manifesta tion of dignity, preeminence or majesty. At least three uses may be distinguished: (1) It defines the wealth or other material possessions which give honor or distinction to a person; (2) the majesty, dignity, splendor or honor of a person; (3) most important of all, it describes the form in which Jehovah (Yahweh) reveals Himself, or is the sign and manifestation of His presence.

      In Genesis 31 1 (m "wealth") it describes the flocks and herds which Jacob has acquired; in Psalm

      49 16 f, as the parallelism indicates, it 1. Material refers to the wealth of the sinner; and Wealth in Isaiah 10 3 it is said that in the day

      of desolation the heartless plunderers of the poor shall not know where to leave their ill- gotten gain. This idea is also probably to be found in Hag 2 7, where the parallelism seems to indicate that the glory with which JAH (Jehovah) will fill the house is the treasure which He will bring into it. See also Sir 9 11, where the glory of the sinner which is not to be envied is probably his wealth.

      It describes the majesty and dignity or honor of men due to their adornment or to their position. In Genesis 46 13, Joseph bids his brethren tell their father of his glory in Egypt; according to Exodous 28 40,

      the priestly garments arc intended for the glorifica tion of their wearers; in 1 Samuel 4 21 f, the loss of the ark means, for Israel, the loss of her

      2. Human glory, that, which gave her distinction Dignity and from, and preeminence over, her neigh- Majesty bors; in Isaiah, 22 23 it is said that Elia-

      kim is to be a throne of glory, i.e. the source and manifestation of the splendor and dig nity of his father s house; in Job 19 9 the com plaint that God has stripped him of his glory must be taken to refer to his dignity and honor. Refer ence may also be made to the numerous passages in which the glory of Israel and other nations describes their dignity, majesty or distinction; so we hear of the glory of Ephraim (Hosea 9 11), of Moab (Isaiah 16 14), of Kedar (Isaiah 21 16). This use is quite common in Sir. Sir 3 10 f states that the glory of man comes from the honor of his father; the possessor of wisdom shall inherit glory (4 13; 37 26); note also 4 21 with its reference to "a shame that is glory and grace," and 49 5 where the forfeited independence 1 of Judah is described by the terms "power" and "glory."

      Closely related to this use of kdbhodh to describe

      the majesty of men is the group of passages in

      which the phrase "my glory," in paral-

      3. "My lelism with nephe&h (iZJs:), "soul," Soul": the "self," or some similar expression, Self means the man himself in his most

      characteristic nature. In the bless ing of Jacob (Genesis 49 6) we read, "Unto their assembly, my glory, be not thou united." Other passages are Psalm 4 2; 75; 16 9; 30 12; 67 8; 108 1 and perhaps Job -29 20. Some recent inter preters, partly because of the LXX rendering in Genesis 49 6 (Id he paid mou), "my liver," and partly because of the Assyr root, kabittu, meaning "tem per" or "heart" (see Delitzsch, Assyrischcs Hand- worlerbuch, 317), would read in all these passages kdbhcdh, lit. "liver," as in Lam 211, and interpret the figure as referring to the emotions as the expres sion of the self. The arguments in favor of the change are not without weight. Of course on cither interpretation the language is highly figurative. It hardly seems necessary to change the reading, esp. as the LXX renders the passages in the Pss and in Job by doxa, the ordinary Greek rendering for kdbhodh, and it does not seem improbable that in poetry the word l;dbhodh might be used to describe the man himself, indicating that man as such is honorable and glorious, possibly because as hi Psalm 8 1, he is thought of as having been crowned by his Creator with glory and honor.

      Before leaving this use of kabhorlh it is necessary to call attention to the fact that in a few cases it is used to describe things, perhaps because these tilings are thought of as practically personified. The "glory of the forest" (Isaiah 10 LS) is clearly a personification, referring to the majestic force of the Assyrians. We may probably assume a personification also in the case of the glory of Lebanon in Isaiah 35 -: 60 L -t, and the nature of the par able in E/k 31 makes it probable that personification is intended in vcr 18.

      But unquestionably the most important use of

      the word kdbhodh is its employment either with

      the following gen. God or JAH (Jehovah), or ab-

      4. Self- solutely, to describe the method or the manifesta- circumstances of the self-manifestation tion of God of God. In discussing this subject we (Jehovah) shall deal first of all with the use of the

      term as connected with actual or his torical manifestations of the Deity, and then with its use to describe the characteristic features of the ideal state of the future, or, otherwise stated, the Messianic kingdom.

      (1) Exodous 23 18ff.Thz significance of the phrase in its earliest occurrence is by no means clear. Not withstanding the uncertainty as to the exact docu-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      mentary connection of the famous passage in Exodous 33 18 ff, it seems quite certain that we may claim that this is the earliest historical reference that the OT contains to the glory of JAH (Jehovah). "And he [Moses] said, Show me, I pray thee, thy glory. And he [JAH (Jehovah)] said Thou canst not see my face; .... and it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a cleft of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand until I have passed by: and I will take away my hand, and thou shall see my back; but my face shall not be seen." The passage in its present form bears unmistakable evidences of the editorial hand, due perhaps, as Baentsch (Hand- kommentar zum AT, "Exodous-Leviticus- Numbers," 279) suggests, to & desire to transform the primitive, concrete, physical thoophany into a* revelation of the ethical glory of God, but in its basis it belongs to J and is therefore the earliest literary reference to the glory of God in the OT. The glory of JAH (Jehovah) is clearly a physical manifestation, a form with hands and rear parts, of which Moses is permit led to catch only a passing glimpse, but the implication is clear that he actually does see JAH (Jehovah) with his physical eyes.

      It seems not improbable that in its original form it was related that Moses saw the glory, i.e., the form of JAH (Jehovah), and thus that wo are to find in this narrative the source for the statement in Numbers 12 s, that lie (Moses) will behold (or perhaps better rendering the tense as a fre quentative), beholds the form of JAH (Jehovah) (see also the de scription in Exodous 24 9-11). The mention of the cloud (Exodous 34 5) as the accompaniment of the manifestation of JAH (Jehovah) suggests that the form of JAH (Jehovah) was thought of as being outlined in cloud and flame, and that JAH (Jehovah) was originally thought of as manifesting Himself in connec tion with meteorological or more probably volcanic phenomena.

      (2) Isaiah 6. Later the glory of JAH (Jehovah) and the form of JAH (Jehovah) are no longer identical terms, but the glory is still the physical manifestation of the Divine presence. This is clear from Isaiah s account of his great inaugural vision. The prophet sees the enthroned JAH (Jehovah) with His skirts filling the temple. There is no indication of what it was that he saw or how he recognized that it was JAH (Jehovah). The attend ant seraphim in addition to the solemn "Holy, Holy, Holy" declare that "the whole earth is full of his glory."

      Unquestionably TTis glory is here regarded as some thing visible, something, a part of which at least, Isaiah sees. The glory as such has no ethical significance except in so "far as it is the method of manifestation of one who is undoubtedly an ethical being. The phrase ology suggests that the skirts which fill the temple and the glory which fills the whole earth refer to the phe nomena of fire and smoke. Some think that the smoke is caused by the clouds of incense that would fill the temple in connection with the sacrificial observances. But in view of Isaiah s horror of these observances, this interpretation is very questionable. A more probable interpretation connects the clouds and gloom with the phenomena of a great storm, and even possibly of an earthquake, for it seems highly plausible that the call of Isaiah in the year of the death of King Uzziah coincided with the great earthquake in the days of Uzziah referred to in Zee 14 5. (It seems at least probable that the references to the darkness and light in Zee 14 *> f may have their origin in the phenomena attendant upon this earthquake. It is probable that the earthquake by which the prophecy of Amos is dated [Am 1 1] is also this same historic earthquake.) The clouds and fire attendant upon this .storm or earthquake become the media by which the glory of JAH (Jehovah) is made known to the youthful prophet, and this glory partly reveals and partly conceals the presence of JAH (Jehovah) of which, through, and in part by means of , these phenomena, Isaiah is made so vividly conscious.

      (3) Psalm 19 1. This conception of Isaiah that the glory of JAH (Jehovah) fills the earth is closely related to the thought of Psalm 19 1 that "the heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament showeth his handi work," the difference being that in the psalm JAH (Jehovah) s glory is manifested in the ordinary rather than in the extraordinary phenomena. Parallel thoughts may be found in Psalm 8 1; 67 5; 108 5; 113 4. In Psalm 29, as in Isaiah, the glory of JAH (Jehovah) is re

      vealed in the extraordinary physical phenomena which the psalm describes. Glory here is a purely external, meteorological thing and is the manifes tation of the presence of JAH (Jehovah), no matter whether the psalm is regarded, as it usually is, as a description of a thunderstorm, or whether with von Gall and others it is taken as a description of the phenomena which accompany the inauguration of the Messianic kingdom (see Joel 2 30 f ERV).

      (4) Sinai and the Temple. Deuteronomy 5 24 indicates that in the theophany at the time of the giving of the law, the glory and the greatness of JAH (Jehovah) con sisted in the fire and thick darkness which envel oped the mountain, and out of which JAH (Jehovah) spoke to the people. Essentially the same idea is expressed in the account of the dedication of Solomon s temple (1 Kings 8 10 f; 2 Chronicles 5 14). The cloud which filled the house of JAH (Jehovah), preventing the priests from ministering, is identified with the glory of JAH (Jehovah) which filled the house. It is noteworthy that in 2 Chronicles 7 1-3 the glory of JAH (Jehovah) which fills the house manifests itself in the form of the cloud of smoke from the sacrifices which were consumed by the fire coming down from heaven.

      (5) EzekieUs visions. Perhaps the most elaborate description of the glory of JAH (Jehovah) to be found in the OT is that given by Ezekiel in the various accounts of his visions. It is not easy to interpret his con ception, but it seems clear that he does not identify the glory with the stormy clouds, the fire, the cheru bim and the chariots. "The appearance of the like ness of the glory of JAH (Jehovah)" (Kzk 1 2X) is not applied to all the phenomena which have been described in the preceding verses, but only to the likeness of form which looked like a man above the sapphire throne (ver 26). The same idea is indicated in 9 3 which states that "the glory of the God of Israel was gone up from the cherub, whereupon it was"; that is, the glory is something peculiar to JAH (Jehovah), and is not quite identical with the phenomena which accompany it. This is true of all his visions. The glory of JAH (Jehovah) manifests itself with all the accom paniments which he describes with such richness of imagery, but the accompaniments are not the glory. For other descriptions of the glory of JAH (Jehovah) in Ezekiel, see 3 12.23; 8 4; 10 4.18 ff; 11 22 f.

      Very similar to this conception of E/ekiel is that given in those passages of the Pent which are usually assigned to the PC. When the children of Israel murmured against Moses and Aaron on account of the lack of food, the glory of JAH (Jehovah) appeared in the cloud as they "looked toward the wilderness" (Exodous 16 7.10; of Exodous 24 1(5 f). And just as in Ezekiel, the glory is distinguished from its attendant circum stances; for after the completion of the Tent of Meeting, the cloud covers the tent, and the glory of JAH (Jehovah) fills the tabernacle (Exodous 40 34 f; see also Leviticus 9 6.23; Numbers 14 21 f; 16 19.42; 20 6). The same thought is suggested in the references in Sir 17 13; 45 3.

      (6) Messianic ideal. These passages just cited stand on the border between the historical and the ideal descriptions of the glory of JAH (Jehovah), for whatever may be one s views as to the historical worth of P s account of the Exodus and the wilderness sojourn, all must agree in seeing in it really the program or constitution for the ideal state of the future. And in this state the distinguishing characteristic is to be the manifest presence of JAH (Jehovah) in His sanctuary, and this manifestation is the glory. This is the view of Ezekiel, for whom the essential action in the establishment of the new community is the return of the glory of JAH (Jehovah) to the house of JAH (Jehovah) (Ezekiel 43 2.4. 5; 44 4). The same thought is expressed very clearly in Isaiah 4 5 f, which may be rendered on the basis of a slight rearrangement and regrouping of the original, And JAH (Jehovah) will create over .... Matthew. Zion

      Glory Gnash


      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      ... . , u cloud :uid smoke by day, and the shining of a (laming fire by night ; for over everything the glory [of Yahweh] shall be a canopy and a pavilion, and it shall serve as a shelter from the heat, and a refuge and a covert from the storm and the rain. This translated has the advantage that it furnishes an intel ligible and characteristic conclusion to the descrip tion of the Messianic age which the chapter contains. Isaiah 11 10, reading with RVm, "and his resting-place shall be glory," has the same thought, for it is clearly the glory of JAH (Jehovah) that is manifested in the resting- place of the root of Jesse, and this resting-place can be none other than Matthew. Zion (cf also Isaiah 24 23).

      The Pss and Deutero-Isaiah have many passages in which t his phase of the thought is brought out. P or both books the restoration of the people from cap tivity is to be accompanied by, or, perhaps better, itself is, a revelation of the glory of JAH (Jehovah) (Isaiah 40 5). The children of Israel have been created for the glory of JAH (Jehovah), and hence they must be restored that His glory may be made manifest (43 7). The light of the restored community is to be the glory of JAH (Jehovah) (60 1 f). The presence of JAH (Jehovah) brings grace and glory (Psalm 84 11), and His salvation of those that fear Him causes glory to dwell in the land (Psalm 85 9). To these and many similar passages in Isaiah and the Pss may also be added Sir 36 14, which refers prob ably to the manifestation of God in glory in the Messianic kingdom.

      (7) Its ethical content. But these passages make it quite evident Uhat "glory" is not always used in the external, lit. or fig. physical sense. It comes to have an ethical significance, and this because, like the holiness with which it is associated in Isaiah 6, it is connected with JAH (Jehovah), who is more and more exclu sively viewed as an ethical being. As holiness gradually loses its physical sense of aloofness, apart ness, and comes to describe moral purity, so glory, because it is an attribute or expression of JAH (Jehovah), comes to have a moral sense. This transformation, as we have seen, is already being made in the present- text of Exodous 33 IS. 20, and the connection with holi ness in Isaiah 6 makes it almost certain that Isaiah gave the word an ethical connotation. So the God of glory of Psalm 29 3 suggests a moral quality because JAH (Jehovah) is a moral being. All doubt on this matter dis appears when we find the word "glory" used as the term for the essential nature of JAH (Jehovah), as we have already found it to be used of man. In Isaiah 42 8, "I am JAH (Jehovah), that is my name; and my glory will I not give to another," the meaning would seem to be, my essential character and power, that is, my glory, I will not share with other gods (cf also Isaiah 48 11 ). And in Isaiah 58 8 the glory must be taken in a fig urative sense and refer to JAH (Jehovah) Himself in His saving grace, who attends His people in advance and in the rear. It hardly seems possible to deny the ethical sense in Ezekiel 39 21, where the manifestation of the glory of JAH (Jehovah) comes as a result of the execution of His purposes of justice and righteousness upon His people. And in Hab 2 14, the glory of JAH (Jehovah) which is to be known throughout the earth cannot be limited to any physical, external thing. It is equiva lent to the righteous and just will of JAH (Jehovah). These passages are sufficient to prove the ethical signifi cance of the word kubhodh, but it may be worth while to quote one more passage and this time from Psalm 97 with its wonderful description of the bless ings of the righteous rule of JAH (Jehovah). It is stated in ver 6 that "the heavens declare his righteousness, and all the peoples have seen his glory." His righteous ness may include, as Kirkpatrick suggests, "His faithfulness to His people and His sovereign justice in the punishment of all," or it may refer only to the former of these qualities; but in any case, it is a moral act, and by it the peoples recognize the gloy of JAH (Jehovah) as the supreme moral ruler.

      IV. In Apoc and NT. "Glory" in the apocryphal books and in the NT is almost exclusively the translated of the Greek noun doxa. In all these writings the OT usage seems to be the most important, and it seems to be the fact, if one may judge from the LXX and from the original Hebrews of Sir, that the Greek noun doxa, in the great majority of cases, represents the Hebrews kubhodh, so that the underlying thought is Hebrews, even though the words may be Greek.

      (1) As applied to external things. It will be perhaps a little more convenient to deal with the usage of the Apoc

      separately, following essentially the order 1 In the that has been adopted for the OT dis- . cussion of kdlihdtih, and bearing in mind

      Apoc that the usage of Sir has been discussed

      under the OT. The use of the word "glory" to describe the honor, reputation and splendor which belong to men is quite common. In this sense 1 Esdras

      1 33 refers to the glory of Josiah, while in Wistl 10 14 the perpetual glory given by Wisdom to Joseph must be interpreted in the same way. In 2 Mace 5 16.20 glory refers to the beautiflcation and adornment of the temple in a sense like that of tilth ar ah in Isaiah 60 7. In Jth 15 9 "glory" is the translated of the Greek gauriama, and in dicates that Judith is the pride of Israel.

      (2) As applied to God. But the most significant use of doxa in the Apocrypha is that in which it refers to the light and splendor which are regarded as the invariable accompaniments of God. The reference may be to the historic manifestation of God in glory at Matthew. Sinai, as in

      2 Esdras 3 19, or to the manifestation of God in Israel, which is to be the especial characteristic of the Messianic kingdom. In 1 Esdras 5 01 songs sung to the praise of the Lord, "because his goodness and his glory are forever in all Israel," are based upon the hope that JAH (Jehovah) is about to establish the Messianic kingdom among the people who have bound themselves to obey His law. In several passages in 2 Esdras the reference seems to be not to the Messianic kingdom in the historical sense, but rather to that kingdom of God which the saints are to inherit after death. This is clearly the thought in 2 Esdras 2 30 and in 7 52; also in 8 51 where the context shows clearly that the reference is to the glory of Paradise, which is the heritage of all those who are like Ezra in their devotion to JAH (Jehovah) (cf also 10 50).

      But most frequently in the Apoc, in a sense which approximates that of the NT, the word "glory" refers to the blaze of light and splendor which is the essential expression of the holy majesty of JAH (Jehovah). The prayer of Manasseh refers to the unbearable majesty of the glory of JAH (Jehovah); while 2 Esdras 8 30, trusting in JAH (Jehovah) s glory is equivalent to trusting in JAH (Jehovah) Himself; and in 16 53 the oath "before God and his glory" is simply be-fore the Lord God Himself. The same thought is expressed in Tob 12 15; 13 14; Wisdom 7 25. In the Three, vs31.33, the glory of JAH (Jehovah) refers to His self-manifestation in His heavenly kingdom, and this is undoubtedly the signifi cance in the frequently recurring doxologies, "Thine is the glory forever."

      (1) As applied to men. In the NT, much the same variety of usage is to be noted as in the OT

      and the Apoc, and it is not easy to 2. In the trace the exact relationship and order NT of the various meanings. The ordinary

      classical use of the word in the sense of "opinion," "judgment," "view," occurs in Hel lenistic Greek only in 4 Mace 6 17 (18) on the author ity of Thayer.

      It is perhaps as convenient to follow generally the order adopted in the preceding discussion. In some places the word refers to the manifestations and insignia of rank and power, as in the familiar phrase, "Solomon in all his glory" (Matthew 6 29), or the glory of the kingdoms of the world (4 8), or the glory of the kings and nations of the earth which shall be brought into the heavenly city (The Revelation 21 24. 26). Doxa also defines the praise, honor and dig nity of men. This is the meaning in John 5 41.44, where Christ distinguishes between His accusers and Himself in that He receives not glory from men, while they receive glory one of another (cf also John 7 18). In Eph 3 13, Paul declares that his tribulations for those to whom he is writing are a glory or distinc tion to them, while in 1 Thessalonians 2 20 he declares that the Thessalonian Christians are his glory and joy.

      (2) As applied to God. Closely related to this usage is the employment of the word to ascribe honor




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Glory Gnash

      and praise to God; sec Luke 17 18, where only the stranger returned to give glory to God; or John 9 24, where the man who had been born blind is bidden to give glory to God; or the phrase "to the glory of God" in Romans 15 7, where the meaning is to secure the honor and praise of God among men. Similar is the use in the frequently recurring doxologies such as, "Glory to God in the highest," "to him," that is, to God, "be glory," etc.

      While the foregoing meanings are frequently illustrated in the NT, it is undoubtedly true that the characteristic use of the word doxa in the NT is in the sense of brightness, brilliance, splendor; and first of all, in the literal sense, referring to the brightness of the heavenly bodies, as in 1 Corinthians 15 40 f, or to the supernatural brightness which over came Saul of Tarsus on the road to Damascus (Acts 22 11).

      (3) As applied to the saints. But the most com mon use of the word is to describe the brilliance which is the characteristic of all persons who share in the heavenly glory. Moses, Filijah and Jesus Himself have" this glory on the Matthew. of Transfig uration (Luke 9 31 f). It was the same glory which gave the angel who came out of heaven power to lighten the earth (The Revelation 18 1), and also which shone about the shepherds when the angel appeared unto them (Luke 2 9). Paul refers to this glory, when he speaks of the face of Moses as it appeared after God had spoken with him (2 Corinthians 3 7f). And as in the case of Moses, so here, the source of this glory is God Himself, who is the God of glory (Acts 7 2, and frequently).

      (4) As applied to the Messianic kingdom. It is also used to describe the ideal Messianic kingdom of the future. It is applied to Christ to describe His royal majesty when He comes to set up His kingdom. So James and John ask to sit, one on His right hand and one on His left in His glory (Mark 10 37). Christ is to appear in glory with the angels (Matthew 16 27 and often), for His condition in the coming age as it was before the incarnation is a condition of glory (Luke 24 20; John 17 5.22.24). But not merely the Messiah, but also all His followers shall share in the glory of the Messianic kingdom. This use is so common that it is scarcely necessary to illustrate it by reference. This glory is to be revealed to all Christians in the future (Romans 8 18. 21; 9 23; cf also 1 Corinthians 2 7; 2 Corinthians 4 17).

      In all these cases it has a distinctly ethical signifi cation, for it is the term which is used to describe

      the essential nature, the perfection of 3. Its the Deity, and is shared by others

      Ethical Sig- because they are made partakers of nificance the Divine nature. So Paul refers to

      "the glory of the incorruptible God" (Romans 1 23; cf also Eph 1 17 f, and often). And the essential nature of Christ comes to be described in the same way. He has glory as of the only begotten of the Father (John 1 14) ; he shows His glory in the performance of miracles (John 2 11); and like the Father, He is the Lord of glory (1 Corinthians 2 8). As a vb. in the OT the most common signification of the word "glory" is, to make one s boast in or of anything, usually of the pious glorying in Yah- weh (JAH (Jehovah)), but occasionally with some other ref erence, as in Jeremiah 9 23 of man glorying in his riches, might or wisdom. In all these cases it represents the Hebrews hith-hallel. In Exodous 8 9 the phrase, "Have thou this glory over me," is the translated of the Hebrews hilh- pa er, and means take to thyself the honor or dis tinction as regards me. In 2 Kings 14 10 it translates the Hebrews hik-kabhedh, "honor thyself," i.e. be satis fied with the home which you have already attained.

      In the apocryphal books it means either "glorify thy self," the middle voice of the yb. doxdzd, as in Sir 3 10, whore the original Hebrews has hiih-kabbedh, or "to exult,"

      "boast over," as in Jth 9 7, where it represents the Greek gauroomai; or "to boast," "take pride in," where it repre sents, as it does usually in the NT, the Cir kauchdomai (Sir 17 9; 24 1; 38 2f>; 39 8; 48 4, in the second and fourth of which cases it represents the Hebrews hith-pa er).

      In the NT the vb. is used 3 t in Jas, and several times in the Epp. of Paul, and everywhere is used to translate the vb. kauchdomai, or, in two cases in Jas, the same vb. is compounded with the preposi tion katd. In all these cases the meaning is "to take pride in," "to congratulate oneself," upon any thing.

      In this connection attention may be called to the use of the noun "glorying," once or twice rendered "to glory," where the meaning is either the occasion or ground of glorying, or sometimes the act of glory ing. The original has kancheina or kauchesis. This usage occurs in Jas 4 10; He 3 6, and several times in the Epp. of Paul.

      LITERATUReast In addition to the commentaries and works on Biblical theology among which, Briggs, ICC on the Pss, Scribner, northY., 1900, esp. the note in I, 66, 67; and Weiss, Hih. Th.-nln, ,f the ,T, KT, T. & south Clark, Edin burgh, 1882-83, may be mentioned esp., the clu ef works oil the subject are von Gall, Die Herrlichkeit Gottes, Giessen, 1900; and Caspari, Die Bedeutungen der Wort- sippe 12D im Hcbrarixchen, Leipzig, 1908. The dis cussions by G. B. Gray and J. Massie in HDB, II, are valuable, and also the brief but significant article by Zenos in the Standard liible Diet., Funk & ,Vagnalls, northY., 1909.


      GLOWING, gld ing, SAND (Isaiah 35 11). See MIRAGeast

      ( GLUTTON, gluf n, GLUTTONOUS, glut"n-us (557, zalal, "to be lavish"; tjxryos, phdgos): "Glutton" (from glut, to swallow greedily) is the translated of zolel from zalal, "to shake or pour out," "to be lavish, a squanderer." In Deuteronomy 21 20, "This our son .... is a glutton, and a drunkard," the word may mean a squanderer or prodigal; ERV has "a riotous liver." In Prov 23 21, "For the drunkard and the glutton shall come to poverty" (following zole bhdsdr, "squanderers of flesh," RV "gluttonous . eaters of flesh"), "glutton" in the usual sense is in tended; "a man gluttonous," "a gluttonous man" (RV) (phdgos, "an eater," "a glutton") was a term applied to Christ in Ilis freedom from asceticism (Matthew 11 1<>; Luke 7 34).

      RV has "idle gluttons" (m Greek, "bellies") for "slow bellies" (Tit 1 12); "gluttonous" "gluttons," for "riotous" (Prov 23 20; 28 7).

      west L. WALKER

      GNASH, nash (p"^n , hdrak; (BpvyfAos, bntytnds}: "Gnash" is used of grinding or striking together the teeth in rage, pain or misery of disappointment.. In the OT it is the translated of hdrak, a mimetic word, and represents for the most part rage, anger, hatred (Job 16 9, "He gnasheth upon me with his teeth," RV "hath gnashed upon me"; Psalm 35 10; 37 12; 112 10, grief; Lam 2 10, contempt or derision); bruchd, "to gnash the teeth in rage," indicates anger, rage, LXX for hdrak (Acts 7 54, of Stephen, "They gnashed on him with their teeth"). The several instances of brugmos, "gnashing," in the Gospels seem to express disappointment rather than anger (Matthew 8 12, "There shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth," RV "the weeping and the gnashing of teeth" ; 13 42.50; 22 13; 24 51; 25 30; Luke 13 28 a vivid representation of the misery of disappointed expectations; cf Ecclus 30 10, "lest thou shalt gnash thy teeth in the end," gomphidzo, "to have the teeth set on edge"); trizo (Mark 9 18), which means "to give out a creaking, grating sound," "to screak," is used in the NT (in the above instance only) to mean "to grate or gnash with the teeth," indicating the effect of a paroxysm, RV "grindeth his teeth." west L. WALKER

      Gnat Gnosticism



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      GNAT, nat (in EV, only in Matthew 23 24, KWV<OX|/, kondps. In Exodous 8 10, for EV "lice," one of the plagues of Egypt, C33 , kinnim, O" 1 ?? , kinnim, or D3? , kinndm, we find in RVm "sand flies" or "fleas" [Gcsenius "gnat"; Mandelkern "culex"]. For k rno ken [Isaiah 51 6], EV "in like manner," LXX cio-irep ravra, hospcr taut a, Vulg sicut haec, RVm has "like gnats," since ]5 , ken, elsewhere "thus," may here be taken to be a sing, of the form D 1 ?^ , kinnim, which occurs in Exodous 8) : In the NT passage, the difference between AV and RV should be noted. "Strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel" is changed to "strain out the gnat and swallow the camel," the reference being to the inconsistency of the Jew ish religious leaders in taking extraordinary pains in some things, as in the preparation of food, while leaving weightier matters unattended to.

      In Isaiah 51 6, the suggestion of RVm, "They that dwell therein shall die like gnats," seems a decided improvement on the "shall die in like manner" of EV, esp. as ken, "thus" (see supra), is a repetition of k e mo, whose meaning is practically the same, "in like manner" being the rendering in EV of k e mo ken.

      As to the creatures, kinnim, of the Egyp plague, there is little choice between "lice" of EV and the others suggested, except as we may be influenced by the LXX rendering, skn i phcs, which may mean "gnats" or "mosquitoes." See Fu:.,; LICeast


      GNOSTICISM, nos ti-siz m:


      1. Alexandrian Philosophy

      2. Zoroastrianism



      1. Colossians

      2. 1 Corinthians: "Knowledge " at Corinth

      3. Pastoral Epistles

      4. 1 John

      (1) Gnostic Claims

      (2) Its Loveless Nature

      (3) Docetism

      (4) The Antichrist

      (5) Its Antinoinian Side "To Know the Depths," The Revelation


      1. God and the World

      How Did the World Originate ?

      2. Evil

      (1) Christian Doctrine of Sin

      (2) Sin and the Moral Law

      3. Christ and Redemption

      4. Asceticism and Antinomianism VI. HARNACK Samuel VIEW OF GNOSTICISM


      1. Not a Heresy of the Humbler Classes

      2. Cerinthus: His Teaching

      3. The Gospel of John

      4. Various Sects

      (1) The Ophites

      (2) Valentinus

      (3) Basilides

      (4) Saturninus

      (5) Marcion

      5. Relation to the OT

      0. The Christian Verities

      7. Influence on Theology

      8. Truth Underlying Docetism VIII. MODERN GNOSTICISM LITERATURE

      Gnosticism except perhaps in 1 Timothy 6 20, where St. Paul warns Timothy against "the gnosis, which is falsely so called" is not directly alluded to in the NT. Nevertheless its leaven was actually working, as will immediately be seen, and constituted a most serious peril in the apostolic church. "That strange, obscure movement, partly intellectual, partly fanatical .... in the 2d cent, spread with the swiftness of an epidemic over the church from Syria to Gaul" (Law, The Tests of Life, 26). It is therefore of high importance to gain a right con ception of the nature of this potent anti-Christian influence. This is not easy. The difficulty in

      dealing with Gnosticism is that, it was not a homo geneous system of either religion or philosophy, but embraced many widely diversified sects holding opinions drawn from a great variety of sources. "The infinitely varied shapes assumed by the sys tems render it almost impossible to classify them, or even to give an account of their leading ideas, which shall not be open to objection. We might as well try to classify the products of a tropical jungle, or the shapes and hues of the sunset clouds, which change under our view as we look at them" (Orr, The I royrcss of Dogma, 58).

      /. General Definition. On the general definition of Gnosticism a few authorities may be cited. "Gnosticism," says Dr. Gwatkin, "may be pro visionally described as a number of schools of phi losophy, oriental in general character, but taking in the idea of a redemption through Christ, and further modified in different sects by a third ele ment, which may be Judaism, Hellenism, or Chris tianity .... the Gnostics took over only the idea of a redemption through Christ, not the full Chris tian doctrine, for they made it rather a redemption of the philosophers from matter, than a redemption of mankind from sin" (Eddy Church History to AD 813, II, 20).

      Dr. Orr writes, "Gnosticism may be described generally as the fantastic product of the blending of certain Christian ideas particularly that of redemption through Christ with speculations and imaginings derived from a medley of sources (Greek, Jewish, Parsic; philosophies, religions, theosophies, mysteries) in a period when the human mind was in a kind of ferment, and when opinions of every sort were jumbled together in an unimaginable welter. It involves, as the name denotes, a claim to knowledge, knowledge of a kind of which the ordinary believer was incapable, and in the pos session of which salvation in the full sense consisted. This knowledge of which the Gnostic boasted, related to the subjects ordinarily treated of in religious philosophy; Gnosticism was a species of religious philosophy 11 (The Early Church, 71).

      Neander has described Gnosticism as "the first notable attempt to introduce into Christianity the existing elements of mental culture, and to render it more complete on the hitherto rather neglected side of theoretical knowledge; it was an attempt of the mind of the ancient world in its yearning after knowledge, and in its dissatisfaction with the present, to bring within its grasp and to appropriate the treasures of this kind which Christianity pre sented" (Antignostikus, Intro, 199).

      Gnosticism accordingly comprehends in itself many previously existing tendencies; it is an amal gam into which quite a number of different elements have been fused. A heretical system of thought, at once subtle, speculative and elaborate, it en deavored to introduce into Christianity a so-called higher knowledge, which was grounded partly on the philosophic creed in which Greeks and Romans had taken refuge consequent on the gradual decay and brcaking-up of their own religions, partly, as will be shown, on the philosophies of Plato and of Philo, and still more on the philosophies and theos ophies and religions of the East, especially those of Persia and of India.

      "For a long time the pagan beliefs had ceased to be taken seriously by thoughtful men and had been displaced by various creeds derived from philo sophical speculation. These in themselves were ab stract and unsatisfying, but had been partly vital ized by union with the theosophies of the East. An attempt was made on the part of this philosophical religion to effect an alliance with Christianity. _ A section of the church was dissatisfied with the sim plicity of the gospel, and sought to advance to



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Gnat Gnosticism

      something higher by adopting the current .specula tions The lute books of the NT are all occu pied, more or less, with this movement, which was the more dangerous as it threatened the church from within" (Professor PJ. Scott, The Apologetic of the NT, 14).

      Gnosticism, though usually regarded as a heresy, was not really such: it was not the perverting of Christian truth; it came, rather, from outside. Having worked its way into the Christian church, it was then heretical. "Although it became a cor rupting influence within the church, it was an alien by birth. While the church yet sojourned within the pale of Judaism, it enjoyed immunity from this plague; but as soon as it broke through these narrow bounds, it found itself in a world where the decaying religions and philosophies of the West wen 1 in acute fermentation under the influence of a new and powerful leaven from the East ; while the infusion of Christianity itself into this fermenting mass only added to the bewildering multiplicity of gnostic sects and systems it brought forth" (Law, The Tests nj Life, 2(5).

      //. Sources of Gnosticism. Mansel (in his work on The (ittotitic //m.s/c.s-. X 2) sums up the principal sources of Gnosticism in these three, Platonism, the Pers religion, and the Buddhism of India. To Pla tonism it owed much of its philosophical form and tendencies. From the Dualism of the Pers religion it derived its speculations regarding the origin of evil, and much of what it taught about emanations. To Buddhism, he thinks, it owed the doctrine of the antagonism between matter and spirit, and the unreality of derived existence the germ of Doce- tism. Mansel also holds that there is the possibility that Gnosticism derived certain of its features from the Kabbala (kabbalah), or secret teaching of the Jews in the two books, the Si /tficr ygirdfi, or Book of Creation, and the Zdhar, or Book of Light. An influence of Buddhism on Gnosticism, however, may safely be doubted, as there is no reason to be lieve that the knowledge of Buddhist doctrine had so early penetrated inio the West . The Jewish works named by .Mansel are really products of the Middle Ages (West cot t, Intro to the Htmhj of the (los)nlx, 144 If)). The other source s named were really influential. We notice two the Alexandrian philosophy and the Parsic dualism.

      Alexandrian philosophy endeavored to unite Greek philosophy and lleb religion. Philo, the great Jew ish commentator of Alexandria, had 1. Alexan- tried to interpret the ancient Jewish drian Phi- Scriptures by the aid of the Greek phi losophy losophy, to expound the OT in terms of Plato s thought, and .to discover allegorical meanings where none were intended. In Philo s teaching there is a sharp line drawn be tween God and the material world: with him God ciiimot exert any action upon the world of matter, except through intermediate agency, the Jewish angels and the heathen demons. Philo has much to _ say in regard to the Logos. His utterances on this subject may be compared with what is said of the attributes of "Wisdom" in ch 8 of the Book of Prov, and also with the Logos or "Word" of the Gospel of John. With Philo, the Logos is the power of God, or the Divine reason endowed with energy, and embracing within itself all subordinate powers. The Logos is impersonal in its relations to God; and herein is one huge difference between Philo s conception and that in the gospel. Philo teaches that the Logos is the only firstborn of God, the chief of the angels, the viceroy of God, and rep resentative of man. See LOGOS.

      According to Philo the creation of the universe was a gradual molding out of matter; hence arises evil. He also teaches the preexistence of the soul,

      which is now imprisoned in the flesh. The wise man, therefore, will break the thraldom of the flesh, and will rise by a sort of ecstasy to the immediate vision of God. It will be seen how much of this leaching was assimilated by the various gnostic sects.

      The Zproastrian or Pers system was based on the assumption that there existed two original and inde pendent powers of good and evil, of 2. Zoroas- light and darkness, Ormuzd (Ahura- trianism Mazda), the wise Lord, and Ahriman (Angra-Mainyu), the wicked spirit. These powers were believed to be equal, and each supreme in his own domain. The earth, which was created by Ormuzd, became the battlefield of the two powers. Ahriman led away the first man and woman from their allegiance to Ormuzd, and so all evils result to mankind.

      "In oriental (Pers) dualism," says Professor Bous- set, "it is within this material world that the good and the evil powers are at war, and this world be neath the stars is by no means conceived as entirely subject to evil. Gnosticism has combined the two, the Greek opposition between spirit and matter, and the sharp Zoroastrian dualism, which, where the Greek mind conceived of a higher and a lower world, saw instead two hostile worlds standing in contrast to each other like light and darkness. And out of the combination of these two dualisms arose the teaching of Gnosticism with its thoroughgoing pessimism audits fundamental asceticism" ("Gnos ticism," in Knc Brit, llth ed, XII, 154).

      Ill- Nature of Gnosticism. "Gnosticism," says Dr. Gwatkin, "is Christianity perverted by learn ing and speculation" (Early Church History, 73). The intellectual pride of the Gnostics refined away the gospel into a philosophy. The clue to the understanding of Gnosticism is given in the word from which it is derived gnosis, "knowledge." Gnosticism puts knowledge in the place which can only right ly be occupied by Christian faith. To the Gnostic the great question was not the intensely practical one, "What must I do to be saved from sin?" but "What is the origin of evil?" "How is the primitive order of the universe to be restored?" In the knowledge of these and of similar questions, and in the answers given to these questions, there was redemption, as the Gnostic understood it.

      "Those little gnostic sects and groups all lived in the conviction that they possessed a secret and mysterious knowledge, in no way accessible to those outside, which was not to be proved or propagated, but believed in by tho initiated, and anxiously guarded as a secret. This knowledge of theirs was not based on reflection or scien tific inquiry and proof, but on revelation. It was derived directly from the times of primitive Christianity, from tho Saviour Himself and His disciples and friends, with whom they claimed to be connected by a secret tradition, or else from later prophets, of whom many sects boasted. It was laid down in wonderful mystic writings, which were in the possession of tho various circles.

      "In short. Gnosticism in all its various sections. Its form and its character, falls under the category of mystic religions, which were so characteristic of the religious life of decadent antiquity. In Gnosticism, as in tho other mystic religions, we (hid tho same contrast of the initiated and the uninitiated, tho same loose organization, the same kind of petty sectarianism and mystery-moiigering. All alike boast a mystic revelation and a deeply veiled wisdom" (Bousset, op. cit., 153).

      The questions, therefore, with which Gnosticism concerned itself were those of the relation of the finite

      and the infinite, the origin of the world Chief and of evil, the cause, meaning, pur-

      Points in pose and destiny of all things, the reason Gnosticism of the difference in the capacities and

      in the lot in life of individual men, the method of salvation. The following may be re garded as the chief points in the characteristics of the gnostic systems: (1) A claim on the part of the initiated to a special knowledge of the truth, a




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      tendency to regard knowledge as superior to faith, and as the special possession of the more enlightened, for ordinary Christians did not possess this see-ret and higher doctrine. (2) The essential separation of matter and spirit, the former of these being essen tially evil, and the source from which all evil has arisen. (3) An attempt at the solution of the prob lems of creation and of the origin of evil by the con ception of a Demiurge, i.e. a Creator or Artificer of the world as distinct from the Supreme Deity, and also by means of emanations extending between God and the visible universe. It should be ob served that this conception merely concealed the difficulties of the problem, and did not solve them. (4) A denial of the true humanity of Christ, a docetic Christology, which looked upon the earthly life of Christ and esp. on His sufferings on the cross as unreal. (5) The denial of the personality of the Supreme God, and the denial also of the free will of man. (0) The teaching, on the one hand, of asceti cism as the means of attaining to spiritual com munion with God, and, on the other hand, of an indifference which led directly to licentiousness. (7) A syncretislic tendency which combined certain more or less misunderstood Christian doctrines, various elements from oriental and Jewish and other sources. (8) The Scriptures of the OT were ascribed to the Demiurge or inferior Creator of the world, who was the God of the Jews, but not the true God. Some of these characteristic ideas are more obvious in one, and some of them in others of the gnostic systems. The relation of these ideas to Christian facts and doctrines is dealt with more particularly below.

      IV. Gnosticism in the Christian Church. (1) In the N T and the Apostolic Age. The germ of Gnos ticism in the Christian church made its appearance in the apostolic age, and is referred to by St. Paul in several of his epistles, notably in that to the; Colossians and in the Pastoral Epistles. It is also referred to by the apostles Peter and Jude; refer ences to it are found, besides, in the Apocalypse, the First Epistle of John and the Gospel of John.

      In Ool a great deal is said regarding a false teaching, an insidious theosophist doctrine, the teachers of which

      were alienating tho Christians in Cplossae 1. Colos- from tho gospel, and were disseminating sians their speculations, which led to the worship

      of angels in contrast to the worship of Christ, to esoteric exclusiveness wholly opposed to tho universality of the gospel, and to an asceticism injurious to Christian freedom, and derogatory to the human body as indwelt by tho Holy Ghost. These tenets are identi cal with the more fully. developed Gnosticism of the gen eration succeeding that of the apostles; and at the root of the- Colossian false teaching there- lay the same error which tho gnostic mind had no way of meeting, viz. that there could bo no connection between the highest spiritual agency, that is God, and gross corporeal matter. From this theoretical basis arose another error that as sin is inherent in the material substance of the body, therefore tho only way by which perfection can be reached is to punish the body by asceticism, so that through tho infliction of pain and tho mortification of the flesh tho region of pure spirit may bo reached, and thus man may bo etherealized and become like God. This ascetic tend ency is wonderfully widespread; it reappears century after century, and shows itself in many forms of religion, not merely in distorted forms of Christianity, but in tho Hindu religions, in Buddhism and elsewhere. In the Epistle to the Col, accordingly, there are definite references to ascetic practices which were inculcated by the false teachers at Colossae. The very terms which they em ployed have been preserved, "Touch not," "Taste not," "Handle not." It was in this way that these teachers had "at their own hand" invented a worship different from that of tho Christian faith, which endeavored to attain the deliverance of the soul by "the neglecting of the body" (Col 2 21.23 AV). These gnostic teachers showed these tendencies still more boldly when Paul wrote his First Epistle to Timothy (see below), for he describes them as "forbidding to marry, and commanding to ab stain from meats" (1 Timothy 4 3). These ascetic prac tices were afterward taught by various gnostic sects, tho Encratites, the followers of Saturninus, and others.

      These tendencies in tho Colossian church St. Paul set himself to correct in his epistle. The method which ho

      adopts is not so much to demolish error, as to establish the contrary truth, setting before the Colossians the person and work of Christ, Christ the Creator, Christ in whom there dwells not-, merely some or even much of the fulness of God, but all the fulness of the Godhead bodily; Christ the God of providence, tho Upholder of all things, in whom matter and all creatures and all events "consist" and have their being; Christ the Reconciler who has reconciled us unto God through the blood of the cross. In view of truths like these, Colossian error and all other forms of Gnosticism crumble into decay and vanish. See COLOSSIANS, EPISTLE TO THeast

      The Epistle to the Col is the first of the Pauline

      Epistles in which distinctively gnostic teaching is

      found in its attack upon the Christian

      2. 1 Corinthians: faith. But from incidental notices in "Knowl- epistles of Paul written at an earlier edge" period, it can be seen how 7 congenial at Corinth was the soil into which gnostic teach ing was about to fall. For even in

      Corinth when Paul wrote his First Epistle to the church there, there had been a claim on the part of some that they possessed knowledge," as if others were destitute of it, a claim which the apostle refuses to admit, and meets with stern resistance. They thought themselves "wise," they were given to disputing, they professed that they "all had knowledge" (1 Corinthians 8 1), nay, they could "know all mysteries and all knowledge" (13 2) ; but this knowl edge did not edify them, did not build them up, it only puffed them up (81); it did not. make them sympathetic or tender-hearted toward the weak (8 7-11).

      In 1 Timothy 6 20.21 Paul speaks of the "knowledge

      [the gnusis] which is falsely so called; which some

      professing have erred concerning the

      3. Pastoral faith." In other places in that epistle Epistles reference is made to tenets which are

      exactly those of Gnosticism. In 1 4 the apostle speaks of "fables and endless genealogies, which minister questionings, rather than a dispensa tion of God which is in faith." Philo had given a great impetus to an allegorizing interpretation of the OT. His writings were well known and were popular in many of the Jewish schools. These fanciful interpretations would hinder the growth of the Christian church; and this allegorizing of Scripture, joined to the teaching of the genealogies of the aeons, would leave no place for a Redeemer. In 4 3, as already noted, Paul describes ascetic prac tices which were regarded by their votaries as most meritorious. To abstain from marriage and from various kinds of food was the teaching of the Essenes and also of the Gnostics. This ascetic _ teaching was unnatural, as contrary to the constitution of the world, as that has been arranged by a holy and wise Creator, and it is also subversive of Christian liberty. Nothing can be esteemed common or unclean with out throwing a reproach upon the Creator.

      Antinomian development. But another and con trary result also followed from the principles of the sinfulness of matter, and of redemption as de liverance from the flesh, viz. that there was an easier way of relief, by treating the soul and the body as separate entities which have nothing in common. Let the soul go its way on the wings of spiritual thought, while the body may indulge its fleshly desires. For, so it was held, as body and soul are entirely distinct in their nature, the spiritual cannot be defiled by anything, however carnal and gross, that the body can do. _ This was the anti- nomian development of Gnosticism. Many traces of this are apparent in the Pastoral Epistles and in 2 Pet and Jude. The Gnostics, against whom Paul warns Timothy, were "lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, haughty, railers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affec tion, implacable, slanderers, without self-control, fierce, no lovers of good, traitors, headstrong, puffed-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      up, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God; holding a form of godliness, but having denied the power thereof" (2 Timothy 3 2.3.4). Such, too, is the testimony borne regarding them by Ignatius (Law, The Tests of Life, 30): "They give no heed to love, caring not for the widow, the orphan or the afflicted, neither for those who are in bonds, nor for those who are released from bonds, neither for the hungry nor the thirsty." Such persons professed that they knew God, but by their works they denied Him; they were "abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate" (Tit 1 16). They enticed others into sins of impurity (2 Timothy 3 5. (5). They allured others through the lusts of the flesh; and the means by which they succeeded in doing this was that they spoke great swelling words of vanity, and the end was that in their destroying of others they themselves also were surely destroyed (2 Pet 2 12.18). They were ungodly men, turn ing the grace of God into lasciviousness and denying our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ; they gave themselves up to the sins of the flesh, and ran riot ously after error in hope of a gain in money; they were sensual men, not having the Spirit (Jude vs The entire Ep. of Jude is directed against this antinomian and licentious development of Gnosticism, and against its terrible permission of an unholy life (see below on Book of The Revelation).

      In the First Epistle of John them is a distinct polemical purpose. Them is no book of the N T which is more purposeful in its attack of error. There is "the spirit of error" (1 John 4 G), opposing the Spirit A 1 T v.n of truth. " Many false prophets are gone * 1 JO nn O ut into the world" (4 1), and this from the church itself, "They went out from us, hut they were not of us" (2 19); and these false prophets arc distinctly named "the antichrist" (2 22) and "the liar" (il, and "the deceiver and the antichrist" (2 John ver 7). This peril, against which the apostle writes, and from which he seeks to defend the church, was Gnosticism, as-is proved by what, is said again and again in the epistle of the characteristics of this insidious and deadly teach ing.

      (1) Gnoxtic claim*. The gnostic claim to knowledge throws light upon many passages in this epistle. St. John refers to his opponents using such phrases as " I know God." "I abide in Christ." "I am in the light." These lofty claims were made by persons who did not love their brethren on earth, who did not walk in Christ s footsteps, and who were destitute of love. The apostle therefore describes these lofty churns as false, because those who made them possessed neither love nor obe dience.

      In contrast to these gnostic claims for those who made them were no other than the early Gnostics St. John shows how the Christ of history is the Christ of experience; for those to whom he is writing know Christ, who is from the beginning, and they know the Father. " ,Ve know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God. and eternal life" (5 20). This knowledge of God and communion with Him are attained, not by gnostic- specu lation, but by the obedience of faith, the outcome of which is brotherly love and a life in which the Christian walks even as Christ did (2 0). And t hus also obedience and brotherly love are the test of the profession which any man may make that he knows God. "Every one also that doeth righteousness is begotten of him" (2 29); "Whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither ho that loveth not his brother" (3 10).

      (2) Its loveless nature. Gnosticism was distinguished by an unethical, loveless intellectualism. This socms to be the explanation of the false teaching against which this epistle is directed. The apostle describes the dry head-knowledge which left the heart and life untouched by love, and which led men, while they professed to love God, nevertheless to remain destitute of love to their fellow-men. They did not fold their human brethren to their hearts, they were dead to the fact that where pity dwells, the love of God dwells also. In Gnosticism knowledge was in itself the supreine end and purpose; of life, the sum of highest good to which a man could attain, the crown of life. The system was loveless to the core.

      (3) DocHixm. Xow, when the attempt was made to amalgamate! these gnostic ideas with tho Christian faith, the inevitable result was Docetism. Just because God cannot have any immediate contact with matter, there fore tho incarnation of Almighty God in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ is inconceivable. From this position it is, of course, only a step to deny that the incarnation and the true human life of Christ ever took place at all.

      (4) The Antichrist. The Antichrist of the First

      Epistle of John is docetic Gnosticism. The soul of the apostle rushes onward, with glowing zeal for the honor of his Master whom Gnosticism dishonored, to identify per sonally the historical Jesus with the Divine Being, "the Son of God," "the Word of Life," "the Christ." "Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, even he that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, tho same hath not the Father: he that confesseth tho Son hath tho Father also" (2 22.23). It should be rioted that the last clause in vcr 23, which is printed in italics in AV, is restored in RV to its rightful position in the original text. "Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesseth not Jesus is not of God: and this is the spirit of the anti christ, whereof ye have heard that it comoth; and now it is in the world already" (4 2.3).

      (5) 7;.s- antinomian aide. The antinomian side of Gnosticism is not so directly referred to in the First Epistle of John as Docetism is; but evidences are mani fest that the apostle had it clearly before him. "Little children," ho writes, "lot no man lead you astray: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as ho is right eous: he that doeth sin is of the devil" (3 7.Samuel). And these wore the methods by which those deceivers en deavored to lead the members of the church astray They alleged that sin was a thing indifferent in itself. It made no difference to the spiritual man whether he sinned with his body or not. It is for this reason that tho apostle, in opposing those teachers, insists that "sin is lawlessness" (3 4); "All unrighteousness is sin" (5 17); "Whosoever is begotten of (rod doeth no sin" (3 9) ; "In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither ho that loveth not his brother" (3 10). The whole passage presupposes, as familiar to its readers, a doctrine of moral indifferentism, accord ing to which the status of the spiritual man is not to be tested by the commonplace facts of moral conduct" (The Texts of Life, 34). See JOHN, FIKST EPISTLE OF.

      As time advanced, and the later books of the NT were written, Gnosticism assumed more of its dis tinctive peculiarities. "Those who 5. "To had knowledge" regarded themselves

      Know the as a superior order of believers. One Depths": of their phrases was "to know the The Revelation depths" (The Revelation 2 24 AV), and this was

      valued far more highly than love and obedience. "From this language, we may, 1 think, infer the existence of an Ophite sect, boasting of its peculiar ynosi-s, before the date, of the Apocalypse" (Mansel, The Gnostic Heresies, 10.5). The claim of the Ophites was that they alone knew "the depths." "Yes," is the apostle s reply to claims of this kind, "yes, the depths, but not of God, the depths of Satan"; for such is a just description of a teaching which ascribed the origin and the work ing of evil to God. It is in the light of gnostic teaching of this sort that the meaning can be seen of the same apostle s language in his First Epistle, "And this is the message which we have heard from him and announce unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all" (1 John 1 5).

      The Nicolaitans. In the Epistles to the Seven Churches in the Apocalypse there are other refer ences to Gnosticism. Who the Nicolaitans were (2 (i.l.")) is not. absolutely certain; but it is not unlikely that they were so called because of their having assumed the name of "Nicolaiis, a proselyte of Antioch" (Acts 6 />). The first step_to the re- cept ion of gentile believers into the Christian church on an equal foot ing with the Jews may have been t he appointment of Nicolaiis as one of the first deacons, for the facts that he was a native of An tioch and a proselyte, show that he had been a heathen by birth. And it is noteworthy to find such a person appointed to office in the church at so very early a period, even before the conversion of the apostle Paul. The Nicolaitans therefore may have distorted in an antinomian sense the doctrine taught by Nicolaiis, who in all probability pro claimed the liberty of the gospel, as his fellow- deacon, Stephen, did (Acts 7 throughout). But the liberty claimed by the Nicolaitans was liberty to sin. They are mentioned in the Epistle to Ephe- sus, and their deeds are characterized as deeds which




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      Christ hates (The Revelation 2 0). Their iinme occurs in the Epistle to Pergamum, and there also their doctrine is described as a doctrine which the Lord hates (ver 15). Their leaching was one of licen tiousness eating things sacrifice! to idols, and com mitting fornication (ver 14). Again in the Epistle to Thyatira, the Gnostics are spoken of as prac tising the same evil courses, and as holding a doc trine of "the depths of Satan" (vs 20.21.24 AV) see above. The persons mentioned in the Epistle to Philadelphia were also evidently Gnostics. They are describe! 1 as being "of the synagogue of Satan" (3 9).

      "In the language of St. Judo, as in that of St. Peter, which it. closely imitates, we may clearly discern a ref erence to the gnostic sect of the Nicolaitans mentioned by name in The Revelation. The comparison in all these passages, of the error condemned with that of Balaam, is decisive as to the identity of the persons intended. The other characteristics noted by St. Peter are also repeated by St. Jude their denial of the Lord, their profligate lives, their contempt of government, and evil speaking of dig nities and of things that they know not, their pollution of the feasts of charity, their great swelling words. The antinomian, no less than the ascetic side of Gnosticism, seems by this time to have fully manifested itself" (Man- sel, The Gnoxtic Heri xirx, 71).

      V. The Christian Antithesis. The principal points of contrast between Gnosticism and Christian teaching in regard to leading doctrines will now be apparent, and can be briefly summarized.

      According to the Gnostics, (Joel is thought of as

      the ultimate, nameless, unknowable Being, of whom

      they speak as the "Abyss." He is

      1. God and perfect, but the material world is alien the World to the Divine nature. How then does

      it come to exist at all? What is the source of its imperfections and evils?

      How did the world originate? The Gnostic an swer is that the pl&roma or fulness of the Deity (see FULNKSS) could flow out in no other way than in emanations or aeons or angels, all of which are necessarily imperfect, the highest of these emana tions or aeons or angels being more spiritual than the grade immediately below it. Of these aeons there is a gradation so numerous, that at length the lowest of them is almost wholly corporeal, the spirit ual element having been gradually diminished or eliminated, until at last the world of man and of matter is reached, the abode of evil. In this way the gulf is bridged between God and the world of mankind. The highest aeons approximate closely to the Divine nature, so spiritual are they and so nearly free from matter. These form the highest hierarchy of angels, and these as well as many other grades of the angelic host are to be worshipped.

      In opposition to this view, Christian faith wor ships God as the free self-sufficient Creator, infinitely good and wise and powerful and holy, the Author of all things, and affirms creation as an incompre hensible fact revealed to faith, and which rises above the grasp of the understanding. "By faith we understand that the worlds have been framed by the word of God, so that what is seen hath not been made out of things which do appear" (He 11 3 AV).

      The doctrine of evil follows directly from the

      above account of the relation of God to the world.

      According to Gnosticism the mani-

      2. Evil festation of God is possible only

      through self-limitation on His part, for in His essence God is the unfathomable Abyss. Through this Divine self-limitation are evolved, first, the Divine powers or attributes, which pre viously were hidden in the Abyss of His being. These Divine powers (the pleroma) become the principles of all further developments of life. Life continues to be unfolded in such a way that its suc cessive grades sink farther and farther from the

      purity of God, the life; is feebler the nearer they come to matter, with which, at length, they blend. Such, according to Gnosticism, is the origin of evil.

      Whenever men are not content with acknowl edging evil to be the; act of their own free; will, which has chosen to forsake its absolute dependence upon God; whenever they go beyond this and seek for another origin of evil, then one of two results follows. They either limit the holiness of God, and find the cause of evil in God Himself, thus annihilating all distinction between good and evil which is Pan theism; or they limit the power of God by granting the existence of an eternal evil power beyond the control of God which is Dualism. In avoiding Pantheism, Gnosticism accepted the dualist ic, solu tion, ascribing to evil an eternal self-subsi-Uent nature, which is to make it absolute as God Him self is. As absolute self-subsistence can be affirmed of none but God, the eternally self-subsist en I, evil of Dualism must be God, which it cannot possibly be, because it is not good. Here is the self-contra diction on which Gnosticism was wrecked.

      (1) The- ChrixlitDi doctrine of ,s///. Directly con trary to this is the Christian doctrine, according to which evil is the refusal of the creature-will to lean absolutely and utterly on God, upon His care and love and upholding grace. Sin is that which ought not to be; it has no right to exist at all; it is de fiance of God; it is moral transgression; its mag nitude cannot be exaggerated. If it could, it would dethrone God. It has defied His righteousness and wisdom and holiness and even His grace. Sin therefore is dealt with by God in two ways, either by direct punishment or by redemption, in which provision is made for its removal by its being borne by the Lamb of God who laketh away the sin of the world.

      The gnostic idea of the origin of evil follows at once from, and is inseparably involved in. theirdual- istic interpretation of nature. The question "What is sin?" is no mere academic or philosophical dis cussion, in which one opinion may be as good as another. "Everything in Christianity is connected more or less directly with the great facts of Sin and Redemption; and the plan of Redemption, which is the essence of Christianity, cannot be rightly understood until the doctrine of Sin be adequately recognized and established. Here, certainly, if anywhere, Christian theology must fight pro or IK el focis" (Julius Miiller, quoted in Dr. Orr s /Samuel m r/.s a Problem of TIX/III/, (}).

      (2) *Samuel m and the moral law. The universality of sin, its persistence, its gravity, its power to destroy and to deprave these are facts which can hardly be exaggerated. To view sin aright, it is impossible to leave out of sigh! its relation to moral law, to God, and to His kingdom. Sin is the transgression of moral law; it is transgression also against a holy God, of whose character and will moral law is a transcript or reflection. "Sin is transgression against God, the substitution of the creature- will for the will of the Creator; revolt of the creature- will from God" (Samuel in as a Problem of Today, 7). It is the resolve of the will to make itself independent of God and to renounce His authority. Sin is self- will, false independence, freedom which ends in bondage and misery.

      But in Gnosticism sin is something quite different; it is not the act and the disposition of the human will in rebellion against God; it is only a physical fact or quality inherent in the body and in matter every where. Redemption therefore does not consist in the work of Christ for us on the cross, and the apply ing of the benefits of that work by the Holy Spirit of God in the renewal of the moral nature of man. Redemption is simply each man s efforts to secure emancipation from (lie flesh from physical evil.




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      It is easily seen that a system of this kind had no

      need of Christ and leaves no place for redemption

      in the Christian sense of that term.

      3. Christ Redemption in this scheme of thought and Re- is not deliverance from sin, it is not demption removal of guilt and renewing of the

      mind. It is something quite different, and consists in the restoration of the cosmic order and illumination of the mind of the select, few through knowledge. Christ is not the Saviour who saves His people from their sins, and who gives them unceasingly, through union with Himself, deliverance from the power of sin. He is only one of the aeons, the highest of them. He is an origi nated being, and not God. There is thus no place in Gnosticism either for the creation of the universe by God, or for the incarnation and work of Christ. Once grant that matter is essentially evil, and there is excluded the possibility of Christ s having assumed a true human nature, simply for the one reason that the world and human nature are originally and necessarily evil. Thus, as already seen, we are landed in Docetism.

      The Christology of the Gnostics accordingly assumed one of two types. One class of early Gnostics separated the spiritual being Christ from the man Jesus; they supposed that the Christ en tered Jesus at the time of His baptism, and left Him at the moment of His crucifixion. Thus the Christ was neither born as a man nor suffered as a man. In this way they obviated the, difficulty, insuperable to the gnostic mind, of conceiving the connection between the highest spiritual agency and gross corporeal matter, which was involved in the Catholic doctrine of the Incarnation and Pas sion, and which Gnostics of another rype more effectually set aside by the doctrine of Docetism, i.e. by assuming that the human body of Our Lord was only a phantom body, and not real flesh and blood. Irenaeus represents the former class as teaching that Jesus was the receptacle of the Christ, and that the Christ descended upon Him from heaven in the form of a dove, and after lie had declared to mankind the nameless Father, entered again into the pl( rdia imperceptibly and invisibly. Here no names are given. But in another passage he ascribes precisely the same doctrine, without however naming the pier o ma, to Cerinthus" (Light- foot, Col, 2(>4). How strenuously this doctrine was combnted in apostolic circles has already been shown in speaking of St. John s First Epistle.

      The necessary consequence of the gnostic theory

      in an ascetic morality which passed over by sure

      steps into antinomian license has like-

      4. Asceti- wise been fully illustrated in the fore- cism and going, and need not be further enlarged Anti- on. The whole has its root in a false nomianism intellect ualism, to which the gospel in

      its inculcation of humility, faith and dependence upon God s Spirit for guidance into truth is, in its inmost principle, opposed.

      VI. Harnack s View of Gnosticism. Harnack s view of Gnosticism differs from that now given in laying the chief emphasis on its Judaeo- Hellenistic side. He describes well how, when Christianity appeared, an extensive spiritualizing or allegorizing of the OT had already taken place. "This jspirit- ualizing was the result of a philosophic view of religion, and this philosophic view was the outcome of a lasting influence of Greek philosophy, and of the Greek spirit generally, upon Judaism. In consequence of this view, all facts and sayings of the OT in which one could not find his way, were allegorized. Not h ing was what it seemed, but was only t he symbol of something invisible. The history of the OT was here sublimated to a history of the emancipation of reason from passion" (History of Doyma, I, 223).

      This allegorical interpretation disclosed to the ma ture mind a wealth of relations, of hints and of in tuitions from the OT, which to the uninitiated was only a dry record of fact. Ihis view of the OT gave its readers a strange interest, which pro ceeded to transfer their ancient Jewish hopes into the world of Greek philosophy, and transformed the result into a metaphysic. When these; thinkers entered the Christian church, Christian hopes and terms were added to the already existing Judaic- Greek-Alexandrian compound, and such was Gnos ticism. It represented the acute secularizing or Hellenizing of Christianity. The Gnostics "are therefore those Christians, who, in a swift advance, attempted to capture Christianity for Hellenic cul ture, and Hellenic culture for Christianity, and who gave up the OT in order to facilitate the conclusion of the covenant between the two powers and make it possible to assert the absoluteness of Christianity" (p. 227).

      Harnack indeed grants that there were other ele ments in Gnosticism, but- he strongly asserts that the Greek element was the predominating one. In this he seems to us to be in error. Laying the chief em phasis on Hellenism, he fails to give the due and preponderating place to eastern dualism. As already seen, an eastern dualist ic theosophy is the chief element in Gnosticism. This eastern source is also acknowledged by Ilarnack, but only as if it were subsidiary to Hellenism. As he regards it, Gnosticism was an acute Hellenizing of Chris tianity" (p. 230).

      In regard to the fundamental philosophic doc trines of Gnosticism, the indefinable nature of the Divine primeval Being, the sinfulness of matter, the fulness of God in aeons, the Demiurge, etc, Harnack agrees generally with other writers, and adds, "All these are ideas for which we find the way prepared in the philosophy of the time, anticipated by Philo, and represented in neo-Platonism as the great final result of Greek philosophy" (p. 233).

      VII. Influence and Development of Gnosticism. Gnosticism is peculiarly the heresy of the 2d cent., and in itself a proof of the extent to which a knowl edge of the Christian faith had, at that early period, penetrated in literary and philosophical circles. Though it is true that Christianity at first influenced chiefly the humbler classes, yet. it was not among these persons that the various gnostic heresies arose.

      Gnosticism "was a product which did not spring up spontaneously in the minds of the mechanics and slaves and women and children, whom most, like Celsus, suppose to have formed the bulk of the Christian communities, but could only have taken its rise in minds of a more cultured and speculative cast. This, indeed, was its claim to be a religion of f/Ko.siV or knowledge, for the more highly trained or elite. It could only exist at all, therefore, as t ho result of a Christian fer ment which had entered these speculative circles, and was there powerfully at work. Baur rightly appreciates the situation, when ho says: Gnosticism gives the clear est, proof that Christianity had now come to be one of the most important factors in the history of the time, and it shows esp. what a mighty power of attraction the new Christian principles possessed for the highest intellectual life then to be found either in the pagan or in the Jewish world. Above all, these systems are a striking wittiess to the impression produced on the heathen mind by the great Christian idea of redemption. When the gnostic systems, says Neander, describe the movement, which was produced in the kingdom of the Demiurge by the appearance of Christ as the manifestation of a new and mighty principle which hail entered the precincts of this lower world, they give us to understand how powerful was the impression which the contemplation of the life of Christ and His influence on humanity, had left on the minds of the founders of these systems, making all earlier institutions seem to them as nothing in comparison with Christianity. We must beware, therefore, of under estimating either the extent or the intensity of this great intellectual ferment set up by the gospel in the heart of heathenism" (Orr, Najlected Factors, etc, 190).

      1. Gnos ticism Not a Heresy of the Humbler Classes




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      The earliest of the Gnostic s known to us by name

      is Cerinthus, the antagonist of the apostle John.

      It seems to be beyond reasonable

      2. Cerin- doubt that these two encountered thus: His each other at Ephesus. Irenaeus Teaching relates on the authority of those who

      heard the story from Polyearp how the apostle and Cerinthus met in the public baths in that city. When St. John discovered that Cer inthus was in the same building with him, he in stantly left, exclaiming that he could not remain while Cerinthus, the enemy of (lod and of man, was there. From the accounts which have been pre served of Cerinthus and of his teaching, it can be gathered that he taught that the world was created not by the Supreme God. but by an inferior power, and that he also taught a docetie theory of the In carnation. Cains of Rome, a disciple of Irenaeus, records that Cerinthus held that there would be a millennium of unrestrained sensuality. Dionysius of Alexandria (c 200 AD) more than confirms this. "Thus so far as they go, the historical data harmo nize with the internal evidence of the Epistle [of John] itself, in giving the impression that the differ ent tendencies it combats are such as were naturally combined in one consistently developed gnostic- system, and that the object of its polemic is, through out, one and the same" (The- 7V.s/s of Life, 37).

      As regards the Gospel of John there is the testi mony of Irenaeus, that it was written to oppose that form of Gnosticism which was taught by Cer inthus, and, before him, by the Xicolaitans. The nature of that heresy may be stated in the words of Irenaeus himself:

      "A certain ("Vrinthus." lie says, "in Asia, taught that the world was not made by the Supreme God, but by some power altogether separate and distinct from that Sovereign Power which, is over the universe, and one ignorant of the God who is over all tilings. lie taught., moreover, that Jesus was not born of a virgin (for this seemed to him to be impossible), but was the son of Joseph and Mary, born after the manner of other men; though preeminent above other men in justice and pru dence and wisdom; and that after His baptism the ( hrisi . in the form of a dove, descended upon Him from that Sovereign Power which is over all things; and that He; then announced the unknown Father and wrought mir acles; but that, at the end. the Christ departed again from Jesus, and that Jesus suffered and was raised from the dead, while the Christ continued impassible, as a spirit ual being" (Mansel, The Unnxtii- 7/<r<M>x, 74).

      Such a passage as John 19 34.35 seems to refer to

      docetie Gnosticism, and to be a personal protest.

      against it. After describing the pierc-

      3. The ing of Christ s side by the soldier s Gospel of spear, and how "straightway there John came out blood and water," the apostle

      adds, "And he that hath seen liath borne witness, and his witness is true: and he knowcth that lie saith true, that ye also may believe." There are many other passages which seem to be directed against Docetism, e.g. "The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory)" (1 14); "Jesus therefore, being wearied with his journey, sat thus by the well" (4 0); "Reach hither thy finger, and see my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and put it into mv side: and be not faithless, but believing" (20 27)."

      Cerinthus seems to have taught that the religion of Christ was identical with undiluted Mosaism, including even circumcision and the earthly kingdom of the future. The Cerinthian theory, however, was held under various forms by its adherents, some teachers holding that the God of the OT was, at the best, a subordinate angel of limited power, wisdom and goodness, and that the creation of the world was very imperfect. Others went so far as to identify the God of the OT with Satan. The ethic of systems such as these ,yas antinomian, sometimes even goiiig the length of libertinism.

      Generally, the forms under which Gnosticism appeared varied greatly in different periods. Some went farther than others from the Christian faith.

      Some communities, such as the Encratites, laid the greatest stress on the necessity for asceticism; other

      communities were wholly docetie; the 4. Various Carpocratians taught the philosophy Sects and communism of Plato. One of

      these teachers, Epiphanes, was honored as a god, and this sect crowned the image of Jesus along with those of Pythagoras, Plato and Aristotle. Kurt her, there were impostors of all varieties: magicians, soothsayers, jugglers, deceiv ers and hypocrites, "who appeared using mighty words with a host of unintelligible formulae and taking up with scandalous ceremonies in order to rob men of their money" (Harnack, op. cit., 239), and even for viler purposes.

      (1) The Ophites. Gnosticism, before reaching its full development, is chiefly represented by the ophite sects or systems. These were so named from the word ojthis, "serpent," to which they paid honor as the symbol of intelligence. They held that the Creator of the world was an ignorant and imperfect being, laldaboth, the Son of Chaos; and that it was a meritorious act. when the serpent per suaded Adam and Eve to disobey him. There were several of the ophite sects, such as the Cain- it es, who reversed all the standards of moral judg ment, choosing as their heroes the persons whom the Bible condemned, such as Cain, the men of Sodom, Esau and Korah.

      (2) Valentinus. By the time of Justin Martyr (c 150 AD), Gnosticism had become divided into a variety of sects and schools, Valentinians, Basili- deans, Saturninians and Marcionites. In the Val- entinian system, Christ and the Holy Spirit were two aeons. The Valentinians granted that ordinary Christians were better than the heathen, arid that they might, look forward to a kind of salvation; even now ordinary Christians occupied a middle position, better than the "hylic" or "psychic," but inferior to the "pneumatic." or "spiritual," as the Gnostics termed themselves.

      (3) Basilides. The Basilideans take their name from Basilides of Alexandria, a man of powerful intellect. He and his son Isidore taught this sys tem, which was afterward considerably modified for the purpose of popular apprehension. The world is continuously evolved from a pan^pcrma or "seed of the world," in which all things were origi nally potentially contained. It is ruled by two great Archons, who yet subserve the designs of the Supreme. There are no aeons, but the highest "light" descends through the successive spheres till it rests on Jesus of Nazareth. The process is complete when the Divine element ("sonship") is all drawn out and restored to God; oblivion then falls on lower intelligences. Many fine sayings are attributed to Basilides, e.g. "I will say anything rather than doubt the goodness of Providence" (Orr, The Early Church, 75).

      (4) Saturninus. -The Saturninians were so called from Saturninus, said to be a disciple of Menander, who in turn is said to have been a disciple of Simon Magus. The system of Saturninus is marked both by a strong dualism and by a gloomy asceticism. He is also reported to have been one of the founders of the Encratite heresy, which condemned marriage. Tatian, Justin Martyr s disciple, became a member of this gnostic sect, holding, it is alleged, the usual theory of aeons, and that there was a Demiurge, who was not the Supreme God.

      (5) Marcion. Marcion, a native of Pontus, taught in Rome c 140-55 AD. His system differs much from ordinary gnostic theories, except that he absolutely distinguished between the God of the OT, who is regarded as merely great, harsh, rig orous, and the good God of the NT, who is wholly love. He also held to the usual gnostic dualism and




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      docetism. Marcion s system has been described as an overstrained Paulinism, as he lays the stress on faith, not on knowledge. Marcion was the author of a book called the Anthithescs, which con trasted the OT with the NT. He also drew up a canon of Scripture, which contained only one gos pel, viz. Luke in a mutilated state, and ten Epp. of Paul. Marcion was a rigorous ascetic. In the Lord s Supper he allowed only water to be used instead of wine. The Marcionites refused baptism to married persons. This sect or "church" endured for several centuries.

      "All the gnostic systems had one feature in com mon, viz. that they regarded the OT ami the NT

      as revelations of two different Gods, 6. Relation and considered the mission of Christ to the OT to proceed from a higher power than

      the God of the Jewish religion, who was identified with the Demiurge, or Maker of the world. But- under this common assumption there was room for two very opposite estimates of the older revelation and of the God whom it reveals. Some of the gnostic sects regarded the Demiurge as being altogether alien from and opposed to the Supreme God; others considered him merely as a subordinate power, inferior but riot hostile to the Supreme God, and acting before the coming of a more perfect revelation, as his unconscious organ" (Mansel, The (inostic H/nxies, 45). "There can be no doubt that the gnostic propaganda was seri ously hindered by the inability to organize and dis cipline churches, which is characteristic of all phil osophic systems of religion" (Harnack, History of Dogma, I, 252). "From about 210 they ceased to be a factor of the historical development, though the church of Constantine and Theodosius was alone really able to suppress them" (ib, 251).

      In contrast to Gnosticism the Christian church held fast to these great facts, that Jesus Christ is

      the Son of God, preexist ent before the

      6. The Incarnation, and manifest in the flesh Christian and crucified for us men and for our Verities salvation; that He rose from the dead;

      that the OT is a true revelation of the one supreme and holy God, the Creator of all things. Dualism, the eternity of matter and its inherent evil, as well as Docetism and oriental mythologies were accordingly rejected as contrary to the Chris tian faith. During the period of the prevalence of

      Gnosticism there took place the earlier

      7. Influence developments of Christian theology. on Theology Gnosticism gave a powerful impetus to

      the formation of a NT canon of Scrip ture, and to the shaping of the earliest creed. See APOSTLES CUKKD.

      In the revulsion from Gnosticism and Docetism it should not be forgotten that there is truth to be

      found even amid the errors of these

      8. Truth systems. Docetism was an over- Underlying statement of a great truth, an over- Docetism statement so large as to destroy the

      true humanity of Our Lord. But the truth in Docetism is that the eternal Christ touches and appeals to and has a definite relationship to and actually influences every human heart; and also, that, to the Christian believer, Christ is more and does more than this; Christ dwells in the believer s heart by faith, "Christ in you, the hope of glory" (Col 1 27). "Docetism was not all folly. Rather we may regard it as one primitive form of the assertion of that mystical element which has never been wanting to Christianity from the first days until now, and we may be sure, never will be want ing to it" (Sanday, Christologies Ancient and Modern, 9).

      VIII. Modern Gnosticism. Gnosticism in its ancient form has passed away, but it is interesting

      to observe how its spirit reappears from time to time in modern days. Gnosticism, as already seen, is not one aspect of thought alone, but many. And in one form or another it is seen again and again. For example, the modern denial of the virgin birth of Our Lord is that form of Gnosticism which taught that the man Jesus became Christ only at His bap tism, when the Holy Ghost descended upon Him from heaven.

      Phases of gnostic teaching are reproduced in modern pantheistic philosophies and other forms of religious doctrine, which hold that there has been no objective atonement and no resurrection of Christ from the dead. "Basilides with his powerful speculative grasp and all-embracing evolutionary process might be termed the Hegel of the move ment; Valentinus with his robe of fantasy and triple fall and redemption was its Schelling; Mar cion with his severe practical bent, his doctrine of faith, and his antitheses of the just God and the good, might without straining be termed its Ritschl" (Orr, The Progress of Dogma, 59).

      "Fichte said, There were no external realities at all, they were the mere objectivity of the sub ject or creations of the inward eye ; after Fichte came Schelling, and Schelling said, Then this creat ing eye is God s own eye ; and after Schelling came Hegel, and Hegel said that God and man are one, and God all men, and all men God, and the whole universe God eternally thinking in the process of development, and that or something like it is Hegelianisrn. I feel in studying this philosophy, as Baron Humboldt says he felt, when he experi enced the first shock of an earthquake. I feel a dreadful sense of restlessness and insecurity. The ground seems to give way beneath, and the earth and the heaven to dissolve", the universe becomes a dream, a myth" (west B. Robertson, D.D., Martin Lather, German Student Life, etc, 13S).

      "Philosophy," says Mansel, "striving after a first principle which shall be one and simple and unconditioned and incapable of all further analysis in thought, is naturally tempted to soar above that complex combination of attributes which is implied in our conception of personality, and in endeavor ing to simplify and purify our representation of the Divine nature, ends by depriving it of every attri bute which can make God the object of any reli gious feeling or the source of any moral obligation" (The (innslic Heretics, 11). God is no longer the author and source; of goodness and truth and moral law, but the mind is occupied with the metaphysi cal relation between God and the world, as absolute 1 and relative, cause and effect, principle and conse quence, and God becomes identical with the world.

      It is easily seen how teaching of this sort .strikes at the root of all religion and morality. The per sonality of God, the personality and free will of man, the existence of moral evil, the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ, the redemption which He ac complished for the world, His resurrection, the whole significance of His person and His work all is denied. This is the spirit and the meaning of Gnosticism.

      Dr. Gwatkin sums up the matter thus: "Gnosti cism undermined Christian monotheism by its dis tinction of the Creator from the Supreme, Christian morals by its opposition of the philosopher to the unlearned, Christian practice by its separation of knowledge from action; and it cut away the very basis of the gospel whenever it explained away its history. In every case it had got hold of truth on one side the reality of evil in the world, thefunction of knowledge in religion, the difference between the letter and the spirit ; but fragments of truth are not enough for a gospel, which is false if all truth is not summed up in Christ. Therefore there could be


      Goats Hair



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      no peace between the gnostic -illiunimt/i and the Christian churches (Early Church History, II, 08).

      LITERATUKeast Uhlhom, The Conflict of Christianity with Heathenism; Neander, Church History, Antii/n.os- tikus; Reuss, History of Christian Theology in the Apos tolic A,je; Lightfoot, Notes on Ei>i*tlex of ,S7. 1 aul, Col, Phil; (iwatkin, Early Church History to ,113 AD, II; ,V. Bousset, art. " Gnosticism. " Knc Brit, llth ed; Harnack, History of Dogma, I (ET); ( )rr, Xci/lcctcit Fuctors in the Xtu,dy of the- Early Prourcss- of I hristianiiy, Sin us a Problem of Today, The Progress* of l>o,ima. The Early Church; Mansel, The Gnostic Heresies; Robert Law, B.D., The Tests of Life.


      GO (!fbn, hdlakJi, ^, ydlakh, N ; 3 , bo, Samuel^ , 1/afu ; a.y<a } dgo, wrasya), hupdgo,,fia.lvu>,ci,n(tbainu,, erchotnai, airlpx.OH.cti, aperchmnai, Trope-uojAai,

      porcuomai) . "Go" ("went," etc) occurs very fre quently in the Eng. Bible, and is the translated of a great many different, Hebrews and Greek terms. As the word implies inort ttn-ttt of all kinds, ])hysical and mental, it has naturally many applications.

      In the OT hulakh and i/dlakh are among the com monest words, meaning to go" in its original sense of "to walk," but also in the most

      1. In the varied senses, according to the verbal OT conjugations, etc, the prep, attached,

      and the words in connection with which the terms stand; hdlakh. and ydlalcli are often used figuratively (translated 1 "to walk," etc) for lo lire, to pursue a way of life, e.g. "to walk over in his ways" (J)t 19 9; cf Psalm 15 2; 89 30; 1 Kings 2 3 f ; 3 3, etc); to die, "He departed [Hebrews "went"] without being de sired" (2 Chronicles 21 20); bo , properly "to go in," "to enter" (e.g. Genesis 7 9), is very common, and y<ld , "to go or come out," also occurs frequently; ydc.a has frequently the meaning "to go forth," e.g. (Jen 8 7, "He sent forth a raven, and it went forth. Other frequent words are ydnnlh, "to go down" (Genesis 11 7, etc); *dluli, "to go or come up" (Genesis 2 6, etc; Isaiah 15 5, "go it up," AV); used also figuratively, e.g. "to rise up or excel," "Thou excellest them all" (Prov 31 29), "to come up on the heart," to be remembered, "The former things shall not be re membered, nor come into mind" (Isaiah 65 17; cf.Ier 3 Kings)); ^ilh/iar, "to go or pass over," "to cross" (Gon 41 40, etc), also used figuratively "to pass away," e.g. "as chaff that passeth away" (Isaiah 29 5), passeth by transgression (Alic 7 18); xfnlbli, "to go again" (Genesis 43 2, otc); sdtdh and xil-r, "to go aside," occur several times with the meaning of wrongdoing (e.g. Numbers 5 12; I)t 28 14, RV "turn aside"); naxd, , "to remove" (Exodous 14 lo), "Speak unto the children of Israel that they go forward" (ver 19 "removed"; Numbers 2 24, etc); <iz<il. (Aram.), "to go away or about" (E/r 4 23; Daniel 2 17, etc). Many other words occur only once or twice, e.g. drnh, "to travel" (Job 34 8); <lxli(translated, "to go straight- or right" (Prov 4 14; 9 0, UV "walk"); ddrnkh, "to tread" (Isaiah 59 8); dadttah, "to go softly" (Psalm 42 4; Isaiah 38 lo, RYm "as in solemn procession"); rdghal, "to stir," "to move," "I taught Ephraim to go" (IIos 11 3, RV "to walk").

      The obsolete expression "go to" (derived from Tindale)isthe translated of yahabh, Genesis 11 3.4.7; 38 10; Exodous 1 10, "come on," RV "come"; of bo (2 Kings 5 5 RV 1 ), "go now"; no 1 (Judges 7 3; Isaiah 6 5; Jeremiah 18 11, omitted in RV).

      In the NT nnalmino is "to go up" (Alt 3 10;

      5 1, etc); erchotnai, "to go on" (Alt 12 9, etc);

      aperchomai, "to go off or away" (Alt

      2. In the 2 22; 4 24, etc); pan uomai, "to go or NT pass on" (Alt 2 8.20, etc); hupago, "to

      go away" (Alt 5 41; 8 32, etc). We have also other combinations with different shades of meaning, e.g. huperbdind, "to go over or beyond" (1 Thessalonians 4 0); eiserc,homai,"togointo" (Alt 7 13; 15 11, etc); proporetiomai, "to go before" (Luke 1 70; Acts 7 40), and other forms; ago (dgomen),

      "Let us go" (Alt 26 40; John 14 31, etc); age is rendered "goto" (Jas 4 13; 5 1), RV "come."

      "Go about [to]" AV is the translated of zcted, "to seek, in John 7 19, "Why go ye about to kill me?" RV "Why seek ye?" and Romans 10 3; of peirdzo, "to try," "attempt" (Acts 24 0, RV "assayed"), and of peirdomai (26 21, RV "assayed"), of epicheireo "to lay hands on" (Acts 9 29), which remains in ERV unchanged, ARV "seeking"; "to let go" is the translated of apoluo, "to loose off" or "away" (Luke 14 4, etc), "to go astray," of plando (Alt 18" 12, etc).

      Various other words occurring singly are translated 1 by forms of "go," e.g. phero, "to bear on," AVLet us go on unto perfection" (He 6 1, see below); epidud, "to go in upon, ""Let not the sun go down upon your wrath" (Eph 4 20).

      Among the many changes in RV are the following: For "go," Exodous 4 2(>, "alone"; Leviticus 9 7, "draw near"; Numbers 2 :U, "set forth"; 16 4fi, "carry it"; isa 11 !.">; 27 4, "march"; Matthew 11 4; John 8 11, "Go your way"; Luke 17 7, "Come straightway"; 18 25, "enter in"; John 21 8h, "come." "Co" is substituted for "pass" (Exodous 12 12), "came" (13 4), "away" (19 24), "be put" (Leviticus 6 12), "enter" (Job 34 2.H), "return" (EccI 1 7), "come" (Micah 4 2; cf Zee 14 IS/;. ID), "should be cast " (Matthew 5 30); "if I go up" for "I will come up" (Exodous 33 5); "make to go forth" for "bring forth" (Psalm 37 <>>; "let them go" for "gave them up" (Psalm 81 12). For the phrase, "go a whoring." ARV has "play the harlot" (Exodous 34 15f, etc, "commit fornication"); for "go about even now" (I)t 31 21. ARV), "frame this day"; for "go well" (Prov 30 2 .)), " are stately in their march "; for "suffer us to go" (Matthew 8 HH, "send us" (a different text); for "not to think of men above that which is written" (1 Corinthians 4 0), "not [to go] beyond the things which are written"; for "that no man go beyond" (1 Thessalonians 4 <>), "transgress," m "overreach"; for "Let us go on unto perfection" (ITeb 6 1), ERV "and press," ARV "Let us press on unto perfection."

      west L. WALKER

      GOAD, god ("3"n> ddrWian, ^pf "? , indlniCidh; KtVrpov, Icctitron): The goad used by the Syrian fanner is usually a straight branch of oak or ot hei st rong wood from which the bark has been stripped, and which has at one end a pointed spike and at the other a fiat, chisel-shaped iron. The pointed end is to prod the oxen while plowing. The flat tened iron at the other end is to scrape off the earth which clogs the ploughshare. The ancient goad was probably similar to this instrument. It could do villainous work in the hands of an experienced fighter (Judges 3 31). If 1 Samuel 13 21 is correctly translated 1 , the goads were kept sharpened by files.

      Figurative : "The words of the wise are as goads" (Eccl 12 11). The only reference to goads in the NT is the familiar passage, "It is hard for tliee to kick against the. goad" (Acts 26 14). It was as useless for Saul to keep on in the wrong way as for a fractious ox to attempt to leave the furrow. He would surely be brought back with a prick of the goad. JAMES A. PATCH

      GOAH, gd a (nra, <iV<ih ; AV GOATH, gr/ath;

      LXX reads ! Kings,KTWV ,C0tov, ex eklekton lithdtt): A place named in describing the boundaries of Jerus as restored in the "days to come" (Jeremiah 31 39). If Gareb is the northeast hill, then probably Goah is to be identified with the northwest hill, which is called by Jos "the camp of the Assyrians" (BJ, V, vii, 3; xii, 2). See JERUSALEM.

      GOAT, got : The common generic word for "goat" is TIP , *ez (cf Arab. yLc. , az, "she-goat"; ai g,

      aix), used often for "she-goat" ((Jen 1. Names 15 9; Numbers 15 27), also with "H3 ,

      g e dhi, "kid," as D" 1 "? "Hi! , g e dhl ( izzlm, "kid of the goats" (Genesis 38 17), also with "V^TC , ,sd Ir, "he-goat," as C" 1 "? "PyCJ , s e lr *izzltn, "kid of the goats" or "he-goat," or translated d simply "kids," as in 1 Kings 20 27, "The children of Israel encamped before




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      Goats Hair

      them like 1 wo little flocks of kids." Next frequently used is ~P"TIJ , sa*lr, lit. "hairy" (cf Arab. jiXO ,

      sha r, "hair"; XVP, chtr, "hedgehog"; Lat hircus, "goat"; hirlns, "hairy"; also Ger. Haar; Eng. "hair"), like ez and attiidh used of goats for offer ings. The goat which is sent into the wilderness bearing the sins of the people is sa ir (Leviticus 16 7-22). The same name is used of devils (Leviticus 17 7; 2 Chronicles 11 15, RV "he-goats") and of satyrs (Isaiah 13 21; 34 14, RVm "he-goats," ARV "wild goats"). Cf also C 1 "? ro^rtp , s^lrnth *izzlm, "a female from the flock" (Leviticus 4 28; 5 0). The male or loader of the flock is "PP? , *attiif1h; Arab, atud, "yearling he-goat"; fig. "chief ones" (Isaiah 14 9; cf Jeremiah 50 8). A later word for "he-goat," used also figur atively, is "^Si, qaplnr (2 Chronicles 29 21; Ezra 8 35; Daniel 8 5.8.21). in Prov 30 31, one of the four things "which are stately in going" is the he-goat, ETI? , tayixh (Arab, <j*wO , Ids, "he-goat"), also men tioned in Genesis 30 35; 32 14 among the possessions of Laban and Jacob, and in 2 Chronicles 17 11 among the animals given as tribute by the Arabians to Jehoshaphat. In Ho 9 12.13.19; 10 4, we have rpdyos, trtif/ns, the ordinary Greek word for "goat"; in Matthew 25 32.33, ep" s . eriplm*, and its dim. tpltyiov, cri/thinn; in He 11 37 StpiMa. atyeiov, derma a ujcion, "goatskin," from aix (see supra). "Kid" is "H3 , (f.lhi (cf En-godi [1 Samuel 23 29], etc), fern. fC^, (fillrnjah (Cant 1 8), but also *ez,jf(lhl <izzTi, s e lr izzlm, s^lrath izzlm, b r nc * izzlm, and eriphos. There remain ^71, ytfcl (I Samuel 24 2; Job 39 1 ; Psalm 104 IS), EV "wild goat"; r6|P , yn uICJi (Prov 5 19), AV "roe," RV "doe"; ipS , akko (Deuteronomy 14 5), EV "wild goat"; and "H2T, zemer (Deuteronomy 14 5), EV "chamois."

      The original of our domestic goats is believed to be the Pers wild goat or pasang, Cupra cugagrus, which inhabits some of tlie Greek islands, 2. Wild Asia Minor, Syria, Mesopotamia, Per- Goats sia, Afghanistan, and Northwestern

      India. It is called v/i l (cf Hebrew yd 1 el) by the Arabs, who in the north apply the same name to it s near relative, the Sinaitie ibex, Capr/i bl< j n. The last, doubtless the "wild goat" (yet el) of the Bible, inhabits Southern Philestina, Canaan-Land, Arabia, Sinai, and Eastern Egypt, and within its range is uniformly called heilcti by the Arabs. It isthought bythewriter

      that the "chamois" (ze- mer) of Deuteronomy 14 5 may be the Pers wild goat. The word occurs only in this passage in t he list of clean animals. See CHAMOIS; DKKR; ZOOLOGY. Wild goats are found only in Southern Europe, South western Asia, and. North eastern Africa. They in clude the well-known, but now nearly extinct, Al- pine ibex, steinbok, or

      Wild Goat of Sinai.

      , ,

      bouquet in, the markhor, and the Himalayan ibex, which has enormous horns. The so-called Rocky Mountain goat is not properly a goat, but is an animal intermediate between goats and antelopes. Domestic goats differ greatly among themselves in the color and length of their hair, in the size and

      shape of their ears, and in the size and 3. Domestic shape, of their horns, which are usually Goats larger in the males, but in some breeds

      may be absent in both sexes. A very constant feature in both wild and domestic goats is

      the bearded chin of the male. The goats of Philestina, Canaan-Land and Syria are usually black (Cant 41), though sometimes partly or entirely white or brown. Their hair is usually long, hanging down from their bodies. The horns are commonly curved outward and back ward, but in one very handsome breed they extend nearly outward with slight but graceful curves, sometimes attaining a span of 2 ft. or more in the old males. The profile of the face is d ist inct ly convex. They are herded in the largest numbers in the moun tainous or hilly districts, and vie wit h their wild con geners in climbing into apparently impossible places. They feed not only on herbs, but also on shrubs and small t roes, to which they are mi >st dost ruct ive. They are largely responsible for the deforested condition of Judaea and Lebanon. They reach u p t he t roes to t he height of a man, holding themselves nearly or quite erect, and even walk out on low brandies.

      Apart from the ancient use in sacrifice, which still

      survives among Moslems, goats are most valuable

      animals. Their ilosh is eaten, and

      4. Economy may be had when neither mutton nor

      beef can be found. Their milk is drunk and made 1 into cheese and scmn, a sort of clarified butter much used in cooking. Their hair is woven into tents (Cant 1 5), carpets, cloaks, sacks, slings, and various camel, horse and mule trappings. Their skins are made into bottles (noilh; Greek a.s-Avw; Arab, l;irl>eh} for water, oil, scinn, and other liquids (cf also lie 11 37).

      Just as the kid was often slaughtered for an

      honored guest (Judges 6 19; 13 19), so the kid or

      goat was frequently taken for sacri-

      5. Religious fice (Leviticus 4 23; 9 15; 16 7; Numbers 15 and Fig- 2t; Ezra 8 35; Ezekiel 45 23; He 9 12). urative A goat was one of the clean animals

      (si-h Hzzlm, Deuteronomy 14 4). In Daniel, the powerful king out of the west is typified as a goat with a single horn (8 5). One of the older goats is the leader of the flock. In some parts of the country the goatherd makes different ones leaders by turns, the leader being trained to keep near the goat herd and not to eat so long as he wears the bell. In Isaiah 14 9, ". . . . stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth," the word translated d "chief ones" is atludh, "he-goat." Again, in Jeremiah 50 Samuel, we have "Go forth out of the land of the Chal deans, and be as the he-goats before the flocks." In Matthew 25 32, in the scene of the last judgment, we find "He shall separate them one from another, as the shepherd soparateth the sheep from the goats." It is not infrequent to find a flock including both goats and sheep grazing over the mountains, but they are usually folded separately.


      GOATSKINS, got skinz (ev al-yetois Sepp-ao-iv, en ai(/ei.oix (lcrinaxin): Such skins are mentioned only oiice (lie 11 37), whore the wearing of goatskins, indicating extreme poverty, is referred to, by im plication, as the possible lot of the faithful Christian, oven as it had been of others. Ascetics of different religions, esp. of the Moslem sects, are frequently seen going about Syria and Philestina, Canaan-Land today, clad in sheep skins or goatskins, a sign of their renunciation of all things worldly.

      GOATS HAIR (T? , ?): The word for she-goat is used elliptically to mean goats hair, which was used in the tabernacle furnishings in the form of curtains (Exodous 26 7; 36 14). Goats hair was prob ably used in the Midianite and Israohtish camps in much the same way as in the Bedouin camps today (cf Numbers 31 20). The tents, tent ropes and rugs are made of spun goats hair. The provision sacks which hold wheat, rice, etc, and the saddle bags are made of the same material. A strip of the cloth rolled up furnishes a bolster for the head while

      Gob God



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      sleeping (cf 1 Samuel 19 13.16). Goats hair cloth is admirably suited to stand the hard usage of a fre quently shifting encampment. The children of Israel appreciated its utility, even for the taber nacle, where to the modern critical eye it would have looked out of place, matched against scarlet and fine linen (Exodous 25 4; 35 6.26). The fact that goats hair was used is good indication of the com parative crudeness of the tabernacle, when con trasted with present-day furnishings. See also HAIR; WEAVING. JAMES A. PATCH

      GOB, gob (D3 , D13 , gobh) : A place mentioned in 2 Samuel 21 18 f as the scene of two of David s battles with the Philis. The name appears here only. In the 1 passage, 1 Chronicles 20 4, it is called Gezer (cf Ant, VII, xii, 2). Certain texts read "Nob" for "Gob," while Syriac and LXX read "Gath." The latter is probably correct.

      GOBLET, gob let (*$$ , aggan): A bowl or basin (Cant 7 2), the only place where the word is used. Aggan is used in the pi. in Exodous 24 6 and Isaiah 22 24, and is translated 1 "basins" and "cups." These "basins" were used to hold the blood of the sacrifices and must have been of moderate size. The "cups" were bowl-shaped vessels and belonged evidently to the smaller class of vessels used in a house.

      GOD, " "Jlj?, shadday,


      1. The Idea in Experience and in Thought

      2. Definition of the Idea

      3. The Knowledge of God

      4. Ethnic Ideas of God

      (1) Animism

      (2) Petichism

      (3) Idolatry

      (4) Polytheism

      (5) Henotheism ((>) Pantheism

      (7) Deism

      (8) Semitic Monolatry

      (9) Monotheism


      1. The Course of Its Development

      2. Forms of Its Manifestation

      (1) The Face or Countenance of <!od

      (2) The Voice and Word of God

      (3) The Glory of God

      (4) The Angel of (Joel

      (5) The Spirit of God (<>) The Name of God (7) Occasional Forms

      3. The Names of God

      (1) Generic

      (2) Attributive

      (3) Jehovah

      4. Pre-prophetic Conceptions of CJod

      (1) Jen Alone the God of Israel

      (a) His Early Worship

      (b) Popular Religion

      (c) Polytheistic Tendencies

      (i) Coordination (ii) Assimilation (iii) Disintegration

      (d) No Hebrew Goddesses

      (e) Human Sacrifices

      (2) Nature and Character of JAH (Jehovah) (a) A God of War

      (6) His Relation to Nature

      (3) Most Distinctive Characteristics of JAH (Jehovah) (a) Personality

      (6) Law and Judgment

      5. The Idea of God in the Prophetic Period

      ( 1 ) Righteousness

      (2) Holiness

      (3) Universality

      (4) Unity

      (5) Creator and Lord

      (G) Compassion and Love

      6. The Idea of God in Post-exilic Judaism

      (1) New Conditions

      (2) Divine Attributes

      (3) Surviving Limitations

      (a) Disappearing Anthropomorphism

      (b) Localization

      (c) Favoritism

      (d) Ceremonial Legalism

      (4) Tendencies to Abstractness (a) Transcendence

      (6) Skepticism (c) Immanence

      (5) Logos, Memra and Angels III. THE IDEA OF GOD IN THE NT

      1. Dependence on the OT

      2. Gentile Influence

      3. Absence of Theistic Proofs

      4. Fatherhood of God

      (1) In the Teaching of Jesus Christ (a) Its Relation to Himself

      (6) To Believers (c) To All Men

      (2) In Apostolic Teaching

      (a) Father of Jesus Christ

      (6) Our Father

      (<) Universal Father

      5. God Is King

      (1) The Kingdom of God

      (2) Its King (a) God (6) Christ

      (c) Their Relation

      (3) Apostolic Teaching 0. Moral Attributes

      (1) Personality

      (2) Love

      (3) Righteousness and Holiness

      7. Metaphysical Attributes

      8. The Unity of God

      (1) The Divinity of Christ

      (2) The Holy Spirit

      (3) The Church s Problem LITERATURE

      /. Introduction to the General Idea. Religion gives t he idea of God, theology construes and organizes its content, and philosophy establishes 1. The Idea its relation to the whole of man s ex- in Expe- perience. The logical order of treat- rience and ing it might appear to be, first , to estab- in Thought lish its truth by philosophical proofs; secondly, to develop its content into theological propositions; and finally, to observe its development and action in religion. Such has been the more usual order of treatment. But the actual history of the idea has been quit e the reverse. Men had the idea of God, and it had proved a creative factor in history, long before reflection upon it issued in its systematic expression as a doctrine. Moreover, men had enunciated the doctrine before they attempted or even felt any need to define its relation to reality. And the logic of history is the truer philosophy. To arrive at the truth of any idea, man must begin with some portion of expe rience, define its content, relate it to the whole of experience, and so determine its degree of reality.

      Religion is as universal as man, and every religion involves some idea of God. Of the various philo sophical ideas of God, each has its counterpart and antecedent in some actual religion. Pantheism is the philosophy of the religious consciousness of India. Deism had prevailed for centuries as an actual attitude of men to God, in China, in Judaism and in Islam, before it found expression as a rat ional theory in the philosophy of the 18th cent. Theism is but the attempt to define in general terms the Christian conception of God, and of His relation to the world. If Pluralism claims a place among the systems of philosophy, it can appeal to the religious consciousness of that large portion of mankind that has hitherto adhered to Polytheism.

      But all religions do not issue in speculative recon structions of their content . It is true in a sense that all religion is an unconscious philosophy, because it is the reaction of the whole mind, including the intellect, upon the world of its experience, and, therefore, every idea of God involves some kind of an explanation of the world. But conscious reflec tion upon their own content emerges only in a few of the more highly developed religions. Brahmanism, Buddhism, Judaism, Islam and Christianity are the only religions that have produced great systems of thought, exhibiting their content in a speculative and rational form. The religions of Greece and




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Gob God

      Rome were unable to survive the reflective period. They produced no theology which could ally itself to a philosophy, and Greek philosophy was from the beginning to a great extent the denial and super session of Greek religion.

      Biblical lit. nearly all represents the spontaneous ex perience of religion, and contains comparatively little reflection upon that experience. In the OT it is only in Second Isaiah, in the Wisdom literature and in a few Pss that the human mind may be seen turning back upon itself to ask the meaning of its practical feelings and beliefs. Even here nothing appears of the nature of a philosophy of Theism or of religion, no theology, no organic definition and no ideal reconstruction of the idea of God. It never occurred to any OT writer to offer a proof of the existence of God, or that anyone should need it. Their concern was to bring men to a right relation with C .od, and they propounded right views of God only in so far as it was necessary for their practical purpose. Even the fool who "hath said in his heart , There is no God" (Psalm 14 1 ; 53 1), and the wicked nations "that forget, God" (Psalm 9 17) are no theore tical atheists, but wicked and corrupt men, who, in conduct and life, neglect or reject the presence of God.

      The NT contains more theology, more reflection upon the inward content of the idea of God, and upon its cosmic significance; but here also, no sys tem appears, no coherent and rounded-off doctrine, still less any philosophical construction of the idea on the basis of experience as a whole. The task of exhibiting the Biblical idea of God is, therefore, not that of setting together a number of texts, or of writ ing the history of a theology, but rather of inter preting the central factor in the life of the Hebrews and Christian communities.

      Logically and historically the Biblical idea stands related to a number of other ideas. Attempts have been made to find a definition of so 2. Defini- general a nature as to comprehend tion of the them all. The older theologians as- Idea of God sumed the Christian standpoint, and put into their definitions the conclu sions of Christian doctrine and philosophy. _ Thus Melanchthon: "Godis a spiritual essence, intelli gent, eternal, true, good, pure, just, merciful, most free and of infinite power and wisdom." Thoma- sius more briefly defines God as "the absolute per sonality." These definitions take no account of the existence of lower religions and ideas of God, nor do they convey much of the concreteness and nearness of God revealed in Christ. A similar recent definition, put forward, however, avowedly of the Christian conception, is that of Professor ,Y. north Clarke: "God is the personal Spirit., perfectly good, who in holy love creates, sustains and orders all" (Outline of Christian Theology, 66). The rise of comparative religion has shown that "while all religions involve a conscious relation to a being called God, the Divine Being is in different religions conceived in the most different ways; as one and as many, as natural and as spiritual, as like to and manifested in almost every object_in the heavens above or earth beneath, in mountains and trees, in animals and men; or, on the contrary, as being in capable of being represented by any finite image whatsoever; and, again, as the God of a family, of a nation, or of humanity" (east Caird, Evolution of Religion, I, 62). Attempts have therefore been made to find a new kind of definition, such as would include under one category all the ideas _of God possessed by the human race. A typical instance of this kind of definition is that of Professor west Adams Brown: "A god in the religious sense is an unseen being, real or supposed, to whom an indi vidual or a social group is united by voluntary ties

      reverence and service" (Christian Theology in Outline, 30). Many similar definitions are given: "A supersensible being or beings" (Lotze, A. M. Fairbairn); "a higher power" (Allan Menzies); "spiritual beings" (east B. Tylor); "a power riot our- selves making for righteousness" (Matthew Arnold). This class of definition suffers from a twofold defect. It says too much to include the ideas of the lower religions, and too little to suggest those of the higher. It is not all gods that are "unseen" or "supersen sible," or "making for righteousness," but all these qualities may be shared by other beings than gods, and they do not connote that which is essential in the higher ideas of God. Dr. east Caird, looking for a definition in a germinative principle of the genesis of religion, defines God "as the unity which is pre supposed in the difference of the self and not-self, and within which they act and re-act on each other" (op. cit., I, 40, 64). This principle admittedly finds its full realization only in the highest religion, and it may be doubted whether it does justice to the transcendent personality and the love of God as revealed in Jesus Christ. In the lower religions it appears only in fragmentary forms, and it can only be detected in them at all after it has been revealed in the absolute religion. Although this definition may be neither adequate nor true, its method recog nizes that there can be only one true idea and defi nition of God, and yet that all other ideas are more or less true elements of it and approximations to it. The Biblical idea does not stand alone like an island in mid-ocean, but is rather the center of light which radiates out in other religions with varying degrees of purity.

      It is not the purpose of this article to deal with the problem of the philosophy of religion, but to give an account of the idea of God at, certain stages of its development, and within a limited area of thought. The absence of a final definition will pre sent no practical difficulty, because the denotation of the term God is clear enough; it includes every thing that is or has been an object of worship; it is its connotation that remains a problem for specu lation.

      A third class of definition demands some atten tion, because it raises a new question, that of the knowledge or truth of any idea what- 3. The soever. Herbert Spencer s definition

      Knowledge may be taken as representative: God of God is t lie unknown and unknowable cause

      of the universe, "an inscrutable power manifested to us through all phenomena" (First Principles, V, 31). This means that there can be no definition of the idea of God, because we can have no idea of Him, no knowledge "in the strict sense of knowing." For the present purpose it might suffice for an answer that ideas of God actual ly exist; that they can be defined and are more definable, because fuller and more complex, the higher they rise in the scale of religions; that they can be gathered from the folklore and traditions of the lower races, and from the sacred books and creeds of the higher religions. But Spencer s view means that , in so far as the ideas are definable, they are not true. The more we define, the more ficti tious becomes our subject-matter. While nothing is more certain than that God exists, His being is to human thought utterly mysterious and inscru table. The variety of ideas might seem to support this view. But variety of ideas has been held of every subject that is known, as witness the progress of science. The variety proves nothing.

      And the complete abstraction of thought from existence cannot be maintained. Spencer himself does not succeed in doing it. He says a great many things about the "unknowable" which implies an extensive knowledge of Him. The traditional




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      proofs of the existence" of (!od h;ive misled the Agnostics. Hut. existence is meaningless except for thought, and a noumenon or iirst, cause that lies hidden in impenetrable mystery behind phenomena cannot be conceived even as a fiction. Spencer s idea of the Infinite and Absolute are contradictory and unthinkable. An Infinite that stood outside all that is known would not be infinite, and an Abso lute out, of all relation could not even be imagined. If t here is any t rut h at all i n t he idea of t he Absolute, it must be true to human experience and thought; and the true Infinite must include within itself every possible and actual perfection. In truth, every idea of God that has lived in religion refutes Agnos ticism, because they all qualify and interpret ex perience, and the only question is as to the degree of their adequacy and

      A brief enumeration of (he leading ideas of Cod that have lived in religion will serve to place (lie Biblical idea in

      its (rue perspecth e.

      4. Ethnic U) Animism is the narno of a theory

      Ideas of which explains the lowest (and perhaps (he

      n , earliest) forms of religion, and also the prin

      ciple of all religion, as the belief in the uni versal presence of spiritual beings which arc hold to affect or control the events of the material world, and man s life here and hereafter; and, it being considered that they hold intercourse with men, and re ceive pleasure or displeasure from human ael ions, the belief in their existence leads naturally, and, it might almost be said, inevitably, sooner or later, to active rev erence and propitiation " (10. 15. Tylor, Primitive Culture, I, -t2i> 27). According to this view, the world is full of disembodied spirits, regarded as similar to man s soul and any or ail of these may be treated as gods.

      (2) Fit id, .- in is sometimes used in a general sense for "the view that the fruits of the earth and tilings in gen eral are divine, or animated bv powerful spirits" (J. C Frazer, Adonis, Attia, Osiris, 2H1): or it may be used in a more particular sense of the belief that, spirits "take up their abode, either temporarily or permanently, in some

      object and this object, as endowed with higher

      power, is then worshipped" (Tide, Outlines of the His tory of Religion, 9).

      (:}) Idolatry is a term of still more definite significance. It means that the object, is at least selected, as being the permanent habitation or symbol of the deity; and, gen erally, it is marked by some degree of human workman ship, designed to enable it the more adequately to repre sent the deity. It is not to bo supposed that men ever worship mi-re, "stocks and stones." but, they address their worship to objects, whet her fetiches or idols, as being the abodes or images of their god. It is a natural and com mon idea that the spirit has a form similar to the visible object in which it dwells. Paul retleeted the heathen idea accurately when lie said, "We ought not to think that the Codhcad is ///,-, unto gold, or silver, or stone graven by art and device of man" (Acts 17 29).

      (4) Ptilt/thrixm. The belief in many gods, and the worship of them, is an attitude of soul compatible with Animism, Fctichism and Idolatry, or it may be inde pendent of them all. The term Polytheism is more usually employed to designate the worship of a limited number of well-defined deities, whether regarded as pure disembodied spirits, or as residing in the greater objects of Nature, such as planets or mountains, or as symbol ized by images "graven by art and device of man." In ancient (i recce or modern India the great gods are well defined, named and numerable, and it is clearly under stood that, though they may be symbolized by" images, they dwell apart in a spiritual realm above the rest of the world.

      _ (5) Ilrniiitn-ism. There is, however, a tendency, both in individuals and in communities, even where many gods are believed to exist, to set one god above the others and consequently to confine worship to that god alone. "The monotheistic, tendency exists among all peoples, after they have reached a certain level of culture. There is a difference in the degree in which this tendency is emphasized, but whether we turn to Babylonia, Egypt, India, China, or (i recce, there are distinct traces of a trend toward concentrating the varied manifestations of Divine powers in a single source" (Jastrow, The Study of Religion, 70). This attitude of mind has been called Henotheism or Monolatry the worship of one Cod combined with the belief in the existence of many. This tendency may be governed by metaphysical, or by ethical and personal motives, either by the monistic demands of reason, or by personal attachment to one political or moral rule.

      (G) Pantheism. Where the former principle predomi nates, Polytheism merges into Pantheism, as is the case in India, where Brahma is not only the supreme, but the sole, being, and all odier gods are but forms of his mani festation. But, in India, the vanquished gods have had a very complete revenge upon their vanquisher, for

      Brahma has become so abstract and remote that wor ship is mainly given to the other gods, who are forms of

      is manifestation. Monolatry has been reversed and modern Hinduism were better described as the belief in one God accompanied by the worship of many.

      (7) />r/.s-/n. The monistic tendency, by a less thor ough application of it, may take the opposite turn toward Deism, and yet produce similar religious conditions 1 he Supreme Being, who is the ultimate reality and power of the universe, may be conceived in so vague and abstract a manner, may be so remote from the world that it becomes a practical necessity to interpose between Him and men a number of subordinate and nearer beings as objects of worship. In ancient Greece Necessity in China, Tien or llea,cn, were the Supreme Beings; but a multiplicity of lower gods were the actual objects of worship. The angels of Zoroastrianism, Judaism and Islam and the saints of Romanism illustrate the same tendency. Pantheism and Deism, though they have had considerable vogue as philosophical theories, have proved unstable and impossible as religions, for they have invariably reverted to some kind of polytheism and idolatry, which seems to indicate that they are false proc esses of the monistic tendency.

      (Samuel) Hfniitir mountain/. -The monistic tendency of reason may enlist in its aid many minor causes, such as tribal isolation or national aggrandizement. It is held that many Semite (Shemite, of Shem) tribes were monolatrists for either or both_ of these reasons; but the exigencies of intertribal relations in war and commerce soon neutralized their effects, and merged the tribal gods into a territorial pantheon.

      ( .)) Mittmtlu-ixm, ethical and personal: One further principle may combine with Monism so as to bring about a stable Monotheism, that is the conception of God as standing in moral relations with man. Whenever man reflects upon conduct as moral, be recognizes that there can bo only one moral standard and authority, and when God is identified with that moral authority, He inevi tably conies to be recognized as supreme and unique. The belief in t he existence of ot her beings called gods may survive for a while; but they are divested of all the at tributes of deity when they are seen to be inferior or opposed to the Cod who rules in conscience. Not only are they not worshipped, but their worship by others comes to be regarded as immoral and wicked. The ethi cal factor in the monistic conception of Cod safeguards it from diverging into Pantheism or Deism and thus reverting into Polytheism. For the ethical idea of God necessarily involves His personality, His transcendence as distinct from the world and above it, and also His inti mate and permanent relation with man. If He rules in conscience, He can neither be merged in dead nature or abstract being, nor be removed beyond the heavens and the angel host. A thoroughly moralized conception of Cod emerges first in the OT where it is the prevailing type of thought.

      //. The Idea of God in the OT. Any attempt to write the whole history of the idea of God in the OT would require a preliminary study of 1. Course the literary and historical character of of Its De- the documents, which lies beyond the velopment scope of this article and the province of the writer. Yet the OT contains no systematic statement of the doctrine of God, or even a series of statements that need only to be collected into a consistent conception. The OT is the record of a rich and varied life, extending over more than a thousand years, and the ideas that ruled and inspired that life must be largely inferred from the deeds and institutions in which it was realized; nor was it stationary or all at one level. Nothing is more obvious than that revelation in the OT has been progressive, and that the idea of God it con veys has undergone a development. Certain well- marked stages of the development can be easily recognized, without entering upon any detailed crit icisin. There can be no serious question that the age of the Exodus, as centering around the person ality of Moses, witnessed an important new depar ture in Hebrews religion. The most ancient traditions declare (perhaps not unanimously) that God was then first known to Israel under the personal name Jehovah (Yahweh[YHWH]isthecorrect form of the word, Jehovah being composite of the consonants of Yahweh and the vowels of ddhonay, or lord. JAH (Jehovah) is retained here as the more familiar form). The Hebrews people came to regard Him as their Deliverer from Egypt, as their war god who assured them the conquest of Canaan, and He, therefore, became




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      their king, who ruled over their destinies in their new heritage. But the sett lenient of JAH (Jehovah) in Canaan, like that of His people, was challenged by the native gods and their peoples. In the 9th cent, we see the war against JAH (Jehovah) carried into His own camp, and Baal-worship attempting to set itself up within Israel. His prophets therefore assert the sole right of JAH (Jehovah) to the worship of His people, and the great prophets of the 8th cent, base that right upon His moral transcendence. Thus they at once reveal new depths of His moral nature, and set His unique ness and supremacy on higher grounds. During the exile and afterward, Israel s outlook broadens by contact with the greater world, and it draws _out the logical implications of ethical monotheism into a theology at once more universalistic and abstract. Three fairly well-defined periods thus emerge, corre sponding to three stages in the development of the OT idea of God: the pre-prophetic period governed by the Mosaic conception, the prophetic period during which ethical monotheism is firmly estab lished, and the post-exilic period with the rise of abstract monotheism. But even in taking these large and obvious divisions, it is necessary to bear in mind the philosopher s maxim, that "things are not cut off with a hatchet." The most character istic, ideas of each period may be described within their period; but it should not bo assumed that they are altogether absent from other periods; and, in particular, it, should not be supposed that, ideas, and the life they represent, did not exist before they emerged in the clear witness of history. Mosaism had undoubtedly its antecedents in the life of Israel; but any attempt to define them leads straight into a very morass of conjectures and hypotheses, archae ological, critical and philosophical; and any results that are thus obtained are contributions to com parative religion rather than to theology.

      Religious experience must always have had an inward and subjective aspect, but it is a long and difficult process to translate the ol>- 2. Forms jective language of ordinary life for of the the uses of subjective experience.

      Manifes-- "Men look outward before they look tation of inward." Hence we iind that men God express their consciousness of God in

      the earliest periods in language bor rowed from the visible and objective world. It does not follow that they thought of God in a sen suous way, because they speak of Him in the lan guage of the senses, which alone was available for them. On the other hand, thought, is never entirely independent of language, and the degree in which men using sensuous language may think of spiritual facts varies with different persons.

      (1) The face, or countenance (parilm) of (lod is a natural expression for His presence. The place where God is seen is called Peniel, the face of ( !od (den 32 ISO). The face of Joh is His people s bless ing (Numbers 6 2f>). With His face (RV "presence") He brought Israel out of Egypt, and His^face (RV "presence") goes with them to Canaan (Exodous 33 14). To be alienated from God is to be hid from His face (Genesis 4 14), or God hides His face (Deuteronomy 31 17. IS; 32 20). In contrast with this idea it is said else where that man cannot see the face of God and live (Exodous 33 20; cf Deuteronomy 5 24; Judges 6 22; 13 22 j. In these later passages, "face" stands for the entire being of God, as distinguished from what man may know of Him. This phrase and it s cognates enshrine also that fear of God, which shrinks from His majesty even while approaching Him, which enters into all worship.

      (2) The voice (kol) and word (dabhar) of God are forms under which His communion with man is conceived from the earliest days to the latest. The idea ranges from that of inarticulate utterance

      (1 Kings 19 12) to the declaration of the entire law of conduct. (Deuteronomy 5 22-24), to the message of the prophet (Isaiah 2 1 ; Jeremiah 1 2), and the personification of the whole counsel and action of God (Psalm 105 19; 147 IS. 19; Hosea 6 5; Isaiah 40 Samuel).

      (3) The (/lor i/ (kdbhodh) of (lod is both a pe culiar physical phenomenon and the manifestation of God in His works and providence. In certain passages in Exodous, ascribed to the PC, the glory is a bright light, "like devouring fire" (24 17); it fills and consecrates the tabernacle (29 43; 40 34. 35); and it is reflected as beams of light in the face of Moses (34 29). In Ezekiel, it is a frequent term for the prophet s vision, a brightness like the appear ance of a rainbow (1 2S; 10 4; 43 2). In another pla.ce, it is identified with all the manifested good ness of God, and is accompanied with the procla mation of His name (Exodous 33 17-23). Two passages in Isaiah seem to combine under t his term the idea of a physical manifest at ion with that of God s effectual presence in the world (3 Samuel; 6 3). God s presence in creation and history is often expressed in the Pss as His glory (19 1; 57 5.11; 63 2; 97 G). Many scholars hold that the idea is found in Isaiah in its earliest, form, and that the physical meaning is quite late. It would, however, be contrary to all analogy, if such phenomena as rainbow and lightning had not first impressed the primitive mind as mani festations of God. See GLOHY.

      (4) The (ini/t l. (Din I <ll:ft) of (!od or of JAH (Jehovah) is a fre quent mode of God s manifestation of Himself in human form, and for occasional purposes. It is a primitive conception, and its exact relation to God, or its likeness to man, is nowhere fixed. In many passages, it. is assumed that God and His angel are the same being, and the names are used synony mously (as in Genesis 16 7 IT; 22 15.10; Exodous 3 2.4; Judges 2 4.5); in other passages the idea blurs into varying degrees of differentiation (Genesis 18; 24 40; Exodous 23 21; 33 2.3; Judges 13 8.9). But everywhere, it fully represents God as speaking or acting for the. time being; and it is to be distinguished from the subordinate and intermediate beings of later angel- ology. Its identification with the Messiah and the Logos is only true in the sense that, these; later terms are more definite expressions of the idea of revela tion, which the angel represented for primitive thought.

      (5) The spirit (nT h] of Cod in the earlier period is a form of His activity, as it moves warrior and prophet to act and to speak (Judges 6 34; 13 25; 1 Samuel 10 10), and it is in the prophetic period that it be comes the organ of the communication of God s thoughts to men. See HOLY SPIRIT.

      (()) The name (shcin) of God is the most com prehensive and frequent expression in the OT for His self-manifestation, for His person as it may be known to men. The name is something visible or audible which represents God to men, and which, therefore, may be said to do His deeds, and to stand in His place, in relation to men. God reveals Him self by making known or proclaiming His name (Exodous

      6 3; 33 19; 34 5.0). His servants derive their authority from His name (Exodous 3 13.15; 1 Samuel 17 45). To worship God is to call upon His name (Genesis 12 8; 13 4; 21 33; 26 25; 1 Kings 18 24-26), to fear it (Deuteronomy 28 58), to praise it (2 Samuel 22 50; Psalm 7 17; 54 6), to glorify it (Psalm 86 9). It, is wickedness to take God s name in vain (Exodous 20 7), or to profane and blaspheme it (Leviticus 8 21; 24 10). God s dwelling-place is the place where He chooses "to cause his name to dwell" (2 Samuel 7 13; 1 Kings 3 2; 5 3.5; 8 16-19; 18 32; Deuteronomy 12 11.21). God s name defends His people (Psalm 20 1; Isaiah 30 27). For His name s sake He will not forsake them (1 Samuel 12 22), and if they perish, His name cannot remain (Joshua

      7 9). God is known by different names, as express-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      ing various forms of His self-manifestation (don 16 13; 17 1; Exodous 3 0; 34 6). The name even confers its revelation-value upon the angel (Exodous 23 20-23). All God s names are, therefore, significant for the revelation of His being.

      (7) Occasional forms. In addition to these more or less fixed forms, God also appears in a variety of exceptional or occasional forms. In Numbers 12 6-8, it is said that Moses, unlike others, used to see the form (t -munah) of JAH (Jehovah). Eire, smoke and cloud are frequent forms or symbols of God s presence (e.g. Genesis 15 17; Exodous 3 2-4; 19 IS; 24 17), and notably "the pillar of cloud by day, and the pillar of fire by night" (Exodous 13 21 f). According to later ideas, the cloud rested upon the tabernacle (Exodous 40 34), and in it God appeared upon the ark (Leviticus 16 2). Exodous traordinary occurrences or miracles are, in the early period, frequent signs of the power of God (Exodous 7 ff; 1 Kings 17 ff).

      The questions of the objectivity of any or all of these forms, and of their relation to the whole Di vine essence raise large problems. OT thought had advanced beyond the nai ve identification of God with natural phenomena, but we should not read into its figurative language the metaphysical dis tinctions of a Greek-Christian theology.

      All the names of God were originally significant

      of His character, but the derivations, and therefore

      the original meanings, of several have

      3. The been lost , and new meanings have been

      Names sought for them.

      of God (1) Generic ?iames. One of the old

      est and most widely distributed terms for Deity kno_wn to the human nice is El, with its derivations Ellin, Elohlm and Elo"h. lAkctheos, Dens and God, it is a generic term, including every member of the class deity. It may even denote a posit ion of honor and authority among men. Moses was Elohlm to Pharaoh (Exodous 7 1) and to Aaron (Exodous 4 10; cf Judges 6 8; 1 Samuel 2 25; Exodous 21 5.6; 22 7 if; Psalm 58 11; 821). It is, therefore, a general term expressing majesty and authority, and it only came to be used as a proper name for Israel s God in the later period of abstract monotheism when the old proper name JAH (Jehovah) was held to be too sacred to be uttered. The meaning of the root El, and the exact relation to it, and to one another, of Elohlm and Eld"h, lie in complete obscurity. By far the most frequent form used by OT writers is the pi. Elohlm, but they use it regularly with sing. vbs. and adjs. to denote a singular idea. Several ex planations have been offered of this usage of a pi. term to denote a sing, idea that it expresses the fulness and manifoldness of the Divine nature, or that it is a pi. of majesty used in the manncr_ of royal persons, or even that it is an early intimation of the Trinity; other cognate expressions are found in Genesis 1 26; 3 22; 1 Kings 22 19 f; Isaiah 6 8. These theories are, perhaps, too ingenious to have occurred to the early Hebrews mind, and a more likely explana tion is, that they are survivals in language of a polytheistic stage of thought. In the OT they sig nify only the general notion of Deity.

      (2) Attributive names. To distinguish the God of Israel as supreme from others of the class Elo hlm, certain qualifying appellations are often added. El El yon designates the God of Israel as the high est, the most high, among the Elohlm (Genesis 14 18-20); so do JAH (Jehovah) Elyon (Psalm 7 17) and * Ely on alone, often in Pss and in Isaiah 14 14.

      El Shadday, or Shadday alone, is a similar term which on the strength of some tradition is translated d "God Almighty" ; but its derivation and meaning are quite unknown. According to Exodous 6 3 it was the usual name for God in patriarchal times, but other tradi tions in the Pent seem to have no knowledge of this.

      Another way of designating God was by His rela tion to His worshippers, as God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Genesis 24 12; Exodous 3 6), of Shcm (Genesis 9 26), of the Hebrews (Exodous 3 18), and of Israel (Genesis 33 20).

      Other names used to express the power and majesty of God are cur, "Rock" (Deuteronomy 32 18; Isaiah 30 29), dbhlr (cstr fr abhlr), "the Strong One" (Genesis 49 24; Isaiah 1 24; Psalm 132 2); mdekh, King"; Cidhdn, "lord," and adhonay, "my lord" (Exodous 23 17; Isaiah 10 16.33; Genesis 18 27; Isaiah 6 1). Also ba*al, "proprietor" or "master," may be inferred as a designation once in use, from its appearance in such Ileb proper names as Jerubbaal and Ish- baal. The last three names describe God as a Master to whom man stands in the relation of a servant, and they tended to fall into disuse as the necessity arose to differentiate the worship of JAH (Jehovah) from that of the gods of surrounding nations. ^

      A term of uncertain meaning is Yahiueh or Elohlm c e bhd oth, "JAH (Jehovah)" or "God of hosts." In Hebrews usage "host" might mean an army of men, or the stars and the angels which, apart or in conjunction, made up the host of heaven. God of Hosts in early times meant the war god who led the armies of Israel (1 Samuel 4 4; 2 Samuel 7 8). In 1 Samuel 17 45 this title stands in parallelism with "the God of the armies of Israel." So all Israel is called the host of JAH (Jehovah) (Exodous 12 41). In the Prophets, where the term has become a regular appellation, it stands in relation to every form of the power and majesty, physical and moral, of God (e.g. Isaiah 2 12; 6 3.5; 10 23.33). It stands in parallelism with Isaiah s peculiar title, the Holy One of Israel (Isaiah 6 16.24). It has, there fore, been thought that it refers to the host of heaven. In the Prophets it is practically a proper name. Its original meaning may well have been forgotten or dropped, but it does not follow that a new special significance was attached to the word "hosts." The general meaning of the whole term is well expressed by the LXX translated, kurios pantokrdtor, "Lord Omnipotent."

      (3) Jehovah (Yahweh). This is the personal proper name par excellence of Israel s God, even as Chemosh was that of the god of Moab, and Dagon that of the god of the Philis. The original meaning and derivation of the word are unknown. The variety of modern theories shows that, etymologi- cally, several derivations are possible, but that the meanings attached to any one of them have to be imported and imposed upon the word. They add nothing to our knowledge. The Hebrews them selves connected the word with hay ah, "to be." In Exodous 3 14 JAH (Jehovah) is explained as equivalent to ehyeh, which is a short form of ehyeh usher ehyeh, translated d in RV "I am that I am." This has been sup posed to mean "self-existence," and to represent God as the Absolute. Such an idea, however, would be a metaphysical abstraction, not only im possible to the time at which the name originated, but alien to the Hebrews mind at any time. And the imperfect ehyeh is more accurately translated d "I will be what I will be," a Semite (Shemite, of Shem) idiom meaning, "I will be all that is necessary as the occasion will arise," a familiar OT idea (cf Isaiah 7 4.9; Psalm 23).

      This name was in use from the earliest historical times till after the exile. It is found in the most ancient lit. According to Exodous 3 13 f, andesp. 6 2.3, it was first introduced by Moses, and was the medium of a new revelation of the God of their fathers to the children of Israel. But in parts of Genesis it is represented as being in use from the earliest times. Theories that derive it from Egypt or Assyria, or that would connect it etymologically with Jove or Zeus, are supported by no evidence. We have to be content either to say that JAH (Jehovah) was the tribal God of Israel from time immemorial, or




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      to accept a theory that is practically identical with that of Exodous that it was adopted through Moses from the Midianile. tribe into which lie married. The Kenites, the tribe of Midianites related to Moses, dwelt in the neighborhood of Sinai, anil attached themselves to Israel (Judges 1 10; 4 11). A few passages suggest that Sinai was the original home of JAH (Jehovah) (Judges 5 4.5; Deuteronomy 33 2). But there is no direct evidence bearing upon the origin of the worship of JAH (Jehovah): to us He is known only as the God of Israel.

      (1) JAH (Jehovah) alone was the God of Israel. Hebrews theology consists essentially of the doctrine of JAH (Jehovah) and its

      implications. The teachers and lead- 4. Pre- ers of the people at all times worship

      prophetic and enjoin the worship of JAH (Jehovah) alone. Conceptions "It stands out as a prominent and of JAH (Jehovah) incontrovertible fact, that down to the

      reign of Ahab .... no prominent man in Israel, with the doubtful exception of Solomon, known by name and held up for condemnation, wor shipped any other god but Yahveh. In every na tional and tribal crisis, in all times of danger and of war, it is Yahveh and Yahveh alone who is invoked to give victory and deliverance" (Montefiore, Hibbert Lectures*, 21). This is more evident in what is, without doubt, very early lit., even than in later writings (e.g. Judges 5; Deuteronomy 33; 1 Samuel 4-6). The iso- lat ion of the desert was more favorable to the integrity of JAH (Jehovah) s sole worship than the neighbor hood of powerful peoples who worshipped many other gods. Yet that early religion of JAH (Jehovah) can be called monotheistic only in the light of the end it realized, for in the course of its development it had to overcome many limitations.

      (a) The early worship of JAH (Jehovah) did not exclude belief in the existence of other gods. As other nations believed in the existence of JAH (Jehovah) (1 Samuel 4 8; 2 Kings 17 27), so Israel did not doubt the reality of other gods (Judges 11 24; Numbers 21 29; Micah 4 5). This limitation involved two others: JAH (Jehovah) is the God of Israel only; with them alone He makes a COVENANT (q.v.) ((Jon 15 18; Exodous 6 4.5; 2 Kings 17 34.35), and their worship only He seeks (Deuteronomy 4 32-37; 32 9; Am 3 2). Therefore He works, and can be wor shipped only within a certain geographical area. He may have been associated with His original home in Sinai long after the settlement in Canaan (Judges 5 4; Deuteronomy 33 2; 1 Kings 19 8.9), but gradually His home and that of His people became identical (1 Samuel 26 19; Hosea 9 3; Isaiah 14 2.25). Even after the deportation of the ten tribes, Canaan remains JAH (Jehovah) s land (2 Kings 17 24-28). Early Israelites are, therefore, more properly described as Monolatrists or Henot heists than as Monotheists. It is charac teristic of the religion of Israel (in contrast with, e.g. Greek thought) that it arrived at absolute Mono theism along the line of. moral and religious expe rience, rather than that of rational inference. Even while they shared the common Semite (Shemite, of Shem) belief in the reality of other gods, JAH (Jehovah) alone had for them "the value of God."

      (b) It is necessary to distinguish between the teaching of the religious leaders and the belief and practice of the people generally. The presence of a higher religion never wholly excludes superstitious practices. The use of Teraphim (Genesis 31 30; 1 Samuel 19 13.16; Hosea 3 4), Ephod (Judges 18 17-20; 1 Samuel 23 G.9; 30 7), Urim and Thummim (1 Samuel 28 6; 14 40, LXX), for the purposes of magic and di vination, to obtain oracles from JAH (Jehovah), was quite common in Israel. Necromancy was practised early and late (1 Samuel 28 7 ff; Isaiah 8 19; Deuteronomy 18 10. 11). Sorcery and witchcraft were not unknown, but were condemned by the religious leaders (1 Samuel 28 3). The burial places of ancestors were held in great veneration (Genesis 35 20; 50 13; Joshua 24 30).

      But these facts do not prove that Hebrews religion was animistic and polytheistic, any more than similar phenomena in Christian lands would justify such an inference about Christianity.

      (c) Yet the worship of JAH (Jehovah) maintained and devel oped its monotheistic; principle only by overcoming several hostile tendencies. The Baal-worship of the Canaanites and the cults of other neighboring tribes proved a strong attraction to the mass of Israelites (Judges 2 13; 3 7; 8 33; 10 10; 1 Samuel 8 8; 12 10; 1 Kings 11 5.33; Hosea 2 5.17; Ezekiel 20; Exodous 20 5; 22 20; 34 10.17). I nder the conditions of life in Canaan, the sole worship of JAH (Jehovah) was in danger of modification by three tendencies, coordination, assimilation and disintegration.

      (i) When the people had settled down in peaceful relations with their neighbors, and began to have commercial and diplomatic transactions with them, it was inevitable that they should render their neighbor s gods some degree of reverence and wor ship. Courtesy and friendship demanded as much (cf 2 Kings 5 IS). "When Solomon had contracted many foreign alliances by marriage, he was also bound to admit foreign worship into Jerus (1 Kings 11 5). But Ahab was the first king who tried to set up the wor ship of Baal, side by side with that of JAH (Jehovah), as the national religion (1 Kings 18 19). Elijah s stand and Jehu s revolution gave its death blow to Baal- worship and vindicated the sole right of JAH (Jehovah) to Israel s allegiance. The prophet was defending the old religion and Ahab was the innovator; but the conflict and its issue brought the monotheistic principle to a new and higher level. The supreme temptation and the choice transformed what had been a natural monolatry into a conscious and moral adherence to JAH (Jehovah) alone (1 Kings 18 21.39).

      (ii) But to repudiate the name of Baal was not necessarily to be rid of the influence of Baal-worship. The ideas of the heathen religions survived in a more subtle way in the worship of JAH (Jehovah) Himself. The change from the nomad life of the desert to the r/ agricultural conditions of Canaan involved some change in religion. JAH (Jehovah), t he God of flocks and wars, had to be recognized as the God of the vintage and the harvest. That this development occurred is manifest in the character of the great religious fes tivals. "Three times thou shalt keep a feast unto me in the year. The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep .... and the feast of harvest, the first-fruits of thy labors, which thou sowest in the field: and the feast, of ingathering, at the end of the year, when thou gatherest in thy labors out of the field" (Exodous 23 14-10). The second and the third obviously, and the first probably, were agricultural feasts, which could have no meaning in the desert. Israel and JAH (Jehovah) together took possession of Canaan. To doubt that would be to admit the claims of the Baal-worship; but to assert it also involved some danger, because it was to assert certain similarities between JAH (Jehovah) and the Baalim. When those simi larities were embodied in the national festivals, they loomed very large in the eyes and minds of the mass of the people (,V. R. Smith, Prophets of Israel, 49-57). The danger was that Israel should regard JAH (Jehovah), like the Baals of the country, as a Nature-god, and, by local necessity, a national god, who gave c/ His people the produce of the land and protected them from their enemies, and in return received from them such gift s and sacrifices as corresponded to His nature. From the appearance in Israel, and among JAH (Jehovah) worshippers, of such names as Jerub- baal, Esh-baal (son of Saul) and Becliada (son of David, 1 Chronicles 14 7), it has been inferred that JAH (Jehovah) was called Baal, and there is ample evidence that His worship was assimilated to that of the Canaanite Baalim. The bulls raised by Jeroboam (1 Kings 12 26 ff) were symbols of JAH (Jehovah), and in Judah the Canaan-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      ite worship was imitated down to the time of Asa (1 Kings 14 22-21; 15 12.13). Against tliis tendency above all, the jin at prophets of the Si h cent, con tended. Israel worshipped ,)eh as if He were one of the Baalim, and I losea calls it Baal-worship (Hosea 2 southlL .i:;; cf Am 2 Samuel; Isaiah 1 10- 15).

      (iii) And where, JAH (Jehovah) was conceived as one of the Baalim or Masters of the hind, He became, like them, subject to disintegration into a number of local deities. This was probably the gravamen of Jero boam s sin in the eyes of the "Deuteronomic" his torian. In setting up separate sanctuaries, he di vided the worship, and, in effect, the godhead of JAH (Jehovah). The localization and naturalization of JAH (Jehovah). as well as His assimilation to the Baals, all went together, so that we read that even in Judah the number of gods ,as according to its cities (Jeremiah 2 2S; 11 loi. The vindication of JAH (Jehovah) s moral su premacy and spiritual unity demanded, among other thini!>. the unification of His worship in Jerus (2 Kings 23 i.

      (//) In one respect the religion of JAH (Jehovah) successfully resisted the influence of the heathen cults. At no time was JAH (Jehovah) associated wilh a goddess. Although the corrupt sensual practices that formed a large part of heathen worship also entered into Israel s worship (see ASIIKHAII ), it never penetrated so far as to modify in (his respect the idea of JAH (Jehovah).

      (c) It is a difficult question ho,v far human sac rifices at any time found place in the worship of JAH (Jehovah). The outstanding instance is that of Jephthah s daughter, which, though not condemned, is certainly regarded as exceptional (Judges 11 ,}() 10). Perhaps it is rightly regarded as a unique "survival." Then the story of the sacrifice of Isaac, while reminiscent, of an older practice, represents n more advanced view. Human sacrifice, thoiijih not demanded, is not abhorrent to JAH (Jehovah) (Genesis 22 1. A further stage is represented where Aha/ sacrifice of his son is con demned as an abomination of the nations" (2 Kings 16 :{). The sacrifice of children is emphatically condemned by the prophets as a late and foreign innovation which JAH (Jehovah) had not commanded (Jeremiah 7 )U ; E/k 16 20). Other cases, such as the execu tion of the chiefs of Shit t im (Numbers 25 4), and of Saul s sons "before JAH (Jehovah)" (2 Samuel 21 <)), and the herein or ban, by which whole communities were; devoted to destruction (Judges 21 10; 1 Samuel 15), while they show a very inadequate idea of the sacredness of human life, are not sacrifices, nor were they demanded by JAH (Jehovah) s worship. They were survivals of savage cus toms connected with tribal unity, which the higher morality of JAH (Jehovah) s religion had not yet abolished.

      (2) The nature ami churueler of ,/<// are mani fested in Ilis activities. The OT makes no state ments about the essence of ( !od; we are left to infer it from His action in Nature and history and from His dealing with man.

      (a) In this period, ITis activity is predominantly martial. As Israel s Deliverer from Egypt, "JAH (Jehovah) i s a man of war" (Kx 15 H). An ancient account of Israel s journey to Canaan is called "the book of the Wars of JAH (Jehovah)" (Numbers 21 14). By conquest in war He gave Ilis people their land (Judges 5; 2 Samuel 5 24; Deuteronomy 33 27). He is, therefore, more concerned with men_and nations, with the moral, than with the physical world.

      (l>) Even 1 lis activity in Xa t ure is first connected with His martial character. Earth, stars and rivers come to His battle (Judges 5 4.20.21). The forces of Nature do the bidding of Israel s Deliverer from Egypt (Exodous 8-10; 14 21). He causes sun and moon to stand while He delivers up the Amorites (Joshua 10 12). Later, He employs the forces of Nature to chastise His people for infidelity and sin (2 Samuel 24 15; 1 Kings 17 I). Amos declares that His moral rule extends to other nations and that it de

      termines their destinies. In harmony with this idea, great catastrophes like the Deluge ((!en 7 y and the overthrow of the Cities of the Plain (( Jen 19) are ascribed to Ilis moral will. In the same pragmatic manner the oldest, creation narrative describes Him creating man, and as much of the world as He needed ((Jen 2), but as yet the idea of a universal cause had not emerged, because the idea of a universe had not been formed. lie acts as one of great, but limited, power and knowledge ((Jen

      11 . r )-Samuel; 18 20). The more universal conception of (Jen 1 belongs to the same stratum of thought as Second Isaiah. At every stage of the OT the meta physical perfections of JAH (Jehovah) follow as an inference from His ethical preeminence.

      ( .}) The nioxt (lixlinctire e/mrneli r/xlir of JAH (Jehovah), which finally rendered Him and His religion absolutely unique, was the moral factor. In saying that JAH (Jehovah) was a moral God, it is meant that He acted by free choice, in conformity with ends which He set. to Himself, and which He also imposed upon His wor shippers as their law of conduct.

      (/;) The most, essential condition of amoral nature is found in His vivid personality, which at every stage of His self-revelation shines forth with an intensity that might be called aggressive. Divine personality and spirituality are never expressly asserted or defined in the OT; but nowhere in the history of religion are they more; clearly asserted. The modes of their expression are, however, quali fied by anthropomorphisms, by limitations, moral and physical. JAH (Jehovah) s jealousy (Exodous 20 ,~>; Deuteronomy 5 <);

      6 l.V), His wrath and anger (Kx 32 10 12; Deuteronomy

      7 4) and His inviolable holiness (Kx 19 21.22; 1 Samuel 6 1 .); 2 Samuel 6 7) appear sometimes to be irrational and immoral; but they are the assertion of I lis indi vidual nature, of His self-consciousness as He dis tinguishes Himself from all else, in the moral lan guage of the time, and are the conditions of His having any moral nature whatsoever. Likewise, Ho dwells in a place and moves from it (Judges 5 h); men may see Him in visible form (Kx 24 10; Numbers

      12 Samuel); He is always represented as having organs like those of the human body, arms, hands, feet, mouth, eyes and ears. By .such sensuous and fig urative language alone was it possible for a personal God to make Himself known to men.

      (h) The content of JAH (Jehovah) s moral nature as revealed in t he ( >T developed wit h the growl h of moral ideas. Though His activity is most prominently martial, it is most permanently judicial, and is exercised through judges, priests and prophets. Tonlk and tiiixltjiat, "law" and "judgment," from the time of Moses onward, stand, the one for a body of cus toms that should determine men s relations to OIK; another, and the other for the decision of individual cases in accordance with those customs, and both were; regarded as issuing from JAH (Jehovah). The people came to Moses "to inquire of God" when they had a matter in dispute, and he "judged between a man and his neighbor, and made them know the statutes of God, and his laws" (Exodous 18 15. Kings)).. The judges appear mostly as leaders in war; but it. is clear, as their name indicates, that they also gave; judgments as ^between the people (Judges" 3 10; 4 4; 10 2.:5; 1 Samuel 7 1(>). The earliest literary prophets assume the existence of a law which priest and prophet had neglected to administer rightly (Hosea 4 G; 8 1.12; Am 2 4). This implied that JAH (Jehovah) was thought, of as actuated and acting by a consistent moral prin ciple, which He also imposed on His people. Their morality may have varied much at different periods, but there is no reason to doubt that the Decalogue, and the moral teaching it involved, emanated sub stantially from Moses. "He taught them that Yahveh, if a stern, and often wrathful, Deity, was also a God of justice and purity. Linking the moral




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      life to the religious idea, he may have taught them too that murder and theft, adultery ami false wit ness, were abhorred and forbidden by their God" (Alontefiore, Hibbert Lectures 3 , 49). The moral teaching of the OT effected the transition from the national and collective to the individual and per sonal relation with JAH (Jehovah). The most fundamental defect of Hebrew morality was that its application was confined within Israel itself and did little to deter mine the relation of the Israelites to people of other nations; and this limitation was bound up with Henotheism, the idea that JAH (Jehovah) was God of Israel alone. "The consequence of this national concep tion of JAH (Jehovah) w r as that there was no religious and moral bond regulating the conduct of the Hebrew s wit h men of other nations. Conduct which between fellow-Hebrews w r as offensive in JAH (Jehovah) s eyes was inoffensive when practised by a Hebrew toward

      one who was not a Hebrew (Deuteronomy 23 19 f)

      In the latter case they w ere governed purely by considerations of expediency. This ethical limi tation is the real explanation of the spoiling of the Egyptians " (Exodous 11 2.3) (G. Buchanan Gray, The, Divine Discipline of Israel, 46, 4S).

      The first line of advance in the teaching of the prophets was to expand and deepen the moral de mands of JAH (Jehovah). So they removed at once the ethi cal and the theological limitations of the earlier view. But they were conscious that they were only developing elements already latent in the character and law of JAH (Jehovah).

      Two conditions called forth and determined the message of the Sth-cent. prophets the 1 degradation of morality and religion at home and 5. The Idea the growing danger to Israel and Judah of God in from the all- victorious Assyrian. With the Pro- one voice the prophets declare and phetic condemn the moral and social iniquity

      Period of Israel and Judah (Hosea 4 1; Am 4 1;

      Isaiah 1 21-23). The worship of JAH (Jehovah) had been assimilated to the heathen religions around (Am 2 Samuel; Hosea 3 1; Isaiah 30 22). A time of pros perity had produced luxury, license and an easy security, depending upon the external^ bonds and ceremonies of religion. In the threatening attitude of Assyria, the prophets see the complement of Israel s unfaithfulness and sin, this the cause and that the instruments of JAH (Jehovah) s anger (Isaiah 10 5.6).

      (1) Righteousness. These circumstances forced into first prominence the righteousness of JAH (Jehovah). It was an original attribute that had appeared even in His most martial acts (Judges 6 4; 1 Samuel 12 7). But the prophet s interpretation of Israel s history re vealed its content on a larger scale. JAH (Jehovah) was not like the gods of the heathen, bound to the purposes and fortunes of His people. Their relation was not a natural bond, but a covenant of grace which He freely bestowed upon them, and He demanded as its condition, loyalty to Himself and obedience to His law. Impending calamities were not, as the naturalistic conception implied, due to the impo tence of JAH (Jehovah) against the Assyr gods (Isaiah 31 1), but the judgment of God, whereby He applied impar tially to the conduct of His people a standard of righteousness, which He both had in Himself and declared in judgment upon them. The prophets did not at first so much transform the idea of right eousness, as assert its application as between^ the people and JAH (Jehovah). But in doing that they also reject ed the external views of its realization. It consists not in unlimited gifts or in the costliest oblations. "What doth JAH (Jehovah) require of thee, but to do justly, and to love kindness, and_ to walk humbly with thy God?" (Micah 6 8). And it tends to become of uni versal application. JAH (Jehovah) will deal as a righteous judge with all nations, including Israel, and Israel as the covenant people bears the greater respon

      sibility (Am 1-3). And a righteous judge that metes out even justice to all nations will deal simi larly with individuals. The ministry of the prophets produced a vivid consciousness of the personal and individual relation of men to God. The prophets themselves were not members of a class, no order or school or profession, but men impelled by an inner and individual call of God, often against their inclination, to proclaim an unpopular message (Am 7 14.15; Isaiah 6; Jeremiah 1 6-9; Ezekiel 3 14). Jere miah and Ezekiel in terms denounced the old idea of collective responsibility (Jeremiah 31 29 ff; E/ck 18). Thus in the prophets application of the idea of righteousness to their time, two of the limitations adhering to the idea of God, at least in popular religion hitherto, were transcended. JAH (Jehovah) s rule is no longer limited to Israel, nor concerned only with the nation as a collective whole, but He deals im partially with every individual and nation alike. Other limitations also disappear. His anger and wrath, that once appeared irrational and unjust, now become the intensity of His righteousness. Nor is it merely forensic and retributive righteous ness. It is rather a moral end, a chief good, which He may realize by loving-kindness and mercy and forgiveness as much as by punishment. II eb thought knows no opposition between God s right eousness and His goodness, between justice and mercy. The covenant of righteousness is like the relation of husband to wife, of father to child, one of loving-kindness and everlasting love (Hosea 3 1; 11 4; Isaiah 1 IS; 30 IS; Micah 7 IS; Isaiah 43 4; 648; Jeremiah 31 3ff.34; 924). The stirring events which showed JAH (Jehovah) s independence of Israel revealed the fulness of grace that was alwavs latent in His relation to His people (Genesis 33 11; 2 Samuel 24 14). It was enshrined in the Decalogue (Exodous 20 6), and proclaimed with incomparable grandeur in what may be the most ancient Mosaic tradition: "JAH (Jehovah), JAH (Jehovah), a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abundant in lovingkindness and truth; keeping lovingkindness for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin" (Exodous 34 6.7).

      (2) The holiness of JAH (Jehovah) in the Prophets came to have a meaning closely akin to His righteousness. As an idea more distinctly religious and more ex clusively applied to God, it was subject to greater changes of meaning with the development or degra dation of religion. It was applied to anything withdrawn from common use to the service of reli gion utensils, places, seasons, animals and men. Originally it was so far from the moral meaning it now has that it was used of the "sacred" prostitutes who ministered to the licentiousness of Canaanitish worship (Deuteronomy 23 18). Whether or not the root- idea of the word was "separateness," there is no doubt that it is applied to JAH (Jehovah) in the OT to express his separateness from men and his sublimity above them. It was not always a moral quality in JAH (Jehovah); for He might be unapproachable because of His mere power and terror (1 Samuel 6 20; Isaiah 8 13). But in the Prophets, and esp. in Isaiah, it acquires a distinctly moral meaning. In his vision. Isaiah hears JAH (Jehovah) pro claimed as "holy, holy, holy, and he is filled with the sense of his own sin and of that of Israel (Isaiah 6; cf 1 4; Am 2 7). But even here the term conveys more than moral perfection. JAH (Jehovah) is already "the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy" (Isaiah 67 15). It expresses the full Divinity of JAH (Jehovah) in His uniqueness and self-existence (1 Samuel 2 2; Am 4 2; Hosea 11 9). It would there fore seem to stand in antithesis to righteousness, as expressing those qualities of God, metaphysical and moral, by w r hich He is distinguished and sepa rated from men, while righteousness involves those moral activities and relations which man may share with God. But in the Prophets, God s entire being




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      is moral and His whole activity is righteous. Tin: meanings of the terms, though not identical, coin cide; God s holiness is realized in righteousness. "God the Holy One is sanctified in righteousness" (Isaiah 5 10). So Isaiah s peculiar phrase, "the Holy One of Israel," brings ( lod in I lis most exalted being into a relation of knowledge and moral reciprocity with Israel.

      (3) The moralizing of righteousness and holiness universalized Deity. From Amos downward JAH (Jehovah) s moral rule, and therefore His absolute power, were recognized as extending over all the nations sur rounding Israel, and the great world-power of Assyr ia is but the rod of His anger and the instrument of His righteousness (Am 1-2; Isaiah 10 5; 13 off; 19 1 f f). Idolatrous and polytheistic worship of all kinds are condemned. The full inference of Monotheism was only a, gradual process, even with the prophets. It is not clear that the Sth-cent. prophets all denied the existence of other gods, though Isaiah s term for them, cllllin ("things of nought," "no-gods"), points in that direction. At least the monotheistic process had set in. And JAH (Jehovah) s control over other nations was not exercised merely from Israel s point of view. The issue of the judgment upon the two great, powers of Egypt and Assyria was to be their conversion to the reli gion of JAH (Jehovah) (Isaiah 19 24.25; cf 2 2-4 = Micah 4 1-3). Yet Ileb universalism never went beyond the idea that all nations should find 1 heir share in JAH (Jehovah) through Israel (Zee 8 2:5). The nations from the ends of the earth shall come to Jell and declare that their fathers gods were lies, even vanity and things wherein there is no profit" (Jeremiah 16 I M. Itisstated categorically that "JAH (Jehovah) he is ( !od in heaven above and upon the earth beneath; there is none else" (Deuteronomy 4 39).

      (4) The unity of Cod was the leading idea of Jo- siah s reformation. Jerus was cleansed of every accretion of Baal-worship and of other heathen reli gions that had established themselves by the side of the worship of JAH (Jehovah) (2 Kings 23 4-8.10-14). The semi-heathen worship of JAH (Jehovah) in many local shrines, which tended to disintegrate. His unity, was swept away (2 Kings 23 8.0). The reform was extended to the Northern Kingdom (2 Kings 23 lf)-20), so that Jerus should be the sole; habitation of JAH (Jehovah) on cart h, and His worship there alone should be the symbol of unity to the whole Ileb race.

      But the monotheistic doctrine is first fully and consciously stated in Second Isaiah. There is no God but JAH (Jehovah): other gods are merely graven images, and their worshippers commit the absurdity of worship ping the work of their own hands (Isaiah 42 8; 44 8- 20). JAH (Jehovah) manifests His deity in His absolute sovereignty of the world, both of Nature and history. The prophet had seen the rise and fall of Assyria, the coming of Cyrus, the deportation and return of Judah s exiles, as incidents in the training of Israel for her world-mission to be "a light of the Genesis tiles" and JAH (Jehovah) s "salvation unto the end of the earth" (42 1-7; 49 1-0). Israel s world-mission, and the ordering of historical movements to the grand final purpose of universal salvation (45 23), is the philosophy of history complementary to the doctrine of (iod s unity and universal sovereignty.

      (5) Creator and ljord.,. further inference is that He is Creator and Lord of the physical uni verse. Israel s call and mission is from JAH (Jehovah) who "created the heavens, and stretched them forth; he that spread abroad the earth and that which Cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk there in" (42 5; cf 40 12.20; 44 21; 45 IS; Genesis 1). All the essential factors of Monotheism are here at last exhibited, not in abstract metaphysical terms, but as practical motives of religious life. His coun

      sel and action are His own (Isaiah 40 13) Nothing is hid from Him; and the future like the past is known to Him (40 27; 42 ,; 44 Samuel; 48 0). Notwith standing His special association with the temple in Jerus, He is "the high and lofty One that inhabit eth eternity"; the heaven is His throne, and no house or place can contain Him (57 15; 66 1). No force of history or Nature can withstand His purpose (41 17-20; 42 13; 43 13). He is "the First and the Last, "an "Everlasting God" (40 28; 41 4; 48 12). Nothing can be likened to Him or compared with Him (46 5). As the heavens are higher than the earth, so His thoughts and ways transcend those of men (55 8.0). But. anthropomorphic and anthro- popathic expressions still abound. Eyes, mouth, ears, nostrils, hands, arms and face are His; He is a man of war (42 13; 63 1 IT); He cries like a tra vailing woman (42 14), and feeds His flock like a shepherd (40 11). Thus alone could the prophet express His full concrete Divinity.

      (6) 7//.s compassion anil love are expressed in a variety of ways that- lead up directly to the NT doctrine of Divine Fatherhood. He folds Israel in His arms as a shepherd his lambs (40 11). Her scattered children are His sons and daughters whom lie redeems and restores (43 5-7). In wrath for a moment He hides His face, but His mercy and kindness are everlasting (54 8). Greater than a mother s tenderness is JAH (Jehovah) s love for Israel (49 15; 66 13). "It would be easy to find in the prophet proof-texts for everything which theology asserts regarding God, with the exception perhaps that He is a spirit, by which is meant that He is a particular kind of substance" (A. B. Davidson in Skinner, Isaiah, II, xxix). But in truth the spirituality and per sonality of God are more adequately expressed in the living human language of the prophet than in the dead abstractions of metaphysics.

      Monotheism appears in this period as established beyond question, and in the double sense that JAH (Jehovah) the God of Israel is one Being, and 6. Idea of that beside Him there is no other God. God in He alone is God of all the earth, and

      Post-exilic all other beings stand at an infinite Judaism distance from Him (Psalm 18 31; 24 Iff; 115 3 f f). The generic name God is frequently applied to Him, and the tendency appears to avoid the particular and proper name JAH (Jehovah) (see esp. Pss 73-89; Job; Eccl).

      (1) Ncio conditions. Nothing essentially new appears, but the leaching of the prophets is devel oped under new influences. And what then was enforced by the few has now become the creed of the many. The teaching of the prophets had been en forced by the experiences of the exile. Israel had been punished for her sins of idolatry, and the faith ful among the; exiles had learned that JAH (Jehovah) s rule ex tended over many lands and nations. The foreign influences had been mo re favorable to Monotheism. The gods of Canaan and even of Assyria and Baby lonia had been overthrown, and their peoples had given place to the Persians, who, in the religion of Zarathushtra, had advanced nearer to a pure Mono theism than any gentile race had done; for although they posited two principles of being, the Good and the Evil, they worshipped only Ahura-Ma/da, the Good. When Persia gave way to Greece, the more cultured Greek, the Greek who had ideas to dis seminate, and who established schools at Antioch or Alexandria, was a pure Monotheist.

      (2) Divine attributes. Although we do not yet find anyt hing like a dogmatic account of God s attri butes, the larger outlook upon the universe and the deeper reflection upon man s individual experience have produced more; comprehensive and far-reach ing ideas of God s being and activity, (a) Faith rests upon His eternity and unchangeableness (Psalm




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      90 1.2; 102 27). His omniscience and omnipresence are expressed with every possible fulness (Psalm 139; Job 26 6). His almighty power is at once the con fidence of piety, and the rebuke of blasphemy or frowardness (Psalm 74 12-17; 104 ct passim; Job 36; 37 ct passim; Ecclus 16 17 ff). (b) His most exalted and comprehensive attribute is His holi ness; by it He swears as by Himself (Psalm 89 35); it expresses His majesty (Psalm 99 3.5.9) and His supreme power (Psalm 60 (iff), (r) His righteousness marks all His acts in relation to Israel and the na tions around her (Psalm 119 137-144; 129 4). (,l) That both holiness and righteousness were con ceived as moral qualities is relied ed in the profound sense of sin which the pious knew (Psalm 51) and re vealed in the moral demands associated with them; truth, honesty and fidelity are the qualities of those who shall dwell in God s holy hill (Psalm 15); purity, diligence, kindliness, honesty, humility and wisdom are the marks of the righteous man (Prov 10-11). (c) In. lob and Prov wisdom stands forth as the pre eminent quality of the ideal man, combining in itself all moral and intellectual excellences, and wis dom conies from God (Prov 2 (>); it is a quality of His nature (Prov 8 22) and a mode of His activity (Prov 3 19; Psalm 104 24). In the Hellen istic circles of Alexandria, wisdom was transformed into a philosophical conception, which is at once the principle of God s self-revelation and of His creative activity. Pliilo identifies it with His master-conception, the Logos. "Both Logos and Wisdom mean for Him the reason and mind of (iod, His image impressed upon the universe, His agent of creation and providence, the mediator through which He communicates Himself to man and the world, and His law imposed upon both the moral and physical universe" (Mnn^fultl eastWHJX, 2 ( .Hi). In Book of Wisdom it. is represented as proceeding from God, "a breath of the power of God, and a clear effulgence of the glory of the Almighty .... an unspotted mirror of the working of God, and an image of his goodness" (7 25.20). In man, it is the author of knowledge, virtue and piety, and in the world it has been the guide and arbiter of its destiny from the beginning (chapters 10-12). (/) But- in the more purely Hebrews lit. of this period, the moral attribute of God that comes into greatest promi nence is His beneficence. Goodness and mercy, faithfulness and loving-kindness, forgiveness and redemption are His willing gifts to Israel. "Like as a father piticth his children, so JAH (Jehovah) pitieth them that fear him" (Psalm 103 13; 145 Samuel; 103 8; Ecclus 2 11). To say that God is loving and like a father goes far on the way to the doctrine that He is Love and Father, but not, the whole way; for as yet His mercy and grace are manifested only in individual acts, and they are not the natural and necessary outflow of His nature. All these ideas of God meant less for the Jewish than for the Christian mind, because they were yet held subject to several limitations.

      (3) Kurrival of limitations. (a) We have evidence of a changed attitude toward anthropomorphisms. ( Iod no longer walks on earth, or works under human limitation. Where His eyes or ears or face or hands are spoken of, they are clearly figurative expressions. His activities are universal and invisible, and He dwells on high forevermore. Yet anthropomorphic, limitations arc not wholly overcome. The idea that He sleeps, though not to be taken literally, implies a defect of His power (Psalm 44 23).

      (b) In the metaphysical attributes, the chief limi tation was the idea that God s dwelling-place on earth was on Matthew. Zion in Jerus. He was no longer confined ,ithin Philestina, Canaan-Land; His throne is in heaven (Psalm 11 4; 103 19), and His glory above the heavens (113 4); but

      "In Juclah is God known: His name is great in Israel. In Salem also is his tabernacle, And his dwelling-place in Zion

      (Psalm 76 1.2; 110 2; cf Ecclus 24 8fl).

      That these are no figures of speech is manifested in the yearning of the pious for the temple, and their despair in separation from it (Pss 42, 43; cf 122).

      (r) This involved a moral limitation, the sense of God s favoritism toward Israel, which sometimes developed into an easy self-righteousness that had no moral basis. God s action in the world was de termined by His favor toward Israel, and His loving acts were confined within the bounds of a narrow nationalism. Other nations are wicked and sinners, adversaries and oppressors, upon whom God is called to execute savage vengeance; (Psalm 109; 137 7-9). Yet Israel did not. wholly forget, that, it, was the servant of JAH (Jehovah) to proclaim His name among the nations (Psalm 96 2.3; 117). JAH (Jehovah) is good to all, and His tender mercies are over all His works (Psalm 145 9; Ecclus 18 13; cf Psalm 104 11; Zee 14 16, and the Book of Jonah, which is a rebuke to Jewish par ticularism).

      (d) God s holiness in the hands of the priests tended to become a material and formal quality, which fulfilled itself in established ceremonial, and His righteousness in the hands of the scribes tended to become an external law whose demands wen- sat isfied by a mechanical obedience of works. This external conception of righteousness reacted upon the conception of God s government of the world. From the earliest times the Hebrews mind had asso ciated suffering with the punishment of sin, and blessedness with the reward of virtue. In the post- exilic age the relation came to be thought, of as one of strict correspondence between righteousness and reward and between sin and punishment. Righteousness, both in man and God, was not so much a moral state as a measurable sum of acts, in the one case, of obedience, and in the other, of reward or retribution. Conversely, every calamity and evil that befell men came to be regarded as the direct and equivalent, penalty of a sin they had committed. The Book of Job is a somewhat incon clusive protest against, this prevalent view.

      These were the tendencies that ultimately ma tured into the narrow externalism of the scribes and Pharisees of Our Lord s lime, which had substituted for the personal knowledge and service of God a system of mechanical acts of worship and conduct.

      (4) Tctuliuc us to abstract ness. Behind these defective ideas of (iod s attributes stood a more radical defect of the whole religious conception. The purification of the religion of Israel from Poly theism and idolatry, the affirmation of the unity of God and of His spirituality, required His complete separat ion from 1 he manifoldness of visible exist ence. It was the only way, until the more adequate idea of a personal or spiritual unity, that embraced the manifold in itself, was developed. But it was an unstable conception, which tended on the one hand to empty the unity of all reality, and on the other to replace it by a new multiplicity which was not a unity. Both tendencies appear in post-exilic Judaism.

      (a) The first effect of distinguishing too sharply between God and all created being was to set, Him above and apart from all the world. This tendency had already appeared in E/k, whose visions were rather symbols of (iod s presence than actual expe riences of God. In Daniel even the visions appear only in dreams. The growth of the Canon of sacred lit. as the final record of the law of God, and the rise of the scribes as its professional interpreters, sig nified that God need not, and would not, speak face to face with man again; and the stricter organiza-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      tion of the priesthood and its sacrificial acts in Jcrus tended to shut men generally out from access to God, and to reduce worship into a mechanical performance. A symptom of this fact was the dis use of the personal name JAH (Jehovah) and the substitution for it of more general and abstract terms like God and Lord.

      (b) Not only an exaggerated awe, but also an element of skepticism, entered into the disuse of the proper name, a sense of the inadequacy of any name. In the Wisdom literature, God s incomprehensi bility and remoteness appear for the first time as a conscious search after Him and a difficulty to find Him (Job 16 18-21; 23 3.8.9; Prov 30 2-4). Even the doctrine of immortality developed with the sense of God s present remoteness and the hope of His future nearness (Psalm 17 15; Job 19 25). But Jewish theology was no cold Epicureanism or rationalistic Deism. Men s religious experiences apprehended God more intimately than their theology professed.

      (c) By a "happy inconsistency" (Montefiore) they affirmed His immanence both in Nature (Psalm 104; ,Visd 8 1 ; 12 1.2) and in man s inner expe rience (Prov 15 3.11; 1 Cli 28 9; 29 17. IS). Yet that transcendence was the, dominating thought is manifest, most of all, in the formulation of a number of mediating conceptions, which, while they con nected God and the world, also revealed the gulf that separated them.

      (5) LoyoN, mcnir/i (ini-Wrd ) and angels. This proc ess of abstraction had gone farthest in Alexandria, where Jewish thought had so far assimilated Platonic philosophy, that Philo and Wisdom conceive CJod as pure being who could not Himself come into any contact with the material and created world. His action and revelation are therefore mediated by His Powers, His Logos and His Wisdom, which, as personified or hypostatized attributes, become His vicegerents on earth. But in Philestina, Canaan-Land, too, many mediat ing agencies grew up between God and man. The mcmm, or word of God, was not unlike Philo s Logos. The deified law partly corresponded to Alexandrian Wisdom. The Messiah had already appeared in the Prophets, and now in some circles He was expected as the mediator of God s special favor to Israel. The most important and significant innovation in this connection was the doctrine of angels. It was not entirely new, and Babylonian and Pers influences may have contributed to its development; but its chief cause lay in t he general scheme of thought. Angels became intermediaries of revelation (Zee 1 9.12.19; 3 1 ff), the instruments of God s help (Daniel 3 2S; 2 Mace 11 6), and of His punishment (Apoc Bar 21 23). The ancient gods of the nations became their patron angels (Daniel 10 13-20); but Israel s hatred of their gentile enemies often led to their transforming the latter s deities into demons. Inci dentally a temporary solution of the problem of evil was thus found, by shifting all responsibility for evil from JAH (Jehovah) to the demons. The unity and su premacy of God were maintained by the doubtful method of delegating His manifold, and esp. His contradictory, activities to subordinate and partially to hostile spirits, w T hich involved a new Polytheism. The problem of the One and the Many in ultimate reality cannot be solved by merely separating them. Hebrews Monotheism was unstable; it main tained its own truth even partially by affirming contradictories, and it contained in itself the demand for a further development. The few pluralistic phrases in the OT (as Genesis 1 26; 3 22; 11 7; Isaiah 6 8, and Elohim) are not adumbrations of the Trinity, but only philological survivals. But the Messianic hope was an open confession of the in completeness of the OT revelation of God.

      ///. The Idea of God in the NT. The whole of the NT presupposes and rests upon the OT. Jesus

      Christ and His disciples inherited the 1. Depend- idea of God revealed in the OT, as it ence on OT survived in the purer strata of Jewish

      religion. So much was it to them and their contemporaries a matter of course, that it never occurred to them to proclaim or enforce the idea of God. Nor did they consciously feel the need of amending or changing it. They sought to correct some fallacious deductions made by later Judaism, and, unconsciously, they dropped the cruder anthropomorphisms and limitations of the OT idea. But their point of departure was always the higher teaching of the prophets and Pss, and their conscious endeavor in presenting God to men was to fulfil the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 5 17). All the worthier ideas concerning God evolved in the OT reappear in the NT. He is One, supreme, living, personal and spiritual, holy, righteous and merciful. His power and knowledge are all-sufficient, and He is not limited in time or place. Nor can it be said that any distinctly new attributes are ascribed to God in the NT. Yet there is a difference. The conception and all its factors are placed in a new relation to man and the universe, whereby their meaning is trans formed, enhanced and enriched. The last, trace of particularism, with its tendency to Polytheism, disappears. God can no longer bear a proper name to associate Him with Israel, or to distinguish Him from other gods, for He is the God of all the earth, who is no respecter of persons or nations. Two new elements entered men s religious thought and gradually lifted its whole content to a new plane Jesus Christ s experience and manifesta tion of the Divine Fatherhood, and the growing conviction of the church that Christ Himself was God and the full and final revelation of God.

      Or thought may also have influenced NT thought, but in a comparatively insignificant and subordinate way. Its content was not taken over bodily as o ripntjlfx was that of Hebrews thought, and it did not influence the fountain head of NT ideas. Influence Jt did not color the mind and teaching of Jesus Christ. It affected the form rather than matter of NT teaching. It appears in the clear-cut i between flesh and spirit, mind and body, which n Paul s Kpp., and so it helped to define more - the spirit uality of God. The idea of the Logos nd the kindred idea of Christ as the image of God He, owe something to the influence of the Pla tonic and Stoic schools. As tills is the constructive concept employed in the NT to define the religious significance of Christ and His essential relation to God, it modifies the idea of God itself, by introducing a distinction within the unity into its innermost meaning.

      Philosophy never appears in the NT on its own account, but only as subservient to Christian expe

      rience. In the NT as in the OT, the 3. No existence of God is taken for granted

      Theistic as the universal basis of all life and Proofs in thought. Only in three passages of the NT Paul s, addressed to heathen audiences,

      do we find anything approaching a natural theology, and these arc concerned rather with defining the nature of God, than with proving His existence. When the people of Lystra would have worshipped Paul and Barnabas as heathen gods, the apostle protests that God is not like men, and bases His majesty upon His creatorship of all things (Acts 14 15). He urges the same argument at Athens, and appeals for its confirmation to the evidences of man s need of God which he had found in Athens itself (Acts 17 23-31). The same nat ural witness of the soul, face to face with the uni verse, is again in Romans made the ground of universal responsibility to God (1 18-21). No formal proof of God s existence is offered in the NT. Nor are the metaphysical attributes of God, His infinity,

      emerges accuratel in John, ; in Paul a




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      omnipotence and omniscience, as denned in system atic theology, at all set forth in the NT. The ground for these deductions is provided in the reli gious experience that finds God in Christ all-suffi cient.

      The fundamental and central idea about God in NT teaching is His Fatherhood, and it determines all that follows. In some sense the 4. Divine idea was not unknown to heathen Fatherhood religions. Greeks and Romans ac knowledged Father Zeus or Jupiter as the creator and preserver of Nalure, and as standing in some special relation to men. In the OT the idea appears frequently, and has a richer content. Not only is God the en-tit or and preserver of Israel, but He deals with her as a father with his child. "Like as a father pilieth his children, so Jell pitieth them that fear Him" (Psalm 103 13; of Deuteronomy 1 31; 32 0; Jeremiah 3 4.19; 31 20; Isaiah 63 10; Hosea 11 1; Mai 3 17). Even I lis chastisements are "as a man chasteneth his son (Deuteronomy 8 5; Isaiah 64 8). The same idea is expressed under the figure of a mother s tender care (Isaiah 49 lo; 66 13; Psalm 27 10), and it is embedded in the covenant relation. But in the OT the idea docs not occupy the central and de terminative position it has in NT, and it is always limited to Israel.

      (1) /// (lif tcnclihxj af ,/r.s//.s <"//r/.s/ God is pre eminently the Father. It is his customary term for the Supreme Being, and it is noteworthy that Jesus usage has never been quite naturalized. We still say "God" where; Jesus would have said "the Father." He meant that the essential nature of God, and His relation to men, is best expressed by the attitude and relation of a father to his children; but God is Father in an infinitely higher and more perfect degree than any man. He is "good" and "perfect," the heavenly Father, in contrast with men, who, even as fathers, are evil (Matthew 5 48; 7 11). What in them is an ideal imperfectly and inter mittently realized, is in Him completely fulfilled. Christ thought not of the physical relation of origin and derivation, but of the personal relation of love and care which a father bestows upon his children. The former relation is indeed implied, for the Father is ever working in the world (John 5 17), and all things lie in His power (Luke 22 42). By His pre serving power, the least, as well as the great eM creature lives (Matthew 6 20; 10 29). But it is not the fact of God s creative, preserving and govern ing power, so much as the manner of it, that Christ emphasizes. He is absolutely good in till His actions and relations (Matthew 7 11; Mark 10 18). To Him men and beasts turn for all they need, and in Him they find safety, rest and peace (Matthew 6 20.32; 711). His goodness goes forth spontaneously and alights upon all living things, even upon the unjust and His enemies (Matthew 5 45). He rewards the obe dient (Matthew 61; 7 21), forgives the disobedient (Matthew 6 14; cf 18 35) and restores the prodigal (Luke 15 11 ff). "Fatherhood is love, original and underived, anticipating and undeserved, forgiving and educating, communicating and drawing to his heart" (Beyschlag, NT Theol, I, 82). To the Father, therefore, should men pray for all good things (Matthew 6 9), and He is the ideal of all perfec tion, to which they should seek to attain (Matthew 6 48). Such is the general character of God as expressed in His Fatherhood, but it is realized in different ways by those; who stand to Him in different rela tions.

      (a) Jesus Christ knows the Father as no one else does, and is related to Him in a unique manner. The idea is central in His teaching, because the fact is fundamental in His experience. On His first, personal appearance in history He declares that He must be about His Father s business (Luke 2 49),

      and at the last He commends His spirit into His Father s hands. Throughout, His life, His filial consciousness is perfect and unbroken. "I and the Father are one" (John 10 30). As He knows the Father, so the Father knows and acknowledges Him. At the opening of His ministry, and again at its climax in the transfiguration, the Father bears witness to His perfect sonship (Mark 111; 97). It, was a relation of mutual love- and confidence, unalloyed ami infinite. "The Father love-th the Son, ami hath given all things into his hand" (John 3 35; 5 20). The Father sent the Son into the world, and intrusted Him with his me-ssage and penver (Matthew 11 27). He gave; Him those- who be-lieveel in Him, to receive- His word (John 6 37.44.45; 17 0.8). He eloes the works ami speaks the words of the; Father who sent Him (John 5 3(1; 8 ]south2>; 14 21). His depe-mlence upon the Fathe-r, ami His trust in ffim are equally complete (John 11 41; 12 27 f; 17). In this perfect union erf Christ with Geiel, unclouded by sin, unbroken by infidelity, Goel first became for a human life- on earth all that He- e-emlel and would become. Christ s filial consciousness was in fact ami experiemv the- full and final re-ve-lation of Ceul. "No one knenveth the Son, save- the Father; ne-ithe-r ele>th any kmnv the- Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son willeth to reve>al him" (Matthew 11 27). Ne>t only can ,ve> see; in Christ what peTfee-t semship is, but in His filial consciousness the Fathe-r Himse-lf is so ce>mple-te-ly re-fle-cted that we- may know the- perfect Father also. "lie 1 that hath seen me hath seen the- Fathe-r" (John 14 9; cf 8 19). Nay, it is more than a re-fle-ction: so completely is the mind ami will eif Christ identified with that of the Father, that they interpem-trnte, and the words ami works of the Fathe-r shine out through Christ. "The* worels that I say unte> you 1 speak ne>t from myself: but. the 1 Father abiding in me; eloeth his works. Believe me that I am in the- Fathe>r, and the Father in me-" (John 14 10.11). As the Fathe-r, so is the Son, for men to honor or to hate (5 23; 15 23). In tin- last day, when He e-ome-s to e-xe-cute the- judg ment which the- Father has intrust eel te> Him, He- shall cemie in the glory of the- Father (Matthew 16 27; Mark 8 38; Luke 9 20). In all this Jesus is aware that His re-lation to the Father is uniejue. What in Him is e>riginal ami realize-d, in etthers can only be> an ide-al to be graelually realized by His communica tion. "I am the- way, ami the truth, and the life: no one cometh unto the Father, but by me" (John 14 0). He; is, the-re-fore, rightly called the "only begotten sem" (3 10), ami His contemporaries believed that He made- Himself e-ejual to Goel (5 18).

      (b) Through Christ, His disciples and hearers, too, may know Genesis>el as the>ir Father. He- spe-aks e>f "your Father," "your heave-nly Father." To them as imlividuals, it means a pe-rsemal relation; He is "thy Father" (Matthew 6 4.18). Their whole conduct should be determineel by the conse-iemsm-ss of the Falhe-r s intimate pre-sene e- (6 1.4). To do His will is the ideal of life (7 21; 12 50). More ex plicitly, it is to act as He dex-s, to leive ami feirgive as He loves and forgives (5 45); and, finally, to be; perfect as He is perfect (5 48). Thus do men be come sons of their Father who is in heaven. _ Their peace and safety lay in their knowledge of His con stant and all-sufficient care (6 20.32). The ulti mate goal of men s relation to Christ is that through Him they shoulel come to a relation with the Father like His re-lation be>th to the Father and to them, wherein Father, Semite (Shemite, of Shem), and believers form a social unity (John 14 21; 17 23; e-f vor21).

      (c) While Gexl s fatherhe>od is thus realized and revealed, originally ami fully in Christ, elerivatively and partially in believers, it alse> has significance for till men. Every man is be>rn a e hilel of God and heir of His kingdom (Luke 18 10). During child-




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      hood, all men arc objects of His fatherly love and care (Matthew 18 10), and it is not His will that one of them should perish (18 14). Even if they become His enemies, He still bestows His beneficence upon the evil and the unjust (Matthew 5 44.45; Luke 6 35). The prodigal son may become unworthy to be called a son, but the father always remains a father. Men may become so far unfaithful that in them the fatherhood is no longer manifest and that their inner spirits own not Cod, but the devil, as their father (John 8 42-44). So their filial relation to God may be broken, but His nature and all it IK le are not changed. He is the Father absolutely, and a.s Father is He perfect (Matthew 5 4S). The essential and universal Divine Fatherhood finds its eternal and continual object in the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father. As a relation with men, it is quali fied by their attitude to (lod; while some by faith lessness make it of no avail, others by obedience become in the reality of their experience sons of their Father in heaven. See CHILDREN OF GOD.

      (2) In ///c (tpuKloIic. ti (iclii/nj, although the Father hood of God is not so prominently or so abundantly exhibited as it was by Jesus Christ, it lies at the root of the whole syst em of salvation there presented. Paul s central doctrine of justification by faith is but the scholastic form of the parable of the Prodi gal Son. John s one idea, that God is love, is but an abstract statement of His fatherhood. In com plete accord with Christ s teaching, that only through Himself men know the Father and come to Him, the whole apostolic system of grace is mediated through Christ the Son of God, sent because "God so loved the world" (John 3 1(5), that through His death men might be reconciled to God (Horn 6 10; 8 3). He speaks to men through the Son who is the effulgence of His glory, and the very image of His substance (He 1 2.3). The central position assigned to Christ involves the central position of the Fatherhood.

      As in the teaching of Jesus, so in that of the apostles, we distinguish three different relationships in which the fatherhood is realized in varying de grees: (a) Primarily He is the God and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 15 6; 2 Corinthians 1 3). As such He is the source of every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ (Eph 1 3). Through Christ we have access unto the Father (Eph 2 IS), (ft) He is, therefore, God our Father (Romans 17; 1 Corinthians 1 3). Believers are sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus (Gal 3 20). "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these arc sons of God" (Romans 8 14). These receive the spirit of adoption whereby they cry, Abba, Father (Romans 8 15; Gal 4 (5). The figure of adoption has sometimes been understood as imply ing the denial of man s natural sonship and God s essential Fatherhood, but that would be pressing the figure beyond Paul s purpose, (c) The apostles teaching, like Christ s, is that man in sin cannot possess the filial consciousness or know God as Father; but God, in His attitude to man, is always and essentially Father. In the sense of creature- hood and dependence, man in any condition is a son of God (Acts 17 28). And to speak of any other natural sonship which is not also morally realized is meaningless. From God s standpoint, man even in his sin is a possible son, in the personal and moral sense; and the whole process and power of his awakening to the realization of his sonship issues from the fatherly love of God, who sent His Son and gave the Spirit (Romans 6 f).Samuel). He is "the Father" absolutely, "one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in all. But unto each one of us was the grace given accord ing to the measure of the gift of Christ" (Eph 4 6.7).

      After the Divine Fatherhood, the kingdom of God (Mark and Luke) or of heaven (Matthew) is the next

      ruling conception in the teaching of 5. God is Jesus. As the doctrine of the Father- King hood sets forth the individual relation

      of men to God, that of the kingdom defines their collective and social condition, as de termined by the rule of the Father.

      (1) The kingdom of God. Christ adopted and transformed the OT idea of JAH (Jehovah) s rule into an inner and spiritual principle of His gospel, without, how ever, quite detaching it from the external and apoca lyptic thought of His time. He adopts the Jewish idea in so far as it involves the enforcing of God s rule; and in the immediate future He anticipates such a reorganization of social conditions in the manifestation of God s reign over men and Nature, as will ultimately amount to a regeneration of all tilings in accordance with the will of God (Mark 9 1; 13 30; Matthew 16 28; 19 28). _ But He eliminated the particularism and favoritism toward the Jews, as well as the non-moral, easy optimism as to their destiny in the kingdom, which obtained in con temporary thought. The blessings of the kingdom are moral and spiritual in their nature, and the con ditions of entrance into it are moral too (Matthew 811; 21 31.43; 23 37.38; Luke 13 29). They are humil ity, hunger and thirst after righteousness, and the love of mercy, purity and peace (Matthew 5 3-10; 18 1.3; cf Matthew 20 20-28; 2534; 721; John 3 3; Luke 17 20.21). The king of such a kingdom is, there fore, righteous, loving and gracious toward all men; He governs by the inner communion of spirit with spirit and by the loving coordination of the will of His subjects with his own will.

      (2) Us kitty . But who is the king? (a) Generally in Mark and Luke, and sometimes in Matthew, it is called the kingdom of God. In several parables, the Father t akes t he place of king, and it is the Fat her t hat gives the kingdom (Luke 12 32). God the Father is there fore the King, and we are entitled to argue from Jesus teaching concerning the kingdom to His idea of God. The will of God is the law of the kingdom, and the ideal of the kingdom is, therefore, the char acter of God. (ft) But in some passages Christ reveals the consciousness of his own Kingship. He approves Peter s confession of his Messiahship, which involves Kingship (Matthew 16 10). He speaks of a time in the immediate future when men shall see "the Son of man coming in his kingdom" (Matthew 16 28). As judge of all men, He designates Him self king (Matthew 26 34; Luke 19 38). He accepts the title king from Pilate (Matthew 27 11.12; Mark 15 2; Luke 23 3; John 18 37), and claims a kingdom which is not of this world (John 18 30). His disciples look to Him for the restoration of the kingdom (Acts 1 0). His kingdom, like that of God, is inner, moral and spiritual, (c) But there can be only one moral kingdom, and only one supreme authority in the spiritual realm. The coordination of the two king ships must be found in their relation to the Father hood. The two ideas are not antithetical or even independent. They may have been separate and even opposed as Christ found them, but He used them as two points of apperception in the minds of His hearers, by which He communicated to them His one idea of God, as the Father who ruled a spiritual kingdom by love and righteousness, and ordered Nature and history to fulfil His purpose of grace. Men s prayer should be that the Father s kingdom may come (Matthew 6 9.10). They enter the kingdom by doing the Father s will (Matthew 7 21). It is their Father s good pleasure to give them the king dom (Luke 12 32). The Fatherhood is primary, but it carries wit h it authority, government, law and order, care and provision, to set up and organize a kingdom reflecting a Father s love and expressing His will.




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      And as Christ is the revealer and mediator of the Fatherhood, He also is the messenger and bearer of the kingdom. In his person, preaching and works, the kingdom is present to men (Matthew 4 17.23; 12 28), and as its king Ho claims men s allegiance and obedience (Matthew 11 28.29). His sonship con stitutes His relation to the kingdom. As son He obeys the Father, depends upon Him, represents Him to men, and is one with Him. And in virtue of this relation, He is the messenger of the kingdom and its principle, and at the same time He shares with the Father its authority and Kingship. _

      (3) Apostolic teaching. In the apostolic writings, the emphasis upon the elements of kingship, author- it y, law and righteousness is greater than in the gospels. The kingdom is related to God (Gal 6 21; Col 4 11; 1 Thessalonians 2 12; 2 Thessalonians 1 5), and to Christ (Col 1 13; 2 Timothy 4 1.18; 2 Pet 1 11), and to both together (Eph 5 5; cf 1 Corinthians 15 24). The phrase "the kingdom of the Son of his love" sums up the idea of the joint kingship, based upon the relation of Father and Son.

      The nature and character of God are summed up in the twofold relation of Father and King in which He stands to men, and any abstract 6. Moral statements that may be made about Attributes Him, any attributes that may be as cribed to Him, arc deductions from His royal Fatherhood.

      (1) Personality. That a father and king is a person needs not to be argued, and it is almost tau tology to say that a person is a spirit. Christ relates directly the spirituality of God to His Fatherhood. "The true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth: for such doth the Father seek to be his worshippers. God is Spirit" (.In 4 23.24 m). Figurative expressions denoting the same truth are the Johanninc phrases, God is life (1 John 5 20), and "God is light" (1 John 1 5).

      (2) Love is the most characteristic attribute of Fatherhood. It is the abstract term that most fully expresses the concrete character of God as Father. In John s theology, it is tised to sum up all God s perfections in one general formula. God is love, and where no love is, there can be no knowledge of God and no realization of Him (1 John 4 8.16). With one exception (Luke 11 42), the phrase "the love of God" appears in the teaching of Jesus only as it is represented in the Fourth Gospel. There it, expresses the bond of union and communion, issuing from God, that holds together the whole spiritual society, God, Christ and believers (John 15 10; 1421). Christ s mission was that of revelation, rather than of interpretation, and what in person and act He represents before men as the living Father, the apostles describe as almighty and uni versal love. They saw and realized this love first in the Son, and esp. in His sacrificial death. It is "the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 8 39). "God commendeth his own love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 58; cf Eph 24). Love was fully made known in Christ s death (1 John 3 1C). The whole process of the incarnation and death of Christ was also a sacrifice of God s and the one supreme manifestation of His nature as love (1 John 4 9.10; cf John 3 16). The love of God is His fatherly relation to Christ extended to men through Christ. By the Father s love bestowed upon us, we are called children of God (1 John 3 1). Love is not only an emotion of tenderness and beneficence which bestows on men the greatest gifts, but a rela tion to God which constitutes their entire law of life. It imposes upon men the highest moral de mands, and communicates to them the moral energy by which alone they can be met. It is law and grace combined. The love of God is perfected only

      in those who keep the word of Jesus Christ the Righteous (1 John 2 5). "For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments" (1 John 5 3). It is manifested esp. in brotherly love (1 John 4 12.20). It cannot dwell with worldliness (1 John 2 15) or cal lous selfishness (3 17). Man derives it from God as he is made the son of God, begotten of Him (4 7).

      (3) Righteousness and holiness were familiar ideas to Jesus and His disciples, as elements in the Divine character. They were current in the thought of their time, and they stood foremost in the C)T conception. They were therefore adopted in their entirety in the NT, but they stand in a different context. They are coordinated with, and even subordinated to, the idea of love. As king ship stands to fatherhood, so righteouncss and holi ness stand to love.

      (a) Once wo find the phrase "Holy Father" spoken by Jesus (John 17 11; cf 1 Pet 1 15.16). But generally the idea of holiness is associated with God in His activity through the Holy Spirit, which renews, enlightens, purifies and cleanses the lives of men. Every vestige of artificial, ceremonial, non-moral meaning disappears from the idea of holi ness in the NT. The sense of separation remains only as separation from sin. So Christ- as high priest is "holy, guileless, undefiled, separated from sinners" (He 7 26). Where it dwells, no un- cleanness must be (1 Corinthians 6 19). Holiness is not a legal or abstract morality, but a life made pure and noble by the love of God shed abroad in men s hearts (Romans 5 5). "The kingdom of God is .... righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit" (Romans 14 17).

      (6) Righteousness as a quality of character is practically identical with holiness in the NT. It is opposed to sin (Romans 6 13.20) and iniquity (2 Corinthians 6 14). It is coupled with goodness and truth as the fruit of the light (Eph 5 9; cf 1 Timothy 611; 2 Timothy 2 22). It implies a rule or standard of con duct, which in effect is one with the life of love and holiness. It is brought home to men by the con viction of the Holy Spirit (John 16 8). In its origin it is the righteousness of God (Matthew 6 33; cf John 17 25). In Paul s theology, "the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ unto all them that believe" (Romans 3 22) is the act of God, out of free grace, declaring and treating the sinner as righteous, that he thereby may become righteous, even as "we love, because he first loved us" (1 John 4 19). The whole character of God, then, whether we call it love, holiness or righteousness, is revealed in His work of salvation, wherein He goes forth to men in love and mercy, that they may be made citizens of His kingdom, heirs of His righteousness, and participators in His love.

      The abstract being of God and His metaphysical attributes are implied, but not defined, in the NT. His infinity, omnipotence and onmis- 7. Meta- cience are not enunciated in terms, but physical they are postulated in the whole Attributes scheme of salvation which He is carry ing to completion. He is Lord of heaven and earth (Matthew 11 25). The forces of Na ture are at His command (Matthew 5 45; 6 30). He can answer every prayer and satisfy every need (Matthew 7 7-12). All things are possible to Him (Mark 10 27; 14 36). He created all things (Eph 3 9). All earthly powers are derived from Him (Romans 13 1). By His power, He raised Christ from the dead and subjected to Him "all rule, and authority, and power, and dominion" in heaven and on earth (Eph 1 20.21; cf Matthew 28 18). Every power and condi tion of existence are subordinated to the might of His love unto His saints (Romans 8 38.39). Neither time nor place can limit Him: He is the eternal God (Romans 16 26). His knowledge is as infinite as


      God, Names of



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      His power; He knows what the Son and the angels know not (Mark 13 32). He knows the hearts of men (Luke 16 15) and all their needs (Matthew 6 8.32). His knowledge is esp. manifested in His wisdom by which He works out His purpose of salvation, "the manifold wisdom of God, according to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Eph 3 10.11). The teaching of the NT im plies that all perfections of power, condition and being cohere in (!od, and are revealed in His love. They are not developed or established on meta physical grounds, but they flow out of His perfect fatherhood. Earthly fathers do what good they can for their children, but the Heavenly Father does all things for the best for His children "to them that love (Jod all things work together for good"- because He is restricted by no limits of power, will or wisdom (.Ml 711; Horn 8 2S).

      It is both assumed through the NT and stated categorically that ( iod is one (Mark 12 29; Romans 3

      30; Eph 4 (i). No truth had sunk 8. The more deeply into the Hebrews mind by

      Unity of this 1 ime t han the unity of (iod. God (1) Tin ({trinity of Christ Ye, it

      is obvious from what has been written, that Jesus Christ claimed a power, authority and position so unique that they can only be adequately described by calling Him (iod; and the apostolic church both in worship and in doctrine accorded Him that honor. All that they knew of God as now fully and finally revealed was summed up in His person, "for in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily" (Col 2 .)). If they did not call Him Cod, they recognized and named Him every thing that Cod meant for them.

      (2) Tin 1 Holy ^iiirit. Moreover, the Holy Spirit is a third term that represents a Divine person in the experience, thought and language of Christ and His disciples. In the Johannine account of Christ s teaching, it is probable thai the Holy Spirit is identi fied with the risen Lord Himself (John 14 10.17; cf ver 18), and Paul seems also to identify them in at least one passage! "the Lord is the Spirit" (2 Corinthians 3 17). But in other places Hie three names are ranged side by side as representing three distinct persons (Matthew 28 1<>; 2 Corinthians 13 14; Eph 4 4-6).

      (3) The ch nrcli .s pnililan. -But how does the unity of God cohere with the Divine status of the Son and the distinct subsistence of the Holy Spirit . Jesus Christ affirmed a unity between Himself and the Father (John 10 30), a unity, too, which might be realized in a wider sphere, where the Father, the Son and believers should form one society (17 21. 23), but He reveals no category which would con strue the unity of the Godhead in a manifoldness of manifestation. The experience of the first Chris tians as a rule found Christ so entirely sufficient to all their religious needs, so filled with all the fulness of God, that the tremendous problem which had arisen for thought did not trouble them. Paul expresses his conception of the relation of Christ to God under the figure of the image. Christ "is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all crea tion" (Col 1 1.1; 2 Corinthians 4 4). Another writer employs a similar metaphor. Christ is "the efful gence of [God s] glory, and the very image of his substance" (He 1 3). But these figures do not carry us beyond the fact, abundantly evident else where, that Christ in all things represented God because He participated in His being. In the pro logue to the Fourth Gospel, the doctrine of the Word is developed for the same purpose. The eternal Reason of God who was ever with Him, and of Him, issues forth as revealed thought, or spoken word, in the person of Jesus Christ, who therefore is the eternal Word of God incarnate. So far and no farther the NT goes. Jesus Christ is God re

      vealed; we know nothing of God, but that which is manifest in Him. His love, holiness, righteousness and purpose of grace, ordering and guiding all things to realize the ends of His fatherly love, all this we know in and through Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit takes of Christ s and declares it to men (John 16 14). The problems of the coordination of the ( )ne with the Three, of personality with the plurality of consciousness, of the Infinite with the finite, and of the Eternal God with the Word made flesh, were left over for the church to solve. The Holy Spirit was given to teach it all things and guide it into all the truth (John 16 13). "And lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world" (Matthew 28 20). SeeJi-:srs CHHIST; HOLY SPIRIT; TKIXITY.

      LiTF.HATriuc. Harris, The Philotophictd Basis of Thci.<ni; (l<i<l tin- Creator and Lord of All; Flint, Tliri.-on; Orr, The Christian View of God and the World: Kings. Caird. The Evolution <>f Religion; James Ward. Tin- R,ilin of Kiulx; Kairbairn, The Philosophy of the Christian Kclii/hni; ,V. X. Clarke, The Christ inn Doctrine of God; Adeney. The. Christian Conei ption of God; Iloclioll, l)er Christliche Gottesbegriff; <). Iloltzmann, Der ChriMiche Gottest/laube, seine Voruexehiehte mill l ! rtjcxch ichte; (i. Wobbernim, Der Christliche < , o/ti si/la ,/he in xehicm Yfrhnlti, is zur he ttlii/cn. Philoxophii 11,1,1 ,aturwissenschaft; Kostlin, art. "(Jolt" in I{Kings; R. south Candlish, Crawford and Scott-Lidgett, books on / //( l- iit/n rli<><l of God: OT Theologies by Oehler, Setmltz and Davidson; NT Theologies by Sehmid, Ji. Weiss, IJeysehlag. I lolUmann and Stevens; Wendt, The Teaching of Jesus; sections in systems of Christian Doctrine by Schleiennacher. Darner Nitzsch, Martensen, Thomasius, Hodge, etc.


      GOD, IMAGE OF: In Genesis 1 2(1.27, the truth is declared that God created man in His own image" (plan), after His "likeness" (il -tnulh). The two ideas denote the same thing resemblance to God. The like; conception of man, tacit or avowed, underlies all revelation. It is given in Genesis 9 as the ground of the prohibition of the shedding of man s blood; is echoed in Psalm 8; is reiterated frequently in the NT (1 Corinthians 11 7; Eph 4 24; Col 3 10; Isaiah 3 9). The nature of this image of God in man is discussed in other arts. see esp. AvniKoi ouxiY. It lies in the nature of the case that, the "image" does not consist in bodily form; it can only reside in spiritual qualities, in man s mental and moral attributes as a self- conscious, rational, personal agent, capable of self- determination and obedience to moral law. This gives man his position of lordship in creation, and invests his being with the sanctity of personality. The image of God, defaced, but not entirely lost through sin, is restored in yet more perfect form in the redemption of Christ. See the full discussion in the writer s work, Cod s Image in Man and Its Dcfnnttn at; see also Dr. J. Laidlaw, The Bible, Doc- trim i if Mint. JAMES OHE

      GOD, NAMES OF:


      1. The Phrase "His Name"

      2. Classification.

      II. PKKSOVM, XAMES OF (iou IN THE OT 1. lohim 13. "fil

      :*. Kln"h

      Adhon, -Adhonau

      Ynhu-eh (Jehovah)

      Cur (Rock) 7. Ktl< lh fish Kings. Shadday III. Dnscuii TivK XAMKS OK GOD IN THE OT

      15. Elijon

      4. Gihbor

      5. Kl-roi G. Cad, Ilk 7. Kiiiiiiii

      south Yahweh C^bhaoth

      9. "I Am That I Am




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      God, Names of


      1. God

      2. Lord

      3. Descriptive and Figurative Names LITERATURE

      /. Introduction. To an extent beyond the appre ciation of modern and western minds the people of Biblical times and lands valued the name of the person. They always gave to it symbolical or character meaning.

      While our modern names are almost exclusively designator}- and intended merely for identification, the Bib name s were also descriptive, and often prophetic. Religious significance nearly always inhered in the name, a parent relating his child to the Deity, or declaring its consecration to the Deity, by joining the name of the Deity with the service which the child should render, or perhaps commemorating in a name the favor of God in the gracious gift of the child, e.g. Nathanael ("gut of God"); Samuel ("heard of God"); Adomjah ( JAH (Jehovah) is my Lord") etc. It seems to us strange that at its birth, the life and character of a child should be forecast by its parents in a name; and this unique custom has been regarded bv an unsympathetic criticism as evidence of the origin of such names and their attendant narratives long subsequent to the completed life itself; such names, for example, as Abraham, Sarah, etc. But that this was actually done, and that it was regarded as a matter of course is proved by the name given to Our Lord at His birth- "Thou shalt call his name Jesus; for it is he that shall save his people" (Matthew 1 21). It is not unlikely that the giving of a character name represented the par ents purpose and fidelity in the child s training, resulting necessarily in giving to the child s life that very direction, which the name indicated. A child s name, therefore, became both a prayer and a consecration, and its reali zation in character became often a necessary psychologi cal effect, (ireat honor or dishonor was attached to a name . The OT writings contain many and varied instances of this. Sometimes contempt for certain rep robate men would be most expressively indicated by a change of name. e.g. the change of Esh-baal, "man of Baal " to Ish-bosheth, "man of shame (2 N 2 8rr), and the omission of JAH (Jehovah) from the name of the apostate king, Ahaz (2 Kings 15 :, etc). The name of the last king of Judah was most expressively changed by .Nebu chadnezzar from Mattaniah to Zedekiah, to assure his fidelity to his overlord who made him king (2 Kings 24 17). See NAMES, PKOI EK.

      Since the Scriptures of the OT and NT are essen tially for purposes of revelation, and since the He brews laid such store by names, we 1. The should confidently expect them to make

      Phrase the Divine name a medium of revela-

      "His tion of the first importance. People

      Name" accust omed by long usage t o significant character indications in their own names, necessarily would regard the mimes of the Deity as expressive of His nature. The very phrase "name of JAH (Jehovah)," or "His name," as applied to the Deity in Biblical xisage, is most interesting and sug gestive, sometimes expressing comprehensively His revelation in Nature (Psalm 81; cf 138 2); or marking the place of His worship, where men will call upon His name (Deuteronomy 12 f>); or used as a syno- nvm of His various attributes, e.g. faithfulness (Isaiah 48 9), grace (Psalm 23 3), His honor (Psalm 79 0), etc. "Accordingly, since the name of God denotes this God Himself as He is revealed, and as He desires to be known by His creatures, when it is said that God will make a name for Himself by His might y deeds, or that the new world of the future shall be unto Him for a name, we can easily understand that the name of God is often synonymous wit h the glory of God, and that the expressions for both are combined in the utmost variety of ways, or used alternately" (Schultz.Or Theology, ET, I, 124-25; cf Psalm 72 19; Isaiah 63 14; also Davidson, OT Thcol., 37-38).

      From the important place which the Divine name

      occupies in revelation, we would expect frequency

      of occurrence and diversity of form"

      2. Classi- and this is just that which we find 1(

      fication of be; true. The many forms or varieties

      the Subject of the name will be considered under

      the following heads: (1) Absolute

      or Personal Names, (2) Attributive, or Qualifying

      Names, and (3) Names of God in the NT. Nat urally

      and in course of time attributive names tend to crystallize through frequent use and devotional regard into personal names; e.g. the attributive adj. kadhosh, "holy," becomes the personal, tran scendental name for Deity in Job and Isaiah. For fuller details of each name reference may be made to separate articles.

      //. Absolute or Personal Names. The first form )f the Divine name in the Bible is "V>"! , Elohim, ordinarily translated d "God" (Genesis 1 1). This 1. Elohim, is the most frequently used name in God" the OT, as its equivalent Veos, Ihcos,

      is in the NT, occurring in Genesis alone approximately 200 t. It is one of a group of kindred words, to which belong also El and Elo"/i. (1) Its form is pi., but the construction is uniformly sing., i.e. it governs a sing. vb. or adj., unless used of heathen divinities (Psalm 96 5; 97 7). It is char acteristic of Hebrews that extension, magnitude and dignity, as well as actual multiplicity, are expressed by the pi. It is not reasonable, therefore, to assume that plurality of form indicates primitive Semite (Shemite, of Shem) polytheism. "On the contrary, historic Hebrews is un questionably and uniformly monotheistic.

      (2) The dirinition is quite uncertain. Gesenius, Ewald and others find its origin in blS. " ? . "t b strong" from which also are derived ayil, "ram. and elah, "terebinth"; it is then an expanded pi. form of {I; others trace it to ri ~Samuel, dlah, "to terrify," and the sing, form is found in the infrequent W5&5 . fll J " h - which occurs chiefly in poetical books; BDIi inclines to the derivation from rVjS > dltih, " lo bc *tS," as the root of the three forms. HI. Hlr,"h and HIo/il m. although admitting that the whole question is involved m uncer tainty (for full statement see BDR. s.v. n?Samuel : a some what fanciful suggestion is the Arab, root ul, "to be in front" from which comes the meaning leader ; and still more fanciful is the suggested connection with the prep bS * signifying (Jod as the "goal" of man s life and aspiration. The origin must always lie in doubt since the derivation is prehistoric, and the name, with its kindred words HI and 8ld ll h, is common to Semite (Shemite, of Shem) languages and religions and beyond the range of Hebrews records.

      (3) It is the reasonable conclusion that the mean ing is "might" or "power"; that it is common to Semite (Shemite, of Shem) language; that the form is pi. to express majesty or "all-mightiness," and that it is a generic, rather than a specific personal, name for Deity, as is indi cated by its application to those who represent the Deity (,J"-s 6 Samuel; Psalm 82 1) or who are in His presence (1 Samuel 28 13). . w

      The sing, form of the preceding name, ni^Kings , Elo"h, is confined in its use almost exclusively to poetry, or to poetic expression, being 2. E16 a h characteristic of the Book of Job, occurring of toner in that, book than in all other parts of theOT. It is, in fact, found in Job oftener than the elsewhere more ordinary pi. Eloluin. For derivation and meaning see above under 1 (2). Cf also the Aram, form, H r X, elah, found frequently in Ezra and Daniel.

      In the group of Semite (Shemite, of Shem) languages, the most common word for Deity is El (bs , </), represented by the Babylonian ihi and the Arab. Allah. It is 3 El found throughout the OT, but, oftener

      in Job and Pss than in all the other books. It occurs seldom in the historical books, and not at all in Leviticus. The same variety of deriva tions is attributed to it as to ELOIIIM (q.v.), most probable of which is VlS?, wZ, " tobc strong." ^BDB interprets ul as meaning "to be in front, from which came ayil, "ram," the one in front of the flock, and elah, the prominent "terebinth," de riving El from alah, "to be strong." It occurs in many of the more ancient names; and, like; Elohim, it is used of pagan gods. It is frequently combined

      God, Names of



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      with nouns or adjectives to express the Divine name with reference to particular_ attributes or phases of His being, as El * Ely on, El-Ro l, etc (see below under III, "Attributive Names").

      An attributive name, which in prehistoric Hebrews had already passed over into a generic name of God, is fn&?, Adfidn, ""pX, Adhonay, the 4. Adhon, latter formed from the former, being Adhonay the const, pi., ddhone, with the 1st pers. ending ay, which has been lengthened to ay and so retained as characteristic of the proper name and distinguishing it from the possessive "my Lord." AV does not distinguish, but renders both as possessive, "mv Lord" (Judges 6 15; 13 8), and as personal name (Psalm 2 4); RV also, in Psalm 16 2, is in doubt, giving "my Lord," possessive, in text and "the Lord" in in. Adhonay, as a name of Deity, emphasizes His sovereignty (Psalm 2 4; Isaiah 7 7), and corresponds closely to Kurios of the NT. It is frequently combined with JAH (Jehovah) (Genesis 15 8; Isaiah 7 7, etc) and with EloMm (Psalm 86 12). Its most significant service in MT is the use of its vowels to point the unpronounce able tetragrarnmaton m~P , indicating that the word Adhonay should be spoken instead of Yah- ivch. This combination of vowels and consonants gives the transliteration "Jehovah," adopted by ARV, while the other EV, since Coverdale, repre sents the combination by the capitals LORD. LXX represents by Kurios.

      Tho name most distinctive of God as the God of Israel is Jehovah (fPirP , a combination of the tetragrammaton with the vowels of 6. "Jeho- Adhonay, transliterated Y e hdwah, van" but read by the Hebrews adhondy).

      While both derivation and meaning are lost to us in the uncertainties of its ante-Bib, origin, the following inferences seem to be justified by the facts: (1) This name was common to reli gions other than Israel s, according to Friedr. De- litzsch, Hommel, Winekler, and Gut he (EB, s.v.), having been found in Babylonian inscriptions. Ammonite, Arab, and Egyp names appear also to contain it (cf Davidson," OT Thcol., .52 f); but while, like Elohim, it was common to primitive Semite (Shemite, of Shem) religion, it became Israel s distinctive name for the Deity. (2) It was, therefore, not first made known at the call of Moses (Exodous 3 13-10; 6 2-8), but, being already known, was at that time given a larger revelation and interpretation: God, to be known to Israel henceforth under the name "Jehovah" and in its fuller significance, was the One sending Moses to deliver Israel; "when I shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? And God said .... I WILL BE

      THAT I WILL BE say I WILL BE hath

      sent me" (Exodous 3 13.14 m). The name is assumed as known in the narrative of Genesis; it also occurs in pre- Mosaic names (Exodous 6 20; 1 Chronicles 2 25; 78). (3) The derivation is from the archaic STiri , hawah, "to be," better "to become," in Biblical Hebrews hayah; this archaic use of to for y appears also in derivatives of the similar "Pn , kayak, "to live," e.g. hawwah in Genesis 3 20. (4) It is evident from the interpre tative passages (Exodous 3; 6) that the form is the fut. of the simple stem (Kal) and not fut. of the causa tive (Hiph il) stem in the sense "giver of life" an idea not borne out by any of the occurrences of the word. The fanciful theory that the word is a com bination of the fut., pres. and perfect tenses of the yb., signifying "the One who will be, is, and was," is not to be taken seriously (Stier, etc, in Oehler s OT Theol., in loc.). (5) The meaning may with some confidence be inferred from Origen s trans literation, lad, the form in Sam, lobe, the form as

      combined in OT names, and the evident signification in Exodous 3 and other passages, to be that of the simple fut., rnJT, yahweh, "he will be." It does not ex

      press causation, nor existence in a metaphysical sense, but the covenant promise of the Divine presence, both at the immediate time and in the Messianic age of the future. And thus it became bound up with the; Messianic hope, as in the phrase, "the Day of Jehovah," and consequently both it and the LXX translated Kurios were applied by the NT as titles of Christ. (0) It is the personal name of God, as distinguished from such generic or essential names as El, Eld/rim, Hhadday, etc. Character istic of the OT is its insistence on the possible knowledge of God as a person; and Jehovah is His name as a person. It is illogical, certainly, that the later Hebrews should have shrunk from its pronun ciation, in view of the appropriateness of the name and of the OT insistence on the personality of God, who as a person has t his name. ARV quite correct ly adopts the transliteration "Jehovah" to emphasize its significance and purpose as a personal name of God revealed.

      Five t in the "Song" of Moses (Deuteronomy 32 4.15.18. 30.31) the word 1^ , f ur, "Rock," is used as a title of God. It occurs also in 1 he Pss, Isaiah and 6. "Rock" poetical passages of other books, and (ur) also in proper names, Elizur, Zuriel, etc.

      Once in AV (Isaiah 44 8) it is translated d "God," but "Rock" in ARV and ARVm. The effort to interpret this title as indicating the animistic origin of OT religion is unnecessary and a pure product of the imagination. It is customary for both OT and NT writers to use descriptive names of God: "rock," "fortress," "shield," "light," "bread," etc, and is in harmony with all the richfigurativencss of the Scriptures; the use of the article in many of the cases cited further corroborates the view that the word is intended to be a descriptive title, not the name of a Nature-deity. It presents the idea of (iod as stedfast : "The appellation of God as gur, rock, safe retreat, in Deuteronomy refers to this" (Oehler, OT Theol.). It often occurs, in a most striking figure, with the pers. suffix as "my rock," "their rock," to express confidence (Psalm 28 1).

      The name (HJ1"!]x , Mdhdsh, "holy") is found

      frequently in Isaiah and Pss, and occasionally in the

      other prophets. It is characteristic

      7. Kadhosh, of Isaiah, being found 32 t in that book. "Holy One" It occurs often in the phrase TCT"ip

      bsnp, Ifdfwsh yisra el, "Holy One of Israel." The derivation and meaning remain in doubt, but the customary and most probable deriva tion is from kadhash, "to be separate," which best explains its use both of man and of the Deity. When used of God it signifies: (1) His transcendence, His separateness above all other beings, His aloneness as compared to other gods; (2) His peculiar relation to His people Israel unto whom He separated Plim- self, as He did not unto other nations. In the former sense Isaiah used it of His sole deity (40 25), in the latter of His peculiar and unchanging cove nant-relation to Israel (43 3; 48 17), strikingly expressed in the phrase "Holy One of Israel." Kadhosh was rather attributive than personal, but became personal in the use of such absolute theists as Job and Isaiah. It expresses essential Deity, rather than personal revelation.

      In the patriarchal lit., and in Job particularly, where it is put into the mouths of the patriarchs,

      this name appears sometimes in the

      8. Shadday, compound "^tp 3S5 , el shadday, some- " Almighty" times alone. While its root meaning

      also is uncertain, the suggested deriva tion from TriO, shadhadh, "to destroy," "to terrify,"




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      God, Names of

      seems most probable, signifying; the God who is manifested by the terribleness of His mighty acts. "The Storm God," from N~ttJ , shddhd , "to pour out," has been suggested, but is improbable; and even more so the fanciful ttJ , she, and "H , day, meaning "who is sufficient." Its use in patriarchal days marks an advance over looser Semite (Shemite, of Shem) concep tions to the stricter monotheistic idea of almighti- ness, and is in accord with the early consciousness of Deity in race or individual as a God of awe, or even terror. Its monotheistic character is in har mony with its use in the Abrahamic times, and is further corroborated by its !| in LXX and NT, jra.vTOKpa.Tup, pdiitokrdtor, "all-powerful."

      ///. Attributive, or Qualifying Names. It is often difficult to distinguish between the personal and the attributive names of God, the two divisions necessarily shading into each other. Some of the preceding are really attributive, made personal by usage. The following are the most prominent de scriptive or attributive names.

      This name ("HZX , dbfnr), translated d in EV "Mighty

      One," is always combined with Israel or Jacob; its

      root is "OK, dbhdr, "to be strong,"

      1. Abhir, from which is derived the word "CX , "Mighty (hltcr, "pinion," used of the strong One" wing of the eagle (Isaiah 40 31), fig. of

      God in Deuteronomy 32 11. It occurs in Jacob s blessing (Genesis 49 24), in a prayer for the sanctuary (Psalm 132 2.r>), and in Isaiah (1 24; 49 20; 60 16), to express the assurance of the Divine strength in behalf of the oppressed in Israel (Isaiah 1 24), or in behalf of Israel against his oppressors; it is inter esting to note that this name was first used by Jacob himself. _

      The name El is combined with a number of de scriptive adjs. to represent God in His various at tributes; and these by usage have

      2. El- become names or titles of God. For Elohe- the remarkable phrase KL- KLdnR- Israel ISRAEL (den 33 20), see separate


      This name CP" 1 "^ , *clyon, "highest") is a deriv ative of ~P" , <lldh, "to go up." It is used of per sons or things to indicate their ele-

      3. Elyon, vat ion or exaltation: of Israel, favored "Most above other nations (Deuteronomy 26 19), of High" the aqueduct of "the upper pool"

      (Isaiah 7 3), etc. This indicates that its meaning when applied to God is the "Exalted One," who is lifted far above all gods and men. It occurs alone (Deuteronomy 32 8; Psalm 18 13), or in com bination with other names of God, most frequently with El (Genesis 14 IS; Psalm 78 35), but also with Jeli (Psalm 7 17; 97 9), or with Elohim (Psalm 66 2 AV; 78 f>6). Its early use (Genesis 14 18 f) points to a high conception of Deity, an unquestioned mono theism in the beginnings of Hebrews history.

      The ancient Hebrews were in constant struggle

      for their land and their liberties, a struggle most

      intense and patriotic in the heroic

      4. Gibbor, days of Saul and David, and in which "Mighty there was developed a band of men [One]" whose great deeds entitled them to

      the honorable title "mighty men" of valor (~"H"ni, yibborlm). These were the knights of David s "Round Table." In like manner the Hebrew thought of his God as righting for him, and easily then this title was applied to God as the Mighty Man of war, occurring in David s psalm of the Ark s Triumphant Entry (Psalm 24 8), in the allegory of the Messiah-King (45 3), either alone or combined with El (Isaiah 9 6; Jeremiah 32 18), and sometimes with JAH (Jehovah) (Isaiah 42 13).

      When Hagar was fleeing from Sarah s persecu tions, JAH (Jehovah) spoke to her in the wilderness of Shur, words of promise and cheer. Where-

      5. E1-R6 I upon "she called the name of JAH (Jehovah) that

      spake unto her, Thou art El roi" (Genesis 16 13 m). In the text the word " 1 X L 1, ro l, deriv. of rd dh, "to see," is translated 1 "that seeth," lit. "of sight." This is the only occurrence of this title in the OT.

      One of the covenant attributes of God, His righteousness, is spoken of so often that it passes

      from adj. to subst., from attribute to

      6. Caddik, name, and He is called "Righteous" "Right- (p H?, viddlk), or "the Righteous ecus" One." The word is never transliter ated but always translated fi in EV, although it

      might just as properly be considered a Divine name as Elyon or Kadhosh. The root p~ , fddhak, "to be straight" or "right," signifies fidelity to a standard, and is used of God s fidelity to His own nature and to His covenant-promise (Isaiah 41 10; 42 6; cf Hosea 2 19); it occurs alone (Psalm 34 17), with El (Deuteronomy 32 4), with Elohim (Ezra 9 lf>; Psalm 7 9; 116 5), but most frequently with JAH (Jehovah) (Psalm 129 4, etc). In Exodous 9 27 Pharaoh, in acknowledging his sin against JAH (Jehovah), calls Him JAH (Jehovah) the Righteous, using the article. The suggestive combination, "JAH (Jehovah) our Righteous ness," is the name given to David s "righteous Branch" (Jeremiah 23 G) and properly should be taken as a proper noun the name of the Messiah-King. Frequently in the Pent, oftenest in the 3 VSS of the Commandments (Exodous 20 5; 34 14; Deuteronomy 6 9), God is given the title "Jealous" (Samuel$3p ,

      7. Kanna, kannn), most specifically in the phrase "Jealous" "JAH (Jehovah), whose name is Jealous" (Exodous 34

      14). This word, however, did not bear the evil meaning now associated with it in our usage, but rather signified "righteous zeal," Jell s zeal for His own name or glory (cf Isaiah 9 7, "the zeal of JAH (Jehovah)," HXIp , kin dfi; also Zee 1 14; 8 2).

      Connected with the personal and covenant name

      JAH (Jehovah), there is found frequently the word Sabaoth

      (niXIlS, fbhd oth, "hosts"). Inva-

      8. gebha - riably in the OT it is translated 1 "hosts" (Isaiah oth, "Lord 1 9; Psalm 46 7.11, etc), but in the NT of Hosts" it is transliterated twice, both in the

      Greek and Eng. (Romans 9 29; Jas 5 4). The passage in Romans is a quotation from Isaiah 1 9 through LXX, which does not translate, but trans literates the Hebrews. Origin and meaning are uncer tain. It is used of heavenly bodies and earthly forces (Genesis 2 1); of the army of Israel (2 Samuel 8 16); of the Heavenly beings (Psalm 103 21; 148 2; Daniel 4 35). It is probable that the title is intended to include all created agencies and beings, of which JAH (Jehovah) is maker and leader.

      When God appeared to Moses at Sinai, commis sioning him to deliver Israel; Moses, being well

      aware of the difficulty of impressing

      9. "lam the people, asked by what name of That I am" God he should speak to them: "They

      shall say to me, What is his name?" Then "God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM .... say .... I AM hath sent me unto you" (Exodous 3 14). The name of the Deity given here is similar to JAH (Jehovah) (ijdltireh) except that the form is not 3d pers. fut., as in the usual form, but the 1st pers. ( cliijek), since God is here speaking of Himself. The op tional reading in ARVm is much to be preferred: "I WILL BE THAT I WILL BE," indicating His covenant pledge to be with and for Israel in all the ages to follow. For further explanation see above, II, 5.

      IV. NT Names of God. The variety of names which characterizes the OT is lacking in the NT, where we are all but limited to two names, each of which corresponds to several in the OT. The

      God, Son of Godhead



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      most frequent is the name "God" (Oeos, Theos)

      occurring over 1,000 I, and corresponding to El,

      Eloliim, etc, of the OT. It may, as

      1. Theos, Eloliim, be used by accommodation of "God" heathen gods; but in its true sense it

      expresses essential Deity, and as ex pressive of such it is applied to Christ as to the Father (John 20 28; Romans 9 5).

      Five 1 "Lord" is ;i translated of SeawoT-^s, despot es (Luke 2 29; Acts 4 24; 2 Pet 2 1 AV; Jude ver 4; The Revelation

      6 10 A,"). In each case there is evi-

      2. Kudos, dent emphasis on sovereignty and "Lord" correspondence to the Adhon of the

      OT. The most common Or word for Lord is Kvpios, Kurios, representing both JAH (Jehovah) and Adhonai of the OT, and occurring upwards of GOO t. Its use for JAH (Jehovah) was in the spirit of both the ifeb scribes, who pointed the consonants of the cove nant name with the vowels of Adhonay, the title of dominion, and of the LXX, which rendered this combination as Kurios. Consequently quotations from the OT in which JAH (Jehovah) occurs are rendered by Kurios. It is applied to Christ equally with the Father and the Spirit, showing that the Messianic hopes conveyed by the name JAH (Jehovah) were for NT writers fulfilled in Jesus Christ; and that in Him the long hoped-for appearance of JAH (Jehovah) was realized. As in the OT, so in the NT various attributive, descriptive or fig. names are found, of ten correspond

      ing to those 1 in the OT. Some of these

      3. Descrip- are: The "Highest" or "Most High" tive and (V^ICTTOS, hi tpsixtox), found in this sense Figurative onlyinLk(l 32.3;"). 71) ; 2 14, etc), and Names equivalent to Elyon (see 111, 3, above) ;

      "Almighty," HavroKpdrtap, Pantokrdtor (2 Corinthians 6 18; The Revelation 1 8, etc), corresponding to Shad- day (see II, Samuel above; see also ALMIGHTY) ; "Father," as in the Lord s Prayer, and elsewhere (Alt 6 9; 11 25; John 17 25; 2 Corinthians 6 IS); "King" (1 Timothy 1 17); "King of kings" (1 Timothy 6 15); "King of kings," "Lord of lords" (The Revelation 17 14; 19 16); "Po tentate" (1 Timothy 6 15); "Master" (kurios, Eph 6 9; 2 Pet 2 1; The Revelation 6 10); "Shepherd," "Bishop" (1 Pet 2 25).

      LiTKKATriteast Tlicolor/ij of OT by various authors: Oeliler. SchulU, Davidson; Delitzsch, Psychology <>f the OT; II. I . Smith, " Thoophorous Xames of OT" in OT and Si in Studies; Crav, 1I1 ,; "God" in // 1) li and EB.




      GODDESS, god es (DTibX , cldhim, 9ed, thcd): There is no separate word for "goddess" in the OT. In the only instance in which the word occurs in EV (1 Kings 11 5.33), the gender is determined by the noun "Ashtoreth, the god [goddess] of the Si- donians." In the NT the term is applied to Diana of Ephesus (Acts 19 27.35.37).

      GODHEAD, god hed: The word "Godhead" is a simple doublet of the less frequently occurring "Godhood." Both forms stand side by side in the Ancren Riwle (about 1225 AD), and both have sur vived until today, though not in equally common use. They are representatives of a large class of abstract substs., formed with the suffix -head or -hood, most of which formerly occurred in both forms almost indifferently, though the majority of them survive only, or very preponderatingly (except in Scottish speech), in the form -hood. The two suffixes appear in Middle Eng. as -hede and -hod, and presuppose in the Anglo-Saxon which

      lies behind them a fern, haeda (which is not actually known) by the side of the masc. had. The Anglo- Saxon word "was originally a distinct subst., mean ing person, personality, sex, condition, quality, rank " (Bradley, in A New Eng. Did. on a His torical Basis, s.v. "-hood"), but its use as a suffix early superseded its separate employment. At first -hede appears to have been appropriated to adjs., -hod to substs.; but, this distinction breaking down and the forms coming into indiscriminate use, -hcile grew obsolete, and remains in common use only in one or two special forms, such as "Godhead," "maidenhead" (Bradley, as cited, s.v. "-head").

      The general elimination of the forms in -head has been followed by a fading consciousness, in the case of t he few surviving instances in this form, of the qualitative sense inherent in the suffix. The words accordingly show a tendency to become simple denotatives. Thus "the Godhead" is frequently employed merely as a somewhat strong synonym of "God," although usually with more or less emphasis upon that in God which makes Him God. One of its established usages is to denote the Divine essence as such, in distinction from the three "hypostases" or "persons" which share its common possession in the doctrine of the Trinity. This usage is old: Bradley (op. cit.) is able to adduce instances from the 13th cent. In this usage the word has long held the rank of a technical term, e.g. the Thirty- Nine Articles of the Church of England, 1571, Art. I: "And in the unitie of this Godhead, there be three persons" (cf the Irish Articles of 1615, and the Westminster Confession, II, 3); Westminster Shorter Catechism, Q. 6: "There arc three persons in the Godhead." Pursuant to the fading of the qualitative sense of the word, there has arisen a tendency, when, the qualitative consciousness is vivid, to revive the obsolescent "Godhood," to take its place; and this tendency naturally _ shows itself esp. when the contrast with humanity is expressed. Carlyle, for example (French Revolution, III, Book vi, ch iv, 1), speaking of the posthumous reaction against Marat, writes: "Shorter godhood had no divine man"; and Phillips Brooks (Sermons, XIII, 237) speaks of Christ bridging the gulf "between the Godhood and the manhood." "Godhood" seems, indeed, always to have had a tendency to appear in such contrasts, as if the qualitative consciousness were more active in it than in "Godhead." Thus it seems formerly to have suggested itself almost _ as inevitably to designate the Divine nature of Christ, as "Godhead" did to designate the common Divine essence of the Trinity. Bradley cites instances from 1563 down.

      The fundamental meaning of "Godhead" is, nevertheless, 110 less than that of "Godhood," the state, dignity, condition, quality, of a god, or, as monotheists would say, of God. As manhood is that which makes a man a man, and childhood that which makes a child a child, so Godhead is that which makes God, God. When we ascribe Godhead to a being, therefore, we affirm that all that enters into the idea of God belongs to Him. "Godhead" is thus the Saxon equivalent of the Lat "Divinity," or, as it is now becoming more usual to say, "Deity." Like these terms it is rendered concrete by prefixing the article to it. As "the Divinity," "the Deity," so also "the Godhead" is only another way of say ing "God," except that when we say "the Di vinity," "the Deity," "the Godhead," we are saying "God" more abstractly and more qualitatively, that is with more emphasis, or at least_with a more lively consciousness, of the constitutive qualities which make God the kind of being we call "God."

      The word "Godhead" occurs in AV only 3 t (Acts 17 29; Romans 1 20; Col 2 9), and oddly enough it translates in these 3 passages, 3 different, though




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      God, Son of Godhead

      closely related, Greek words, to theion (TO Oelov), theiotes (OeioTTjs) , t/ieotes (0e6Tijs).

      To the ion means "that which is Divine," con cretely, or, shortly, "the Deity." Among the Greeks it was in constant use in the sense of "the Divine Being," and particularly as a general term to designate the Deity apart from reference to a particular god. It is used by Paul (Acts 17 29) in an address made to a heathen audience, and is inserted into a context in which it is flanked by the simple term "God" (ho thcos, 6 0<r6s) on both sides. It is obviously deliberately chosen in order to throw up into emphasis the qualitative idea of God; and this emphasis is still further heightened by the direct contrast into which it is brought with the term "man." "Being, then, the offspring of God, we ought not to think that it is to gold or silver or stone graven by art and device of t/nin that the God- hc/td is like." In an effort to bring out this quali tative emphasis, RYm suggests that we might sub stitute for "the Godhead" here the periphrastic rendering, "that which is Divine." But this seems both clumsy and ineffective for its purpose. From the philological standpoint, "the Godhead" is a very fair equivalent for to tin-inn, differing as it docs from the simple "God" precisely by its qualitative emphasis. It may be doubted, however, whether in the partial loss by "Godhead" of its qualitative force 1 in its current usage, one of its synonyms, "the Divinity" (which is the rendering here of the Rhem- ish version) or "the Deity," would not better con vey Paul s emphasis to modern readers.

      Neither of these terms, "Divinity," "Deity," occurs anywhere in AV, and "Deity" does not occur in R Y either; but RV (following the Rhemish version) substitutes "Divinity" for "Godhead" in Romans 1 20. Of the two, "Divinity" was originally of the broader connotation; in the days of heathen dom it was applicable to all grades of Divine beings. "Deity" was introduced by the Christian Fathers forthe express purpose of providing a stronger word by means of which! lie uniqueness of the Christians God should be emphasized. Perhaps "Divinity" retains even in its Kng. usage something of its tra ditional weaker connotation, although, of course, in a monotheistic consciousness the two terms coalesce in meaning. There exists a tendency to insist, therefore, on the "Deity" of Christ, rather than his mere "Divinity," in the feeling that "Di vinity" might lend itself to the notion that Christ posse.ssed but a secondary or reduced grade of Di vine quality. In Acts 17 29 Paul is not discrimi nating between grades of Divinity, but is preach ing monotheism. In this context, then, to tin inn does not lump together "all that is called God or is worshipped." and declare that all that is in any sense Divine should be esteemed beyond the power of material things worthily to represent. Paul has the idea of God at its height before his mind, and having quickened his hearers sense of God s exal tation by his elevated description of Him, he de mands of them whether this Deity can be fitly rep resented by any art of man working in dead stuff. He uses the term to theion, rather than ho thcos, not merely in courteous adoption of his hearers own language, but because of its qualitative emphasis. On the whole, the best Kng. translated of it would probably be "the Deity." "The Godhead" has ceased to be sufficiently qualitative: "the Godhood" is not suffi ciently current: "the Divine" is not sufficiently personal: "the Divinity" is perhaps not sufficiently strong: "Deity" without the article loses too much of its personal reference to compensate for the gain in qualitativeness: "the Deity" alone seems fairly to reproduce the apostle s thought.

      The Greek term in Romans 1 20 is theiotes, which again, as a term of quality, is not unfairly rendered

      by "Godhead." What Paul says here is that "the everlasting power and ( Sodhead" of God "are clearly perceived by means of His works." By "Godhead" he clearly means the whole of that, by which God is constituted what we mean by "God." By coupling the word with "power," Paul no doubt intimates that his mind is resting esp. upon those qualities which enter most intimately into and constitute the exaltation of God; but we must beware of limit ing the connotation of the term all of God s attri butes are glorious. The context shows that the thought of the apostle was moving on much the same lines as in Acts 17 29; here, too, the contrast which determines the emphasis is with "corruptible man," and along with him, with the lower creatures in general (ver 2- >). How could man think of the Godhead under such similitudes- the (ioil/n ml, so clearly manifested in its glory by its works! The substitution for "Godhead" here of its synonym "Divinity" by RY is doubtless due in part to a desire to give distinctive renderings to distinct terms, and in part to a wish to emphasi/e, more strongly than "Godhead" in its modern usage em phasizes, the qualitative implication which is so strong in theioles. Perhaps, however, the substi tution is not altogether felicitous. "Divinity," in its contrast with "Deity," may have a certain weakness of connotation clinging to it, which would unsuit it to represent tln-iut T.s here. It is quite true that the two terms, "Divinity" and "Deity," are the representatives in Lat Patristic writers respec tively of the Greek theioles and theotes. Augustine (The City of (!<>,!, ,, l;_<-f X, 1) tells us that "Deity" was coined by Christian writers as a more accurate rendering of the Greek lln-oles than the cur rent "Divinity." But it does not. follow that be cause "Deity" more accurately renders Iheoles, therefore "Divinity" is always the best rendering of theiotes. The stress laid by the ( !r Fathers on t he employment of I /notes to express the "Deity" of the Persons of the Trinity was in sequence to at tempts which were being made to ascribe to the Son and the Spirit a reduced "Divinity"; and it was the need the Lat Fathers felt in the same inter ests which led them to coin "Deity" as a more accurate rendering, as they say, of theotes. Mean while theioles and "Divinity" had done service in the two languages, the former as practically, and the latter as absolutely, the only term in use to ex press the idea of "Deity." Tfn-otes is very rare in classical Greek, "Deity" non-existent in classical Lat. To represent, llt< iutes uniformly by "Divinity," if any reduced connotation at all clings to "Divinity," would therefore be to represent, it often very inade quately. And that is the case in the present pas sage. What Paul says is clearly made known by God s works, is His everlasting power and all the other everlasting attributes which form His God head and constitute His glory.

      It is (/notes which occurs in Col 2 9. Here Paul declares that "all the fulness of the Godhead" dwells in Christ "bodily." The phrase "fulness of the ( lodhead" is an esp. emphatic one. It means every thing without exception which goes to make up the Godhead, the totality of all that enters into the conception of Godhood. All this, says Paul, dwells in Christ "bodily," that is after such a fashion as to be manifested in connection with a bodily organism. This is the distinction of Christ : in the Father and in the Spirit the whole plenitude of the Godhead dwells also, but not "bodily"; in them it is not manifested in connection with a bodily life. It is the incarnation which Paul has in mind; and he tells us that in the incarnate Son, the fulness of the Godhead dwells. The term chosen to express the Godhead here is the strongest and the most unambiguously decisive which the language affords.

      Godless Gods



      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      Thcioti x may mean all thai Ihcolcx can mean; on monotheistic lips it does mean just what thcotes means; but lli>tt~x must mean the utmosl that either term can mean. The distinction is, not that thiuli Kings refers to the essence and tli<ioli~x lo the attri butes; ,ve cannot separate the essence and the attri butes. ,heret lie essence is, there t lie attributes are; they are merely (lie determinants of the essence. And where the attributes are, there the essence is; it, is merely the thing, of the kind of -which they are the determinants. The distinction is that tlicolCx emphasi/es that it. is the highest si retch of Divinity which is in question, while t/i<i<>t(~x might possibly be taken as referring to Deity at a lower level. It it not merely such divinity as is shared by all the gods many and lords many of the heathen world, to which "heroes" might aspire, and "demons" attain, all the plenitude of which dwells in Christ as incar nate; but that. Deity which is peculiar to the high gods, or, since Paul is writing out of a. monotheistic consciousness, that Deity which is the Supreme Cod alone. All the fulness of supreme Deity dwells in Christ bodily. There is nothing in the Cod who is over all which is not in Christ. Probably no better rendering of this idea is afforded by our modern Mug. than the term "Codhead," in which the qualitative notion still lurks, though somewhat obscured behind the individualizing implication, and which in any event emphasi/es precisely what Paul wishes here to assert -that all that enters into the conception of Cod, and makes Cod what we mean by the term "Cod," dwells in Christ, and is manifested in Him in connection with a bodily organism. BKNJAMIN B. WAHFIKLD

      GODLESS, god les: This word is not found in the text of AV. It is found, however, in Apoc (2 Marc 7 34, "() godless [RV "unholy"| man"). RY sub stitutes the word "godless for the word "hypo crite" in t he following passages: ,Iob8 13; 13 Hi; 15 34; 17 X; 20 f>; 27 Samuel; 34 30; 36 13; Prov 11 <); Isaiah 33 14. RV does not seem to be con sistent in carrying out the idea of "godless" for "hypocrite," for in Isaiah 9 17; 10 (i; Psalm 35 1(1 this same Hebrews word /jinicj>/i. is 1 r 1 "profane." The principal idea lying at the root of the word is that of pollution and profanity; a condition of not merely being without Cod but assuming an attitude of open and blatant opposition toward Cod. The godless man is not merely the atheistic, unbelieving or even irreligious, but the openly impious, wicked and profane man. Indeed it can hardly be rightly claimed t hat (he idea of hypocrisy is involved in the meaning of the word, for the "godless" man is not the one who professes one thing and lives another, but 1 he one who openly avows not only his disbelief in, but his open opposition to, ( lod. Doubtless 1 he idea of pollution and defilement is also to be in cluded in the definition of this word; see Jeremiah 3 H; Numbers 35 33; Daniel 11 31. WILLIAM EVANS

      GODLINESS, god li-nes, GODLY, god li (cvo-^- (3eia, cnnclH i<i, evcrepTjS, -"Samuel, <;//,sc/>r,s, -ON): In 1 lie OT the word rendered "godly" in Psalm 4 3; 32 (i (TCn , haxliih) is lit. "kind," then "pious" (RYm renders it in the former passage, "one that he favor- eth"). Sometimes in both the ( )T and the NT a periphrasis is employed, "of Cod," "according to Cod" (e.g. "godly sorrow," 2 Corinthians 7 10). Cod- liness, as denoting character and conduct deter mined by the principle of love or fear of Cod in the heart , is t he summing up of genuine religion. There can be no true religion without it: only a dead "form" (2 Timothy 3 5). The term is a favorite one in the Pastoral Epistles. The incarnation is "the mystery of godliness" (1 Timothy 3 10).


      GODS ("TpX, (lolilin; 9eoi, l/n oi):

      I. IN THI; OT

      l. Superhuman Beings (God and Angels)

      _ . .Unifies, Kulcrs :i. Cods of the Nations

      ,. Superiority of .Icliovuli to Other Cods 5. Regulations Kri_ ur<liiiK the Clods of the Nations (i. Israel s Tendency to Idolatry II. IN TH i; A poc 111. Ix THE NT

      The Hebrews pi. flolnin is generally known as the pi. of "majesty" and is the ordinary name for Cod. The meaning of the pi. seems to be "plenitude of powers." It. denotes the fulness of those attributes of power which belonged to the Divine Being. Thus it is usually translated d in the sing., "Cod," when re ferring to the Cod of Israel. "When reference is made to (he gods of the other nations the word is translated Mn the pi., "gods." The heathen nations usually had a plurality of gods. Among the Semites it was customary for one nation or tribe to have its own particular god. Often there were many tribes, or families, or communit ies.inone nation, each having a particular god. Thus even among Semites a nation may have many gods and be polytheistic. Among the other nations, Iranian, Hamitic, etc, there were always a number of deities, sometimes a multitude. There are many references to these in the OT. In a few cases where t he pi. is used, the sing, would be better, e.g. Cen 3 T> AV; Exodous 32 4.south23; Ruth 1 ir> AV; Judges 17 f>; 18 24; 1 ti 17 43. This, how ever, might be disputed.

      /. In the OT. The following are the more impor tant usages of the word in the ( )T: Their of Psalm 8 5 is disputed. LXX and AV translate

      1. Super- it "angels," RV and ARV, "Cod," human Be- with "angels" in the margin. The ingslnclud- Epistle to the He has the word "an- ing God gel-. This seems to be more in keep- and Angels ing with the OT ideas of the relation

      between Cod, men and angels. Cen 1 20 has the pi. "us," but it is not certain to whom it refers, most probably to the angels or mighty ones which surrounded the throne of Codas serv ants or counsellor.-; cf Job 38 7, and see SONS OK GOD. In Psalm 97 7 the expression "worship him, all ye gods," may possibly refer to the gods of the nations, but more probably to the angels or mighty ones.

      Judges, rulers, are regarded "either as Divine

      representatives at sacred places, or as reflecting

      Divine majesty and power" (see HDB,

      2. Judges, s.v.). Exodous 21 6 might better be translated d Rulers as in the margin, "the judges." These

      were men appointed to represent Cod and adjudicate on important matters of law. LXX has "Criterion of Cod." In Exodous 22 Samuel the word is used in the same sense, and ver <) would also be better translated 1 "the judges"; ver 2S likewise. See also 1 Samuel 2 2~>; Psalm 82 1.0, where the reference is to those who act as judges.

      (1) The ancestors of Israel "beyond the River" had their gods (Joshua 24 14 f). While there is no

      mention of idolatry before the Deluge,

      3. Gods of the ancestors and kindred of Abraham the Nations were idolaters. Vr of the Chaldees as Objects was the center for the worship of Sin, of Worship the Moon-god. Many others were

      worshipped in the various cities of Babylon. See BABYLONIA.

      (2) The gods of Laban and his family (Genesis_31 30.32; 35 2.4) were household gods or t raphlm, and were stolen by Rachel and carried off in her flight with Jacob. See TKRAPHIM.

      (3) Cods of Egypt: For many centuries before the time of Abrakarn there had been numerous objects of worship in Egypt. Many of these were animals, birds and natural objects. Horus, the




      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Godless Gods

      hawk, was one of the earliest, of all. The cat, the bull, etc, were worshipped at times. The plagues of Egypt were specially directed against these wretched deities (Numbers 33 4; Exodous 12 12). JAH (Jehovah) took vengeance on all the gods of Egypt. These ter rible events showed that "JAH (Jehovah) is greater than all gods" (18 11). He redeemed His people from the nations and its gods (2 Samuel 7 23). Jeremiah pre dicted the time when JAH (Jehovah) should destroy the gods of Egypt (Jeremiah 43 12 f; 46 2. )).

      (4) Of the gods of the Amorites (Judges 6 10) no names are given, but they probably were the same as the gods of the Canaanites.

      (5) The gods of the Canaanites w r ere Nature-gods, and their worship was that of the productive and chiefly reproductive powers of Nature. Their service was perhaps the most immoral and degrading of all. The high places and altars of the different Baals, Ashtoreths, etc, were numerous throughout Canaan. These deities were always represented by images and Moses makes frequent reference to them with warnings against this seductive worship (Deuteronomy 7 2.",; 12 3.30.31; 13 7; 20 IS; 29 IS; 32 1(1, etc). See also IDOLATRY; BAAL; ASHTORETH; ASHERAH, etc.

      (G) Gods of the Philis: The champion Goliath cursed David by his gods (1 Samuel 17 4. )). Perhaps it would be better rendered "god." Saul s and his son s armor was put into the house of their gods (1 Chronicles 10 10). See also DA<;OX; BAALZEBUB.

      (7) The two golden calves erected by Jeroboam at Dan and Bethel to keep the people from going to Jerus to worship are called gods (1 Kings 12 2S; 2 Chronicles 13 8f). See CALF, GOLDKnorth

      (Samuel) The gods of Damascus: Ben-hadad was accus tomed to worship in the house of the god Himmon (2 Kings 5 IS). No other names are mentioned, but from 2 Chronicles 28 23 it is clear that there were many gods in Syria. See RIMMOX.

      (9) Solomon s many wives worshipped their own gods, and he provided the means for their worship. Chief among these were Chemosh of Aloab and Moleeh of Ammon (1 Kings 11 2.4.Samuel). See CHEMOSH; MOLECH.

      (10) The mixed peoples transplanted into Samaria by Sargon had their various gods and mingled their service with that of JAH (Jehovah), after being taught by a priest, of JAH (Jehovah). The names of some of 1 hcse gods were Succoth-benoth, Nergal, Ashima, Nibhaz, Tarlak, Adrammelech (2 Kings 17 See separate articles.

      (11) Of the gods of Seir, which were brought to Jenis by Amaziah, the names are not given (2 Chronicles 25 14).

      (12) The gods of the nations conquered by Sen nacherib and his fathers, viz. Hamoth, Arpad, Sepharvaim, Hena, I wall (2 Kings 18 33-30 ; 19 13). Also those conquered by Sennacherib s fathers, Gozan, Haran, Rezeph, Eden or Telassar (2 Kings 19 12; Isaiah 36 IS. 19. 20; 2 Chronicles 32 13 f).

      (13) Gods of Moab are mentioned in Ruth 1 15; 1 Kings 11 1.7. Possibly Ruth 1 15 should be translated 1 "god." See CHEMOSH.

      (14) Gods of Babylon: The graven images of her gods referred to in Isaiah 21 9; 42 17; Bel and Nebo mentioned in Isaiah 46 1; other gods of silver andgoldJEzr 1 7; Daniel 4 8.9.1S; 5 _

      (15) Nineveh s gods are merely referred to in Nah 1 14. Sennacherib was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god when slain by his sons (2 Kings 19 37).

      (16) The coastlands or borders and peninsulas of the Aegean Sea had numerous idol gods, shrines and devotees. Isaiah challenges them to prove that they are gods (Isaiah 41 22 f).

      JAH (Jehovah) was "greater than all gods" (Exodous 15 11; 18 11); "God of gods, and Lord of lords" (Deuteronomy 10 14.

      17); "The Mighty One" (Joshua 22 22); "tobefeared

      above all gods" (1 Chronicles 16 25; 2 Chronicles 2 5; Psalm 96

      4f); "King above all gods" (Psalm 95 3;

      4. The Su- 97 7.9; 86 Samuel; 135 5; 136 2; 138 1; periority of Jeremiah 10 1 1 ; Zeph 211; Daniel 2 IS. 47). Jehovah to Jeremiah advances so far toward a Other Gods pure and well-defined monotheism that

      he speaks of all other gods as "not gods." They have no existence to him (Jeremiah 2 11; 5 7; 16 20). A similar position is taken in Isaiah 41, 43, etc.

      The laws of Moses give no uncertain sound concerning them. The Decalogue begins: "Thou

      shalt have no other gods before me."

      5. Regula- Whatever may be the exact meaning tions Re- of this, it is perfectly clear that Israel garding the was to have nothing to do with any Gods of the God but JAH (Jehovah) (Exodous 20 3; Deuteronomy 5 7). Nations No images shall be made of them (Exodous

      20 4.23; 34 17; Leviticus 19 4; Deuteronomy 5 Sf). No mention shall be made of them (Exodous 23 13; Joshua 23 7). They are not to be worshipped but destroyed (Exodous 23 24). They are to make no cove nant with the people or their gods would be a snare to them (Exodous 23 32; Deuteronomy 6 14; 7 4.25). A curse will follow any defection from JAH (Jehovah) to them (Deuteronomy 11 2S; 28 14 ff; 12 3.30; 13 7; 20 IS; 29 17). These gods are an abomination to JAH (Jehovah) (Deuteronomy 12 31; 20 IS; 29 17; 32 37; E/k 7 20; 1 Kings 11 5; 2 Kings 23 13). They are to be as foreign gods to Israel (1 Samuel 7 3f; Joshua 24 20.23; Judges 10 Hi; 2 Chronicles 14 3; 33 15).

      The constant tendency of Israel to go after other gods was first made manifest at Sinai (Exodous 32 I.4.south

      23.31; 34 15). Hosea says (11 2),

      6. Israel s "The more the prophets called them, Tendency the more they went from them." E/e- to Go after kiel declares (16 3), "The Amorite was Other Gods thy father, and thy mother was a Hit- lite," referring doubtless to the idola trous taint in the blood of Israel. The tendency manifested itself also at Baal-pern- where Israel was led into the licentious rites of the Moabites (Numbers 25 2f). Moses saw the taint in the blood, foresaw tln> danger and repeatedly warned them (Deuteronomy 17 3; 18 20; 29 2(5; 30 17; 31 IS). Perhaps the most striking passages in Deuteronomy are chapters 13, 28, 30, where are pictured the consequences of going after other gods. Joshua also warns them (23 7), and the history of the period of the Judges is the story of their periodical defection from JAH (Jehovah) and the punish ment resulting therefrom (Judges 2 12.17.19; 5 Samuel; 10 6 f; 1 Samuel 8 <Samuel). Solomon himself gave an im petus in that direction (1 Kings 11 5-Samuel). After the disruption, the religion of the Northern Kingdom became very corrupt (1 Kings 14 9; 2 Chronicles 13 Sf). The golden calves of Jeroboam opened the door for an inrush of idols and other gods. Ahab s marriage to Jezebel threatened to wipe out JAH (Jehovah)-worship and substitute Baal-worship, and, but for the powerful ministry of Elijah and Elisha, might have effected such a result. Partly checked for a time, the evil broke out in other forms, and even the preaching of Amos and Hosea failed to turn the tide of idol atry. The result was the destruction of the king dom (2 Kings 17 7ff; Jeremiah 3 6-8; 1 Chronicles 5 25). The Southern Kingdom fared better. Other gods were countenanced by Rehoboam, Abijah, Athaliah, Jehoram, Ahaz, Amon, Manasseh, Jehoiakim, etc. Reform movements were attempted by Asa, Jehosha- phat, Hezekiah and Josiah, but did not wholly avail. In the reign of Manasseh the nation plunged into the worship of other gods. The ministries of Isaiah, Jeremiah, etc, availed not to stop the tide (2 Chronicles 34 25; Jeremiah 11 13; 5 19; 2 Kings 22 17; Jeremiah 1 16; 19 4; 7 6; 13 10; 16 11; 44 5.8). The nation was carried into exile because of its going

      God(s) Strange Golan, Gaulomtis


      Annotated by NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary


      after other gods (2 Kings 22 17; Deuteronomy 29 2f> f). The captivity had its desired effect. The Israel that returned and perpetuated the nation never again lapsed into the worship of other gods.

      II. In the Apocrypha. The Apoc reiterates much of the OT teaching: the defection of Israel (2 Esdras 1 (>); the gods of the nations (Jth 3 8; 8 IS); the gods which their fathers worshipped (5 7f); the sin of Israel (Ad Esl 14 7). The Hook of Wisdom refers to the "creatures which they supposed to be gods" (12 27; 13 2.3.10; 15 15). Mention is made of the gods of Babylon (Bar 1 22; 6 0-f>7 jxixxitn; Bel 1 27).

      ///. In the NT. The expression "gods" occurs in six places in the NT: (1) Jesus, in reply to the Pharisees, who questioned His right to call Himself the son of (lod, quoted Psalm 82 (>: "I said, ,e are gods." He argues from this that if God Himself called them gods to whom the word of (lod came, i.e. the judges who acted as representatives of God in a judicial capacity, could not lie who had been sancti fied and sent into the world justly call Himself the Son of (lod? It was an (irt/nini iilnni <ul hominem (John 10 34-37). (2) When Paul and Barnabas preached the gospel in Lystra they healed a certain man who had been a cripple* from birth. The Lycaonians, seeing the miracle, cried out in their own dialect, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men. And they called Barnabas, Jupi ter; and Paul, Mercury" (Acts 14 llf)._ Their as cription of deity to t lie a post les in such times shows their familiarity with the (Ir pantheon. (3) As Paul preached .Jesus and t he resurrect ion at At hens the people said he seemed to be a setter forth ot strange gods. The conception of only one (lod seemed to be wholly foreign to them (Acts 17 1M.

      (4) In 1 Corinthians 8 f> Paul speaks of "gods many, and lords many," but the context shows that lie did not believe in the existence of any god but OIK-; "We know that no idol is anything in the world."

      (5) While at. Ephesus, Paul was said to have "per suaded and turned away much people, saying that they are no gods, that are made with hands" (Acts 19 2(>). ((>) The (ialatians had been "in bondage to them that- by nature are no gods" (flal 4 Samuel). Indirect, references are also found in Acts 17 1C), where Paul observed the city full of idols. Likewise in Romans 1 22 f. 2.1 IT. Paul refers to the numerous gods of the heat hen world. These were idols, birds, four-footed beast sand creeping things. The results of this degrading worship are shown in the ver fol lowing. See also IDOLATRY; GOD, NAMES OF.

      J. J. RKKVE

      GOD (Samuel), STRANGE, stranj: The word "strange," as used in this connection in the ( >T, refers to the fact that the god or gods do not belong to Israel, but are the gods which are worshipped by other families or nations. In several cases a more exact translated would give us the "gods of the stranger" or foreigner. So in Genesis 35 2.4; Joshua 24 2; Judges 10 1(1; Deuteronomy 31 Hi; 32 12, etc. In a few passages like Deuteronomy 32 1<>; Psalm 44 20; 81 9; Isaiah 43 12, the word is an adj., but the idea is the same: the gods are those which are worshipped by other peoples and hence are forbid den to Israel, which is under obligation to worship Yahweh alone (cf 2 Esdras 1 0).

      In the XT the phrase occurs only onco, in the arocmnt of Paul s experiences in Athens (Acts 17 IS), when some of his auditors said, "He secmcth to he a setter forth of strange fjods" (ftVa fiai^oria. XCIKI dnimonia). Here

      the thought is clearly that by his preaching of Jesus he was regarded as introducing a new divinity, that is one who was strange or foreign to the Athenians and of whom they had never heard before. Like the Romans of this period the Athenians were doubtless interested in, and more or less favorable to, the numerous new cults which were coming to their attention as the result of the constant intercourse with the Orient. See preceding article.


      GODSPEED, god/sped (,X aC P" f/niird): "Cod- speed" occurs only in 2 .In vs 10.11 AV as the translated of cltnircin, t he infin. of chtiiro, and is rendered in RV "greet ing." It means "rejoice," "be of good cheer," "be it well with thee"; chitirc, cha irctr, chairein, were common forms of greeting, expressive ot good-will and desire for the person s prosperity, translated 1 in the Cospels, "Hail!" "All Hail!" (Matthew 26 40; 27 2<); 28 .), etc); ctuilrcin is the LNX for xhaloni (Isaiah 48 22; 57 21; cf 2 Mace 1 10). "Godspeed" first appears in Tindale s version; Wyclif had "lieil!" Rheims, "( lod save you."

      In tin- passage cited Christians are forbidden thus to salute false teachers who might come to them. The injunction does not imply any breach of charity, since it would not be right to wish anyone success in advocating ,hat was believed to be false and harmful. We should be sincere in our greetings; formal courtesy must yield to truth, still courteously, however, and in the spirit of love.

      west L. WALKKR

      GOEL, go el ( $$ , (/o cl, "redeemer"): Coel is the participle of the Hebrews word yaal ("to deliver," "to redeem") which aside from its common usage is frequently employed in connection with Hebrews law, where it is the technical term applied to a person who as t he nearest relative of another is placed under certain obligations to him. (1) If a Jew because of poverty had been obliged to soil himself to a wealthy "stranger or sojotirner," it became the duty of his relatives to redeem him. Cf Leviticus 25 47 IT and the art . JrniLi .F.. (2) The sameduty fell upon the near est, kinsman, if his brother, being poor, had been forced to sell some of his property. Cf Leviticus 25 2:; IT; Ruth 4 4 ff, and the art. JUBILEeast (3) It also devolved upon the nearest relative to marry the childless widow of his brother (Ruth 3 13; Tob 3 17). (4) In Numbers 5 off a law is stated which de mands that restitution be made to the nearest rela tive, and after him to the priest , if the injured party has died (Leviticus 6 Iff). (/>) The law of blood-revenge (ttlut-li/ic/i<) made it the sacred duty of the nearest, relative to avenge the blood of his kinsman. He was called the ijo il Jxt-dani (-^H ?J$3), "the avenger of blood." This law was based upon the command given in Genesis 9 f) f: "Whoso sheddeth man s blood, by man shall his blood be