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 "J"



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 "J"

    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 "J"


    Letter "J"

    JAAKAN, ja a-kan;


    JAAKOBAH, ja-a-kd ba, ja-ak o-ba;
      ya^akdbhah, for meaning cf JACOB, I, 1, 2): 1 Ch 4 36, a Simeonite prince.

    JAALA, ja a-la, ja-a Ia
      meaning unknown, Neh 7:58) and JAALAH "mountain goat" [?], PJzr 2 56): The name of a family of returned exiles, "children of Solomon's servants" = "Jeeli" in 1 Esd 5 33.

    JAALAM, ja a-lam;
      AV for JALAM (q.v.).

    JAANAI, ja a-ni:
      AV for JANAI (q.v.).

    JAAR, ja ar
      ("IIP, ya ar, "forest" or "wood"): Is only once taken as a proper name (Ps 132:6 RVm), "We found it in the field of Jaar." It may be a shortened form of the name Kiriath-jearim, where the ark had rested 20 years. See KIRIATH- JEARIM.

    JAARE-OREGIM, ja a-rO-or 0-jim,
      In 2 Sam 21:19, given as the name of a Bethlehemite, father of Elhanan, who is said to have slain Goliath the Gittite (cf


      1 Sam The name is not likelv to be a man's name; the second part means "weavers" and occurs also as the last word of the verse in the MT, so it is probably a scribal error here due to repel it ion.

      The first part is taken to be i I i an error for T"^ , i/tl ~ir (see JAIIO, which is to be read in the section in 1 Ch 20 :>; (2) in 2 S 23 21 Elhatian is t he son of Dodo, also a I Bethlehemite, and ermann would read here Dodai as the name of Elhanan's father. DAVID FKA.VCIS ROBERTS

    JAARESHIAH, jfi-ar-e-shi a
      meaning unknown In 1 Chron 8:27, a Benjamite, "son" of Jeroham. AV has "Jaresiah"

    JAASAI, ja a-sl;
      JAASAU, ja a-so. See JAASU.

    JAASIEL, ja-a si-e
      "Cod makes" In I Chron 11:17, a Ale/obaite, one of "the mighty men of the armies," and probablv "Jaasiel" of 1 Ch 27 21, "the son of Abner," and a Benjamite tribal prince of David s. AV "Jasiel."

    JAASU, ja a-sfi
      (RV and K-lliIbh, meaning uncertain ; JAASAI, and JAASAU (AV): In K/r 10 37, one of those who had married foreign wives. LXX tr s the consonantal text as a vb., "and they did." 1 Esdras 9:31 lias "Eliasis."

    JAAZANIAH, ja-az-a-ni
      a OTOX? yahu, in 2 King 25:23; Eze 8:11; in Jer 35:3; Eze 11: 1, "Jah hears"):

      (1) In 2 Kings 25:23, "son of the Alaacatliite," and one of the Judaean "captains of the forces" who joined Cedaliah, the Bab governor appointed by Nebuchadrezzar over Judah, at Ali/pah. He is the "Je/aniah" of Jer 40 8: 42 1. Though not mentioned by name, he was presumably one of those captains who joined Johanan in his attack on Ishmad after the latter had slain Cedaliah (Jer 41:l-15).

      He is also the same as Azariah of Jer 43:2, a name read by LXX B in 42 I also. Jer 43:1-40 relates how Johanan and his allies, Jaazaniah( = Azariah) among them, left Judah with the remnant, and took up their abode in Egypt.

      (2j In Jer 35:3, son of Jeremiah (not the prophet), and a chief of the Rechabite clansmen from whose "staunch adherence to the precepts of their ancestor" Jeremiah "points a lesson for his own country men" i Driver).

      (3) In E/k 811, son of Shaphan, and one of the seventy men of the elders of Israel whom Ezekiel saw in a vision of Jerus offering incense to idols.

      (4) In E/k 11 1, son of A//ur, and one of the 25 men whom Ezekiel saw in his vision of Jerus, at the E. door of the Lord s house, and against whose iniquity he was commanded to prophesy (11 1-13).


    JAAZER, ja a-zer
      See JAZER.

    JAAZIAH, ja-a-zl
      "Jah strengthens"): I, 1 Chron 24:26-27, a Levite, "son" <>l Alerart. But the MT is corrupt. LXX B reads Ofeid (Ozeid), which some take t., suggest L//iah ct 27 2o); see Curtis, Crit. and Exeget. Comm. on the Books nj Ch, 27:4-7. ) ; Kit t el, ad loc.

    JAAZIEL, ja-a zi-d
      "Cod strengthens"): I,, l Ch 15 ls ; ., Levite, one of the musicians appointed to play upon instruments at the bringing up of the ark by .David. Kind and Curtis following LXX oj-^X (Ozrifl), read "Uzziel the name they adopt for A/id in ver 20, and for Jeiel in 16 ~>.

    JABAL, ja bal;
      (meaning uncertain): In Cen 4 20, a son of Lamech by Adah. He is called the father of those who dwell in tents and [with] herds. So Cunkel, (, ( ;/r ! , o2, who says t hat, the corresponding word in Arab, means "the herds man who tends the camels." Skinner, (, ni, 120, says t hat bot h Jabal and Jubal suggest b^ , ijohln-l, which in I hoen and II eb "means primarily ram/ then ram s horn as a musical instrument, and finally joyous music (in the designation of the year of Jubilee)." See also Skinner, Gen, 103, on the sup posed connection in meaning with Abel.


      _ JABBOK, jab ok (pin, ynhhdk, "luxuriant river"): A stream in Ivistern Pal first named in the history of Jacob, as crossed by the patriarch on his return from Paddan-aram, after leaving Mahanaim (Cen 32 22 ff). On the bank of this

      The.Jubbok ( Xal/r r?-Z< rkrn.

      river lie had his strange conflic: with an unknown antagonist. The Jabbok was the northern bound ary of the territory of Silion the Amorite (Xu 21 24). It is also named as the border of Aiiunon ( Dt 3 16). It is now called Nahr ez-Zerlca, "river of blue," referring to the clear blue color of its water. It rises near to Amman Kabbath Ammon and makes a wide circuit, flowing first to the E., then to the X.W., until it is joined by the stream from 11 ady Jerash, at which point it turns westward, and flows, with many windings, to the Jordan, the confluence being just N. of e<l-Daini ych. It drains a wider area than any other stream E. of the Jordan, except, the Y arm ill: . The bed of the river is in a deep gorge with steep, and in many places precipi tous, banks. It is a great cleft, cutting the land of Oilead in two. It is lined along its course by a luxuriant growth of oleander which, in season, lights up the valley with brilliant color. The length of the stream, taking no account of its innumerable windings, is about 60 miles. The mouth of the river has changed its position from time to time. In the lower reaches the vegetation is tropical. The river is fordable at many points, save when in full flood. The particular ford referred to in Cen 32 cannot, now be identified. W. EWINO

      JABESH, ja besh (CD? , ydbhcsl,): A short form of JABESH-GILEAD (q.v.).

      JABESH-GILEAD, ja besh-gil e-ad ("?p3

      h (jiradh; or simply tfT?^ , i/<l.b/i7nfi, "dry"): A city E. of the Jordan, in the deliverance of which from Xalmsh the Ammonite Saul s military prowess was first displayed (1 S 11 Iff). At an earlier time the inhabitants failed to share with their brethren in taking vengeance upon Benjamin. This laxity was terribly punished, only 400 virgins being spared alive, who afterward became wives to the Benja- mites (Jgs 21). The gratitude of the inhabitants to Saul was affectingly proved after the disaster to



      Jacnin and Boaz

      that monarch on Gilboa (1 S 31). David, hearing of tlu ir deed, sent an approving message, and sought to \\\\\\\\vin their loyalty to himself (2 S 2 4iT). Robin son (hli, III, 39) thought it iniglit be represented by ed-Deir, al)out 6 miles from Pella (Fakii), on the southern bank of Wady Ydbis. The distance from Pella agrees with the statement of Ononi (s.v.). Others (Oliphant, Land of (Ilk- ad, 277 f; Merrill, East of Jordan, 430, etc) would identify it with the ruins of Mcriamln, about 3 miles S.E. of Pella, on the N. of Wady Ydbix. The site remains in doubt; but the ancient name still lingers in that of the valley, the stream from which enters the Jordan fully 9 miles S.E. of Bcixdtt. W. Ewixo

      JABEZ, ja bez ("^3"- , ["height"]):

      (1) Place: An unidentified town probably in the territory of Judah, occupied by scribes (1 Ch 2 55). For an ingenious reconstruction of the passage see Eh, s.v.

      (2) Person: The head of a family of Judah, noted for his "honorable" character, though "his mother bare him with .so/vow" (1 Ch 4 9.10), ya hc^ being interpreted as if it stood for ya\\\\\\\\-rbh, "he causes pain." The same play upon words recurs in his prayer, "thai it be not to my NO/YOH-/" His request wns granted, "and the sorrow implied by his omi nous name was averted by prayer" (Dummelow, in loc.j.

      JABIN, j a/bin (T5^ , ydbltln, "one who is intelli gent," "discerning." The word may have been a hereditary royal title among the northern Canaan- ites. Cf the familiar usage of /w o/i inclckh miQ- raijini) :

      (1) "The king of Hazor," the leading city in Northern Pal, who led an alliance against Joshua. He was defeated at the waters of Merom, his city was taken and lie was slain (Josh 11 1-9).

      (2) "The king of Canaan, that reigned for had reigned] in Ha/or." It is not clear whether In dwelt in Hazor or Harosheth, the home of Sisera, t he capt ain of his host at t he 1 hue of t he st ory nar rated in Jgs. He oppressed Israel in the days pre ceding the victory of Deborah and Barak. To the Israelites lie must have been but a shadowy figure as compared with his powerful captain, Sisera, for the song makes no mention of him and there is nothing to indicate that he even took part in the battle that freed Israel (Jgs 4 bis; Ps 83 9.10). ELLA DAVIS ISAACS

      JABNEEL, jab ne--el, JABNEH, jab ne (b::P , yahlm ^ l, "(lod is builder"; LX X AefJvd, Li biid, Swete reads Lcnind, Apoc Ia.[j.v(a, Iain/da, lajAveCa, laninc io) :

      (1) A town on the northern border of the land assigned to Judah, near the western sea, mentioned in connection with Ekrou (Josh 15 11). The place is now represented by the modern village of Ycbiia which stands upon a hill a little to the S. of the Xahr Rubin, about 12 or 13 miles S. of Jaffa, on the road from then; to Askelon, and about 4 miles from the sea. It had a port , now called Mina Rubin, a short distance S. of the mouth of the river, some remains of which still exist. Its harbor was superior to that of Jaffa (PEFS, 1875, 167-68). It does riot occur in the Ileb text of the OT except in the passage mentioned, but, it appears under the form "Jabneh" (~::P , yabhnvh) in 2 Ch 26 6, as is evident from the mention of Gath and Ashdod in connection with it. LXX reads Te/j.vd ((Icmnci, Jabncli) where the Heb reads riTE^T , wa-yammah, "even unto the sea," in Josh 15 46, where Ekron and Ashdod and other cities and villages are men

      tioned as belonging to Judah s inheritance. Jos (Ant, V, i, 22) assigns it to the tribe of Dan. We have no mention of its being captured by Joshua or occupied by Judah until the reign of I zziah who captured it and demolished its wall, in connection with his war upon the Philis (2 Ch 26 6). The position of J. was strong and was the scene of many contests, both in the period of the monarchy and that of the Maccabees. It is mentioned frequently in the account of the wars of the latter with the Syrians. It was garrisoned by the Seleucid kings, and served as a base for raiding the territory of Judah. When Judas Maccabaeus defeated Gor- gias and the Syrians he pursued them to the plains of J., but did not take the fortress (1 Mace 4 15). Gorgias was there attacked by the Jewish generals Joseph and A/arias, contrary to Judas orders, who were repulsed with loss (5 56-60; Jos, Ant, XII, viii, (>). Apollonius occupied it for King Deme trius (1 Mace 10 69); and Cendebeus for Antio- chus, and from there harassed the Jews (15 40). Judas burned the port and navy of J. (2 Mace 12 8-9). It was taken by Simon in 142 BC (Jos, Ant, XIII, vi, 7; h.J , I, ii, 2), together with Gazara and Joppa, but was restored to its inhabitants by Pom- pey in 62 BC (Ant, XIV, iv, 4), and was rebuilt by Gabinius in 57 BC (BJ , I, viii, 4). It was restored to the Jews by Augustus in 30 AD. Herod gave it to his sister Salome and she bequeathed it to Julia, the wife of Augustus (Ant, XVIII, ii, 2; hJ, II, ix, 1). The town and region were pros perous in Rom times, and when Jems was besieged by Titus the Sanhedrin removed to J., and it after ward became the seat of a great rabbinical school (Milman, Hist Jews, II, 411-12), but was sup- prosed in the persecution under Hadrian. An- tonius allowed it to be revived, but it was again suppressed because of hostile language on the part of the rabbis (ib, 451-52). The Crusaders built there the castle of Ibelin, supposing it to be the site of Gath. It was occupied by the Saracens, and various inscriptions in Arab, of the 13th and 14th cents, have been found there (SWP, II, 441-42).

      (2) A town of Naphtali mentioned in Josh 19 33, and supposed to be the site of the modern Yemma, S.W. of the sea of Galilee (SWP, I, 365). It is the Kefr Yama of the Talm. H. POUTER

      JACAN, ja kan ("2IP , i/a*kdn, meaning not known; AV Jachan): A chief of a familv descended from Gad (1 Ch 5 13).

      JACHIN, jfi kin Cp2\\\\\\\\ yaklnn, "he will estab lish"):

      (1) The 4th son of Simeon (Gen 46 10; Ex 6 15; Nu 26 12). In 1 Ch 4 24 his name is given as "Jarib" (cf AVm, RVm). "Jachinites," the patronymic of the family, occurs in Nu 26 12.

      (2) Head of the 21st course of priests in the time of David (1 Ch 24 17). It is used as a family name in 1 Ch 9 10, and as such also in Neh 11 10, where some of the course arc 1 included in the- list of those who, having returned from Babylon, will ingly accepted the decision of the lot, and abandoned their rural retreats to become citizens and guardians of Jerus (vs 1 f). JAMES CIUCHTOX

      JACHIN, jfi kin, AND BOAZ Cp?? , ,/akhin, "he shall establish"; T"3 , bo^az, "in it is strength," 1 K 7 15-22; 2 K 25 16.17; 2 Ch 3 15-17; Jer 52 17): These were the names of the two bronze pillars that stood before the temple of Solomon. They were not used in supporting the building; their appearance, therefore, must have been solely due to moral and symbolic reasons. What these are it is not easy to say. The pillars were not

      Jacimus Jacob



      altar pillars with hearths at their top, as supposed In- \\\\\\\\Y. K. Smith (Rlnjn,n ofjhe Semites, l .)l, -H>S); rather they were "pillars of witness," as was (.he pillar that, witnessed the cont ran. between Jaeob and Laban (( .en 31 f>2). A difficulty arises about the height, of the pillars. The writers in K and Jer aflinn that, the pillars before the porch were 18 cubits high apiece (1 K 7 15; Jer 52 21), while I he Clmmicler states thai (hey were 35 cubits (2 Ch 3 15). Various methods have been suggested of reconciling this discrepancy, but it is more probable that there is a. corruption in the Chronicler s num ber. On the construction of the pillars and their capitals, see TF.MPLK. At the final capture of Jerus (hey were broken up and (he metal of which they were composed was sent to Babylon (2 K 25 115. Hi). In Ezekiel s ideal temple the two pillars are represented by pillars of wood (40 49).


      JACIMUS, jfi si-mus (Anl, XII, ix, 3). See AL- CIMUS.


      JACKAL, jak 61:

      (1) C n iPi , tannlm, "jackals," AV "dragons"; cf

      Arab. .jULo, lindn, "wolf"; and cf "psn , tannin, Arab. .J.AXJ, tinnin, "sea monster" or "monster,"

      ERV "dragon" (Job 7 12m; Ps 74 13; 148 7; Isa 27 1; 51 9; Jer 51 3-4), "serpent" (Ex 7 9.10.12; Dt, 32 33; Ps 91 13), AV "whale" (On 1 21; Job 7 12); but T3P,, tannin, "jackals," AV "sea monsters" (Lam 4 3), "jackal s well," AV "dragon well" (Neh 2 13), and tannlm, "monster," AV and ERV "dragon" (Ezk 29 3; 32 2).

      (2) D" n X, lylm, "wolves," AV "wild beasts of the islands"; cf ^X , % pi. C^S , lynn, "island"; also !~PX , ai/i/u/i, "a cry," V ~0^ <^ , "to cry,"

      "to howl"; Arab. ^ % , *auwa, "to bark" (of dogs, wolves, or jackals); ^.1 *^\\\\\\\\ , ibn dwa , collo quially cj , it i iicf, "jackal."

      (3) C 1 ^?, flylm, "wild beasts of the desert."

      (4) DTl S, ohim, "doleful creatures." "Jackals" occurs as a tr of tannlm, AV "dragons,"

      in Job 30 29; Ps 44 19; Isa 13 22; 34 13; 35 7; 43 20; Jer 9 11; 10 22; 14 G; 49 33; 51 37; of the fern. pi. form tannoth in Alal 1 3, and of tannin in Neh 2 13 and Lam 4 3. Tannlm is variously referred to a root meaning "to howl," and to a root meaning "to stretch out," trop. "to run swiftly, i.e. with outstretched neck and limb extended" (Os.). Either derivation would suit "wolf" equally as well as "jackal." The expression in Jer 10 22, "to make the cities of Judah a deso lation, a dwelling-place of jackals," seems, however, esp. appropriate of jackals. The same is true of Isa 34 13; Jer 9 11; 49 33, and 51 37.

      The jackal (from Pers shnaliul), Canis aitrrus, is found about the Mediterranean except in Western Europe. It ranges southward to Abyssinia, and eastward, in Southern Asia, to farther India. It is smaller than a large dog, has a moderately bushy tail, and is reddish brown with dark shadings above. It is cowardly and nocturnal. Like the fox, it is destructive to poultry, grapes, and vegetables, but is less fastidious, and readily devours the remains of others feasts. Jackals generally go about in small companies. Their peculiar howl may frequently be heard in the evening and at any time in (he night. It begins with a high-pitched, long-drawn-out cry.

      This is repeated two or three times, each time in a higher key than before. Finally there are several short, loud, yelping barks. Often when one raises the cry others join in. Jackals are not infrequently confounded with foxes. They breed freely with dogs.

      Jackal (Canis aureus).

      While tannlm is the only word tr d "jackal" in EV, the words lylm, e,lylm, and ohim deserve atten tion. They, as well as tannlm, evidently refer to wild creatures inhabiting desert places, but it is difficult to say for what animal each of the words stands. All four (together with b nulh ya anafi and s e *lrlm) are found in Isa 13 21.22: "But wild beasts of the desert [c7//7/] shall lie there; and their houses shall be full of doleful creatures [ohlm\\\\\\\\; and ostriches [If not h ya^&nah] shall dwell there, ana wild goats [s *lrlm] shall dance there. And wolves \\\\\\\\ lylm] shall cry in their castles, and jackals [tannlm] in the pleasant palaces."

      In AV ijjim (Isa 13 22; 34 14; Jer 50 39) is trd "wild beasts of the islands " (cf iyim, "islands"). AVm has merely the transliteration iim, KV "wolves," RVm "howling creatures." (ieseiiius suggests the jackal, which is certainly a howler. While the wolf has a blood-curdling howl, it is much more rarely heard than the jackal.

      Giuim (Ps 72 9; 74 14; Isa 13 21; 23 13; 34 14; Jer 50 30) has been considered akin to zii/d/i, "drought " (cf crcf fi.yd/i, "a dry land" [Ps 63 Ij), and is trMn RV as follows: Ps 72 9, " they that dwell in the wilderness "; 74 14, "the people inhabiting the wilderness"; Isa 23 13, "them that dwell in the wilderness," RVm "the beasts of the wilderness"; Isa 13 21; 34 14; Jer 50 :{!>. "wild beasts of the desert." There would be some difficulty in referring fi.yim in Ps 72 U to beasts rather than to men, but that is not the. case in Ps 74 14 and Isa 23 13. " Wild cats " have been suggested.

      Ohim, "doleful creatures," perhaps onomatopoetic, occurs only in Jsa 13 21. The tr "owls" has been sug gested, and is not unsuitable to the context.

      It is not impossible that tannlm and lylm may be different names of the jackals. lylm, fT/ylm, and tannlm occur together also in Isa 34 13.14, and lylm and flylm in Jer 50 39. Their similarity in sound may have much to do with their colloca tion. The recognized word for "wolf," z r cbh (cf Arab, dhi b), occurs 7 t in the OT. See DRAGON; WOLF; ZOOLOGY. ALFRED ELY DAY

      JACKAL S WELL Cpsrn T?, <ctt ha-lannin; LXX has irryTi T <Sv O-VKWV, pct/t ton sukon, "fountain of the figs"; AV dragon well): A well or spring in the valley of Ilinnom between the "Gate of the Gai" and the Dung Gate (Neh 2 13). No such source exists in the Wady cr Rababi (see HINNOM) today, although it is very probable that a well sunk to the rock in the lower parts of this valley might strike a cert ain amount of water trickling down the valley- bottom. G. A. Smith suggests (Jems, I, ch iv) that this source may have arisen as the result of an



      Jacimus Jacob

      earthquake, hence (lie name "dragon," and have subsequently disappeared; hut. it is at least as likely that it received its name from the jackals which haunted this valley, as the pariah dogs do today, to consume the dead bodies which were thrown there. See HINNOM; JACKAL.

      E. W. G. MASTERMAN JACOB, ja kub:

      I. XAMK

      1. Form and Distribution

      2. Etymology and Associations


      1. As Son of Isaac and Rebekah

      2. As Brother of Esau

      3. As Father of the Twelve

      III. BlOdRAPHY

      1. With Isaac in Canaan

      2. To Aram and Back

      3. In Canaan Again

      4. Last Years in Egypt


      1. Natural Qualities

      2. Stages of Development

      3. Attitude toward the Promise

      4. How Far a "Type" of Israel V. REFERENCES OUTSIDE OF GENESIS

      1. In the <)T

      2. In the NT


      1. Personification of the Hebrew .Nation

      2. (iod and Demi-Clod

      3. Character of Fiction

      /. Name. HpJP (5 t Dipjn)- yaakdbh; Iaioi/3, lak&b,

      is in form a vb. in the Kal impf., 3d masc. sing. Like

      .., some 50 other Ileb names of this same

      1. bormand form, it has no subject for the vb. ex- Distribution pressed. But there are a number of inde pendent indications that Jacob belongs

      to that large class of names consisting of a vb. with some, Divine name or title (in this case /;/) as the subject, from which the common abbreviated form is derived by omitting the subject. () In Bab documents of tin- period of the Patriarchs, there occur such personal names as Ja-ku-bi, Ja-ku-ub-ilu (the former doubtless an ab breviation of the latter), and Aq-bu-u (cf Aq-bi-a-hu), according to Ililprecht a syncopated form for A-qu(V) -bu(-u), like Aq-bi-ili alongside of A-qa-bl-ili; all of which may be associated with the same root ^pJ7 , fikubh, as appears in Jacob (see II. Ranke, Early Bab Personal Nam?*, 1905, with annotations by Professor Ililprecht as editor, esp. pp. 67, 113, 98 and 4). (/,) In the list of places in Pal conquered by the Pharaoh Thut- mose III appears a certain J qb r, which in Egyp char acters represents the Sem letters bSIlpy" 1 , ya dkobh- el, and which therefore seems to show that in the earlier half of the 15th cent. EC (so Petrie, Breasted) there was a place (not a tribe; see \\\\\\\\V. M. M tiller, .! und Europa, 1(12 ff) in Central Pal that bore a name in some way connected with "Jacob." Moreover, a Pharaoh of the Hyksos period bears a name that looks like ija akolih- il (Spiegelberg, Orientalische Literaturzeitung, VII, 130). (r) In the Jewish tractate Pirke Abhdth, iii.l, we read of a Jew named Akabhyah, which is a name composed of the same verbal root as that in Jacob, together with the Divine name Ytihu (i.e. Jeh) in its common abbreviated form. It should be noted that the personal names Akkubh and Ya dkdbhah (accent on penult) also occur in the OT, the former borne by no less than 4 different persons; also that in the Palmyrene inscriptions we find a person named 3p37Pi37 > a name in which this same vb. Dp37 is preceded by the name of the god Ate, just as in A kabhi/ah it is followed by the name YaJiu.

      Such being the form and distribution of the name, it

      remains to inquire: What do we know of its etymology

      and what were the associations" it con-

      2. Etymol- veyed to the Heb ear?

      n * The vb. in all its usages is capable of

      ugy cum ^ deduction, by simple association of ideas, Associations from the noun "heel." "To heel" might mean: (a) "to take hold of by the heel" (so probably Hos 12 3; cf Gen 27 36); (b) "to follow with evil intent," "to supplant" or in general "to de ceive" (so Gen 27 36; Jer 9 4, where the parallel, "go about with slanders," is interesting because the word so tr<i is akin to the noun "foot," as "supplant" is to "heel"); (<) "to follow with good intent," whether as a slave (cf our Eng. "to heel," of a dog) for service, or as a guard for protection, hence "to guard" (so in Ethiopic), "to keep guard over" and thus "to restrain" (so Job 37 4); (d) "to follow," "to succeed," "to take the place of another" (so Arab., and the Heb noun ^p37 ,

      ekebh, "consequence," "recompense," whether " of reward or punishment).

      Among these four significations, which most commends itself as the original intent in the use of this vb. to form a proper name? The answer to this question depends

      upon the degree of strength with which the Divine name was felt to be the subject of the vb. As Jacob-el, the simplest interpretation of the name is undoubtedly, as Baethgen urges (Beitr&ge znr *<>. Religionsgeschichte, 158), "(iod rewardeth" ([,/] above), like Nathanael, "God hath given," etc. But we have already seen that centuries before the time when Jacob is said to have been born, this name was shortened by dropping the Divine subject; and in this shortened form it would be more likely to call up in the minds of all Semites who used it, associations with the primary, physical notion of its root ([a] above). Hence there is no ground to deny that even in the patriarchal period, this familiar personal name Jacob lay ready at hand a name ready made, as it were for this child, in view of the peculiar circum stances of its birth; we may say, indeed, one could not escape the use of it. (A parallel case, perhaps, is Gen 38 2S.30, Zerah; cf Zerahiah.) The associations of this root in everyday use in Jacob s family to mean "to supplant" led to the fresh realization of its appropriate ness to liis character and conduct when he was grown ([b\\\\\\\\ above). This construction does not interfere with a connection between the patriarch Jacob and the "Jacob-els" referred to above (under 1, [/]), should that connection on other grounds appear probable. Such a longer form was perhaps for every "Jacob" an alter native; form of his mime, ami under certain circumstances may have been used by or of even the patriarch Jacob.

      //. Place in the Patriarchal Succession. In the

      dynasty of the "heirs of the promise," Jacob takes his place, first, as the successor of

      1. As Son Isaac. In Isaac s life the most sig- of Isaac and nincant single fact had been his mar- Rebekah riage with Rebekah instead of with

      a woman of Canaan. Jacob therefore represents the first general ion of those who are determinately separate from their environment. Abraham and his household were immigrants in Canaan; Jacob and Esau were natives of Canaan in the second generation, yet had not a drop of Canaanitish blood in their veins. Their birth was delayed till 20 years after the marriage of their parents. Ilebekah s barrenness had certainly the same effect, and probably the same purpose, as that of Sarah: it drove Isaac to Divine aid, demanded of him as it had of Abraham that "faith and pa- t ience through which they "inherited the promises" (He 6 12), and made the children of this pair also the evident gift of Clod s grace, so that Isaac was the better able "by faith" to "bless Jacob and Esau even concerning things to come" (He 11 20).

      These twin brothers therefore share thus far the same relation to their parents and to what their

      parents transmit to them. But here

      2. As the likeness ceases. "Being not yet Brother born, neither having done anything of Esau good or bad, that the purpose of Clod

      according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth, it was said unto (Rebecca], The elder shall serve the younger" (Rom 9 11.12). In the (Jen-narrative, without any doctrinal assertions either adduced to explain it, or deduced from it, the fact is nevertheless made as clear as it is in Mai or Rom, that Esau is rejected, and Jacob is chosen as a link in the chain of in heritance that receives and transmits the promise. With Jacob the last person is reached who, for his own generation, thus sums up in a single indi vidual "the seed" of promise. He

      3. As becomes the father of 12 sons, who are Father of the progenitors of the tribes of the the Twelve "peculiar people." It is for this

      reason that this people bears his name, and not that of his father Isaac or that of his grandfather Abraham. The "children of Israel," the "house of Jacob," are the totality of the seed of the promise. The Edomites too arc; children of Isaac. Ishmaelites equally with Israel ites boast of descent from Abraham. But the twelve tribes that called themselves "Israel" were all descendants of Jacob, and were the only de scendants of Jacob on the agnatic principle of family-constitution.




      ///. Biography.

      5 K VIM ) such ;is .1; vided on the g career fulls into I h his residence

      The life of a wanderer (Dt 26 rob was, mav often be best di- ographieal principle. Jacob s four di-t ini-t perieiels: t hat of with Isaac in Canaan, that of his residence \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\iih Laban in Aram, that ot his inde pendent life in Canaan and that of his migration to Egypt.

      Jacob s birth was remarkable in respect of (a) its delay for 20 years as noted above, (l>) that condi tion of his meither which le>d tei the 1

      1, With Divine oracle conce-rning his future Isaac in greatness and supremacy, and (r) the Canaan unusual phenomenon that gave; him

      his name: "he holds by the heel" (see above, I, _ ). I nlike his twin brother, Jacob seems to have be-en free from any physical pecul iarities; his smoothness (,Gen 27 \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\) is only predi cated of him in contrast, to Esau s hairiness. These brothers, as they developed, grew apart in taste s and habits. Jae ob, like his father in his quiet manner of life and (for that reason perhaps) the companion and favorite; of his mother, found early the opportunity to obtain Esau s sworn renunciat ieni of his right of primogeniture, by taking advantage of his habits, his impulsiveness and his fundamental indifference to the higher things of the family, the things of the future (25 32). It, was not. until long afterward that the 1 companion- scene to this first "supplanting" (27 30) was en act eel. Both sons meanwhile are te> be; thought of simply as members of Isaac s following, during all the period of his successive sojourns in Gerar, the Valley of Cerar and Beersheba (ch 26). Within this period, when the 1 brothers were 40 years of age , occurml Esau s marriage 1 with twe> Hittite women. Jacob, remembering his own mother s origin, bided his time to find the 1 woman who should be- the mother of his children. The question whether she should be brought to him, as Rebekah was to Isaac, e>r he 1 should go to find her, was set tied at last by a family feud that only his absence could heal. This feud was occasioned by the fraud that Jacob at Rebek ah s behest prad ised upon his father and brotheT, when these; two we re- minded to nullify the- clearly revealed purpose of the 1 oracle (25 23) and the sanctions of a solemn oath (25 33). Isaac s partiality for Esau arose perhaps as much from Esau s resemblance te> the active, impulsive nature; of his mother, as from the sensual gratification affordeel Isaac by the; savory dishes his son s hunt ing supplie d. At any rate-, this partiality defeated itself because it, overreached itself. The 1 wife, who hael learned to be eyes and ears fe>r a husband s tailing senses, detected the see-ret scheme, counter- plotte el with as much skill as unscrupulousness, and while she obtained the 1 paternal blessing for her favorite son, fell nevert heless under the 1 painful nee-essity of choosing between losing him through his brother s revenge or losing him by absence from home. She chose, of course, the latter alternative, and herself brought about, Jaceib s departure, by pleading to Isaac, the necessity for obtaining a woman as Jacob s wife of a sort different, from the- Canaanitish women that Esau had married. Thus ends the- first port ion of Jacob s life.

      It is no^ veiling man that sets out. thus to escape

      a brother s vengeance, and perhaps to find a wife;

      at length among his meither s kindred.

      2. To Aram It was long before this that Esau at and Back the age of forty had married the Hit tite women (cf 26 34 with 27 40).

      Vet te> one who had hitherto spent his life subor dinate to his father, indulged by his mother, in awe of a Ill-other s physical superioritv, and "dwelling in tents, a quiet [domestic] man" (25 27), this journey of 500 or 000 miles, with no one to guide,

      counsel or defend, was as new an experience as if he had really been the stripling that he is sometimes represented to have been. All the most significant chapters in life awaited him: self-determination, love, marriage, fatherhood, domestic provision and administration, adjustment of his relations with men, and above all a personal and independent religious experience.

      Of these things, all were to come to him in the 20 years of absence from Canaan, and the last was to come first; for the dream of Jacob at Beth-el was of course but the opening scene in the long drama of Cod s direct dealing with Jacob. Yet it was the determinat ive scene, for CJod in His latest and fullest manifest at ion to .Jacob was just "the God of Beth-el" (35 7; 48 3; 49 24).

      With the arrival at Haran came love at once, though not for 7 years the consummation of that love. Its strength is naively indicated by the writer in two ways: impliedly in the sudden output of physical power at the well-side (29 10), and expressly in the patient years of toil for Rachel s sake, which "seemed unto him but a few days for the love he had to her" (29 20). Jacob is not pri marily to be blamed for the polygamy that brought trouble into his home-life and sowed the; seeds of division and jealousy in the nation of the future. Although much of Israel s history can be summed up in the rivalry of Leah and Rachel Judah and Joseph yet it was not Jacob s choice but Laban s fraud that introduced this cause; of schism. At the end of his 7 years labor Jacob received as wife not Rachel but Leah, on the belated plea that to give the younger daughter before the elder was not the custom of the country. This was the first of the "ten times" that Laban "changed the wages" of Jacob (31 7.41). Rachel became Jacob s wife 7 days after Leah, and for this second wife he "served 7 other years." During these 7 years were born most of the sons and daughters (37 35) that formed the actual family, the nucleus of that large caravan that Jacob took back with him to Canaan. Dinah is the only daughter named; 30 21 is obviously in preparation for the story of ch 34 (see esp. 34 31). Four sons of Leah were the oldest: Reuben, with the right of primogenit ure, Simeon, Levi and Judah. Next came the 4 sons of Bilhah and Zilpah, the personal slaves of the two wives (cf ABRAHAM, IV, 2); the two pairs of sons were probably of about the same age (cf order in ch 49). Leah s 5th and 6th sons were separated by an interval of uncertain length from her older group. And Joseph, the youngest, son born in Haran, was Rachel s first child, equally beloved by his mother, and by his father for her sake (33 2; cf 44 20), as well as because he was the youngest of the eleven (37 3).

      Jacob s years of service for his wives were fol lowed by 6 years of service rendered for a stipulated wage 1 . Laban s cunning in limiting the amount of this wage in a variety of ways was matched by Jacob s cunning in devising means to overreach his uncle, so that the* penniless wanderer of 20 years before becomes the wealthy proprietor of countless cattle and of the hosts of slaves necessary for their care (32 10). At the same time the ape>le>gy of Jacob for his conduct during this entire period of residence in Haran is spirited (31 30-42); it is apparently unanswerable by Laban (ver 43); and it is confirmed, both by the evident concurrence of Leah ami Rachel (vs 14-10), and by indications in the narrative that the justice (not merely the par tiality) of God gave to each party his due recom pense: to Jacob the rich returns of skilful, patient industry; to Laban rebuke and warning (vs 5-13. 24.29.42).

      The manner of Jacob s departure from Haran was determined by the strained relations between




      his uncle and himself. His motive in going, how ever, is represented as being fundamentally the desire to terminate an absence from his father s country that had already grown too long (31 30; cf 30 25) a desire which in fact presented itself to him in the form of a revelation of God s own pur pose and command (31 3). Unhappily, his clear record was stained by the act of another than him self, who nevertheless, as a member of his family, entailed thus upon him the burden of responsibility. Rachel, like Laban her father, was devoted to the superstition that manifested itself in the keeping and consulting of t Tnphitn, a custom which, whether more nearly akin to fetishism, totemism, or ancestor- worship, was felt to be incompatible with the W 7 or- shipof theonetrue God. (Note that the"teraphim" of 31 19.34 f are the same as the "gods" of vs 30.32 and, apparently, of 35 2.4.) This theft furnished Laban with a pretext for pursuit. What he meant to do he probably knew but imperfectly himself. Coercion of some sort he would doubtless have brought to bear upon Jacob and his caravan, had he not. recognized in a dream the God whom Jacob worshipped, and heard Him utter a word of warning against the use of violence. Laban failed to find his stolen gods, for his daughter was as crafty and ready-witted as he. The whole; adventure ended in a formal reconciliation, with the usual sacrificial and memorial token (31 43-55).

      After Laban, Esau. One danger is no sooner escaped than a worse threatens. Yet between them lies the pledge of Divine presence and pro tection in the vision of God s host at Mahanaim: just a simple statement, with none of the fanciful detail that popular story-telling loves, but the sober record of a tradition to which the supernatural was matter of fact. Even the longer passage that pre serves the occurrence at Peniel is conceived in the same spirit. What the revelation of the host of God had not sufficed to teach this faithless, anxious, scheming patriarch, that God sought to teach him in the night-struggle, with its ineffaceable physical memorial of a human impotence that can compass no more than to cling to Divine omnipotence (32 22-32). The devices of crafty Jacob to disarm an offended and supposedly implacable brother proved as useless as that bootless wrestling of the night before; Esau s peculiar disposition was not of Jacob s making, but of God s, and to it alone Jacob owed his safety. The practical wisdom of Jacob dictated his insistence upon bringing to a speedy termination the proposed association with his changeable brother, amid the difficulties of a jour ney that could not be shared by such divergent social and racial elements as Esau s armed host and Jacob s caravan, without discontent on the one side and disaster on the other. The brothers part, not to meet again until they meet to bury their father at Hebron (35 29).

      Before Jacob s arrival in the S. of Canaan where his father yet lived and where his own youth had been spent, he passed through a period 3. -In of wandering in Central Pal, somewhat

      Canaan similar to that narrated of his grand-

      Again father Abraham. To any such nomad,

      wandering slowly from Aram toward Egypt, a period of residence in the region of Mt. Ephraim was a natural chapter in his book of travels. Jacob s longer stops, recorded for us, were (1) at Succoth, E. of the Jordan near Peniel, (2) at Sheehem and (3) at Beth-el.

      Nothing worthy of record occurred at Succoth, but the stay at Sheehem was eventful. Gen 34, which tells the story of Dinah s seduction and her brother s revenge, throws as much light upon the relations of Jacob and the Canaanites, as does ch 14 or ch 23 upon Abraham s relations, or ch 26 upon

      Isaac s relations, with such settled inhabitants of the land. There is a strange blending of moral and immoral elements in Jacob and his family as por trayed in this contretemps. There is the persistent tradition of separateness from the Canaanites be queathed from Abraham s day (ch 24), together with a growing family consciousness and sense of superiority (34 7.14.31). And at the same time there is indifference to their unique moral station among the environing tribes, shown in Dinah s social relations with them (ver 1), in the treachery and cruelty of Simeon and Levi (vs 25-29), and in Jacob s greater concern for the security of his possessions than for the preservation of his good name (ver 30).

      It was this concern for the safety of the family and its wealth that, achieved the end which dread of social absorption would apparently never have achieved the termination of a long residence where there was moral danger for all. For a second time Jacob had fairly to be driven to Beth-el. Safety from his foes was again a gift of God (35 5). and in a renewal of the old forgotten ideals of con secration (vs 2-S), he and all his following move from the painful associations of Sheehem to the hallowed associations of Beth-el. Here were re newed the various phases of all God s earlier com munications to this patriarch and to his fathers before him. The new name of Israel, hitherto so ill deserved, is henceforth to find realization in his life; his fathers God is to be his God; his seed is to inherit the land of promise, and is to be no mean tribe, but a group of peoples with kings to rule over them like the nations round about. (35 9-12). No wonder that Jacob here raises anew his monument of stone emblem of the "Stone of Israel" (49 24) and stamps forever, by this public act , upon ancient Luz (35 0), the name of Beth-el which he had pri vately given it years before (28 19).

      Losses and griefs characterized the family life of the patriarch at this period. The death of his mother s Syrian nurse at Beth-el (35 S; cf 24 59j was followed by the death of his beloved wife Rachel at Ephrath (35 19; 48 7) in bringing forth the youngest of his 12 sons, Benjamin. At. about the same time the eldest of the 12, Reuben, for feited the honor of his station in the family by an act that showed all too clearly the effect of recent association with Canaanites (35 22). Finally, death claimed Jacob s aged father, whose latest years had been robbed of the companionship, not only of this son, but also of the son whom his par tiality had all but made a fratricide; at Isaac s grave in Hebron the ill-matched brothers met once more, thenceforth to go their separate ways, both in their personal careers and in their descendants history (35 29).

      Jacob now is by right of patriarchal custom head of all the family. He too takes up his residence at Hebron (37 14), and the story of the family fortunes is now pursued under the new title of "the gener ations of Jacob" (37 2). True, most, of this story revolves about Joseph, the youngest, of the family save Benjamin; yet the occurrence of passages like ch 38, devoted exclusively to Judah s affairs, or 46 8-27, the enumeration of Jacob s entire family through its secondary ramifications, or ch 49, the blessing of Jacob on all his sons all these prove that Jacob, not Joseph, is the true center of the narrative until his death. As long as he lives he is the real head of his house, and not merely a super annuated veteran like Isaac. Not only Joseph, the boy of 17 (37 2), but also the self-willed elder sons, even a score of years later, come and go at his bidding (chs 42-45). Joseph s dearest thought, as it is his first thought, is for his aged father (43 7.27; 44 19; and esp. 45, and 46 29).



      It is (his devotion of Joseph that results in Jacob s migration to Kgvpt. What honors there Joseph

      can show his father he shows him: he 4 Last presents him to Pharaoh, \\\\\\\\vlio for

      Years in Joseph s sake receives him with dig- Egypt nity, and assigns him a home and sus tenance for himself and all his people as honored quests of the land of Egypt (47 7 12 Vet in Beersheba, while en route to Egypt, Jacob had obtaine<I a greater honor than this reception by Pharaoh. He had found there, as ready to respond to his sacrifices as ever to those of his fathers, the God of his father Isaac, and had received the gra cious assurance of Divine guidance m this mo mentous journey, fraught with so vast a significance for the future nation and the world (46 1-4): bod Himself would go with him into Egypt and give him, not merely the gratification of once more embracing his long-lost son, but the fulfilment ol the covenant-promise (15 13-li) that he and his were not turning their backs upon Canaan forever. Though VM) years of age when he stood before Pharaoh, Jacob felt his days to have been few as well as "evil," in comparison with those ot his fathers (47 <. And in fact he had yet 17 years to live in Goshen (47 2S).

      These last days are passed over without record, save of the growth and prosperity of the family. But at their close came the impart ation of the an cestral blessings, with the last, will of the dying patriarch. After adopting Joseph s sons, Manas- seh and Ephraim, as his own, Jacob blesses them, preferring the younger to the elder as he himself had once been preferred to Esau, and assigns to Joseph the double portion" of the firstborn that "preeminence" which he denies to Reuben (48 22; 49 4). In poetry that combines _ with the warm emotion and glowing imagery of its style and the unsurpassed elevation of its diction, a lyrical fervor of religious sentiment which demands for its author a personality that had passed through just such a course of tuition as Jacob had experienced, the last words of Jacob, in ch 49, mark a turning-point in the history of the people of God. This is a trans lation of biography into prophecy. On the assump- tion that it is genuine, we may confidently aver that it was simply unforgetable by those who heard it. Its auditors were its theme. Their descend ants were its fulfilment. Neither the one class nor the other could ever let it pass out, of memory.

      It was "by faith," we are, well reminded, that Jacob "blessed" and "worshipped" "when lie was dying" (lie 11 21). For he held to the promises of God, and even in the hour of dissolution looked for the fulfilment of the covenant, according to which Canaan should belong to him and to his seed after him. He therefore set Joseph an example, by "giving commandment, concerning his bones," that they might rest in the burial-place of Abraham and Isaac near Hebron. To the accomplishment of this mission Joseph and all his brethren addressed themselves after their father s decease and the 70 days of official mourning. Followed by a "very great company" of the notables of Egypt, including royal officials and representatives of the royal family, this Ileb tribe carried up to sepulture in the land of promise the embalmed body of the patriarch from whom henceforth they were to take their tribal name, lamented him according to custom for 7 days, and then returned to their temporary home in Egypt, till their children should at length be "called" thence to become God s "sou" (Hos 11 1) and inherit His promises to their father Jacob. IV. Character and Beliefs. In the course of this account of Jacob s career the inward as well as the outward fortunes of the man have somewhat, ap peared. Yet a more comprehensive view of the

      kind of man he was will not be superfluous at this point. With what disposition was he endowed the natural nucleus for acquired characteristics and habits? Through what stages did he pass in the development of his beliefs and his character? In particular, what attitude did he maintain toward the most significant thing in his life, the promise of God to his house? And lastly, what resemblances may be traced in Israel the man to Israel the nation, of such sort that the one may be regarded as "typi cal" of the other? These matters deserve more than a passing not ice.

      From his father, Jacob inherited that domesticity and affectionate attachment to his home circle which appears in his life from begin- 1. Natural ningtoend. lie inherited shrewdness, Qualities initiative and resourcefulness from Rebekah qualities which she shared apparently with her brother Laban and all his family. The conspicuous ethical faults of Abraham and Isaac alike are want of candor and want of courage. It is not surprising, therefore, to find the same failings in Jacob. Deceit and cowardice are visible again and again in the impartial record of his life. Both spring from unbelief. They belong to the natural man. God s transformation of this man was wrought by faith by awakening and nourishing in him a simple trust, in the truth and power of the Divine word. For Jacob was not at any time in his career indifferent, to the things of the spirit., the things unseen and belonging to the future. Unlike Esau, he was not callous to the touch of God. Whether through inheritance, or as a fruit of early teaching, he had as the inesti mable treasure, the true capital of his spiritual career, a firm conviction of the value of what God had promised, and a supreme ambition to obtain it for himself and his children. But against the Divine plan for the attainment of this goal by faith, there worked in Jacob constantly his natural quali ties, the non-moral as well as the immoral qualities, that urged him to save himself and his fortunes by "works" by sagacity, cunning, compromise pertinacity anything and everything that would anticipate God s accomplishing His purpose in His own time and His own way. In short, "the end justifies the means" is the program that, more; than all others, finds illustration and rebuke in the character of Jacob.

      Starting with such a combination of natural endowments, social, practical, ethical, Jacob passed through a course of Divine tuition, 2. Stages which, by building upon some of t hem, of Devel- repressing others and transfiguring the opment remainder, issued in the triumph of

      grace over nature, in the transforma tion of a Jacob into an Israel. This tuition has been well analyzed by a recent writer (Thomas, Cctii sis, III, 204 f) into the school of sorrow, the school of providence and the school of grace. Under the head of sorrow, it is not difficult to recall many experiences in the career just reviewed: long exile; disappointment; sinful passions of greed, anger, lust, and envy in others, of which Jacob was the victim; perplexity; and, again and again, bereave ment of those he held most dear.

      Hut besides these sorrows, God s providence dealt with him in ways most remarkable, and per haps more instructive for the st udy of such Divine dealings than in the case of any other character in the OT. By alternate giving and withholding, by danger here and deliverance there, by good and evil report, now by failure of "best laid schemes" and now by success with seemingly inadequate means, God developed in him the habit not native to him as it seems to have been in part to Abraham and to Joseph of reliance on Divine power and guidance,




      of accept in; (lie Divine will, of realizing the Divine nearness and faithfulness.

      And lastly, there are those admirably graded lessons in the grace of God, that were imparted in the series of Divine appearances to the patriarch, at Beth-el, at Haran, at Peniel, at Beth-el again and at Beersheba. For if the substance of these Divine revelations be compared, it will be found that all are alike in the assurance; (1) that God is with him to bless; (2) that the changes of his life are ordained of (lod and are for his ultimate good; and (3j that he is the heir of the ancestral promises.

      It will further be found that they may ho arranged in a variety of ways, according as one or another of the revelations bo viewed as the climax. Thus (1), agreeing with the chronological order, the appearance at Beer sheba may well bo regarded as the climax of them all. Abraham had gone to Egypt to escape a famine (12 10), but lip went without revelation, and returned with bitter experience of his error. Isaac- essayed to go to Kgypt for the same cause (26 1 f), and was prevented by re ve- lation. Jacob now goes to Kgypt, but lie goes with the express approval of the God of his fathers, and with the explicit assurance that the same Divine providence which ordained this removal (50 20) will see that it does not frustrate any of the promises of God. This was a crisis in the history of the Kingdom of God" on a par with events like the Kxodus, the .Kxile, or the Keturn.

      C2) In its significance for his personal history, the first of these revelations was unique. Beth-el witnessed Jacob s choice, evidently for the first time, of his fathers God as his God. And though we find Jacob later toler ating idolatry in his household and compromising his religious testimony by sin, we never find a hint of his own unfaithfulness to this first and final religious choice. This is further confirmed by the attachment of his later revelations to this primary one, as though this lent them the significance ol continuity, and made possible the unity of his religious experience. So at Ifuran it was the "Cod of Beth-el" who directed his return (31 13); at Shechem it- was to Beth-el that he was directed, in order that ho might at length fulfil his Beth-el vow. by erect ing there an altar to the Cod who had there appeared to him (35 1); and at Beth-el finally the promise of former years was renewed to him who was henceforth to be Israel (vs 9-15).

      ( >) Though thus punctuated with the supernatural the only striking bit of the marvelous in all this biography is the night scene at Peniel. And this too may justly be claimed as a climax in Jacob s development. There he first received his new name, and though he deserved it as little in many scenes thereafter as he had deserved it before, yet the same could be said of many a man who has "seen the face of (iod," but lias yet to grasp, like Jacob, the lesson that the way to overcome is through the helpless but clinging importunity of faith.

      ( 1) Rat her t han in any of the other scenes, however, it was at Both-el the second time that the patriarch reached the topmost rung on the ladder of development As already noticed, the substance of all the earlier reve lations is here renewed and combined. It is no wonder that after this solemn theophany we find Jacob, like Moses later, enduring as seeing him who is invisible (He 11 27), and "waiting for the salvation" (Gen 49 IS) of a God who is not ashamed of him, to be called his God (He 11 16), but is repeatedly called "the God of Jacob."

      Finally, such a comparison of these revelations to_ Jacob reveals a variety in the way God makes Himself known, lu the first revelation, naturally, the effort is made chiefly to impress upon its recip ient the identity of the revealing God with the God of his fathers. And it has been remarked already that in the later revelations the same care is taken to identify the Rovoaler with the One who gave that first revelation, or else to identify Him, as then, with the God of the fathers. Yet, in addition to this, there is a richness and suitability in the Divine. ?/fiin< S revealed, which a mechanical theory of literary sources not only leaves unexplained but fails even to recognize. At Beth-el first it is Jeh, the personal name of this God, the God of his fathers, who enters into a new personal relation with Jacob; now, of all times in his career, he needs to know God by the differential mark that distinguishes Him absolutely from other gods, that there may never be confusion as to Jeh s identity. But, this matter is settled for Jacob once for all. Thenceforth one of the ordinary terms for deity, with or without an attributive adjunct, serves to lift the patriarch s

      soul into communication with his Divine Inter locutor. The most general word of all in the Sem tongues for deity is El, the word used in the revelations to Jacob at Haran (31 13), at Hhechem (35 1), at Beth-el the second time (35 11) and at Beersheba (46 3). But it is never used alone. Like Allah in the Arab, language ( = the God), so El with the definite article before it serves to des ignate in Heb a particular divinity, not deity in general. Or else El without the article is made definite by some genitive phrase that supplies the necessary identification: so in Jacob s case, El- bet h-el (35 7; cf 31 13) or El-Elohe-lsrael (33 20). Or, lastly, there is added to El some determining title, with the force of an adjective, as Shaddai (tr d "Almighty") in 35 H (cf _ 43 3). In clear dis tinction from this word, El, with its archaic or poetic flavor, is the common Ileb word for God, Elohlm. But while Elohlm is used regularly by the narrator of the Jacob-stories in speaking, or in letting his actors speak, of Jacob s God, who to the monotheistic writer is of course the God and his own God, he never puts this word thus abso lutely into the mouth of the revealing Deity. Jacob can say, when he_awakes from his dream, "This is the house of Elohlm," but God says to him in the dream, "I am the God [ Elohlm] of thy at her" (28 17.1:3). At JMahanaim Jacob says, "This is the host of Elohlm" (32 2), but at Beersheba God says to Jacob, "I am .... the God [ Eluhlm] of thy father" (46 3). Such are the distinctions maintained in the use of these words, all of them used of the same God, yet chosen in each case to fit the circumstances of speaker, hearer and situation.

      The only passage in the story of Jacob that might appear to be an exception does in fact but prove the rule. At Peniel the angel of God explains the new name of Israel by saying, "Thou hast striven with God [ Klvhlm] and with men, and hast prevailed." Here the contrast with "men" proves that Elfilnm without the article i.s just the right expression, even on the lips of Deity neither Deity nor humanity has prevailed against Jacob (32 2S).

      Throughout the entire story of Jacob, therefore, his relations with Jeh his God, after they wen; once established (28 13-1(>J, are narrated in terms that emphasize the Divinity of Him who had thus entered into covenant-relationship with him: His Divinity that i.s tosay, those at tributes in which His Divinity manifested itself in His dealings with Jacob.

      From the foregoing, two things appear with respect to Jacob s attitude toward the promise of God. First, with all his faults and 3. Attitude vices he yet was spiritually sensitive; toward the lie responded to the approaches of his Promise God concerning things of a value wholly spiritual future good, moral and spiritual blessings. And second, he was capable of progress in these; mailers; that is, his reaction to the Divine tuition would appear, if charted, as a series of elevations, separated one from another, to be sure, by low levels and deep declines, yet each one higher than the last, and all taken collectively lifting the whole average up and up, till in the end faith has triumphed over sight, the future over present good, a yet unpossessed but Divinely promised Canaan over all the; comfort and honors of Egypt, and the aged patriarch lives only to "wait for Jeh s salvation" (49 18).

      The contrast of Jacob with Esau furnishes per haps the best means of grasping the significance of these two facts for an estimate of Jacob s atti tude toward the promise-. For iti the first place, Esau, who possessed so much that Jacob lacked directness, manliness, a sort of bonhomie, that made him .superficially more attractive than his brother Esau shows nowhere any real "sense" for things




      spiritual. The author of Hebrews has caught, the inan in the flash of a single word, "profane" (/#- PII\\\\\\\\OS, IH I~IOX)I>( course, in the older, broader, etymological meaning of the term. Esau s desires dwelt- in tin- world of the non-sacred; they did not aspire to that world of nearness to (lod, where one must put off the shoes from off his feet, because tlu> place whereon he stands is holy ground. And in the second place, there is no sign of growth in Esau. What we see him in his father s encamp ment, that we see him to the end -so far as appears from the laconic story. With the virtues as well as the vices of the man who lives for the present - forgiving when strong enough to revenge, conde scending when flattered, proud of power and independent of parental control or family tradition Ksau is as impartially depicted by the sacred his torian as if the writer had been an Edomite, instead of an Israelite: the sketch is evidently true to life, both from its object ivity and from its coherence.

      Now what. Esau was, Jacob was not. His fault in connection with the promises of (iod, the family tradition, the ancestral blessing, lay not in despising them, but in seeking them in immoral \\\\\\\\vays. Good was his aim; but he was ready to "do evil that good might come." He was always tempted to be his own Providence, and Clod s training was clearly directed, both by providential leadings and by gracious disclosures, to this corresponding purpose: to enlighten Jacob as to the nature of the promise; to assure him that it was his by grace; to awaken personal faith in its Divine Giver; and to supple ment his faith" by that "patience" without which none can "inherit the. promises." The faith that accepts was to issue at length in the faith that waits.

      A nation was to take its name from Jacob-Israel, and there are some passages of Scripture where it is uncertain whether the name designates the nation or 4 How Far its ancestor. In their respective relations "T n " M* ( 0( illl( l ! tno vvor ( of men and na il lype tions, there is a true sense in which the of Israel father was a "type" of the children. It is probably only a play of fancy that would discover a parallel in their respective careers, between the successive stages of life in the father s home (Canaan), life in exile, a return, and a second exile. But it is not fanciful to note the resemblance between Jacob s character and that of his descendants. With few exceptions the qualities mentioned above (IV, 2) will be found, mutatis nuitnndix, to be equally appli cable to the nation of Israel. And even that curriculum in which the patriarch learned of Clod may be viewed as a type of the school in which the Ileb people not all of them, nor even the mass, but the "remnant" who approximated to the ideal Israel of the prophets, the "servant of .Teh" were taught the lessons of faith and patience, of renunciation and consecration, that appear with growing clearness on the pages of Isaiah, of Habak- kuk, of Jeremiah, of Malachi. This is apparently Hosca s point of view in 12 2-4.12.

      A word of caution, however, is needed at this point. There are limits to this equation. Even critics who regard Jacob tinder his title of Israel as merely the eponymous hero, created by legend to bo the forefather of the nation (cf below, VI, 1), must confess that Jacob as Jacob is no such neutral creature, dressed only in the coloi-s of his children s racial qualities. There is a largo residuum in Jacob, after all parallelisms have been traced, that refuses to fit the lines of Ileb national char acter or history, and his typical relation in fact lies chiefly in the direction of the covenant-inheritance, after the fashion of Malaehi s allusion (Mai 1 2), interpreted by Paul (Kom 9 10-13).

      V. References Outside of Genesis. Under his two names this personage Jacob or Israel is more frequently mentioned than any other in the whole of sacred history. Yet in the vast majority of cases the nation descended from him is intended by the name, which in the form of "Jacob" or "Israel" contains not. the slightest, and in the form "children of Israel," "house of Jacob" and the like, only the slightest, if any, allusion to the patriarch himself. But there still remain many passages in both Testaments where the Jacob or Israel of Gen is clearly alluded to.

      There is a considerable group of passages that

      refer to him as the last, of the pat riarchal triumvirate

      Abraham, Isaac and Jacob: so

      1. In particularly of Jeh as the "(iod of the OT Abraham, Isaac and Jacob," and of

      the covenant-oath as having been "sworn unto Abraham, Isaac; and Jacob." And naturally the nation that, is known by his name is frequently called by some phrase, equivalent to the formal l> n<l /y/.sm. r7, yet through its unusualness lending more significance to the idea of their deri- vat ion from him : so "seed of Jacob" and (frequently) "house of Jacob [Israel]." But then; are a few OT passages outside; of Gen in which so much of Jacob s history has been preserved, that from these allusions alone a fair notion might have been gathered concerning the Hebrews tradition of their common ancestor, even if all the story in (!en had been lost,. These passages arc;: Josh 24 3.4.152; Ps 105 10-23; Hos 12 2-4.12; Mai 1 2 f . Be sides these, there; an; other allusions, scattered a word here and a sentence there, from all of which together we learn as follows. God gave to Isaac; twin sons, Esau and Jacob, the latter at birth taking the former by the heel. God elected Jacob to be the recipient, of the covenant-promise made to his father Isaac and to his grandfather Abraham; and this choice involved the rejection of Esau. Jeh appeared to Jacob at Beth-el and told him the land of Canaan was to be his and his seed s after him forever. Circumstances not. explained caused Jacob to flee from his home in Canaan to Aram, where he served as a shepherd to obtain a wife as his wage. He became the father of 12 sons. He strove; with the angel of God and prevailed amid earnest supplication. His name 1 was by Jeh Himself changed to Israel, t nder Divine pro tection as God s chosen one and representative, his lifc> was that of a wanclerer from place to place; once only he bought a piee-e of land, for a hundred pieces, near Shechem, from Hamor, the father of Shechem. A famine drove him down to Egypt, but not without providential preparation for the ivceptiem there of himself and all his family, through the remarkable fortunes of his son Joseph, sold, exiled, imprisoned, delivered, and exalted to a posi tion where he could dispose of rulers and nations. In Egypt the children of Jacob multiplied rapidly, and at his death he made the sons of Joseph the heirs of the only portion of Canaanitish soil that he had acquired.

      From this it appears, first, that not much that is essential in the biography of Jacob would have perished though Gen had been lost; and, second, that the sum of the incidental allusions outside Gen resemble the total impression of the narratives in Gen in other words, that the Bib. tradition is self-consistent. And it runs back to a date (Hosea, 8th cent. BC) little farther removed from the events recounted than the length of time that separates our own day from the Norman conquest, or the Fall of Constantinople from the Hegira, or Jesus Christ from Solomon.

      In the NT also there are, besides the, references

      to Jacob simply as the father of his nation, several

      passages that recall events in his life

      2. In the or traits of his character. These are: NT Jn 4 5.6.12; Acts 7 12.14-16; Rom

      9 10-13; He 11 9.20 f. In the conver sation between Jesus and the Samaritan woman it appears that the Samaritans cherished the association of Jacob with the ground he bought near Shechem, and with the well he dug while sojourning there with his sons and his flocks; they prided themselves on its transmission to them through Joseph, not to the hated Jews through Judah, and magnified them selves in magnifying Jacob s "greatness" and calling




      him "our father." . Stephen s speech, as Luke reports it, includes in its rapid historical flight a hint or two about Jacob beyond the bare fact of his place in the tribal genealogy. Moved by the famine prevailing in Egypt and Canaan, Jacob twice dispatches his sons to buy grain in Egypt , and the second time Joseph is made known to his brothers, and his race becomes manifest to Pharaoh. At Joseph s behest, Jacob and all the family remove to Egypt. There all remain until their death, but the fathers" (Joseph and his brethren; cf Jerome, Epistola cviii, ed. Migne) are buried in the family possession near Shechem. (Here emerges one of those divergences from the OT tradition that, are a notable feature of Stephen s speech, and that, have furnished occasion for much speculation upon their origin, value and implications. See comms. on Acts.) Paul s interest in Jacob appears in con nection with his discussion of Divine election, where he calls attention to the oracle of Gen 25 23 and to the use already made of the passage by Malachi (1 2f), and reminds his readers that this choice of Jacob and rejection of Esau was made by God even before these twin sons of Isaac and Rebecca were born. Finally, the author of lie, when charting the heroes of faith, focuses his glass for a moment upon Jacob: first, as sharing with Abraham and Isaac, the promise of (!od and the life of unworldly, expectant faith (He 11 9); and second, as receiving from Isaac, and at. his death transmitting to his grandsons, blessings that had value only for one who worships and believes a God with power over "things to come" (vs 20 f).

      VI. Modern Interpretations of Jacob. For those who see in the patriarchal narratives anything myth, legend, saga rather than true biography, there is, of course, a different interpretation of the characters and events portrayed in the familiar Gen-stories, and a different value placed upon the stories themselves.

      Apart from the allegorizing treatment accorded them by I liilo tile Jew and early Christian writers of like mind (see specimen in Ann A HAM), these views belong to modern criticism. To critics who make Heb history begin with the settlement of Canaan by the nomad Israelites fresh from the desert, even the Mosaic a ire and the Egyp residence are totally unhistorical much more so these tales of a prc-Mosaie patriarchal age. Yet even those writers who admit the broad outlines of a residence of the tribes in Egypt, an exodus of some sort, and a founder of the nation named Moses, are for the most part skeptical of this cycle of family ligmvs and fortunes in a remote age. with its nomads wander ing between Mesopotamia and Canaan, and to and fro in Canaan, its circumstantial acquaintance with the names and relationships of each individual through those 4 long patriarchal generations, and its obvious foreshadowing of much that the later tribes were on this same soil to act out cents, later. This, we are told. is not history. Whatever else it may be, it is not a reliable account of such memorable events as compel their own immortality in the memories and through the written records of mankind.

      The commonest view held, collectively of the entire narrative, specifically of Jacob, is that which sees here the precipitate from a pure 1. Personi- solution of the national character and fication of fortunes. Wellhausen, e.g., says (Pro- the Hebrew legomcna 6 , 316): "The material here Nation is not mythical, but national; there

      fore clearer [viz. than in Gen 1-11] and in a, certain sense historical. To be sure there is no historical knowledge to be gained here about the patriarchs, but only about the time in which the stories concerning them arose in the people of Israel; this later time with its inward and outward char acteristics is here unintentionally projected into the gray antiquity and mirrored therein like a glorified phantasm .... [p. 318] Jacob is more real istically drawn than the other two [Abraham and Isaac]." In section IV, 4, above, we observed

      that, while many of Jacob s personal qualities pre figured the qualities of the later Heb people, there were some others 1 hat did not at all fit this equation. Wellhausen himself remarks this, in regard to the contrast, between warlike Israel and the peaceful ancestors they invented for themselves. In his attempt to account for this contrast, he can only urge that a nation condemned to eternal wars would naturally look back upon, as well as forward to, a golden age of peace. (An alternative explana tion he states, only to reject.) He fails to observe that this plea does not in the least alter the fact his plea is indeed but a restatement of the fact that this phenomenon is absolutely at variance with his hypothesis of how these stories of Jacob and the rest came to be what they are (see Meyer, Die Israelitc/i innl Hire .\\\\\\\\<ic/il>arx/anunc, 250 ff).

      This general view, which when carried to its extreme implications (as by Steuernagel, Die, Ein- wantlcntng tier -/.sm< ////.sr/ic/;. Xlanutie in Kantian, 1001) comes perilously near the rcduc- 2. God and tin ml ahxnrtlnni that is its own refuta- Demi-God tion, has been rejected by that whole group of crit ics, who, following Noldeke, see in Jacob, as in so many others of the patriarchs, an original deity (myth), first, abased to the grade of a hero (heroic legend ), and at last degraded to the level of a clown (tales of jest or marvel). Adherents of this trend of interpretation differ widely among themselves as to details, but, Jacob is generally regarded as a Canaanitish deity, whose local shrine was at Shechem, Beth-el or Peniel, and whose cult was taken over by the Hebrews, their own object of worship being substituted for him, and the out standing features of his personality being made over into a hero that Israel appropriated as their national ancestor, even to (lie extent of giving him the secondary name of Israel. Stade attempted a combination of this "mythical" view with the national" view in the interest, of his theory of primitive animism, by making the patriarch a "mythological figure revered as an eponymous hero." This theory, in any form, requires the assumption, which there is nothing to support, that Jacob (or Jacob-el) is a name originally belonging to a deity and framed to fit hi_s supposed character. At first, then, it meant " El deceives" or "El recompenses" (so B. Luther, ZATW, 1901, GOff; cf also the same writer, as well as Meyer himself, in the latter s Iwriclitcn, etc, 109 ff, 271 ff). Meyer proposes the monstrosity of a nominal sentence with the tr, " He deceives is El." Thus the first element of the name Jacob came to be felt, as the name it self ( = "Jacob is God"), and it was launched upon its course of evolution into the human per sonage that Gen knows. It suffices to say with regard to all this, that in addition to its being inher ently improbable not to say, unproved it goes directly in the face of the archaeological evidence adduced under I, 1, above. The simple fact that Jacob (-el) was a personal name for men, of every day occurrence, in the 2d-3d millenniums BC, is quite enough to overthrow this whole hypothesis; for, as Luther himself remarks (op. cit., 65), the above evolution of the name is essential to the "mythical" theory: "when this alteration took place cannot be told; yet it has to be postulated, since otherwise it remains inexplicable, how personal names could arise out of these formations [like Jacob-el] by rejection of the El."

      The inadequacy of the two theories hitherto ad vanced to account for the facts of Gen being thus evident, Gunkel and others have ex- 3. Character plicitly rejected them and enunciated of Fiction a third theory, which may be called the saga-theory. According to Gun kel, "to understand the persons of Gen as nations

      Jacob Jael



      is by no moans a general key to I heir interpret at inn"; and, "against the whole assumption that the prin cipal patriarchal figures are originally gods is this fact first and foremost., that the names Jacob and Abraham are shown by the Hab to be customary personal names, and furthermore that the tales about them cannot be understood at. all as echoes of original myths." In place of these discredited views Gunkel (cf also Gressmann, ZAT\\\\\\\\V, !!)](), 1 ft ) makes of .Jacob simply a character in the stories (marvelous, humorous, pathetic and the like) current in ancient, Israel, esp. on t lie lips of the professional story-teller. Whereas much of the material in these stories came to the Hebrews from the Babylonians, Canaanites or Egyptians, Jacob himself is declared to have belonged io the old Heb saga, with its flavor of nomadic; desert life and sheep-raising. "The original Jacob may be the sly shepherd Jacob, who fools the hunter Esau; another tale, of the deceit of a father-in-law by his son-in-law, was added to it the more naturally because both are shepherds; a third cycle, about an old man that loves his youngest son, was trans ferred to this figure, and that youngest, son received the name of Joseph at a time when Jacob was ident i- fied with Israel s assumed ancestor Israel. Thus our result is, that the most important patriarchs are creations of fiction" (Schriftcn dcs AT, ote Lieferung, 42).

      It. is so obvious that this new attitude toward the patriarchs lends itself to a more sympathetic criticism of the narrative of Gen, that critics who adopt it are at pains to deny any intention on their part of rehabilitating Jacob et al. as historical figures. "Saga," we are told, "is not capable of preserving through so many cents, a picture" of the real character or deeds of its heroes, even sup posing that, persons bearing these names once actu ally lived; and we are reminded of the contrast between the Etzel of saga and the Attila of history, the Dietrich of saga and the Theodoric of history. Hut as against this we need to note, first, that the long and involved course of development through which, ex hypothesi, these stories have passed before reaching their final stage (J, Dili cent. HC; Gunkel, op. cit.,_S, 40) involves a very high antiquity for the earlier stages, and thus reduces to a narrow strip of time those "so many cents." that are sup posed to separate the actual Jacob from the Jacob of saga (cf ABRAHAM, VII, 4); and second, that the presuppositions as to the origin, nature and value of saga with which this school of criticism operates are, for the most part, only an elaborate; statement of the undisputed major premise! in a syllogism, of which the minor premise is: the (Jen- stories are saga. Against this last proposition, however, there lie many weighty considerations, that are by no means counterbalanced by those resem blances of a general sort which any student of comparative literature can easily discern (see also Baethgen, op. cit., 15X). JAMES O.SCAH BOYD

      JACOB ppr?, U a\\\\\\\\1l-rM; IaKc&p, 7,,/,-o7/) :

      (1) The patriarch (see preceding art.).

      (2) The father of Joseph the husband of Marv (Mt 1

      (3) Patronymic denoting the Israelites (Is-i 10 21; 14 1; Jer 10 Hi).


      JACOB S WELL (TTT,^ TOV laioSp, pff/f ton Jakob): In .In 4 :i ff we read that Our Lord "left Judaea, and departed again into Galilee. And he must needs pass through Samaria, 80 he comet h to a city of Samaria, called Sychar, near to the

      parcel of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph: and Jacob s well was there." When Jacob came to

      Shechem on his return from Paddan- 1. Position aram he encamped "before," i.e. E. of of Well the city, and bought the land on which

      he had spread his tent (Gen 33 ISfj. This is doubtless the "portion" (Heb sh klion) spoken of in Gen 48 22; although there it is said

      Jacob s Well.

      to have been taken with sword and bow from the Amoritcs. Where the pass of Shechem opens to theK, near the northern edge of the valley, lies the traditional tomb of Joseph. On the other side of the vale, close to the base of Gemini, is the well universally known _ as Bir Ya kilb, "the well of Jacob." The position meets perfectly the require ments of the narrative. The main road from the S. splits a little to the E.,one arm leading westward through the pass, the other going more directly to the N. It is probable that these paths follow pretty closely the ancient tracks; and both would be fre quented in Jesus day. Which of them He took we cannot tell; but, in any case, this well lay in the fork between them, and could be approached with equal ease from either. See SVCIIAH.

      In the chapter quoted, it is said that Jacob dug

      the well (ver 12). The OT says nothing of this.

      With the copious springs at Mm

      2. Why M.s Ay/r and Balatfi, one might ask Dug why a well should have been dug here

      at all. We must remember that in the East, very strict laws have always governed the use of water, esp. when there were large herds to be considered. The purchase of land here may not have secured for Jacob such supplies as he required. There was danger of strife between rival herdsmen. The patriarch, therefore , may have dug the well in the interests of peace, and also to preserve his own independence.

      Jew, Samaritan, Moslem ami Christian agree in

      associating this well with the patriarch Jacob.

      This creates a strong presumption in

      3. Consen- favor of the tradition: and there is no

      good reasem to doubt its t rut h. St and- Tradition ing at the brink of the well, over shadowed by the giant, bulk of Geri- zim, one feels how naturally it would be spoken of as "this mountain."

      For long t he well was unprotected, opening among the rums of a vaulted chamber some feet below the surface of the ground. Major Anderson describes it (Recovery of Jems, 465) as having "a narrow opening, just wide enough to allow the body of a



      Jacob Jael

      man to pass through with arms uplifted, and this

      narrow neck, which is about 4 ft. long, opens into

      the well itself, which is cylindrically

      4. Descrip- shaped, and about 7ft. 6 in. in diameter. tion The mouth and upper part of the well

      are built of masonry, and the well appears to have been sunk through a mixture of alluvial soil and limestone fragments, till a com pact bed of mountain limestone was reached, having horizontal strata which could be easily worked; and the interior of the well presents the appear ance of having been lined throughout with rough ma sonry." The depth was doubtless much greater in ancient times; but much rubbish has fallen into it, and now it is not more than 75 ft. deep. It is fed by no spring, nor is the water conducted to it along the surface, as to a cistern. Its supplies depend entirely upon rainfall and percolation. Possibly, therefore, the water may never have approached the brim. The woman says the well is _deep." Pege, _ spring," does not, therefore, strictly apply to it, but rather "tank" or "reser voir," phrear, the word actually used in vs 11 f. The modern inhabitants of Nablus highly esteem the "light" water of the well as compared with the "heavy" or "hard" water of the neighboring springs. It usually lasts till about the end of May; then the well is dry till the return of the rain. Its contents, therefore, differ from the "living" water of the perennial spring.

      From the narratives of the pilgrims we learn that, at different times churches have been built over the well. The Moslems probably demolished the last of them after the overthrow of the Crusaders in 1187. A description of the ruins with drawings, as they were 30 years ago, is given in PEF, 11, 174, etc. A stone found in 1881 may have been, the original cover of the well. It measures 3 ft. 9 in.X 2 ft. 7 in. XI ft. G in. The aperture in the center is 13 in. in diameter; and in its sides are grooves worn by the ropes used in drawing up the water (PEFX, 1881, 212ff).

      Some years ago the plot of ground containing the

      well was purchased by the authorities of the Gr

      church, and it has been surrounded by

      5. Present a wall. A chapel has been built over Condition the well, and a large church is being

      erected beside it. W. EWING

      JACUBUS, ja-ku bus ( IdKo^pos, Idkoubos; B reads larso u boos ): In 1 Esd 9 4S = "Akkub"in Neh 8 7, a Levite who helped in the exposition of the law.

      JADA, ja da (^"^ , yddhd\\\\\\\\ "the knowing one"): Son of Onam and grandson of Jerahmecl by his wife Atarah (1 Ch 2 26.28.32).

      JADAU, ja do, ja-da u OT , yiddo, K c thibh; "H? , yadday, K>re AV; but RV IDDO): In Ezr 10 43, one of those who had married foreign wives. II Vm has "Jaddai" ( = "Edos," 1 Esd 9 35). See IDDO.

      JADDAI, jad l, jad a-I. See IDDO; JADAU.

      JADDUA, jad Q-a, ja-du a (?^ , yaddu a \\\\\\\\ "known"):

      (1) One of the "chiefs of the people" who with Nehemiah sealed the covenant, thus signifying their voluntary acceptance of the law and their solemn promise to submit to its yoke (Neh 10 21 [Heb 22] ).

      (2) Son of Jonathan or Johanan, and great- grandson of Eliashib, the high priest in Nehemiah s time (Neh 12 11.22). He is the last of the high priests mentioned in the OT, and held office during the reign of Darius the Pers, i.e. Darius III Codo-

      mannus, the last king of Persia (336-332 BC), who was overthrown by Alexander the Great. It is doubtless to him that Jos refers in his romantic account of Alexander s entrance into Jems (Ant, XI, viii, 4f; vii, 2; viii, 7). JAMES CRICHTON

      JADDUS, jad us (B, laSSovs, laddous; A, Io8- &ovs,Ioddous): AV has "Addus" = Barzillai (Ezr 2 61; Neh 7 63). J. was removed from the office of the priesthood because he could not prove his right to it after the return to Jerus under Zerub- babel (1 Esd 5 38). He is called Barzillai in the OT, because he married Augia, the daughter of Zorzelleus (Barzillai the Gileadite, in the OT). Cf BARZILLAI.

      JADON, ja don ("VP , ycidhon, perhaps "he will judge" or "plead"): One who helped to rebuild the wall of Jerus in company with the men of Gibeon and of Mizpah (Neh 3 7). He is called the "Mer- onothite," and another Meronothite is referred to in 1 Ch 27 30, but there is no mention of a place Meronqth. Jadon is the name given by Jos (Ant, VIII, viii, 5; ix, 1) to "the man of God" from Judah who confronted Jeroboam as he burned incense at the altar in Bethel, and who was afterward deceived by the lie of the old prophet (1 K 13). Jos may probably have meant Iddo the seer, whose visions concerning Jeroboam (2 Ch 9 29) led to his being identified in Jewish tradition with "Hie man of God" from Judah. JAMES CRICHTON

      JAEL, ja el ( IP, ya cl, "a wild or mountain goat," as in Ps 104 18; IaT)\\\\\\\\, latl): The wife of Hebcr the .Kenite and the slayer of Sisera (Jgs 4 17-22; 5 2-31). Jael emerges from obscurity by this single deed, and by the kindest construction can hardly be said to have reached an enviable fame. The history of this event is clear. For years Jabin the king of Canaan had oppressed Israel. For twenty years the Israelites had been subject to him, and, in largest measure, the instru ment of their subjugation had been Sisera, the king s general, the "man of the iron chariots." Deborah, a prophetess of Israel, by her passion for freedom, had roused the tribes of Israel to do battle against Sisera. They defeated him at "Taanach by the waters of Megiddo," but Sisera sought in flight to save himself. He came to the "oaks of the wander ers,"^ where the tribe of Heber lived. Here he sought, and was probably invited, to take shelter in the tent of Jael (4 17-18). There are two accounts of the subsequent events one a prose narrative (4 19-22), the other a poetic one, found in Deborah s song of triumph (5 24-27). The two accounts arc as nearly in agreement as could be expected, considering their difference in form.

      It is evident that the tribe of Hcner was regarded by both parties to the struggle as being neutral. They were descendants of Jcthro, and hence had the confidence of the Israelites. Though they had suffered somewhat at the hands of the Canaanites they had made a formal contract of peace with Jabin. _ Naturally Sisera could turn to the tents of Hcber in Kedesh-naphtali with some confidence. The current laws of hospitality gave an added ele ment of safety. Whether Jael met Sisera and urged him to enter her tent and rest (4 18), or only in vited him after his appeal for refuge, the fact remains that he was her guest, was in the sanctuary of her home, and protected by the laws of hospi tality. She gave him milk to drink, a mantle for covering, and apparently acquiesced in his request that she should stand guard at the tent and deny his presence to any pursuers. When sleep came to the wearied fugitive she took a "tent-pin, and took a hammer in her hand, and went softly unto him,

      Jagur Jambri



      and smote tin 1 pin into his temples" (ver 21), and having murdered him, <ioes forth to meet liarak I he Israeli! isli general and claims the credit for her deed. Some critics surest that Sisera was not. asleep when murdered, and thus try to convert .lael s treachery into strategy. But. to kill your Sliest while he is drinking the milk of hospitality is little less culpable than to murder him while asleep. There is no evidence that Sisera offered ,l:iel any insult, or violence, and hut little proba bility that she acted under any spiritual or Divine surest ion. It is really impossible to justify , lad s act, though it is not impossible to understand it or properly to appreciate Deborah s approval of the act. as found in 5 2\\\\\\\\. The motive of Jael may have, been a mixed one. She may have been a sympat hi/er with Israel and with the religion of Israel. But the narrative scarcely warrants the interpretation tha.t. she felt herself as one called to render "stern justice on an enemy of God" (A T .r/>o.s/- Mr .s llihli i. ,Iael was unquestionably prudential. Sisera was in flight and Barak in pursuit . Probably her sympathy was with Barak, but certainly reflec tion would show her that ii would not be wisdom to permit, Barak to find Sisera in her tent. She knew, too, that, death would be Sisera s portion should lie he captured therefore she would kill him and thus cement, a friendship with the con queror.

      As to Deborah s praise of Jael (5 21), there is no call to think that in her hour of triumph she was cit her capable of or intending to appraise the moral quality of Jael s deed. Her country s enemy was dead and that, too at the hand of a woman. The woman who would kill Sisera must be the friend of Israel. Deborah had no question of the propriety of meting out death to a defeated persecutor. Her times were not such as to raise this question. The method of his death mattered little to her, for all the laws of peace were abrogated in the times of war. Therefore Jael was blessed among women by all who loved Israel. "Whether Deborah thought her also to be wort hy of the blessing of God we may not tell. At any rate there is no need for us to try to justify the treachery of Jael in order to explain the words of Deborah. C. E. SCHENK

      JAGUR, ja gur O^ town on the Edomite (Josh 15 21).

      , yaf/hur): An unidentified frontier of Judah in the S

      JAH, ja. See GOD, NAMES OF.

      JAHATH, ja hath (HIT?, yahath, perhaps for ~?~-. !/"ht<h, ~V^-> yah&theh, "he [God] will snatch up") :

      (1) Son of Reaiah, son of Shobal, a descendant of Judah, and father of Ahumai and Lahad, the families of the Zorat iiites (1 Ch 4 2).

      (2) A freemen), name for a descendant of Levi: (n) Son of Libia, son of Gershom, the eldest son

      of Levi (1 Ch 6 20,43 [Ileb 6 5.2SJ, where "son of Libni" is omitted).

      (b) Son of Shimei, son of Gershom (1 Ch 23 l()f).

      (r) One of the "sons" of Shelomoth, a descend ant of Izhar, son of Kohath, the second son of Levi (1 Ch 24 22).

      (d) A descendant of Merari, the third son of Levi, and an overseer in the repairing of the temple in the reign of Josiah (2 Ch 34 12). JAMES CHICIITON

      JAHAZ, ja haz (prr, ynhaf, Isa 15 4; Jer 48 34, ~2:rP, yahaylh, or H^n" 1 , yaft<;ah, Nu 21 23- Dt 2 32; Josh 13 IS; 21 36, AV "Jahazah"; Jgs 11 20; .Jer 48 21; 1 Ch 6 7s, ".hih/.ah"): This 7s the place where in a great battle Israel over-

      whelmed Sihon king of the Amoriles, and then took possession of all his territory (Nu 21 23, etc). It is named along with Beth-baal-meon and Kedemoth (Josh 13 IS), with Kedernoth (21 37) ])ointing to a ])osition in the S.E. of the Amorite territory. It was given to Reuben by Moses, and was one of the cities in the portion of that tribe assigned to the Merarite Levites. Mesha (MS, 11. ISfT) says that the king of Israel dwelt in Jaha/ when at war with him. Mesha drove him out, and the city passed into the hands of Moab. It is re ferred to as a city of Moab in Isa 15 4; Jer 48 21. 34. Cheyne thinks that either Jaha/ or Kedemoth must be represented today by the important ruins of I nnn ir-RrxiiK, about 2\\\\\\\\ hours N. of Dibon toward the desert (EB, s.v.). No certain identi fication is possible. W. EWIXG

      JAHAZIAH, ja-ha-zl a: AV for JAHZEIAH (q.v.).

      JAHAZIEL, ja-ha zi-el (TrP, ynMz^cl, "God sees") :

      (1) In 1 Ch 12 4 (TIeb ver 5), one of David s recruits at Ziklag, a Benjamite or maybe a Judaean.

      (2) In 1 Ch 16 (>, one of two priests appointed by David to sound trumpets before the ark on its journey to Jerus. LXX B, A, read "I zziel."

      (3) In 1 Ch 23 1); 24 2)5, a Levite, son" of Hebron, a Kohathite. Kit t el, following LXX, reads "t zziel."

      (4) In 2 Ch 20 14, an Asaphite, son of Zeehariah. lie encouraged King Jehoshaphat of Judah and his subjects to fight against the Moabite and Ammonite invaders.

      (5) In Ezr 8 5, an ancestor of one of the families of the Restoration. Read probably "of the sons of Zattu, Sheeoniah the son of .].," following 1 Esd 8 32 ( = Jezelus). DAVID FRANCIS ROBERTS

      JAHDAI, ja da-i, jii dl (^ST, yaMaij, "Job leads" [?]; Baer reads "*~7V, yehday}: In 1 Ch 2 47, where six sons of J. are mentioned. "The name has been taken as that of another wife or concubine of Caleb; more probably Jahdai is a descendant of Caleb, whose name, in the original connection, has fallen from the text" (Curtis, Ch, ( ,)li).

      aMlTl, "God f a Manassite

      JAHDIEL, ja di-el gives joy"): In 1 Ch 5 24, head family.

      JAHDO, jii do ("HrP, i/dhflo, meaning nncer- tain; Kit t el suggests "^[JTTJ, ynh<lm/ = Jahdai) : In 1 Ch 5 14, a Gileadite."

      JAHLEEL, ja l5-el (5X5rP, }/nhl f cl, "wait for Cod!"): In Gen 46 14; Nu 26 2(5, a "son" (i.e. clan) of Zebulun.

      JAHLEELITES, jii lS-el-ifs, THE ("^Xbrpn, ha- i/tihl"Tll. coll. with art.): In Nu 26 26, the descend ant s of t he clan of Jahleel.

      JAHMAI, ja ma-i, ja mi C 1 ?!! !! , yahmay, ]ier- haps = rTJpn^, yahm e yah, may Jeh protect!"): In 1 Ch 7 2, head of a clan of Issachar.

      JAHWEH, yii we. See GOD, NAMES OF. JAHZAH, ja za. See JAHAZ.

      JAHZEEL, ja zS-el (bSn:, yah? el, "God di vides," "apportions"): In Gen 46 24; Nu 26 48; and2:!MSSinl Ch 7 13; and JAHZIEL (b^n^ yahu^l cl, same meaning as above): 1 Ch 7 13, a "son" (clan) of Naphtali.



      Jagur Jambri

      JAHZEELITES, ja ze-el-Its, THE C^SSITTI, },a- yah^ cll, coll. with art.): In Nu 26 48, descendants of the chin of Jahzeel.

      JAHZEIAH, jii-ze ya, ja zO-ya (!~PTTP , yahz e - ydh, "Jeh ROCS"): In Ezr 10 15, son of Tikvah, and a contemporary of Ezra. It is disputed whether he and Jonathan opposed or supported Ezra in the matter of prosecuting those who had married foreign wives = Ezekias, 1 Esd 9 14, or Ezias. See JONATHAN, 9.

      Two translations of the Heb phrase (nj$T~by "7)037 . dmadh al-zd th) are given: (1) "stood over this matter," i.e. supported Ezra; so AV ("were employed in this mutter"), and so LXX, 1 Esd 9 14, KVm. This is supported by ver 4, "Let now our princes be appointed for all the assembly," where the same phrase is found. (2) KV "stood up against this matter," so BDB, Gesenius, Bertheau, Stade. Both translations can be supported by Is in Heb. The context is better suited by the former rendering.


      JAHZERAH, ja ze-ra, ja-ze ra (rVTTrn, yah- zcrdti, meaning unknown): In 1 Ch 9 12, an an cestor of Maasai and apparently = "Ahzai" of Neh 11 13.

      JAHZIEL, ja zi-el. See JAII/EEL. JAILOR, jfil er. See PRISON.

      yd lr, "he enlightens" or "one

      JAIR, ja er:

      (1) Jair giving light ):

      () Son, i.e. descendant of Manasseh (Nu 32 41; Dt 3 14; Josh 13 30; 1 K 4 13; 1 Ch 2 22 f). According to 1 Ch 2 21 f he was the son of Segub, son of Hezron, a descendant of Judah, who married the daughter of Machir, son of Manasseh. He was thus descended both from Judah and Manasseh. At the time of the conquest he distin guished himself by taking the tent-villages HAV- VOTH-JAIH (q.v.). The accounts of his exploit are diflicult to harmonize (see K C on above passages). Some would identify him with the Jair of Jgs 10 3, holding that Manasseh s settlement in Northern Cilead and Bashan took place, not before Israel s passage of the Jordan, but after the settlement of the tribe on the W. For a criticism of this view see Ifd/IL, 577, n.

      (/;) One of the judges. He is said to have had 30 sons, who rode on 30 ass colts, and who had as many cities, known as Ilavvoth-jair (Jgs 10 3.4). One tradition identifies (a) and (/;). Others reconcile the two narratives by interpreting the word "son" in a non-literal sense.

      ((} The father of Mordecai (Est 2 5). In the Apoc (Ad Est 11 2) his name is given as "Jairus" ( Ideipos, liU iros).

      ( !) Jair (K Te "PIP, yd*lr, "he arouses"; K 1 - thlbh "Wl), yd*ur; a different name from [1] above): The father of Elhanan, the giant-slayer (1 Ch 20 5j. In the |j passage (2 S 21 19) his name is given as "Jaare-oregim," but the text should be corrected to Jair, "oregim" ( dr e ghlm) having crept in from the line below through a copyist s error.


      JAIRITE, ja er-it O 1 ")^, ya irl, "of Jair"): In 2 S 20 20, Ira the Jairite is "chief minister unto David." He was a descendant of Jair who was a Manassite (Nu 32 41, etc) and whose territory was in Gilead. LXX Luc and Syr suggest "HZ-P , yattirl, "Jattirite," i.e. a native of Jattir mentioned in 1 S 30 27 as one of the towns friendly t o David when he was in Ziklag. It is not improbable that a native of Jattir would be given such a post by David. See IRA, and cf 2 S 23 38.

      JAIRUS, ja i-rus, ja-I rus ( Ideipos, fdciros; 1 Esd 5 31; Ad Est 11 2). See Ami s; JAIH.

      JAIRUS, ja i-rus, ja-I rus ( Ideipos, It uiros): A ruler in a synagogue near Capernaum whose only daughter, aged about 12 years, was raised from the dead by Jesus (Mt 9 18-26; Mk 5 22-43; Lk 8 41-56). The accounts of the miracle are sub stantially the same, but vary in detail. According to Mk and Lk the arrival of Jairus in Capernaum fell immediately after the return of Jesus from ( ladara, but according to Mt the sequence of events was that Jesus had returned to Capernaum, had called Matthew, had joined the feast, of the publi cans, and had just finished His discourse on fast ing when Jairus came to Him. Alt and Mk both testify to the great faith of Jairus, who besought of Jesus that He should but lay His hand upon the maid and she should live. According to Mt she was already dead when Jairus came to Capernaum; according to the others she was on the point of death; but all agree as to her death before the arrival of Jesus and His followers at her abode. Mt implies that Jesus alone was present, at the actual raising; M~k and Lk state that Peter, James, John and the parents were also there. The healing of the woman with the issue of blood by Jesus on the way is given by all. C. M. KERR

      JAKAN, ja kan ("j^" 1 ], ija^akdn). See JAAKAN.

      JAKEH, ja ke (!"!]x^ , yakch, perhaps from Arab, root meaning "carefully religious"; Xp^ , ydke , as if from fc^p , /a ) : The fat her of Agur, t he author of the sayings recorded in Prov 30 1. Nothing is known of eit her Jakeh or Agur. The immc< liat c con nect ion in the Heb text of li(i-i>i(iiv<d , "the prophecy" or "burden" (AV "even the prophecy," II V "the oracle") with n e um, "oracle" (AV "spake," RV "saith") is quite exceptional, while the ver is un intelligible and the text, as the LXX shows, is evi dently corrupt. The best, emendation is that which changes ha-massa , "the prophecy," into /m-iitaxHal, "the Massaite," or into iiiiiiuiiuxxa , "Of Massa" ( U Vm ), Massa being the name of ; he country of an Ishmaelite tribe (cf Gen 25 14; 1 Ch 1 30; Prov 31 1 HVm). SeeAoi:R. JAMES CRICIITON

      JAKIM, jii kim O^p??, yalflm, "he [God] liftoth up"; cf ELIAKI.M):

      (1) A Benjamite, a son of Shimei (1 Ch 8 19).

      (2) A priest, the head of the 12th of the 24 courses into which the priests were divided (L Ch 24 12).

      JALAM, ja lam (Q57 1 ?, i/<i !ai//, according to BDB following LXX l-yX6|A, Jajloin, in Gen, from l C^y, *alam, meaning "to conceal"; according to Gunkel, Gen 3 , 390, from 5!P, ya*cl, "mountain- goat"; see II PN, 90, n. 5; AV Jaalam): In Gen 36 5.14.18; 1 Ch 1 35, a son of Esau, mentioned as the 2d son by Oholibamah; probably an Edomite clan.

      JALON, ja lon ("5^, ydJdn, meaning unknown): In 1 Ch 4 17, a son of E/.rah, a Judahite.

      JAMBRES, jam brez. See JAXNES AND JAM- ORES.

      JAMBRI, jam brl (ol viol Iap.ppiv, hoi huioi lambrcln; 1 Mace 9 30-41): The sons of Jambri are said to have come out of Medeba (originally Med ba), a city of the Moabites, and subsequently a possession of the Amorites, and to have carried off John, the brother of Jonathan, who succeeded Judas Maccabaeus as leader of the Jews. The




      ! p<i>sesMMii of the place and assigne

      it to I he t ribe nf Ueilheil.

      elsewhere of the .lainliri. In Jos (Ant, XIII. i, 2;

      tliev are called "sons ol Amaraeus.

      JAMES, jam/ i TaKcopos, l<irnl>ox}: English form of Jacob, and the name of 3 NT men of note:

      il) The Son of Zebedee, one of the Twelve A post les (6 roiJ ZepeSaiov, f/o tun Zi IH il/i ioii) :

      I. In AT. -To the Synoptists alone an- we

      indebted for any account of this James. He was

      the son of Zebedee and (lie brother of

      1. Family John (Ml 4 21: Mk 1 111; Lk 5 Relations, 10). As 1 he Synopt ists generally place etc 1 lie name of .lames before that of John,

      and allude to the latter as "the brot her of James," it is inferred thai James was ihe elder of the t\\\\\\\\vo brothers. His mother s name \\\\\\\\vas probably Salome, the sister of the mother of Jesus ((f Ml 27 51 i; Mk 15 -10; Jn 19 25), but this is disputed by some (cf BUKTIIKKX OK THE LOUD). J. \\\\\\\\vas a fisherman by trade, and worked along with his father and brother (Mt 4 21). According to Lk, i heso \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\-ere ]>ai t ners with Simon (5 10), and this is also implied in Mk (1 lit). As they owned several boa I. sand employed hired servants ( Lk 5 11; Mk 1 JO), the establishment, they possessed must, have been considerable.

      The call i,) J. K> follow Chrisi (Mt 4 18-22; Mk

      1 Hi JO; Lk 5 1-11) was given by Jesus as He

      was walkh.g by the sea of (Jalilee

      2. First (Mt 4 IS;. There lie saw "James Call the son of /cbedee, and John his

      brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, mending 1 heir nets; and lie called them. And they st raiuht way left the boat and their father, and followed him" (Mt 4 21.22;. The account of Lk varies in part from those of Ml and Mk, and con tains t he additional detail of the miraculous draught of fishes, at which J. and John also were ama/ed. This version of Lk is regarded by some as an amalgamation of the earlier accounts with Jn 21 1-S. As the above incident took place after the im prisonment of John the Baptist, when Jesus had

      departed into (ialilee (Mt 4 12; Mk

      3. Proba- 1 14), and as then 1 is no mention of J. tion and among those 1 who received the pre- Ordination liminary call recorded by John (cf Jn

      1 35-51; 3 24, and cf ANDREW), it is probable that while Peter and Andrew made the pilgrimage to Bethany, J. and the other partners remained in (ialilee to carry on the business of their trade. Yet, on the return of Peter and Andrew, the inquiries of J. must have been eager concerning what they had seen and heard. His mind and imagination became filled with their glowing ac counts of the newlv found Lamb of God" (Jn 1 Hti) and of the preaching of John the Baptist, until he inwardly dedicated his life to Jesus and only awaited an opportunity to declare his allegiance openly. By this is the apparently abrupt nature of the call, as recorded by the Synoptists, to be ex plained. After a period of companionship and probat ionership with his Master, when he is men tioned as being present, at the healing of Simon s wife s mother at Capernaum (Mk 1 29-31), he was ordained one of the Twelve Apostles (Mt 10 2; Mk 3 17; Lk 6 14; Acts 1 VI).

      From this time onward he occupied a prominent

      place among the apo.-l les, and, along with Peter

      and John, became the special confi-

      4. Apostle- danf of Jesus. These three alone of ship the apostles were present at the rais ing of Jairus daughter (Mk 5 37;

      Lk 8 51), at the Transfiguration (Mt 17 1-S; Mk 9 2-S; Lk 9 2S-3C>;, and at the Agony in the Carden of (lethsemane (Mt 26 36-46; Mk 14

      32 12). Shortly after the Transfiguration, when Jesus, having "stedfastly set his face to go to .Jerusa lem" ( Lk 9 51), was passing through Samaria, the ire of J. and .John was kindled by the ill reception accorded to Him by the populace (Lk 9 53). They therefore 1 asked of Jesus, "Lord, wilt thou that we bid fire to come down from heaven, and con sume them?" (Lk 9 54). "But he turned, and re buked them" (vor 55). It was probably this hot headed impetuosity and fanaticism that won for them the surname "Boanerges, which is, Sons of thunder," bestowed on them when they were or dained to the Twelve (Mk 3 17;. Yet, upon this last occasion, there was some excuse for their action. The impression left by the Transfiguration was still deep upon them, and they fell strongly that their Lord, whom they had lately beheld "in his glory" with "countenance altered" and "glistering raiment," should be subjected to such indignities by the Samaritans. Lpon the occasion of Jesus last journey to Jerus (Mk 10 32), t he two brot hers gave expression to this presumptuous impetuosity in a more selfish manner (Mk 10 35-45). Presum ing on their intimacy with Jesus, they made the request of him, "(Irant unto us that we may sit, one on thy right hand, and one on thy left hand, in thy glory" (Mk 10 37;. In the account of Mt (20 20-28), the words are put in the mouth of their mother. The request drew forth the rebuke of Jesus (Mk 10 38), and moved the ten with indig nation (Mk 10 40); but by the words of their Lord peace was again restored (Mk 10 42-45). After the arrival of Jesus in Jerus, when lie "sat on the mount of Olives over against the temple," J. was one of the four who put the question to Him concerning the last things (Mk 13 3.4). He was also present when the risen Jesus appeared for the 3d time to the disciples and the miraculous draught of fishes was made at the sea of Tiberias (Jn 21 1-14).

      J. was the first martyr among the apostles, being slain by King Herod Agrippa I about 44. AD,

      shortly before Herod s own death. 5. Death The vehemence and fanaticism which

      were characteristic of J. had made him to be feared and hated among the Jewish enemies of the Christians, and therefore when "Herod the king put forth his hands to afflict certain of the church . ... he killed J. the brother of John with the sword" (Acts 12 1.2). Thus did J. fulfil the prophecy of Our Lord that he too should drink of the cup of his Master (Mk 10 39).

      //. In Apocryphal Literature. According to the "(Jencalogies of the. Twelve Apostles" (.cf Budge, Con- ti tiiliittjs of tin-. Apostles, II, 49), "Zebedee was of the house of Levi, and his wife of the house of .ludah. Now, because the father of James loved him greatly he counted him among the family of his father Leyi, and similarly because the mother of John loved him greatly, she counted him among the family of her father Judah. And they were surnamed Children of Thunder, for they were of both the priestly house and of the royal house." The Acts of St. John, a heretical work 9f the 2(1 cent., referred to by Clement of Alexandria in his Hupiituposis and also by Eusebius (HE, 111, 25), gives an account of the call of J. and his presence at the Trans figuration, similar in part to that of the Gospels, but giving fantastic details concerning the supernatural nature of Christ s body, and how its appearances brought confusion to J. and other disciples (cf Hennecke, Hand- liuch zu den neutestamentlichen Apokri/phtn, 423-59). The Acts of St. James in India (cf Budge, II, 295-303) tells of the missionary journey of J. and Peter to India, of the appearance of Christ to them in the form of a beaut iftil young man, of their healing a blind man, and of their imprisonment, miraculous release, and their conversion of the people. According to the Martyrdom of St. James (Budge, II, 304-8), J. preached to the 12 tribes scattered abroad, and persuaded them to give their first-fruits to the, church instead of to Herod. The accounts of his trial and death are similar to that in Acts 12 1-2.

      J. is the patron saint of Spain. The legend of his preaching there, of his death in Judaea, of the trans-




      pqrtation of his body under the guidance of angels to Iria and of the part that his miraculous appearances played in the history of Spain, is given in Mrs. Jameson Kacred and Legendary Art, 1, 23041.

      (2) James the son of Alphaeus (6 TOV AX.<}>cuou,

      ho tou Alp/talou; for etymology, etc, of James, see above): One of the Twelve Apostles (Alt 10 3; iMk 3 IS; Lk 6 15; Acts 1 13). By Mt and Mk he is coupled with Thaddaeus, and by Lk and Acts with Simon Zelotes. As Matthew or Levi is also called the son of Alphaeus (cf Mt 9 9; Mk 2 14), it is possible that he and James were brothers. According to the Genealogies of the Apostles (cf Budge, Contendings of the Apostles, II, 50), James was of the house of Gad. The Martyrdom of St. James, the son of Alphaeus (cf Budge, ib, 2G4-G6) records that James was stoned by the Jews for preaching Christ , and was "buried by the Sanctuary in Jems."

      This James is generally identified with James the Little or the Less, the brother of Joses and son of Mary (Mt 27 50; Mk 15 40). In Jn 19 25 this Mary is called the wife of Cleophas (AV) or Clopas (RV), who is thus in turn identified with Alphaeus. There is evidence in apocryphal lit. of a Simon, a son of Clopas, who was also one of the disciples (cf NATHAXAEL). If this be the same as Simon Ze lotes, it would explain why he and James (i.e. as b* ing brothers) were coupled together in the apos tolic lists of Lk and Acts. Some have applied the phrase "his mother s sister" in Jn 19 25 to Mary the wife of Clopas, instead of to a separate person, and have thus attempted to identify James the son of Alphaeus with James the brother of Our Lord. For a further discussion of the problem, See BRETH REN OF THE LOUD.

      (3) James, "the Lord s brother" (6 d,SX4>6s TOV Kupiov, ho adelphos toil Kuriou):

      I. NT References. This James is mentioned by name only twice in the Gospels, i.e. when, on the visit of Jesus to Nazareth, the count ry-

      1. In the men of Our Lord referred in con- Gospels tempt uous terms to His earthly

      kindred, in order to disparage His preaching (Mt 13 55; Mk 6 3). As J. was one of "his brethren," he was probably among the group of Christ s relatives who sought to interview Him during His tour through Galilee with the Twelve (Mt 12 46). By the same reasoning, he accompanied Jesus on His journey to Capernaum (Jn 2 12), and joined in attempting to persuade Him to depart from Galilee for Judaea on the eve of the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7 3). At this feast J._was present (7 10), but was at this time a non-believer in Jesus (cf 7 5, "Even his brethren did not believe on him").

      _Yet the seeds of conversion were being sown

      within him, for, after the crucifixion, he remained

      in Jerua with his mother and brethren,

      2. In the and formed one of that earliest band Epistles of believers who "with one accord

      continued stedfastly in prayer" (Acts 1 14). While there, he probably took part in the election of Matthias to the vacant apostleship (Acts 1 15-25). J. was one of the earliest wit nesses to the resurrection, for, after the risen Lord had manifested Himself to the five hundred, "he was seen of James" (1 Cor 15 7 AV). By this his growing belief and prayerful expectancy received confirmation. About 37 or 38 AD, J., "the Lord s brother" (Gal 1 19), was still in Jerus, and had an interview there for the first time with Paul, when the latter returned from his 3 years sojourn in Damascus to visit Cephas, or Peter (Gal 1 18. 19; cf Acts 9 26). In several other passages the name of J. is coupled with that of Peter. Thus, when Peter escaped from prison (about 44 AD), he

      gave instruct ions to those in the house of John Mark that they should immediately inform "James and the brethren" of the manner of his escape (Acts 12 17). By the time of the Jerus convention, i.e. about 51 AD (cf Gal 2 1), J. had reached the posi tion of first overseer in the church (cf Acts 15 13. 19). Previous to this date, during Paul s ministry at Antioch, he had dispatched certain men thither to further the mission, and the teaching of these had caused dissension among the newly converted Christians and their leaders (Acts 15 1.2; Gal 2 12). The conduct of Peter, over whom J. seems to have had considerable influence, was the prin cipal matter of contention (cf Gal 2 11 ff). How ever, at the Jerus convention the dispute was ami cably settled, and the pillars of the church, J., John and Cephas, gave to Paul and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship (Gal 2 9). The speech of J. on this occasion (Acts 15 13-29), his sympathy with the religious needs of the gentile world (ver 17), his desire that formalism should raise no bar rier to their moral and spiritual advancement (vs, and his large-hearted tributes to the "beloved Barnabas and Paul (vs 25.26), indicate that J. was a leader in whom the church was blessed, a leader who loved peace more than faction, the spirit more than the law, and who perceived that religious communities with different forms of ob servance might still live and work together in com mon allegiance to Christ. Once more (58 AD), J. was head of the council at Jerus when Paul made report of his labors, this time of his 3d missionary journey (Acts 21 17 ff). At this meeting Paul was admonished for exceeding the orders he had received at the first council, in that he had en deavored to persuade the converted Jews also to neglect circumcision (Acts 21 21), and was com manded to join in the vow of purification (Acts 21 23-20). There is no Scriptural account of the death of J. From 1 Cor 9 5 it has been inferred that he was married. This is, however, only a con jecture, as the passage refers to those who "lead about a sister, a wife" (AV), while, so far aswe know, J. remained throughout his life in Jerus.

      This J. has been regarded as the author of the Ep. of Jas, "a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ"; cf JAMES, EPISTLE OF. Also, for details concerning his relationship to Christ, cf BRETHREN OF THE LORD.

      //. References in Apocryphal Literature. J. figures in one of the miraculous events recorded in the gnostic "Gospel of the Infancy, by Thomas the Israelite phi losopher," being cured of a snake-bite by the infant Jesus (cf Hennecke, Ilnndtmrh zu den neutestamentlichen Apokryphen, 73). According to the Gospel of the He brews (cf il), 11-21), J. had also partaken of the cup of of the Lord, and refused to eat till he had seen the risen Lord. Christ acknowledged this tribute by appearing to J. first. In the Acts of Peter (cf Budge, Contemli/n/.-i of the Apostles, II, 475), it is stated that "three days after the ascension of our Lord into heaven, James, whom our Lord called his brother in the flesh, consecrated the Ott ering and we all drew nigh to partake thereof: atid when ten days had passed after the ascension of our Lord, wo all assembled in the holy fortress of Zion and we stood up to say the prayer of sanctification, and we made supplication unto God and besought Him with humility, and James also entreated Him concerning the descent of the Holy Ghost upon the Offering." The Preaching of St. James the Just (cf Budge, II, 78-si) tells of the appointment of J. to the bishopric of Jerus, of his preaching, healing of the sick and casting out of devils there. This is confirmed by the evidence of Clement of Alexandria (Kuseb., HE, II, 1). In the Martyrdom of St. James the Just (cf Budge, II, 82-89), it is stated that J., " the youngest of the sons of Joseph," alienated, by his preaching, Piobsata from her husband Ananus, the governor of Jerus. Ananus therefore in flamed the Jews against J., and they hurled him down from off the pinnacle of the temple. Hegesippus, quoted by Kusebius (RE, 11,23), and Jos (Ant, XX, ix, 1), testify to the general truth of this. It is thus probable that James was martyred about 02 or 03 AD.

      Besides the op. which bears his name, J. was also the reputed author of the Protevangelium Jacobi. a work




      1. CIIAH.U n:iii>Ti< .- in -I M i: I liMSTl.B 1. Jewish ^. Aullii>riUitivo : ,. lYaetieal

      II. Al I HOH "I Til 1 Kl ISTl.E

      111. STYI.B 01 TH i. Krivri K I. IMaiiiness

      a. i u>od < ircek

      : ,. Vividness -I. Duudiplosis

      5. Kiglires of Speech (i. I nlikeness Id I aul 7. I .ikeae.^s to Jesus 1\\\\\\\\". [ ) VTK ov TII I. KIM- ; i K V. |I l.sTUKt "K I ll I- I - I lSTLE

      \\\\\\\\ [. MKSSACI-; OK THE KIM.STLK TO ()rn Ti. \\\\\\\\IF.S

      I. To I In 1 i irl i-l

      I I . To i lir Sociologist

      :;. To tho Student of the Life and < Jharacter of Jesus

      LITKK VTI in-:

      I. Characteristics of the Epistle. I IK Ep. <

      Jas is the most Jewish writing in the NT. I lie (lospel according to Ml was written 1. Jewish for tin- .Jews. The Ep. to the Hejs addressed explicitly to liiein. The Apocalypse is full of the spirit ofllieOT. The Ep. of .hide is .Jewish loo. Yet all of these hooks have more of t he dist inci ively ( hrist ian element in t hem than we can find in the Ep. of Jas. If we eliminate two or three passages containing references 1,> Christ, the whole epistle might find its place just as properly in the Canon of the OT as in that of the NT, as far as its substance of doctrine and contents is concerned. That could not. bo said of any other hook in the NT. There is no mention of the in- carnal ion or of the resurrection, (lie two funda mental facts of the 1 Christian faith. The word "gospel" does not occur in the ep. There is no sug gest ion that, the Messiah has appeared and no presentat ion of 1 hi- possibility <.! redemp! ion t h rough Him. The teaching throughout is that of a lofty morality which aims at the fulfilment of the re quirements of the Mosaic law. It is not strange t herot ore t hat Spilt a and others have thought, t hat we have in the Ep. of .Jas a treatise written by an unconverted .Jew which lias been adapted to Chris tian use by the interpolation of the two phrases containing the name of Christ in 1 1 and 2 1. Spit t a thinks that this can lie the only explanation of 1 ho fact that wo have here an op. practically ignoring the life and work of Jesus and every dis tinctively Christian doctrine, and without a trace of any of the great controversies in the early Chris tian church or any of the specific features of its propaganda. This judgment is a superficial one, and rests upon superficial indications rather than any appreciation of the underlying spirit and prin ciples of the book. The spirit of Christ is here, and there is no need to label it. The principles of this op. are the principles of the Sermon on the Mount. There are more s to that Sermon in this op. than can he found anywhere else in the NT in the same space. The op. represents the idealiza tion of Jewish logalism under the transforming in fluence of the Christian motive and life It is not a theological discussion. It is an ethical appeal. It has to do wit h t he outward life for t he most part , and the life it pictures is that of a Jew informed with the spirit of Christ. The spirit is invisible; in the op. as in the individual man. It is the body which appears and t he out ward life with which thai body has to do. The body of the op. is Jewish, and the outward life to which it oxhorts is that of a profoundly pious Jew. The Jews familiar with the OT would read this op. and find its language and tone thai to which they wore accustomed in their sacred books. Jas is evidently written by a

      Jew for Jews. It is Jewish in character throughout.

      This is apparent in the following particulars: (1) The op. is addressed to the 12 tribes which are of l ho Dispersion (1 1). The Jews wore scattered abroad through the ancient world. From Babylon to Homo, wherever any community of them might he gat hored for commercial or social purposes, t hose exhortations could he carried and read. Probably the o]>. was circulated most widely in Syria and Asia Minor, but it may have gone out to the ends of the earth. Here and there in the ghettos of the Horn Empire, groups of the Jewish exiles would gather and listen while one of their number read this letter from home. All of its terms and its allu sions would recall familiar homo scenes. (2) Their meeting-place is called "your synagogue" (2 2). (. }) Abraham is mentioned" as "our father" (2 21). ( Ij (lod is given the OT name, "the Lord of Sa- baot h" (5 4). (o) The law is not to be spoken against, nor judged, but reverently and loyally obeyed. It is a royal law to which every loyal Jew will he subject, li is a law of liberty, to be freely obeyed (2 S-12; 4 11). (6) The sins of the flesh are not inveighed against in the op., but those sins to which the Jews were more conspicuously liable, such as the love of money and the distinction which money may bring (2 2-i), worldliness and pride (4 4-(>), impatience and murmuring (5 7-11 ), and other sins of the temper and tongue (3 1-12; 4 11.12). (7) The illust rat ions of fait hfulnoss and pat ioneo and prayer are found in< )T characters, in Abraham (2 21), Ilahab (2 25), Job (5 11), and Elijah (5 17.18). The whole atmosphere of the op. is Jewish.

      The writer of this ep. speaks as one having

      authority. He is not on his defence, as Paul so

      often is. There is no trace of apology

      2. Authori- in his presentation of the truth. His tative official position must have boon recog nized and unquestioned. He is as

      sure of his standing with his readers as he is of the absoluteness of his message.

      No OT lawgiver or prophet was more certain that ho spoke the word of the lie has the vehemence of Klijah and the assured meekness of Moses. lie lias been culled "the Amos of the NT," and there arc; para graphs \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\hich recall the very expressions used by Amos and which are full of the same fiery eloquence and pro phetic fervor. Both fill their writings with metaphors drawn from the sky and the sea, from natural objects and domestic experiences. Both seem to be country- bred and to bo in sympathy with simplicity and poverty. Both inveigh against the luxury and the cruelty of the idle rich, and both abhor the ceremonial and the ritual which are substituted for individual righteousness. lUulaclii was not the last of the prophets. John the Baptist was not the last prophet of the Old Dispensation. The writer of this ep. stands at the end of that prophetic; line, and lie is greater than John the Baptist or any who have preceded him because lie stands within the borders of the kingdom of Christ. ITe speaks with authority, as a messenger of (iod. He belongs to the goodly fellow ship of the prophets and of the apostles. lie has the authority of both. There are 5-i imperatives in the 108 verses of this ep.

      The op. is interested in conduct more than in

      creed. It has very little formulated theology, less

      than any other ep. in the NT; but

      3. Practical it insists upon practical morality

      throughout. It begins and it closes with an exhortation to patience and prayer. It preaches a gospel of good works, based upon love to God anil love to man. It demands liberty, equality, fraternity for all. It enjoins humility and justice and peace. It prescribes singleness of purpose and stedfastness of soul. It requires obedience to the law, control of the passions, a:.d control of the tongue. Its ideal is to be found in a good life, characterized by the meekness of wis dom. The writer of the ep. has caught the spirit of the ancient prophets, but the lessons that he teaches are t akon, for the; most part , from the Wisdom lit. of the OT and the Apoc. His direct quotations



      are from the Pent and the Book of Prov; but it has been estimated that there are 10 allusions to the Book of Prov, 6 to the Book of Job, 5 to the Book of Wisd, and 15 to the Book of Ecclus. This Wis dom lit. furnishes the staple of his meditation and the substance of his teaching. He has little or nothing to say about the great doctrines of the Christian church.

      He has much to say about thn wisdom that cometh down from above and is pure, peaceable, gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, without hypocrisy (3 15-17). The whole ep. shows that the author had stored his mind with the rich treasure of the ancient wisdom, and his material, while offered as his own. is both old and new. The form is largely that of the Wisdom lit. of the .Jews. It lias more parallels with Jesus the son of iSirach than with any writer of the sacred books.

      The substance of its exhortation, however, is to be found in the Synoptics and more particularly in the Sermon on the Mount. Its wisdom is the wisdom of Jesus the son of Joseph, who is the Christ .

      These are the three; outstanding characteristics of this ep. In form and on the surface it is the most Jew ish and least Christian of the writings in the NT. Its Christianity is latent and not apparent. Yet it is the. most authoritative in its tone of any of the epp. in the NT, unless it be those of the apostle John. John must have occupied a position of undisputed primacy in the Christian church after the death of all the other apostles, when he wrote his epp. It is noteworthy that the writer of this ep. assumes a tone of like authority with that of John. John was the apostle of love, Paul of faith, and Peter of hope. This writer is the apostle of good works, the apostle of the wisdom which manifests itself in pi-ace and purity, mercy and morality, and in obedience; to the royal law, the law of liberty. In its union of Jewish form, authoritative tone, and insistence upon practical morality, the ep. is unique among tile NT books.

      II. Author of the Epistle. The address of the ep. states that the writer is "James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ" (1 1). The tradition of the church has identified this James with the brother of Our Lord. Clement of Alex andria says that Peter and James and John, who were 1 the three apostles most honored of the Lord, chose James, the Lord s brother, to be the bishop of Jerus after the Lord s ascension (Euseb.. II K, II, 1). This tradition agrees well with all the no tices of James in the NT books. After the death of James the brother of John, Peter was thrown into prison, and having been miraculously released, he asked that the news be sent to James and to the brethren (Acts 12 17). This James is evidently in authority in the church at this time. In the apostolical conference held at Jerus, after Peter and Paul and Barnabas had spoken, this same James sums up the whole discussion, and his de cision is adopted by the assembly and formulated in a letter which has some very striking |s in its phraseology to this ep. (Acts 15 6-29). When Paul came to Jerus for the last time he reported his work to James and all the elders present with him (Acts 21 18). In the Ep._to the Gal Paul says that at the time of one of his visits to Jerus he saw none of the apostles save Peter and James the Lord s brother (Gal 1 18.10). At another visit he re ceived the right hand of fellowship from James and Cephas and John (Gal 29). At a later time cer tain who came from James to Antioch led Peter into backsliding from his former position of toler ance of the Gentiles as equals in the Christian church (Gal 2 12).

      All of these references would lead us to suppose that James stood in a position of supreme authority in the mother-church at Jerus, the oldest church of Christendom. He presides in the assemblies of the church. He speaks the final and authoritative word. _ Peter and Paul defer to him. Paul men tions his name before t hat of Peter and John. When he was exalted to this leadership we do not know,

      but all indications seem to point to the fact that at a very early period James was the recognized executive authority in the church at Jerus, which was the church of Pentecost and the church of the apostles. All Jews looked to Jerus as the chief seat of their worship and the central authority of their religion. All Christian Jews would look to Jerus as the primitive source of their organization and faith, and the head of 1 he church at Jerus would be recognized by them as their chief authority. The authoritative tone of this ep. comports well with this position of primacy ascribed to James.

      All tradition agrees in describing James as a Hebrew of the Hebrews, a man of the most rigid and ascetic morality, faithful in his observance (-if all the ritual regu lations of the Jewish faith. Hegesippus tells us that lie was holy from his mother s womb. He drank no wine nor strong drink. He ate no flesh. Ho alone was per mitted to enter with the priests into the holy place, and he was found there frequently upon Ids knees begging forgiveness for the people, and his knees became hard like those of a camel in consequence of his constantly bending them in his worship of God and asking forgive ness for the people (Euseb., HE, II, 2:i). He was called James the Just. All had confidence in his sincerity and integrity, and many were persuaded by him to believe on the Christ. This Jew, faithful in the observance of all that the Jews held sacred, and more devoted to the temple-worship than the most pious among them, was a good choice for the head of the Christian church. The blood of David flowed in his veins. He had all the Jew s pride in the special privileges of the chosen race. The Jews respected him and the Christians revered him. No man among them commanded the esteem of the entire population as much as he.

      Jos (Ant, XX, ix) tells us that Ananus the high priest; had James stoned to death, and that the most equitable of the citizens immediately roue in revolt against such a lawless procedure, and Ananus was deposed after only three months rule. This testimony of Jos simply sub stantiates all that we know from other sources concern ing (he high standing of .lames in the whole community. Ilegesippus says that James was first thrown from a pin nacle of the temple, and then they stoned him because he was not killed by the fall, and he was finally beaten over the head with a fuller s club; and then he adds significantly. "Immediately Vespasian besieged them" (Kuseb., IIE, II, 23). There would seem to have been quite a widespread conviction among both the Christians and the Jews that the afflictions which fell upon the holy city and the chosen people in the following years were in part a visitation because of the great crime of the murder of this just man. We can understand how a man with this reputation and character would write an ep. so Jew ish in form and substance and so insistent in its demands for a practical morality as is the Ep. of Jas. All the characteristics of the ep. seem explicable on the suppo sition of authorship by James the brother of the Lord. We accept the church tradition without hesitation.

      ///. The Style of the Epistle. The sentence con struction is simple and straightforward. It re minds us of the Eng. of Bunyan and

      1. Its DeFoc. There is usually no good Plainness reason for misunderstanding anything

      James says. He puts his truth plainly,

      and the words he uses have no hidden or mystical

      meanings. His thought- is transparent as his life.

      It is somewhat surprising to find that the Gr of

      the Ep. of Jas is better than that of the other NT

      writers, with the single exception of

      2. Its Good the author of the Ep. to the Hebrews. Greek Of course this may be dtie to the fact

      that James had the services of an amanuensis who was a Gr scholar, or that his own MS was revised by such a man; but, although un expected, it is not impossible that James himself may have been capable of writing such Gr as this.

      It is not the good Or of the classics, and it is not the poor and provincial Gr of Paul. There is more care for literary form than in the uncouth periods of the gentile apostle, and the vocabulary would seem to indicate an acquaintance with the literary as well as the commercial and the conversational (Jr. "Galilee was studded with Gr towns, and it was certainly in the power of any Gali lean to gain a knowledge of Gr We may reason ably suppose that our author would not have scrupled to avail himself of the opportunities within his reach, so as to master the Gr language, and learn something of Gr philosophy. This would be natural, even if wo think of James as impelled only by a desire to gain wisdom and



      linou ledi- e for himself: hut if we lliink of him also us the principal irarhrr of the Jewish believers, many <>f whom were Hellenists, instructed in 1 he \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\isdom of Alexandria, then l he nauiral bent would take I he shape of d lit y : he would be a s! udent of < i r in order I ha t he might l>e a more eircctivc instructor to his own people" (Mayor. Tin K i>.

      ,if SI. .1,11,1, x. CCXXXVi). The ( ir of the ep. is 1 he st I id led ( ir- of one u ho u as not a nath e to it. but who had famil iarized himself with its literature. James could have done so and the ep. may be proof that he did.

      , hmrs is never content to talk in abstractions. He always .sets a picture before his own eyes and those of his readers. He has the 3. Its dramatic instinct. He lias the secret

      Vividness of sustained interest, lie is not dis cussing things in general Imi things in particular. He is an artist and believes in con crete realities. At the same time lie has a touch of poet rv in him, and a fine sense of the analogies running through all Nature and all life. The doubting man is like the sea spume (1 <>). The rich man fades ;i\\\\\\\\vay in his goings, even as the beauty of the flower falls and perishes (1 11). The syna- goiiue scene with its distinction between the rich and the poor is set before us with the clear-cut im- pressiveness of a cameo (2 1-4). The Pecksniffian philanthropist, who seems to think that men can lie fed not by bread alone but by the words that proceed magnificently from his mouth, is pilloried hero for all time (2 15.1l>). The untamable tongue t hat is set on fire of hell is put in t he full blaze of its world of iniquity, and the damage if does is shown to be like that of a forest fire (3 1-12). The picture of the wisdom that comes from above with its sevenfold excellences of purity, peaceableness, gentleness, mercy, fruit fulness, impartiality, sin cerity, is wort liy to hang in t he gallery of 1 lie world s masterpieces (3 17). The vaunting tradesmen, whose lives are like vanishing vapor, stand there before t he eyes of all in Jerus (4 lo-l(>). The rich, whose luxuries he describes even while he denounces their cruelties and prophesies their coming day of slaughter, are the rich who walk the streets of his own city i5 !-(>). His short sentences go like shots straight to the mark. We feel (lie impact and the impress of them. There is an energy behind them and a reality in them that makes them live in our thought. His abrupt questions are like the quick interrogations of a cross-examining lawyer -2 1-7.14.16; 3 11.12; His prov erbs have the intensity of the accumulated and compressed wisdom of I he ages. They are irredu cible minimums. They are memorable .sayings, t rea- siired in the speech of the world ever since his day.

      Sometimes James adds sontonco to sentence with the repelition of some leading word or phrase il l-(i.l!)-24; 3 2-8). It is the painful style of one who is 4 Its Dua- llnl altogether at home with the language \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\hich he has chosen as the vehicle of his dtplosis thought. It is the method by which a dis

      cussion could bo continued Indefinitely. Nothing bul the vividness of the imagery and theinton- sft> of tlie thought saves James from fatal monotony in the use of this device.

      James has a keen eye for illustrations. He is not blind to the 1 beauties and wonders of Nature. He sees what is happening on every hand, 5. Its and he is quick to catch any honii-

      Figures of letical suggestion it may hold . Does Speech he stand by the seashore? The surge

      that is driven by the wind and tossed reminds him of the man who is unstable in all his ways, because lie has no anchorage of faith, and his convictions are like driftwood on a sea of doubt 1 6). Then lie notices ih ;l t the great ships are turned about by a small rudder, and he thinks how the tongue is a small member, but it accomplishes great things (3 4.5). Dues he walk under the sun light and rejoice in it as the source of so many good and perfect gifts? He sees in it an image of the

      miodness of Clod that is never eclipsed and never exhausted, unvarying for evermore (1 17). He uses t he nat ural phenomena of t he land in which he lives to make his meaning plain at every turn: the flower of the field that passes away (1 10.11), the forest fire that sweeps the mountain side and like a living torch lights up the whole land (3 5), the sweet and salt springs (3 11), the fig trees and the olive trees and the vines (3 12), the seed-sowing and the fruit-bearing (3 IS), the morning mist immediately lost to view (4 14), the early and the latter rain for which the husbandman waiteth patiently (5 7).

      There is more of the appreciation of Nature in this one short cp. of Jas than in all the epp. of Paul put together. Human life was more interesting to Paul than natural scenery. However, James is interested in human life just as profoundly as Paul. He is constantly endowing inanimate things with living qualities. He represents sin as a harlot, conceiving and bringing forth death (1 15). The word of truth has a like power and conceives and brings forth those who live to Clod s praise (1 IS). Pleasures are like gay hosts of enemies in a tourna ment, who deck themselves bravely and ride forth with singing and laughter, but. whose mission is to wage war and to kill (4 1.2). The laborers may be dumb in the presence of the rich because of their dependence and their fear, but their wages, fraudu lently withheld, have a tongue, and cry out to high heaven for vengeance (5 4). What is friendship with the world? It is adultery, James says (4 4). The rust of unjust riches testifies against those who have accumulated them, and then turns upon them and eats their flesh like fire (5 3). James observed the man who glanced at himself in the mirror in the morning, and saw that his face was not clean, and who went away and thought no more about it for that whole day, and he found in him an illus tration of the one who heard the word and did not do it (1 2o.24). The cp. is full of these rhetorical figures, and they prove that James was something of a poet at heart, even as Jesus was. lit 1 writes in prose, but there is a marked rhythm in all of his speech. He has an ear for harmony as he has an eye for beauty everywhere.

      The Pauline epistles begin with salutations and close

      with benedictions. They are filled with autobiographical

      touches and personal messages. Xone

      6. Its Un- of these things appear here. The ep. 1:1^ begins and ends with all abruptness, it

      has an address, but no thanksgiving, to Paul There are no personal messages and no

      indications of any intimate personal rela tionship between the author and his readers. They are his " beloved brethren." lie knows their needs and their sins, but lie may never have seen their faces or visited their homes. The ep. is more like a prophet s appeal lo a nation than a personal letter.

      Both the substance of the teaching and the method of its presentation remind us of the dis courses of Jesus. James says less

      7. Its Like- about the Master than any other ness to writer in the NT, but his speech is Jesus more like that of the Master than the

      speech of any one of them. There are at least ten parallels to the Sermon on the Mount in this short cp., and for almost everything that James has to say we can recall some statement of Jesus which might have suggested it. When the parallels fail at any point, we are inclined to suspect that James may be repeating some unrecorded ut terance of Our Lord. He seems absolutely faith ful to his memory of his brother s teaching. He is the servant of Jesus in all his exhortation and per suasion.

      Did the Master shock His disciples faith by the loftiness of the Christian ideal He set before them in His great sermon, "Ye therefore shall be perfect,



      as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Mt 5 48)? James sets the, same high standard in the very fore front of his ep. : "Let patience have its perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, lacking in nothing" (1 4). Did the Master say, "Ask, and it shall be given you" (Mt 7 7)? James says, "If any of you lacketh wisdom, let him ask of God . . . . ; and it shall be given him" (1 5). Did the Master add a condition to His sweeping promise to prayer and say, "Whosoever .... shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that what he saith cometh to pass; he shall have it" (Mk 11 23)? James hastens to add the same condition, "Let him ask in faith, nothing doubting: for he that doubteth is like the surge of the sea driven by the wind and tossed" (1 (V). Did the Master close the great sermon with His parable of the Wise Man and the Foolish Man, saying, "Every one thatheareth these words of mine , and doeth them, shall be likened unto a wise man. And every one that heareth these words of mine, and doeth them not ( , shall be likened unto a foolish man" (Mt 7 24. 20)? James is much concerned about wisdom, and therefore he exhorts his readers, "He ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deluding your own selves" (1 22). Had the Master declared, "If ye know these things, blessed are ye if ye do them" (Jn 13 17,)? James echoes the thought when he says, "A doer that worketh, this man shall be; blessed in his doing" (1 25). Did the Master say to the disciples, "Blessed are ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of Cod" (Lk 6 20)? James has the same sympathy with the poor, and he says, "Hearken, my beloved brethren; did not God choose them that, are poor as to the world to be rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he promised to them that love him?" (2 5). Did the Master inveigh against the rich, and say, "Woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation. Woe unto you, ye that are full now! for ye shall hunger. Woe unto you, ye that, laugh now! for ye shall mourn and weep" (Lk 6 24.25)? James bursts forth into the same invective and prophesies the same sad reversal of fortune, "Come now, ye rich, weej) and howl for your miseries that are coming upon you" (5 1). "Cleanse your hands, ye sin ners; and purify your hearts, ye doubleminded. Be afflict ed, and mourn, and weep : let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness" (4 8.0). Had Jesus said, "Judge! not, that ye be not judged" (Mt 7 1)? James repeats the ex hortation, "Speak not one againsl another, brethren. He that .... judgeth his brother .... judgeth the law: .... but who art thou that judgest thy neighbor ?" (4 11.12). Had Jesus said, "Who soever shall humble himself shall be exalted" (Mt 23 12) ? We find the very words in James, "Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall exalt you" (4 10). Had Jesus said, "I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by the heaven, for it is the throne of God; nor by the earth, for it

      is the footstool of his feet But let your

      speech be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: and whatsoever is more than these is of the evil one" (Mt 6 34-37) ? Here in James we come upon the exact ||: "But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by t he heaven, nor by the earth, nor by any other oath; but let your yea be yea, and your nay, nay; that ye fall not under judgment" (5 12).

      We remember how the Master began the Sermon on the Mount with the declaration that even those who mourned and were persecuted and reviled and reproached were blessed, in spite of all their suffer ing and trial. Then we notice that James begins his ep. with the same paradoxical putting of the Christian faith, "Count it all joy, my brethren, when ye fall into manifold trials" (1 2 ARVrn) We

      remember how Jesus proceeded in His sermon to set forth the spiritual significance and the assured permanence of the law; and we notice; that James treats the law with the same respect and puts upon it the same high value. He calls it "the perfect law" (1 25), "the royal law" (2 8), the "law of liberty (2 12). We remember what Jesus said about forgiving others in order that we ourselves may be forgiven; and we know where James got his authority for saying, "Judgment is without mercy to him that hath showed no mercy" (2 13) We remember all that the Master said about good trees and corrupt trees being known by their fruits, "Do men gat her grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?" (Mt 7 16 7 20). ( Then in the Ep. of Jas we find a like question, "Can a fig tree, my brethren, yield olives, or a vine figs?" (3 12). We remember that the Master said, "Know ye that he is nigh, even at the doors" (Mt 24 33). We are not surprised to find the statement here in James, "Behold, the judge standeth before the doors" (5 9). These reminiscences of the sayings of the Master meet us on every page. It maybe that there are many more of them than we are able to identify. Their number is sufficiently large, however, to show us that James is steeped in the truths taught by Jesus, and not only their substance but their phraseology constantly reminds us of Him.

      IV. Date of the Epistle. There arc those who think that the Ep. of Jas is the oldest ep. in the NT. Among those who favor an early date are Mayor, Plumptre, Alford, Stanley, Kenan, Weiss, Zahn, Heyschlag, Neander, Schneckenburger, Thiersch, and Dods.

      The reasons assigned for this conclusion arc: (1) the general Judaic tone of the ep., which seems to antedate admission of the Gentiles in any alarming numbers into the church; hut since the ep. is addressed only to Jews, why should the (ientiles be mentioned in It, whatever its date? and (2) the fact that Paul and Peter are sup posed to have quoted from .Jas in their writing; but this matter of quotation is always an uncertain one, and it has been ably argued that the quotation has been the other way about.

      Others think that the ep. was written toward the close of James s life. Among these are Kern, Wie- singer, Schmidt, Bruckner, Wordsworth, and Farrar.

      These argue (1) that the ep. gives evidence of a con siderable lapse of time in the history of the church, sufficient to allow of a declension from the .spiritual fervor of Pentecost and the establishment of distinctions among the brethren; but any of the sins mentioned in the ep in all probability could have been found in the church in any decade of its history. (2) James has a position of established authority, and those to whom he writes are not recent converts but members in long standing; but the position of James may have been established from a very early date, and in an encyclical of this sort we could not expect any indication of shorter or longer membership in the church. Doubtless some of those addressed were recent converts, while others may have been members for many years. (3) There are references to persecutions and trials which fit the later rather than the earlier date; but all that is said on this subject might be suitable in any period of the presidency of James at Jerus. (4) There are indications of a long and disap pointing delay in the Second Coming of the Lord in the repeated exhortation to patience in waiting for it; but on the other hand James says, "The coming of the Lord is at hand," and "The judge standeth before the doors" (5 7-9). The same passage is cited in proof of a belief that the immediate appearance of the Lord was expected, as in the earliest period of the church, and in proof that there had been a disappointment of this earlier belief and that it had been succeeded by a feeling that there was need of patience in waiting for the coming so long delayed.

      It seems clear to us that there are no decisive proofs in favor of any definite date for the ep. It must have been written before the martyrdom of James in the year 63 AD, and at some time during his presidency over the church at Jerus; but there is nothing to warrant us in coming to any more definite conclusion than that Davidson, Hilgenfeld, Baur, Zeller, Hausrath, von Soden, Jtilicher, Har-

      James, Ep. of Jamin



      inck Bacon :iiul others chic the ep. variously in ill., posl-Pauline period, G .t 70 t<> 1 K) ."><) AD. Tin; arguments fur any of these dates fall far short ol proof, rest largely if not wholly upon conjectures and presuppositions, and of course arc inconsistent, with any belief in the authorship by .James.

      V. History of the Epistle. --Kusebius classed -las annum those whose authenticity was disputed by some. ".James is said to be the author of the first of I lie so-called Catholic Kpp. Hut if is to be ob served that it isdisputcd; at least, not many of the ancients have mentioned it, as is the case likewise with the ep. that bears the name of^Ju.le, which is also one of the seven so-called Catholic Kpp. Nevertheless, we kno\\\\\\\\v that these also, with the rest, have been read publicly in most churches" (HE, II, 2:i ). Kusebius himself, however, quotes Jas 4 11 as Scripture and Jas 5 13 as spoken by the holy apostle. Personally he does not seem dis posed to question t he genuineness of the ep. There are s in phraseology which make it possible that, the ep. is quoted in Clement of Rome in the 1st cent., and in Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, the Kp. to Diognetus, Irenaeus, and Hennas in the 2d cent. It is omitted in the canonical list of the Mural orian Fragment and was not included in the Ohl version. Origen seems to be the first writer to quote the ep. explicitly as Scripture and to assert that it was written by James the brother of the Lord. It appears in the Pesh version and seems to have been generally recognized in the East. Cyril of Jerus, Gregory of Na/ianzus, Kphraem of Kdessa, Didymus of Alexandria, received it as canonical. The 3d Council of Carthage in 3 l .)7 AD finally settled its status for the Western church, and from that date in both the East and the West its canonieity was unquestioned until the time of the Reformation. Erasmus and Cajetan revived t he old doubts con cerning it. Luther thought it, contradicted Paul and therefore banished it to the appendix of his Bible. "James," he says, "has aimed to refute those who relied on faith without works, and is too weak for his task in mind, understanding, and words, mutilates the Scriptures, and thus directly contradicts Paul and all Scriptures, seeking to accomplish by enforcing the. law what the apostles successfully effect by love. Therefore I will not place his Kp. in my Bible among the proper leading books" (Wcrkc, XIV, 14S). He declared that it was a downright strawy ep., as compared with such as those to the Rom and to the Gal, and it had no real evangelical character. This judgment of Luther is a very hasty and regrettable one. The modern church has refused to accept it, and it is generally conceded now that Paul and James are in perfect agreement with each other, though their presentation of the, same truth from opposite points of view brings them into apparent contradiction. Paul says, "By grace have ye been saved through faith .... not of works, that no man should glory" (Eph 2 8.0). "We reckon therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law" (Horn 3 2X). James says, "Faith, if it have not works, is dead in itself" (2 17). "Ye see that by works a man is justified, and riot only by faith" (2 24). With these passages before him Luther said, "Many have toiled to reconcile Paul with James .... but to no purpose, for they are contrary, Faith justifies ; Faith does not justify ; I will pledge my life that no one can reconcile those propositions; and if he succeeds he may call me a fool" (Colloqina, II, 202).

      It would be difficult to prove Luther a fool if Paul and James were using these words, faith, works, and justification, in the same sense, or even if each were writing with full consciousness of what the other had written. They both use Abraham for

      an example, James of justification by works, and Paul of justification by faith. How can that be possible? The faith meant by James is the faith of a dead orthodoxy, an intellectual assent, to the dogmas of the church which does not result in any practical righteousness in life, such a faith as the .lemons have when they believe in the being of God and simply tremble before Him. The faith meant, by Paul is intellectual and moral and spiritual, affects the whole man, and leads him into conscious and vital union and communion with God. It is not the faith of demons; it is the fait h that redeems. Again, the works meant by Paul are the works of a dead legalism, the works done under a sense; of com pulsion or from a feeling of duty, the works done in obedience to a law which is a taskmaster, the works of a slave and not of a son. These dead works, he declares, can never give life. The works meant, by James are t he works of a believer, t he fruit, of t he fait h and love born in every believer s heart and manifest in every believer s life. The possession of faith will insure this evidence in his daily conduct and conversation; and without this evidence the mere profession of faith will not save him. The justifi cation meant by Paul is the initial justification of the Christian life. No doing of meritorious deeds will make a man worthy of salvation. He comes into the kingdom, not, on the basis of merit but on the basis of grace. The sinner is converted not by doing anything, but by believing on the Lord Jesus Christ. He approaches the threshold of the king dom and he finds that, he has no coin that is current there. He cannot buy his way in by good works; he must accept salvation by faith, as the gift of God s free grace. The j ust ificat ion meant bynames is the justification of any after-moment in the Christian life, and the final justification before the judgment throne. Good works are inevitable in the Christian life. There can be no assurance of salvation without, them.

      Paul is looking at the root ; James is looking at the fruit. Paul is talking about the beginning of the Christian life; James is talking about its con tinuance and consummation. With Paul, the works he renounces precede faith and are dead works. With James, the faith he denounces is apart from works and is a dead faith.

      Paul believes in the works of godliness just as much as James. He prays that God may estab lish the Thessalonians in every good work (2 Thess 2 17). He writes to the Corinthians that "God is able to make all grace abound unto" them; that they, "having always all sufficiency in everything, may abound unto every good work" (2 Cor 9 S). He declares to the Kphesians that "we are his work manship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God afore prepared that we should walk in them" (Kph 2 10). He makes a formal statement of his faith in Rom: God "will render to every _man according to his works: to them that by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and incor rupt ion, eternal life: but unto them that are fac tious, and obey not the truth, but obey unrighteous ness, shall be wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that worketh evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gr; but glory and honor and peace to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gr" (Rom 2 (>-10). This is the final justification discussed by James, and it is just as clearly a judgment by works with Paul as with him.

      On the other hand James believes in saving faith as well as Paul. He begins with the statement that the proving of our faith works patience and brings perfection (1 3.4). He declares that the prayer of faith will bring the coveted wisdom (1 6). He describes the Christian profession as a holding



      James, Ep. of Jamin

      "the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory (2 1 ) . He says t hat t he poor as t o t he world are rich in faith, and therefore heirs to the kingdom (2 5). He quotes the passage from Gen, "Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness" (2 23), and he explicitly asserts that Abraham s "faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect" (2 22). The faith mentioned in all these passages is the faith of the professing Christian; it is not the faith which the sinner exercises in accepting salvation. James and Paul are at one in declaring that faith and works must go hand in hand in the Christian life, and that in the Christian s experience both faith without works is dead and works without faith are dead works. They both believe in fait h working through love as that which alone will avail in Christ Jesus (Gal 5 0). Fundamentally they agree. Super ficially they seem to contradict each other. That is because they are talking about different things and using the same terms with different meanings for those terms in mind.

      VI. The Message of the Epistle to Our Times. There are those who talk holiness and are hypo crites; those who make profession of

      1. To the perfect love and yet cannot live peace- Pietist ably with their brethren; those who

      are full of pious phraseology but fail in practical philanthropy. This ep. was written for them. It may not give them much comfort, but it ought to give them much profit. The mys ticism that contents itself with pious frames and phrases and comes short in actual sacrifice and de voted service will find its antidote here. The antinomianism that professes great confidence in free grace, but does not recognize the necessity for corresponding purity of life, needs to ponder the pract ical wisdom of this ep. The quietists who are satisfied to sit and sing themselves away to everlast ing bliss ought to read this ep. until they catch its bugle note of inspiration to present activity and cont inuous good deeds. All who are long on theory and short on practice ought to sleep themselves in the spirit of James; and since there are such people in every community and in every age, the message of the ep. will never grow old.

      ^ The sociological problems are to the front today.

      The old prophets were social reformers, and James

      is most like them in the NT. Much

      2. To the that he says is applicable to present- Sociologist day conditions. He lays down the

      right principles for practical philan thropy, and the proper relationships between master and man, and between man and man. If the teach ings of this ep. were put into practice through out the church it would mean the revitalizat ion of Christianity. It would prove that, the Christian religion was practical and workable, and it would go far to establish the final brotherhood of man in the service of God.

      The life of Our Lord is the most important life in the history of the race. It will always be a sub ject of the deepest interest and study.

      3. To the Modern research has penetrated every Student of contributory realm for any added light the Life and upon the heredity and the environ- Character ment of Jesus. The people and the of Jesus land, archaeology and contemporary

      history, have been cultivated inten sively and extensively for any modicum of knowl edge they might add to our store of information concerning the Christ. We suggest that there is a field here to which sufficient attention has not yet been given. James was the brother of the Lord. His ep. tells us much about himself. On the sup- posit ion that he did not exhort others to be what, he would not furnish them an example in being, we

      read in this ep. his own character writ large. He was like his brother in so many things. As we study the life and character of James we come to know more about the life and character of Jesus.

      Jesus and James had the same mother. From her they had a common inheritance. As far as they reproduced their mother s characteristics they were alike. They had the same home training. As far as the father in that home could succeed in put ting the impress of his own personality upon the boys, they would be alike. It is noticeable in this con nection that Joseph is said in the Gospel to have been "a just man" (Mt 1 19 AV), and that James came to be known through all the early church as James the Just, and that in his ep. he gives this title to his brother, Jesus, when he says of the un righteous rich of Jerus, "Ye have condemned and killed the just" man (5 6AV). Joseph was just, and James was just, and Jesus was just. The brothers were alike, and they were like the father in this respect. The two brothers seem to think alike and talk alike to a most remarkable degree. They represent the same home surroundings and human environment, the same religious training and inherited characteristics. Surely, then, all that we learn concerning James will help us the better to understand Jesus.

      They aro alike in their poetical insight and their prac tical wisdom. They are both fond of figurative speech, and it seems always natural and unforced. The dis courses of Jesus are filled with birds and flowers and winds and clouds and all the sights and sounds of rural life in Pal. The writings of James abound in reference to the field flowers and the meadow grass and the salt fountains and the burning wind and the early and the latter rain. They are alike; in mental attitude and in spiritual alertness. They have much in common in the material equipment of their thought. James was well versed in the appc lit. May we not reasonably conclude that Jesus was just as familiar with these books as he? James seems to have acquired a comparative mastery of the Or language and to have had some acquaintance with the Gr philosophy. Would not Jesus have been as well furnished in these; lines as he ?

      What was the character of James ? All tradition testifies to his personal purity and persistent devotion. commanding the reverence and the respect of all who knew him. As wo trace the various elements of his character manifesting themselves in his anxieties and exhortations in this ep., we find rising before us the image of Jesus as well as the portrait of James. He is a single-minded man, stedfast in faith and patient in trials. Ho is slow to wrath, but very quick to detect any sins of speech and hypocrisy of life. He is full of humility, but ready to champion the cause of the oppressed and the poor. He hates all insincerity and he loves wisdom, and lie believes in prayer and prac tises it in reference to both temporal and spiritual good. He believes in absolute equality in the house of God. He is opposed to anything that will establish any dis tinctions between brethren in their place of worship. Ho believes in practical philanthropy. Ho believes that the right sort of religion will load a man to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself un spotted from the world. A pure religion in his estima tion will mean a pure man. He believes that wo ought to practise all that we preach.

      As we study these characteristics and opinions of the younger brother, does not the image of his and our Elder Brother grow ever clearer before our eyes?

      LITERATURE. Works on Introduction: by Zahn, Weiss, Julicher, Salmon, Docis, Bacon, Bennett and Adeney; MacClymont, The NT and Its Writers; Farrar, The Messages of the Books, and Early Days of Christianity; Fraser, Lectures on the Bible; Godot, Bib. Studies. Works on the Apostolic Age: McGiffert, Schaff, Hausrath, Weizsacker. Commentaries: Mayor, Hort, Beyschlag, Dale, Huther, Plummer, Plumptre, Stier.



      JAMIN, ja min ("pE? , yannn, "right hand"): (1) In Gen 46 10; Ex 6 15; Nu 26 12; 1 Ch 4 24, a "son" (clan) of Simeon.

      Jaminites Jareb


      l. r )G8

      (21 In 1 Ch 2 27. a Judahite, "son" of Ram and grandson of .Icrahinccl.

      i:ii In Ndi 8 7, a Levite ( . ), one of those who "caused the people to understand" the To rah when E/.ra enforced it - " ladinus" in 1 Esd 9 -IS.

      JAMINITES, ja min-Its p: n "C*n , hd-i/amJnl. coll. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\-\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ art.): In Nil 26 12, descendants of Janiin ([1] above).

      JAMLECH, jain lek ("V^? , ymnl( ldi, "may he [Clod] cause to reign"): A "])rinee" or chief ol the tribe of Simeon (1 C h 4 15 1). If ver -11 refers to the preceding list, he lived in the time of Hezckiah.

      JAMNIA, jam ni-a. See JAHXKKL.

      JAMNITES, jam nlts ( lafivtrai, lamiiitai): The inhabitants (2 Mace 12 <)) of Jamnia, the ancient Jabneel, a town on the northern border of .hidah near the sea. Its port and navy were burned by Judas Maccabaeus (loc. cit.).

      JANAI, ja nil-T. ja nl fl"? , ya*nay, "he- answers"; as to whether final // is the third radical, or may be taken as equivalent to the Divine name Yah, see /// V 119 ">1 ): A chief of a family descended from Gad (1 Ch 6 12, AV "Jaanai").

      JANGLING, jan ghng (p-ciTcuoXo-yLa, indldidlot/ia, "vain discourse," "babbling"): This word is not found in AH V: once only in AV (1 Tim 1 <>). ARY has "vain talking," instead of "vain jangling." and evidently means proud, self-conceited talking against what God has revealed and against God Himself.

      JANIM, ja nim (C n r , m; AV Janum) : A place in the Hebron uplands named with Eshan and Beth-tappuah (Josh 15 53); unidentified.

      JANNAI, jan n-I ( lawai, lannai, Tisch., Treg., WII: lavvd, Jannd, TR; \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Janna); An ancestor of

      Jesus in Lk s genealogy, the 5th before Joseph, the husband of Mary (Lk 3 24).

      JANNES, jan ez, AND JAMBRES, jam brf-z

      f Iavvf|s Kal Iafi(3pfjs, Jaunts knl Janihrcx, 2 Tim

      3 ;*>) : These are the names of two magicians in

      ancient Egypt, who withstood Moses

      1. Egyptian before- Pharaoh. Phis is the only Magicians place where t he names occur in the NT,

      and they are not mentioned in the ( )T at all. In Ex 7 11.22 Egyp magicians are spoken of, who were called upon by Pharaoh to oppose Moses and Aaron: "Then Pharaoh also called for the wise men anil the sorcerers: and they also, the magicians of Egypt, did in like manner with their enchantments." Jannes and Jambres were evidently two of the persons referred to in this passage. It should be observed that the word tr d here "magi cians" occurs also in Gen 41 8 in connection with Pharaoh s dreams: Pharaoh "sent and called for all the magicians of Egypt, and all the wise men thereof." R\\\\\\\\"m reads for "magicians," "or sacred scribes." The Ileb word is hartummim, and means sacred scribes who were skilled in the sacred writing, that is in the hieroglyphics; they were a variety of Egyp priests. J. and J. were doubtless members of one or other of the various classes spoken of in the passages in Ex and Gen, the wise men, the sorcerers, and the magicians or sacred scribes.

      J. and J., one or both, are also men-

      2. Men- tioned by Pliny (23-79 AD), by Apuleius tioned by (c 130AD),bothofwhomspeakof Moses Pliny and and Jannes as famous magicians of an- Others tiquity. The Pythagorean philosopher

      Numenius (2d cent. AD) speaks of J. and J. as Egyp lii< rni/nimmatcis, or sacred scribes.

      Then- arc many curious Jewish traditions regarding .). and .1. These traditions, which are found in the

      Tg and elsewhere, are full of contradic- 3. Tradi- tions and impossibilities and anachronisms, tions They are to the effect that J. and .J. -were

      sons of lialaam, the soothsayer of IVthor. Notwithstanding this impossibility in the matter of date, they were said to have withstood Moses 40 years pre viously at the court- of Pharaoh, to whom it was also said, they so interpreted a dream of that kin??, i s to foretell the birth of Moses and cause the oppression of the Israelites. They are also said to have become proselytes, and it is added that they left Kgypt at the Kxodus, among the mixed multitude. They are reported to have instigated Aaron to make the golden calf. The t radii ions of their death are also given in a varying fash ion. They were said to have been drowned in the Red Sea. or to have been put to death after the making of the golden calf, or during the slaughter connected with the name of Phinehas.

      According to Origen (Cfiinni. on Mt 27 S) there

      was an apocryphal book not yet rediscovered

      . n . , called "Tim Book of J. and J."

      s Origen s statement is that in 2 Tim

      3 8 Paul is quoting from that book. In theTargumic lit. "Mambres occurs as a vari ant reading instead of "Jambres." It is thought that Jambres is derived from an Aram. 5. Deriva- root, meaning "to oppose," the parti tion ciple of which would be Mambres. The meaning of either form is "lie who opposes." Jannes is perhaps a corruption of loannes or lohannes (John). JOHN RrxiiKKFUHD

      JANNES AND JAMBRES, BOOK OF: An apocryphal work condemned by Pope Gelasius. See preceding art., JANXKS AND JAMBKKS.

      JANOAH, ja-no a (JTir , ynnu"h, "resting- place"):

      (1) A place named on the eastern boundary of Ephraim (Josh 16 (if; AV "Janohah"). Onom(s.v. "Jano") places it in Akrabattinc, 12 Rom miles E. of Xeapolis (Xahhl* ). This points definitely to J\\\\\\\\hirh< t Ydniln. On a hill near by, the Moslems show the Mnkdm of Ni bij \\\\\\\\un, the father of Joshua.

      (2) A. town in the uplands of Naphtali, mentioned as having been captured and depopulat ed by Tiglat h- pileser. It is named with Abel-beth-maacah and Kedesh (2 K 15 29). It may be identical with Yantlh. a village about G miles E. of Tyre.

      \\\\\\\\V. Ewixr,

      JANUM, ja num (Kre B^ , yuniim, Iv thibh C" 1 " 1 ? , ydnlm}. See JANIM.

      JAPHETH, ja feth (P,E? , ycphcth; PSP , ya-

      pfictli; Icuj>0, I/iphdh): This name, in Gen 9 27,

      seems to be explained by the phrase

      1. Ety- "may God make wide [yn/ifit, ARV mologies of "enlarge"] for Japheth," where yapht Japheth and Ja^hclh are represented by the

      same consonants, btit with different vowel-points. The root of ynpht is pathah, "to make wide." This etymology, however, is not universally accepted, as the word-play is so obvious, and the association of Japhcth with Shem ("dark") and Ham ("black") suggests a name on similar lines cither gentllic, or descriptive of race. Japheth has therefore been explained as meaning "fair," from ydphuh, the non-Sem and non-Hamitic races known to the Jews being all more or less white- skinned. The Tg of Onkelos agrees with the EV, but that of Jonathan has "God shall beautify Japheth," as though from ydphdh.

      The immediate descendants of J. were seven in number, and are represented by the nations desig nated Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan,

      2. His De- Tubal, Mesech, and Tiras; or, rough- scendants ly, the Armenians, Lydians, Medes,

      Greeks, Tibarenians, and Moschians, the last, Tiras, remaining still obscure. The sons



      Jaminites Jareb

      of Gomer (Ashkenaz, Riphath and Togarmah) were all settled in the West Asian tract; while the sons of Javan (Elisah, Tarshish, Kittim and Dodanim or Rodanim) occupied the Mediterranean coast and the adjacent islands.

      In Gen 9 27, as in other passages, Japheth occu pies the 3d place in the enumeration of the sons of Noah, but he is really regarded as the

      3. His 2d son, Ham being the youngest. In Place the genealogical table, however (Gen among the 10 Iff), the descendants of Japheth Sons of are given first, and those of Shem last, Noah in order to set forth Sem affinities at

      greater length. Though this would seem to indicate that the fair races were; the least known to the Jews, it implies that the latter were well disposed toward them, for Japheth was (ulti mately) to dwell in the tents of Shem, and therefore to take part in Shein s spiritual privileges.

      It seems unlikely that the Gr giant-hero, lapel os, father of Prometheus, who was regarded by the

      Greeks as the father of the human race,

      4. Japheth has any connection with the Heb and lapetos Japheth. The original of the Heb

      record probably belongs to a date too early to admit borrowing from the Gr, and if the name had been borrowed by the Greeks from the II< brews, a nearer form might be expected. See SHEM; HAM; TABLE OF NATIONS.

      T. G. PINCHES

      JAPHETH, ja feth ( Id<J>e9, />/ <//(): A region mentioned only in Jth 2 12"), where no particulars are given which may lead to its identification. Holofernes "came unto the borders of Japheth, which were toward the south, over against Arabia."

      JAPHIA, ja-fl a, jaf i-a (""*?> yii-phl"\\\\\\\\ perhaps "tall"; cf Arab.; I&frOa, Icphtha):

      (1) King of Lachish, one of the 5 "kings of the Amorites" who allied themselves together in an expedition against Gibeon on account of its treaty with the Israelites (Josh 10 3-")). After their discomfiture by Joshua in the battle of Beth-horon (ver 10), "one of the most important in the history of the world" (Stanley), they fled and hid them selves in the cave at Makkedah (ver 10). As Joshua passed, he was informed of this, but, unwill ing to delay his pursuit of the fugitives, he ordered great stones to be rolled unto the mouth of the cave, leaving a guard in charge (vs 17 f). On the com pletion of his victory, Joshua returned to Makkedah and commanded the Israelites to bring forth the imprisoned kings, and summoned the chiefs of his army to plant their feet upon their necks. Then he put them to death; and after he had hung their bodies on 5 trees, IK; ordered the Israelites in the evening to take them down and cast them into the cave (vs 22-27).

      (2) (LXX Ie</u<?s, Icphics, Ia0ie, laphic): One of the sons of David who were born to him at Jerus (2 S 5 15; 1 Ch 3 7; 14 0). JAMES CKICHTON

      JAPHIA, ja-fl a, jaf i-a (3^2? , yaphl^): A town on the southern boundary of Zebulun named with Chisloth-tabor and Daberath (Josh 19 12). It is represented by the modern Fa/a, about \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ miles S.W. of Nazareth, near the foot of the hills. It was one of the places fortified by Jos (Vita, 45; BJ, II, xx, 6).

      JAPHLET, jaf let (tibs?, yapMet, "he escapes" [?J) : In 1 Ch 7 32.33, a "son" of Hebcr, an Asherite.

      JAPHLETI, jaf le-tl, jaf-le tl: AV in Josh 16 3, where Heb is ^E- S n, ha-yaphletl, "the Japhletites," RV, a clan said to border on the territory of Joseph, but not mentioned elsewhere.

      JAPHO, ja fo: AV and ARVm in Josh 19 46 for JOPPA (q.v.).

      JAR, jar. See BARREL.

      JARAH, ja ra 0? , ya*rah, "honey-comb" [?]): A descendant of King Saul (l^Ch 9 42); but LXX B, A, have Ia6d, /ar/a = rH"? , ycfddh, a name found in LXX of 1 Ch 8 3(1, where MT has "PjyVP, yhd\\\\\\\\idda.h, Jehoaddah. Some Heb MSS have ya\\\\\\\\lah in 9 42, and it should probably be accepted as the correct reading there, for ycfdah= Jehoaddah y e hd*addah, linguistically; cf Jonathan and Jehonathan, etc.

      JAREB, ja reb, jar eb (3"H , yarcbh, "let him

      contend"; LXX lapetfj,, larcim): Is mentioned

      twice in Hos (5 13; 10 6) as an Assyr

      1. Obscurity king who received tribute from Israel. of the We do not, however, know of an Assyr Name king of that name, or of such a place

      as is indicated by "the king of Jareb" (5 13 AVm). Sayce (//<".!/, 417) thinks Jareb may possibly be the earlier name of Sargon who took Samaria in 722 BC, as the passages in which it appears seem to relate to the last struggles of the Northern Kingdom. This conjecture he bases on the probability that the successor of Shalmaneser IV, following the example of other usurpers of the Assyr throne before him, assumed the name of Sar gon. Those who hold that Hosea s prophecies are probably not later than 734 BC reject this view.

      If we take; the Heb text in 5 1 3 as it stands (melckh

      yarcbh}, Jareb cannot be regarded as the name of

      a person, owing to the absence of the

      2. Meaning art. before mdekh, "king," which is of the Word always inserted in such a case. It is

      probably an epithet or nickname applied to the Assyr king, as is suggested by RVm ("a king that should contend") and AYm ("the king that should plead"), being derived from the \\\\\\\\ / r ibh, "to st rive." The rendering would then be "King Com bat," "King Contentious," indicating Assyria s general hostility to Israel and the futility of apply ing for help to that quarter against the will of Jeh. Some suggest that for melekh yarebhwe should read ttnilkl rabh (I being the old nominative termination), or ^melckh rabh, "Great King," a title frequently ap plied to Assyr monarchs. Others, following the LXX, would read melckh rum, "High King."

      The historical reference, if it be to any recorded incident, may be to the attempt of Menahem, king

      of Israel in 738 BC, to gain over the

      3. Histori- Assyrians by a large subsidy to Pul, cal Ref- who assumed the name of Tiglath- erence pileser (2 K 15 1U). In this case, as

      both Ephraim and Jiidah are men tioned in the protasis, we should have to suppose that Ephraim made application on behalf of both kingdoms. If "Judah" be inserted before "sent" to complete the parallel, then the clause would be interpreted of Ahaz, king of Judah, who offered a heavy bribe to Tiglath-pileser to help him to with stand the combined attack of Re/in of Syria and Pekah of Israel (2 K 16 7f). But perhaps there may be no particular allusions in the two clauses of the apodosis, but only a reference to a general tend ency on the part of both kingdoms to seek Assyr aid. Cheyne would make a violent change in the verse. He would substitute "Israel" for "Judah" as war

      ranted by Hos 12 2, insert "Israel" be-

      4. Other fore "sent," change nxhshur, "Assyria," Views into ini^ur, the North Arabian land of

      Musri, "references to which underlie many passages in the OT," and for melckh yarcbh, he would read melckh *drdbhl, "king of Arabia." For other views see ICC. JAMES CRICHTON


      Jared Jattir

      JARED, jfi red ("1?, yeredh, "descent"; pausal form, ~T T , yaredh, in Gen 5 15; 1 Ch 1 2, hence EV "Jared" for "Jered"; lapt S, fared): In Gen 5 15-20; 1 Ch 1 2; Lk 3 37, son of Mahalaleel and father of Enoch. AV has "Jered" in 1 Ch 1 2.

      The name is supposed by Budde to denote a degenera tion of the human race, the first five generations being righteous t heir successors not . except Enoch and Noah. Tin- name has been identified with that of Irad ( (Ty , irddh), Gen 4 18. Wee Skinner, Gen, 117, 129, 131.

      JARESIAH, jar-c-si a: AV for JAARESHIAH (q.v.).

      JARHA, jar ha ("H"P , i/nr/ia\\\\\\\\ meaning unknown) : An Egyp slave of Shesham, about Eli s time (of /// .V, 235), who married his master s daughter, and became tho founder of a house of the Jcrahmoolitos (1 Ch 2 34 tT).

      JARIB, ja rib, jar ib P^T,, i/anhh, "he contends," or "takes [our] part," or "conducts [our] case"):

      (1) In 1 Ch 4 24, a "son" (clan) of Simeon = "Jachin" of Gen 46 10; Ex 6 15; Nu 26 12.

      (2) In Ezr 8 1(>, one of the "chief men" for whom Ezra sent, and dispatched by him to Casiphia to fetch ministers for God s house = " Joribus" (1 Esd 8 44).

      (3) In Ezr 10 18, a priest who had married a foreign wife = " Joribus" (1 Esd 9 19).

      JARIMOTH, jar i-moth ( lapi^O, larimoth): 1 Esd 9 28; called "Jeremoth" in Ezr 10 27.


      JARMUTH, jar muth (H^T! , yarmuth):

      (1) A city of the Canaanites in tho Shephelah (Josh 15 35) of Judah whose "king," Piram, joined the league of the "five kings" against Joshua (Josh 10 3-5), was defeated at Gibeon and slain at Mak- kedah (ver 23). One of the 31 "kings" defeated in Joshua s campaign (Josh 12 11). In Josh 15 35 it is mentioned in conjunction with Adullam, Socoh and Azekah, and in Neh 11 29 with Zorah, Zanoah and Adullam. Cheyne (EB) suggests that the "Maroth" of Mic 1 12 maybe a copyist s error for JarmuTh. In Onnm (OW 132 31; 266 38) mention is made of a Iep/xo%ws, lermochos, or Jer- mucha, 10 Rom miles N.E. of Eleutheropolis (Beit Jibrln). The site of this once important place is Khirbet el Yamulk, a ruin, with many old walls and cisterns, on the top of a hill 1,465 ft. above sea- level. It is nearly 2 miles N.W. of Beit Nattif, from which it is visible 1 , and 82 miles, as measured on map, N.N.E. of Beit Jibrln. Cf PEF, III, 128, Sh XVIII.

      (2) A city of Issachar belonging to the "children of Gershon, of the families of the Levites" (Josh 21 29); in the duplicate list in 1 Ch 6 73 we have Ramoth, while in the LXX version of Josh 21 29 we have, in different VSS, Rhemmdth or Icrmoth. In Josh 19 21 "Remeth" occurs (in Heb) in the lists of cities of Issachar; in the LXX Rhemmas or RJiannitJi. The name was probably "Remeth" or "Ramoth," but. the place has never been identified with any certainty. See RAMOTH.

      . E. W. G. MASTKRMAN

      JAROAH, ja-rd a (H^T^ , yflrd"h, meaning un known): A Gadite chief (1 Ch 5 14). But the text is doubtful; see Curtis, Ch, 124.

      JASAELUS, jas-a-e lus ( Iao-d.T]Xos, Ta.viclos; B, AsnclQ*; AV Ja sael, ja sn-ol [1 Esd 9 30 1 ) : Called "Shoal in Ezr 10 29.

      JASHAR, ja shar, jash ar, BOOK OF (120 "iTlPn, epherha-yashar; A V Book of Jasher, m "the book of the upright"): The title of an ancient Ileb national song-book (lit. "book of the righteous one")

      from which two quotations are made in the OT: (1) Josh 10 12-14, the command of Joshua to the sun and moon, "Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon. . ... Is not this written in the book of Jashar?" (see BETH-HOKON; LXX in this place omits the reference to Jashar) ; and (2) 2 S 1 18 ff, "the song of the bow," or lament of David over Saul and Jonathan. (3) Some conjecture a third extract in 1 K 8 12, "Then spake Solomon, Jeh hath said that he would dwell in the thick darkness." The words of Jeh are quoted by LXX in ver 53 as "written in the book of the song" (en biblio its odes), and it is pointed out that the words "the song" (in Ileb T^H, ha-sfrir) might easily be a corruption of "nlTn , ha-yashdr. A similar confusion ("song" for "righteous") may explain the fact that the Pesh Syr of Josh has for a title "the book of praises or hymns." The book evidently was a well-known one, and may have been a gradual collection of religious and national songs. It is conjectured that it may have included the Song of Deborah (Jgs 5), and older pieces now found in the Pent (e.g. Gen 4 23.24; 9 25-27; 27 27-29); this, however, is uncertain. On the curious theories and speculations of the rabbis and others about the book (that it was the Book of the Law, of Gen, etc), with the fantastic reconstructive theory of Dr. Donaldson in his Jas har, see the full art. in HDB. JAMES ORB

      JASHEN, ja shen, jash en (} , yashen, "asleep" [ ?]): Seemingly the father of some of David s thirty valiant men (2 S 23 32 f). The MT reads "Eliahba the Shaalbonite, the sons of Jashen, Jonathan, Shammah the Hararite, . . . ." 1 Ch 11 33 f has "Eliahba the Shaalbonite, the sons of Ilashem the Gizonite, Jonathan the son of Shagee the Hararite . . . ." It is clear that "sons of " are a dittography of the last three consonants of the pre vious word. LXX, Luc in 2 S and 1 Ch has 6 Yowt, ho Gouni, "the Gunite," for "the Gizonite," perhaps correctly (cf Gen 46 24; Nu 26 48 for "Guni," "Gunite"). So 2 S 23 32 may be corrected thus: "Eliahba the Shaalbonite, Jashen the Gunite, Jona than the son of Shammah the Hararite." Jashen thus becomes one of the thirty = "Hashern" of 1 Ch 11 34. DAVID FRANCIS ROBERTS

      JASHER, ja sher, jash er, BOOK OF: AV for

      JASHAR (q.v.) , and sec BETH-HORON, BATTLE OF.

      JASHOBEAM, ja-sho bS-am (0537 , yashabh- \\\\\\\\lm, probably "people will return"; see discussion of names compounded with D? , aw, in HPN, 41-59) : Jashobeam is mentioned in three passages (1 Ch 11 11; 12 6 [Heb 7]; 27 2f), but opinions vary as to the number of persons referred to. In 1 Ch 11 11 he is called "the son of a Hachmonite" (reference unknown) and "the chief of the three" ("three," the best reading; RV "thirty"; AV, II Vm "captains"), mighty men of David. He is said to have slain 300 (800 in 2 S 23 8) at one time, i.e. one after another.

      The gibborlm, or heroes, numbered 600 and wore di vided into bands of 200 each and subdivided into smaller bands of 20 each, with a captain for each company largo and small. Jashobeam had command of the first of tho throe bands of 200 (see Ewald, ///, III, 140 f; Stanley, HJC, II, 78). From the indeflniteness of the descrip tion, "throe of the thirty chief," ho can hardly be re garded as one of the three mighty men who broke through the ranks of the Philis, and brought water from tho well of Bethlehem to David on tho hill-fortress of Adullam (1 Ch 11 15-17), and the fact that "the thirty" have not yet been mentioned would seem to indicate that this story is not in its proper place. But "Jashobeam" here (1 Oh 11 11) is probably an error for "Ishbaal," the reading of many of the MSS of the LXX (HPN, 46, n.).

      In the 11 passage (2 S 23 8) he is called "Josheb- basshebeth, a Tahehemonite." This verse, however,



      Jared Jattir

      is probably corrupt (RVm), and the text should be corrected in accordance with Ch to "Ishbaal, the Hachmonite." In 1 Ch 27 2 f Jashobcam is said to have been "the son of Zabdiel," of the family of Perez, and the commander-in-chief of the division of David s army which did duty the first month. The army consisted of 12 divisions of 24,000 each, each division serving a month in turn. In 1 Ch 12 6 (Heb 7) Jashobeam is mentioned among those who joined David at Ziklag in the time of Saul, and is described as a Korahite, probably one belonging to a family of Judah (cf 2 43). JAMES CRICHTON

      JASHUB, ja shub, jash ub pW| , yashubh; T1T , yaxtribh, in Ch, but Kre 3^ttT , yashubh, "he returns"):

      (1) In Nu 26 24; 1 Ch 7 1, a "son" (clan) of Issachar. Cien 46 13 has incorrectly lob, but LXX Jashub.

      (2) In E/r 10 29, one of those who had married foreign wives = "Jasubus" in 1 Esd 9 30.

      (3) In Isa 7 3, part of the name SHEAR-JASHUH (q.v.).

      JASHUBI-LEHEM, ja-shoo-bi-le hcm

      , i/tlxhiilihl-lt hon): A name in 1 Ch 4 22 where commentators insert t"P5, 6e</i, between the

      two words and translate; [and] returned to Beth lehem."

      JASHUBITES, ja shub-Its, jash ub-Its, THE CQTP?n, ha-u<l*luibkl, coll. with art.): In Nu 26 24, descendants of JASHUB (q.v. [1]).

      JASIEL, jaVi-el, jas i-el (1153^, yaVm eZ, "God is maker," 1 Ch 11 47 AV). See JAASIKL.

      JASON, ja sun ( Ido-eov, Idson): A common name among the Hellcni/ing Jews who used it for Jesus or Joshua, probably connecting it with the Gr vb. idsthdi ("to heal").

      (1) Son of Eleazar, sent (161 BC) by Judas Maccabaeus with other deputies to Rome to make a league of amity and confederacy" (1 Mace 8 17; Jos, Attt, XII, x, 6), and perhaps to be identified with (2).

      (2) The father of Antipater who went as am bassador of Jonathan to Rome in 144 BC (1 Mace 12 1(5; 14 22; Ant, XIII, v, 8).

      (3) Jason of Cyrene, a Jewish historian, who is known only from what is told of him in 2 Mace 2 19-2)]. 2 Mace is in fact simply an abridgment in one book of the 5 books written by Jason on the Jewish wars of liberation. Pie must have written after 102 BC, as his books include the wars under Antiochus Eupalor.

      (4) Jason the high priest, second son of Simon II and brother of Onias III. The change of name from Jesus (Jos, Aid, XII, v) was part of the Hel- lenizing policy favored by Antiochus Epiphanes from whom he purchased the high-priesthood by a large bribe, thus excluding his elder brother from the office (2 Mace 4 7-26). He did everything in his power to introduce Gr customs and Gr life among the Jews. He established a gymnasium in Jems, so that even the priests neglected the altars and the sacrifices, and hastened to be partakers of the "unlawful allowance" in the palaestra. The writer of 2 Mace calls him "that ungodly wretch" and "vile" Jason. He even sent deputies from Jerus to Tyre to take part in the worship of Her cules; but what he sent for sacrifices, the deputies expended on the "equipment of galleys." After 3 years of this Hellenizing work he was supplanted in 172 BC in the favor of Antiochus by Menelaus who gave a large; bribe for the high priest s office.

      Jason took refuge with the Ammonites; on hearing that Antiochus was dead he tried with some suc cess to drive out Menelaus, but ultimately failed (2 Mace 5 5 ff). He took refuge with the Am monites again, and then with Aretas, the Arabian, and finally with the Lacedaemonians, where he hoped for protection "as being connected by race," and there "perished miserably in a strange land."

      (5) A name mentioned in Acts 17 5-9 and in Rom 16 21. See following article.


      JASON, ja sun ( leurwv, Idson): A Gr name as sumed by Jews who bore the Heb name Joshua. This name is mentioned twice in the NT. (See also preceding article.)

      (1) Jason was the host of St. Paul during his stay in Thessalonica, and, during the uproar or ganized by the Jews, who were moved to jealousy by the success of Paul and Silas, he and several other "brethren" were; severely handled by the mob. When the mob failed to find Paul and Silas, they dragged Jason and "certain brethren" before the politarchs, accusing Jason of treason in receiving into his house those who said "There is another king, one Jesus." The magistrates, being troubled, took security from them, and let them go.

      There are various explanations of the ptirpose of this security. " By this expression it is most probably meant that a sum of money was deposited with the magistrates, and that the Christian community of the place made themselves responsible that no attempt should be made against the supremacy of Rome, and that peace should be maintained in Thessalonica itself" (Conybeare and Howsoil, St. Paul). _ Ramsay (S i. Paul the Traveller) thinks that the security was given to prevent Paul from returning to Thessalonica and that St. Paul refers to this in 1 Thess 2 18.

      The immediate departure of Patil and Silas seems to show the security was given that the strangers would leave the city and remain absent (Acts 17 5-9).

      (2) Jason is one of the companions of St. Paul who unite with him in sending greet ings to the Rom Christians (Rom 16 21). He is probably the same person as (1). Paul calls him a kinsman, which means a Jew (cf Rom 9 3; 16 11.21).

      S. F. HUNTER

      JASPER, jas per, JASPIS, jas pis. See STONES, PRECIOUS.

      JASUBUS, ja-su bus ( Ido-oxifJos, Jdsonbos): An Israelite who in the time of Ezra had to put away his foreign wife (1 Esd 9 30); called "Jashub" in Ezr 10 29.

      JATAL, ja tal (1 Esd 5 28). Sec ATAR.

      JATHAN, j a than ( Ia9Av, lathdn; X , Nathan) : For "Jonathas" in AV, which is the Lat form for the Heb "Jonathan." Jonathan was brother of Ananias and "son of that great Sammaias" (Tob 6 13).

      JATHBATH, jath bath. See JOTBATHAH.

      JATHNIEL, jath ni-el (bfcr;rP , yathin el, "God lives"): Fourth "son" of Meshelemiah, a Kora hite (1 Ch 26 2).

      JATTIR, jat er ("VTP , ynltlr, and "II?!!, yattir): A town in the hill country of Judah, mentioned in conjunction with Shamir and Socoh (Josh 15 48); one of the cities given to the "children of Aaron the priest" (Josh 21 14; 1 Ch 6 57). David after his victory over the Amalekites sent a present of the spoil from Ziklag "to them that were in Jattir" (1 S 30 27).

      It is now Khirbet ^Attir, an important ruin, in the extreme S. of the hill country, 5 miles S.E. of

      Javan Jedidah



      ttlli Dharujih and 20 miles S.I-;, of licit Jihrtn. This must convspond to the "very large village Jethira" which is incutioiicd in ()n<>i (119 27; 133 3; 134 21, etc) as 20 miles S.E. of Eleutheropolis (i.e. licit Jibrin). The site is full of eaves. See / /, / , III, -l()s, Sh XX\\\\\\\\ . E. \\\\\\\\V. ( .. MASTKKMAN

      JAVAN, ja van ("^ , ijairtln, meaning unknown):

      (1) In Gen 10 2.4 = 1 Ch 1 5.7 (LXX \\\\\\\\uvdv, louini); Isa 66 HI; Exk 27 13 (LXX EXXds, Hellas, Greece); Dnl 8 21 in; 10 20; 11 2; Zee 9 13; Joel 3 V) (lleb 4 ti) (LXX oi KXX-^ es, hoi Hellenes, i.e. "Greeks"), "son" of Japheth, and "father" of Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Llodarim, i.e. Rhodes (incorrectly "Dodanim" in (ien 104). Javan is tl> C,r Idiav, IdTin, or ld( p iw, Id(r)on, and in ( .en and 1 Ch=the Ionian Greeks of Asia Minor, prob- ahly here = Cyprus. The reference in E/k 27 13 (from which that in Isa 66 19 is copied) is the country personified. In Joel the pi. Z" 1 " 1 ; , ifwanim, is found. In Dnl the name is extended to the Greeks generally. Corroboration of the name is found in Assyr (/v7>, II, -13). "The Pers Yaiina occurs in the same double reference from the time of Darius; cf Aesch. Pers., 176, 5(12" (Skinner, Gen, 1<)S). In Eiiyp the word is said to be >/ r"n-(n)n; in the Am Tab YirniKi is mentioned as being in the land ol Tyre. See IIDIi, II, 552/>.

      "(2) Place (Exk 27 1<>); name wanting in LXX. DAVID FRANCIS ROBERTS

      JAVELIN, jav lin, jav e-lin. See AHMOK; Aims.

      JAW, jo (Tib , I hi, cheek [bone]," "jaw [bone]" i, JAWBONE, jiVbdn, JAW TEETH: In Job 41 2, RV gives "pierce his jaw through with a hook" for \\\\\\\\ V "bore his jaw through with a thorn" (sec HOOK; LKVIATHAN). Ps 22 15, "My tongue cleaveth to my jaws [nialk(~>"k\\\\\\\\," is descriptive of the effect of a fever or physical torture, a dryness and a horrible clamminess . Malkohayim is an ancient dual form meaning the two jaws, and, metaphorically, >n<ilkd"h indicates that, which is caught between the jaws, booty, prey, including captives (Nu 31 11.20.32; Isa 49 24 f).

      Figurative: (1) Of the power of the wicked, with a reference to Divine restraint and discipline: "I brake the jaws [Ileb "great teeth"] of the un righteous" (Job 29 17; Prov 30 14); cf Ps 58 ti, "Break out the great teeth [maltcfoth, "jaw teeth"] of the young lions, O Jell." Let the wicked be deprived of their ability for evil; let them at, least be disabled from mischief. LXX reads "God shall break," etc. (Cf Edmund Prys s Metrical Parn- vhraseof the ] **, in loc.) "A bridle .... in the jaws of the peoples" (Isa 30 28; cf 2 K 19 28) is descriptive of the ultimate check of the Assyr power at Jerus, "as when a bridle or lasso is thrown upon the jaws of a wild animal when you wish to catch and tame him" (G. A. Smith, Isa, I, 235). Cf Exk 29 4 (concerning Pharaoh); 38 4 (con cerning Cog), "I will put hooks in [into] thy jaws." (2) Of human labor and trials, with a reference to the Divine gentleness: "I was to them as they that lift up the yoke on their jaws" (Hos 11 4), or take the yoke off their jaws, as the humane driver eased the yoke with his hands or lifted it forward from neck to the jaws ; or it may perhaps refer to the removal of the yoke in the evening, when work is over.

      Jawbone (Jgs 15 15 ff). See RAMATH-LKHI.

      M. O. EVANS

      JAZER, ja xer (17"? or "PT3^ , Z/ 2Y LXX la^v, Inzcn in A; X, Inzer): In some cases, e.g. Nu 21 32, AV reads "Jaaxer." This was a city of the Amorites E. of the Jordan taken, along wit limits towns, by Moses, and occupied by the tribe of Gad

      (Nu 21 32; 32 35). The country was very fertile, and its spacious pasture-lands attracted the flock- masters of Gad (32 1), the southern border of whose territory it marked (Josh 13 25). It was assigned to the Merarite Levites (Josh 21 30; 1 Ch 6 Si). The place was reached by Joab when taking the census (2 S 24 5). In the 40th year of King David mighty men of valor were found here to whom he intrusted the oversight in Reuben and Gad "for every matter pertaining to God, and for the affairs of the king" (1 Ch 26 32 f). The fruitfulness of the country is alluded to in Isa 16 8f; Jer 48 32. (Note: "Sea of" Jaxer in this verse has arisen through accidental repetition of yam, "sea," from the preceding clause.) The city was taken from the Ammonites by Judas Maccabaeus, and burned (1 Mace; 5 7.8; "Ant, XII, viii, 1).

      Onom places Jazor 10 Rom miles "\\\\\\\\V. of Philadelphia ( \\\\\\\\.mman), and about 1;"> miles from Heshtaon, where a Kiviit stream rises, which flows into the Jordan. Many would identify it with Khirbct $<ir, on the S. of \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\A<IU Sir, about 5 miles W. of Amman. The perennial stream from \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\~nihi Xir reaches the .Jordan by HYc/// el-Kefrein. Ohevne (KB, s.v.) suggests Y,,juz on Wady Zorby, a tributary of the Jabbok, with extensive Kom remains. It lies a little way to the K. of i l Juhri/ult ("Jogbehah." N u 32 H">). It is situated, however, to the N". and not to the W. of Amman, where Onom places it. Neither identification is certain.

      W. EWING

      JAZIZ, ja xiz (TTJ, yazlz, meaning uncertain): The IFagrite who was over David s flocks (1 Ch 27 30[Heb31J).

      JEALOUSY, jel us-i (H^:p , kin dh; STJ\\\\\\\\O S> zfios): Doubtless, the root id<>a of both the Gr and the Heb ti" 1 "jealousy" is "warmth," "heat." Both are used in a good and a bad sense to represent right and wrong passion.

      "When jealousy is attributed to God, the word is used in a good sense. The language is, of course, anthropomorphic; and it, is based upon the feeling in a husband of exclusive right in his wife. God is conceived as having wedded Israel to Himself, and as claiming, therefore, exclusive devotion. Dis- loyalt yon 1 he part of Israel is represent e< 1 as adultery, and as provoking God to jealousy. See, e.g., Dt 32 10.21; 1 K 14 22; Ps 78 58; Ezk 8 3; 16 38.42; 23 25; 36 5; 38 10.

      When jealousy is attributed to men, the sense is sometimes good, and sometimes bad. In the good sense, it refers to an ardent concern for God s honor. See, e.g., Nu 25 11 (ci" 1 K 19 10; 2 K 10 16); 2 Cor 11 2 (cf Rom 10 2). In the bad sense, it is found in Acts 7 0; Rom 13 13; 1 Cor 3 3; 2 Cor 12 20; Jas 3 14.16.

      The "law of jealousy" is given in Nu 5 _H-31. It provided that, when a man suspected his wife of conjugal infidelity, an offering should be brought to the priest, and the question of her guilt, or inno cence should be subjected to a test there carefully prescribed. The test was intended to be an appeal to God to decide the question at issue. See ADUL- TKHY; SACRIFICE. E. J. FORRESTER


      JEARIM, je a-rim, jo-a rim, MOUNT (S^T^n , har-if arltn): A mountain by the side of which passed the border of Judah (Josh 15 10). It is mentioned here only, and is identical with CHES- ALON (q.v.).

      JEATHERAI, jc-ath e-ri (RV), JEATERAI, JS- at 6-rl (AV) PI^ SP , y c ath e ray, meaning unknown): A descendant of Gershom, "son" of Levi (1 Ch 621 [Heb 6]), and probably an ancestor of Asaph (so



      Javan Jedidah

      commentators); in vs 39-43 the corresponding name is "Ethni." The difference in the Hob words is not great.

      JEBERECHIAH, je-ber-C-kl a (irPDnrP , ybhe- rckhydha, "Jeh blesses"): The father of the Zcch- ariah whom Isaiah (8 2) took as a witness of his prophecy against Syria and Ephraim (c 734 BC).

      JEBUS, jc bus (C^T? , y f bhus; lepous, Icboiis): In Jgs 19 10.11, "Jebus (the same is Jerus)"; 1 Ch

      11 4."), "Jerus (the same is Jebus)." It was once thought that this was the first name of Jerus, as indeed might be suggested by the Bib. references, but it is now known from the Am Tab that Uru- sa-lem was a name used centuries before the time of David (see JERUSALEM, I). It would appear prob able that the name "Jebus" was evolved by the He brews as an alternate name, and possibly they may have imagined an earlier name, for Jerus from JEHUSITE (q.v), the name of the local tribe who owned the district in the first centuries of Israel s occupation of Canaan. E. W. G. MASTERMAN

      JEBUS, je bus, JEBUSI, jel/n-sl, JEBUSITE, jeb fi-zlt (C-2"^ , i/ bhilx, "v ? 2*~ , hu-ifhlmxi); "Je bus" is an old name for Jerus (Jgs 19 10.11; 1 Ch 4.5 || 2 S 5 6-9, "the same is Jerus"; see pre ceding article). "Jelmsi" (lit. "Jebusite") is also used as a name for the city in AV (Josh 18 1(5. 2S; cf 15 S); RV correctly renders "Jebusite" (see JERUSALEM). "Jebusites," for the people (in AV Gen 15 21; Ex 3 S. 17, etc), does not occur in Heb in the pi.; hence in RV is always rendered in the sing., "Jebusite." The "Jebusite" is said in Gen 10 Hi; 1 Ch 1 14 to be the 3d son of Canaan, i.e. of the country of Canaan. Elsewhere he repre sents a tribe separate from the Canaanites. Hi st amis between Ili-th and the Amorite (cf Nu 13 29; Josh 11 3; Ezk 16 3.45). In the lists of Un peoples inhabiting Pal the "Jebusite" is ahvays placed last, a fact indicative, probably, of their smaller number.

      To what race the Jebusites belonged is doubtful. Their name does not seem Sem, and they do not make their appearance, till after the patriarchal period.

      The original name of Jerus was Bah, Uru-Salim, "the city of Sulim," shortened into Salem in (Jen 14 IS and in the inscriptions of the Kgyp kings Ramses II and Kainses 111. In the Am Tab (1400 BC) Jerus is still known as I ru-Salim, and its king hears a Hittite name, implying that it was at the time in the possession of the Hit tiles. His enemies, however, were closing around him, and one of the tablets shows that the city was eventually captured and its king slain. These enemies would seem to have been the Jebusites, since it is after this period that the name "Jebus" makes its appearance for the first time in the OT (Jgs 19 10.11).

      The Jebusite king at the time of the conquest was Adoni-zedek, who met his death at Beth-horon (Josh 10 1 ff; in ver 5 the word "Amorite" is used in its Bab sense to denote the inhabitants of Canaan generally). The Jebusites were a mountain tribe (Nu 13 29; Josh 11 3). Their capital "Jebus" was taken by the men of Judah and burned with fire (Jgs 1 S), but they regained possession of, and held, the fortress till the time of David (2 S 6 (5 ff).

      When Jerus was taken by David, the lives and property of its Jebusite inhabitants were spared, and they continued to inhabit the temple-hill, David and his followers settling in the new City of David on Mt. Zion (Josh 15 8.63; Jgs 1 21; 19 11). And as Araunah is called "king" (2 S 24 23), we may conclude that their last ruler also had been al lowed to live. His name is non-Sem, and the vari ous spellings of it (cf 1 Ch 21 15, "Oman") indicate that the Heb writers had some difficulty in pro

      nouncing it. The Jebusites seem ultimately to have blended with the Israelitish population.

      JAMES ORR JECAMIAH, jek-a-mi a: AV for JEKAMIAH


      JECHILIAH, jek-i-ll a (rpp 1 ] , ifkhilyah). See JECHOLIAH; K e th!bh and 2 Ch 26 3 RV, where K Te is rp ?? 1 ?, yktwltjah^ "Jecoliah" (AV).

      JECHOLIAH, jek-6-H a (TP5D? ,

      2 K 15 2 AV = nTfC ? , ykholyah, ivTe in 2 Ch 26 3, "Jeh is able" or "Jeh has been able"): The mother of King Uzziah (Azariah) of Judah. RV has "Jecoliah" in 2 K and so AV in 2 Ch.

      JECHONIAS, jek-o-nl as ( ( l X ovias, Icchonias, AV; Gr form of Jechoniah," RV):

      (1) The altered form of Jehoiachin (Ad Est 11 4; Bar 1 3.9; Mt 1 11.12). The last but one of the kings of Judah.

      (2) The son of Zeelus (1 Esd 8 92), called "Shec- aniah" in Ezr 10 2.

      JECOLIAH, jek-o-ll a: 2 K 15 2; 2 Ch 26 3 AV; see .JECHILIAH; JECHOLIAH.

      JECONIAH, jck-6-m a. See JEHOIACHIN.

      JECONIAS, jek-6-nfas ( lx ov a s, Icchonlns}:

      (1) One of the chiliarchs who made great gifts of sheep and calves at the Passover of Josiah (1 Esd 1 9); called "Conaniah" in 2 Ch 35 9.

      (2) One reading makes Jeconias (not Joachaz) son of Josiah in 1 Esd 1 34 in.

      JEDAIAH, je-da ya, jMl si:

      (1) (rP"~P, ydha ydh, "Jeh knows"):

      (a) A priest in Jerus (1 Ch 9 10; 24 7). (/>) Ezr 2 36 = Neh 7 39, when; "children of Jedaiah" are mentioned == "Jeddu" in 1 Esd 5 24.

      (c) J. is among "the priests and the Levites" that returned with Zerubbabel (Xeh 11 10; 12 6.19).

      (d) Another priest of the same name (Neh 12 7.21).

      (c) One of the exiles whom Zechariah was com manded to send with silver and gold to Jerus. LXX does not take the word as a proper name (Zee 6 10.14).

      (2) (rPT;, ydhuyuh, "Jeh throws" [?]):

      (a) Father of a Simeonite prince (1 Ch 4 37).

      (b) One of the repairers of the wall of Jerus (Xeh


      JEDDU, jed o7> ( IS8ov, /, ,/,/,/): Called JE DAIAH (q.v. 1, [/;]) in canonical books (1 Esd 5 24).

      JEDEUS, je-de us CleScuos, M/ofo.s): Called ADAIAH (q.v.) in Ezr 10 29 (I Esd 9 30).

      JEDIAEL, je-dl a-el (~$?*>~^ , ifdhlWel, "God makes known"[?]):

      (1) A "son" of Benjamin or probablv of Zebu- Inn (1 Ch 7 6.10.11). See Curtis, ( It, 145-49, who suggests emending the name to ^X^rP , yahl c cl, Jahleel, in agreement with Gen 46 24.

      (2) One of David s _ mighty men (1 Ch 11 45), probably = the Manassite who deserted to David at Zikhig (1 Ch 12 20 [Heb 21J).

      (3) A Korahite doorkeeper in David s reign (1 Ch 26 2).

      JEDIDAH, jc-di da (n~^ , ydhldhah, "be loved"): Mother of King Josiah of Judah, daughter of Adaiah of Bozkath (2 K 22 1).

      Jedidiah Jehoash



      JEDIDIAH, jed-i-dl a (rP-p-P , i^lfniUi-i/illi, "the beloved of Jeh"): The name conferred by Cod through Nathan upon Solomon at his birth (2 S 12 2f>).

      JEDUTHUN, je-du thun. See ASAI-II.

      JEELI, je-e ll ( IciriXC, Tcieli): Called "Jaalah" in E/r 2 56 and "Jaala" in Xeh 7 ">X (1 Esd 5 33).

      JEELUS, je-e lus C lerjXos, htlos): Called "Je hiel" in E/r 10 2 Esd 8 <)2j.

      JEEZER, je-e /er (AV) (1">" S , vVzrr; HV IE/EH i : The name of a clan of (iilead (Nil 26 30), but read ~T"^S~ , In- nlifu czcr, i.e. "of Abiezer" (cf Josh 17 2). See AHIKZKU.

      JEEZERITES, je-e zer-Its. See AHIKZKII.

      JEGAR-SAHA-DUTHA, je-g:ir sa-ha-du tha, (S5F ? "Tnip ~ir> n , iff/lmr sahddhutha ; LXX Bowos (lapTvpei, HOHHUX iti/irl nn t , "(t he] mound wit nesses") : The name given by the Aramaean, Laban, to the "cairn of witness," called by Jacob CALKKD (q.v.) ((len 31 47). The rest of the second part of this name appears again in Job 16 1 .), where "HnTl? , sdhfiiUil, should be rendered with RV , "he that voucheth for me," i.e. "my witness."

      JEHALLELEL, jr-hal Mel (RV), JEHALELEEL,

      je-ha-le le-el (AV) (5S&brP , ifhallvVcl, "he shall praise Cod"):

      (1) A Judahite (1 Ch 4 16).

      (2) A Levite, a descendant of Merari (2 Ch 29 12).

      JEHDEIAH, je-de ya, ja de-ya ( H^rP , //r/,,/<- ydln i, "may Jeh give joy!"):

      (1) A Levite, head of the family of Shubael (1 Ch 24 20).

      (2) An officer of David "over the asses" (1 Ch 27 30).

      JEHEZKEL, jr-hez kel (HV), JEHEZEKEL, je-hez f>-kel (AV) (xXpjrT, ifhczkcl, "Clod strength ens"):

      (1) A priest of David s time (1 Ch 24 16).

      (2) Jehezkel in Ezk 1 3 AVm, for EZKKIKL (q.v.).

      JEHIAH, jf>-hl a (H^n^ , ifhlyah, "may Jeh live!";: Keeper of the ark with Obed-edom (1 Ch 15 24\\\\\\\\ but in v(>r IS the name isbX" 1 ^, y e *i cl, IKIEL ((j.v.)

      JEHIEL, jf-hl el (bx^n-;, if/n cl, "may God live!";:

      (1) A Levite, one of the musicians appointed to play upon instruments at the bringing up of the ark by David (1 Ch 15 1S.20; 16 r; Jehieli, jf-hi Ml r*^TP . ////T r/7): A patronymic of this name (1 Ch 2621.22), but Curtis (Ch, 286-87) reads "Jehiel [ver 21] and his brethren Zet ham and Joel" (ver 22); cf 23 X, where the three seem to be brothers. See (2) above.

      (2) A Gershonite, head of a Levitical house (1 Ch

      23 X; 29 8).

      (3) Son of a Haehmonite; he was "with the king s [David s] sons," i.e. their tutor (1 Ch 27 32).

      (4) A son of King Jehoshaphat (2 Ch 21 2). (o) In 2 Ch 29 14 AV, where K Te is bSPirP ,

      jfhu rl. HV "Jehuel," a Hermanite Levite who took part in cleansing the temple in Hezekiah s reign.

      (6) An overseer in Hezekiah s reign (2 Ch 31 13).

      (7) One of the three "rulers" of the temple in Hezekiah s reign (2 Ch 35 S).

      (S) Father of Obadiah, a returned exile (Exr 8 0) = "Jezelus" of 1 Esd 8 3f).

      (<)) Father of Shecaniah (E/r 10 2) = "Jeelus" of 1 Esd 8 92. He was a "son" of Elam, and so probably the same as "Jehiel" in Ezr 10 26, one of those who had married foreign wives = "Jezrielus" of 1 Esd 9 27.

      (10) A "son" of Ilarim, and one of those, who had married foreign wives (Ezr 10 21) = "Hiereel" of 1 Esd 9 21.

      (11) AV in 1 Ch 9 3r> = jKiKL (q.v. [2]).

      (12) AV in 1 Cli 11 44 = Ji.;iKL (q.v. |3]).


      JEHIZKIAH, je-hiz-kl a (irPpyrP , v/ /,/4 7//.7/m, "Jeh strengthens"): One of the Ephraimite chiefs (2 Ch 28 12) who with Obed are said to have op posed the enslavement of the Judahites taken cap tive by Pekah in his war against Ahaz (c 734 BC).

      JEHOADDAH, je-ho-ad a (RV), JEHOADAH, je-hd a-da (AV) (rniHrP , yhrfuildah, "Jeh lias de posed" or "numbered"): A descendant of King Saul (I Ch 8 36), called "Jarah" in 1 Ch 9^42, whore LXX has Ia<5d, Iadd = r\\\\\\\\~y^ , ya\\\\\\\\lah. See JAHAH.

      JEHOADDAN, je-ho-ad an (" "" , tf meaning unknown): In 2 Ch 25 1; and Kre, AV in 2 K 14 2, wliere K lhlbh and RV are "Jehoad- din" ("" ir !?ln" 1 , yhfraddlri), the mother of King Amaziah of Judah.

      JEHOADDIN, je-ho-ad in. See JEHOADDAN.

      JEHOAHAZ, je-ho a-haz, je-lio-a liaz (THXin^ , yhoahaz, "Jeh has grasped"; Itoaxas, loaclias; 2 K 13 1-9):

      (1) Son of Jehu, and llth king of Israel. He is stated to have reigned 17 years.

      Jos was already aware (Ant, IX, viii. 5) of the chrono

      logical clinically involved in the cross-references in vs

      1 and 10, the former of which states that

      1. Chro- Jehoahaz began to reign in the 2Hd year i nf of Jehoash of Jorus, and reigned 17 years;

      "Oiogy ui w hile the latter gives him a successor in Reign Jehoasli s :$7th year, or 14 years later.

      Jos alters the figure of ver 1 to 21; and, to meet the same difficulty, the LXX (Aldine eel) changes 37 to 39 in ver 10. The difficulty may be met by sup posing that Jehoahaz was associated with his father Jehu for several years in the government of the country before the death of t lie latter, and that these years were counted as a part of his reign. This view has in its favor the fact that Jehu was an old man when he died, and may have been incapacitated for the full discharge of ad ministrative duties before the end came. The accession of Jehoahaz as sole ruler may be dated about 825 BC.

      When Jehoahaz came to the throne, he found a

      discouraged and humiliated people. The territory

      beyond Jordan, embracing 1\\\\\\\\ tribes,

      2. Low or one-fourth of the whole kingdom, Condition had been lost in warfare with the of the Syrian king, Ilazael (2 K 10 32.33). Kingdom A heavy annual subsidy was still pay

      able to Assyria, as by his father Jehu. The neighboring kingdom of Judah was still un friendly to any member of the house of Jehu. Elisha the prophet, though then in the zenith of his influence, does not seem to have done anything toward the stability of Jehu s throne.

      Specially did Israel suffer during this reign from the continuance of the hostility of Damascus (2 K

      13 3.4.22). Hazael had been selected,

      3. Israel together with Jehu, as the instrument and Syria by which the idolatry of Israel was to

      be punished (1 K 19 16). Later the instruments of vengeance fell out. On Jehu s death, the pressure from the east on Hazael was



      Jedidiah Jehoash

      greatly relieved. The great conqueror, Shalma- neser II, had died, and his son Samsi-Ramman IV had to meet a revolt wit hin the empire, and was busy with expeditions against Babylon and Media during t he 1 1? years of his reign (824-812 BC) . Dur ing these years, t he kingdoms of the seaboard of the Mediterranean were unmolested. They coincide with the years of Jehoahaz, and explain the freedom which Hazael had to harass the dominions of that king.

      Particulars of the several campaigns in which the troops of Damascus harassed Israel are not given. The life of Elisha extended through the , i . T , reigns of Jehoram (12 years), Jehu (28

      * e years) and Jelioahaz (12 or 13 years),

      Elisha into the reign of Joash (2 K 13 14). It

      Episodes * s V nort - fF e probable that in the memora bilia of his life in 2 K 4-8, now one and now another king of Israel should figure, and that some of the episodes there recorded belong to the reign of Jehoahaz. There are evidences that strict chronological order is not observed in the narrative of Elisha, e.g. Cehazi appears in waiting on the king of Israel in 8 5, after the account of his leprosy in 5 27. The terrible siege of Samaria in ch 7 is generally referred to the reign of Jehoram; but no atmosphere is so suitable to it as that of the reign of Jehoahaz, in one of the later years of whom it may have occurred. The statement in 13 7 that " the king of Syria destroyed them, and made them like the dust in threshing," and the statistics there given of the depleted army of Jehoahaz, would, corre spond with the state of things that siege implies. In this case the Ben-hadad of 2 K 6 24 would be the son of Hazael (13 3J.

      Jehoahaz, like his father, maintained the calf- worship in Bethel and Dan, and revived also the

      cult of the Asherah, a form of Canaan- 6. His itish idolatry introduced by Ahab

      Idolatry (1 K 16 33)! It centered round a

      sacred tree or pole, and was probably connected with phallic worship (of 1 K 15 13, where Maacah, mother of Asa, is said to have made an abominable image for an Asherah" in Jerus).

      The close of this dark reign, however, is bright ened by a partial reform. In his distress, we are

      told, "Jehoahaz besought Jeh, and 6. Partial Jeh hearkened unto him" (2 K 13 4). Reform If the siege of Samaria in ch 6 belongs

      to his reign, we might connect this with his wearing "sackcloth within upon his flesh" (ver 30) an act of humiliation only accidentally discovered by the rending of his garments. Ver 5 goes on to say that "Jeh gave Israel a saviour, so that they went out from under the hand of the Syrians." The "saviour" may refer to Joash, under whom the deliverance began (13 25), or to Jeroboam II, of whom it is declared that by him God "saved" Israel (14 27). Others take it to refer to Ramman-nirari III, king of Assyria, whose conquest of Damascus made possible the victories of these kings. See JEHOASH.


      (2) A king of Judah, son and successor of Josiah; reigned three; months and was deposed, 608 BC. Called "Shallum" in Jer 22 11; cf 1 Ch 3 15. The story of his reign is told in 2 K 23 30-35, and in a briefer account in 2 Ch 36 1-3. The historian of 2 K characterizes his reign as evil; 2 Ch passes no verdict upon him. On the death of his fat her in battle, which threw the realm into confusion, he, though a younger son (cf 2 K 23 31 with 23 3<>; 1 Ch 3 15 makes him the fourth son of Josiah), was raised to the throne by "the people of the land," the same; who had secured the accession to his father; sec; under JOSIAH. Perhaps, as upholders of the sterling old Davidic idea, which his father had carried out so well, they saw in him a better hope for its integrity than in his elder brother Jehoiakim (Eliakim), whose tyrannical tendencies may already have been too apparent. The prophets also seem to have set store by him, if we may judge by the sympathetic

      mentions of him in Jer 22 11 and Ezk 19 3.4. His career was too short, however, to make any marked impression on the history of Judah.

      Josiah s ill-advised meddling with the designs of Pharaoh-necoh (see under JOSIAH) had had, in fact, the ill effect of plunging Judah again into the vortex of oriental politics, from which it had long been comparatively free. The Egyp king imme diately concluded that so presumptuous a state must not be left in his rear unpunished. Arrived at Riblah on his Mesopotamia!! expedition, he put Jehoahaz in bonds, and later carried him prisoner to Egypt, where he died; raised his brother Je hoiakim to the throne as a vassal king; and im posed on the realm a fine of a hundred talents of silver and a talent of gold. So the fortunes of the Judaean state, so soon after Josiah s good reign, began their melancholy change for the worse.

      Jon\\\\\\\\ T FRANKLIN GENUNG

      (3) In 2 Ch 21 17; 25 23 = AHAZiAii, king of Judah (q.v.) (2 K 8 25 ff; 2 Ch 22 1 ff).

      JEHOASH, je-ho ash, the uncontracted form of JOASH (TBSnnV <//,<-/*/, tJt\\\\\\\\ yu Oish, "Jeh hath best owed" ; cf 2 K 11 2.21; 12 1 19; 2 Ch 24 1, etc; Lods, I WIN):

      (1) The 9th king of Judah; son of Ahaziah and Zibiah, a woman of Beersheba (2 K 11-12; 2 Ch 22 1024 27). Jehoash was 7 years old at his accession, and reigned 40 years. His accession may be placed in 852 BC. Some include in the years of his reign the 6 years of Athaliah s usur pation.

      When, on Athaliah s usurpation of the throne,

      she massacred the royal princes, J. was saved from

      her unnatural fury by the action of his

      1. His aunt Jehosheba, the wife of Jehoiada, Early the high priest (2 K 11 1.2; 2 Ch Preset- 22 10.11). During 6 years he was con- vation cealed in the house; of Jehoiada, which

      adjoined the temple; hence is said to have been "hid in the house of Jeh" a perfectly legitimate use of the phrase according to the idiom of the time.

      During these formative years of J. s early life, he was under the moral and spiritual influence of

      Jehoiada a man of lofty character

      2. The and devout spirit. At the end of 6 Counter- years, a counter-revolution was plan- Revolution ned by Jehoiada, and was successfully

      carried out on a Sabbath, at one of the great festivals. The accounts of this revolution in K and Ch supplement each other, but though the Levitical interest of the Chronicler is apparent in the details to which he gives prominence, the narratives do not necessarily collide, as has often been represented. The event was prepared for by the young king being privately exhibited to the 5 captains of the "executioners" (RV "Carites") and "runners" (2 K 11 4; 2 Ch 23 1). These en tered into covenant with Jehoiada, and, by his direction, summoned the Levites from Judah (2 Ch 23 2), and made the necessary arrangements for guarding the palace and the person of the king. In these dispositions both the royal body-guard and the Levites seem to have had their parts. J. next appears standing on a platform in front of the temple;, the law of the; testimony in his hand and the crown upon his heael. Amid acclamations, he is anointed king. Athaliah, rushing on the se-ene with cries of "treason" (see ATHALIAH), is driven forth and slain. A new covenant is made between Je;h and the king and people, and, at the conclusion of the ceremony, a great procession is formed, and the king is conelue-teel with honor to the royal house (2 K 11 19; 2 Ch 23 20). Thus auspiciously did the new reign be>gin.


      Jehoash Jehohanan

      Crown to manhood (cf the age of his son Amaxiah,

      > Iv 14 .">> J married two wives, and by them

      had sons and daughters (2 Ch 24 3).

      3. Repair His great concern at this period, how- of the ever, was the repair of the tempi* Temple the "house of Jeh" which in the

      reign of Athaliah had been broken ui) in manv places, plundered, and allowed to become dilapidated (2 K 12 0.12; 2 Ch 24 7). To meet the expense of its restoration, the king gave orders that all monies coming into the temple, whether dues or voluntary offerings, should In- appropriated for this purpose (2 K 12 4), and from the account in Ch would seem to have con templated a revival of the half-shekel tax appointed bv Mo<es for the construction of the tabernacle (2 Ch 24 ;>.(>; cf Ex 30 1! -Hi; 38 2.1). To en force this impost would have involved a new census, and the memory of the judgments which attended David s former attempt of this kind may well have had a deterrent effect on Jehoiada and the priest hood. "The Levites hastened it not," it is declared (2 Ch 24 ->).

      Time passed, and in the 23d year of the kings reign (his 30th year),i1 was found that the breaches

      of the house had still not been repaired.

      4. A. New A new plan was adopted. It was Expedient arranged that a chest with a hole

      bored in its lid should be set up on the right side of the altar in the temple-court, under the care of two persons, one the king s scribe, the other an officer of the high priest, and that the people should be invited to bring voluntarily their half-shekel tax or other offerings, and put it in this box (2 K 12 9; 2 Ch 24 S.9). Gifts from wor shippers who did not, visit the altar were received by priests at the gate, and brought to the box. The expedient proved brilliantly successful. The people cheerfully responded, large sums were con tributed, the money was honestly expended, and the temple was thoroughly renovated. There re mained even a surplus, with which gold and silver vessels were made, or replaced, for the use of the temple. Jehoiada s long and useful life seems to have closed soon after.

      With the death of this good man, it soon became

      evident that the strongest pillar of the state was

      removed. It is recorded that "J. did

      5. The that which was right in the _ eyes of King s De- Jeh all his days wherein Jehoiada the clension priest instructed him" (2 K 12 2),

      l)i it after Jehoiada had been honor ably interred in the sepulchers of the kings (2 Ch 24 itij, a sad declension became manifest. The princes of Judah came to J. and expressed their wish for greater freedom in worship than had been permitted them by the aged priest. With weak complaisance, the king "hearkened unto them" (ver 17). Soon idols and Asherahs began to be set up in Jerus and the other cities of Judah. Unnamed prophets raised their protests in vain. _ The high priest Zechariah, a worthy son of Jehoiada, testi fied in his place that as the nation had forsaken Jeh, he also would forsake it, and that disaster would follow (ver 20). Wrathful at the rebuke, the king gave orders that Zechariah should be stoned with stones in the temple-court (ver 21). This was done, and the act of sacrilege, murder, and ingrati tude was perpetrated to which Jesus seems to refer in Mt 23 3.">; Lk 11 .">! ("son of Barachiah" in the former passage is probably an early copyist s gloss through confusion with the prophet Zechariah).

      The high priest s dying words, "Jeh look upon it, and require it," soon found an answer. Within a year of Zechariah s death, the armies of Haxael, the Syrian king, were ravaging and laying waste Judah. The city of Gath fell, and a battle, the place


      of which is not given, placed Jerus at the mercy of the foe (2 K 12 17; 2 Ch 24 23.24). To save the capital from the indignity of 6. Calami- foreign occupation, J., then in din- ties and sickness, collected all the hallowed Assassi- things of the temple, and all the gold nation of the palace, and sent them to Ila-

      xael (2 K 12 17. IS). This failure of his policy, in both church and state, excited such popular "feeling against J., that a conspiracy was formed to assassinate him. His physical suffer ings won for him no sympathy, and two of his own officers slew him, while asleep, in the fortress of Millo, when- lie was paying :l visit, (ver 20). He was buried in the city of David, but not in the royal sepulchers, as Jehoiada had been (2 Ch 24 2.~.

      J. is mentioned as 1 he father of Amaxiah (2 K 14 1- > Ch 25 2.Y). His contemporaries in Israel were Jehoahaz (2 K 13 1) and Jehoash (2 K 13 10).

      P) The son of Jehoahaz, and 12th king of Israel (2 K 13 10-2-,; 14 S-l(>; 2 Ch 25 17-24). Je hoash reigned for 10 years. His acces-

      1. Accession sion may be placed in M3 BC. r \\\\\\\\ here and Reign were almost simultaneous changes in

      the sovereignties of Judah and of As syria Amaxiah succeeding to the throne of Judah in the2d year of J., and Uamman-nirari 1 1 [coining to the throne of Assyria in Sll BC which had important effects on the history of Israel in this reign.

      During the three previous reigns, for halt a cen tury, Elisha had been the prophet of Jeh to Israel.

      He was now aged and on his deathbed.

      2. Elisha Hearing of his illness, the young king and came to Dothan, where the prophet Jehoash was, and had a touching interview with

      him. His affectionate exclamation, "My father, my father, the chariots of Israel and the horsemen thereof" (2 K 13 14; cf 2 12), casts a pleasing light, upon his character. On his lips the words had another meaning than they bore- when used by Elisha himself at Elijah s translation. Then they referred to the "appearance" which parted Elisha from his master; now they referred to the great service rendered by the prophet to the kingdom. Not only had Elisha repeatedly saved the armies of Israel from the ambushes prepared for them by (he Syrians (2 K 6 8-23), but he had given assurance- of the relief of the capital when it was at its worst extremity (6 24 ff). To J., Elisha s presence was indeed in place of chariots and horse. The truth was anew demonstrated by the promise which the dying prophet now made to him. Direct ing J. in the symbolical action of the shooting of certain arrows, "he predicted three victories over t Ill- Syrians the first at Aphek, now Fik, on the E. of the Lake of Galilee and more would have been granted, had the faith of the king risen to the oppor tunity then afforded him (6 15-19).

      An interesting light is thrown by the annals of

      Assyria on the circumstances which may have made

      these victories of J. possible. Ram-

      3. Assyria man-nirari III, who succeeded to the and throne in Sll BC, made an expedition Damascus against Damascus, Edom and Philist ia,

      in his account of which he says: "I shut up the king [of Syria] in his chief city, Damascus. .... He clasped my feet, and gave himself up. . . . .His countless wealth and goods I seized in Damascus." With the Syrian power thus broken during the remainder of this ruler s reign of 27 years, it. may be understood how J. should be able to recover, as it is stated he did, the cities which Ben-hadad had taken from his father Jehoahaz (2 K 13 2.">). Schrader and others see in this Assyr ruler the "saviour" of Israel alluded to in



      Jehoash Jehoiachin

      2 K 13 5; more usually the reference is taken to be to J. himself , and to Jeroboam II (cf 2 K 14 27).

      The epitome of J. s reign is very brief, but the favorable impression formed of him from the acts

      of ElLsha is strengthened by another 4. War gained from the history of Amaziah

      with Judah of Judah (2 K 14 8-16; 2 Ch 25 17-24). For the purpose of a southern campaign, Amaziah had hired a large contingent of troops from Samaria. Being sent back unem ployed, these mercenaries committed ravages on their way home, for which, apparently, no redress was given. On the first challenge of the king of Judah, J. magnanimously refused the call to arms, I mt on Amaziah persisting, the peace established nearly 80 years before by Jehoshaphat (1 K 22 44) was broken at the battle of Bcth-shemesh, in which Amaziah was defeated and captured. Jerus opened its gates to the victor, and was despoiled of all its treasure, both of palace and temple. A portion of the wall was broken down, and hostages for future behavior were taken to Samaria (2 K 14 13.14).

      J. did not long survive his crowning victory, but, left a resuscitated state, and laid the- foundation

      for a subsequent rule which raised 5. Character Israel to the zenith of its power. Jos

      gives J. a high character for godliness, but, like each of his predecessors, he followed in the footsteps of Jeroboam 1 in permitting, if not en couraging, the worship of the golden calves. Hence his conduct is pronounced evil" by the historian (2 K 13 11). He was succeeded by his son Jeroboam II. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\. SHA\\\\\\\\V CALDECOTT

      JEHOHANAN, je-hn-ha nan OITr.rP , ,/lwha- naii, "Jen is [or lias been) gracious"*):

      (1) A Korahite doorkeeper in David s reign, "sou" of Meshelemiah (1 Ch 26 3). LXX, Luc, has "Jehonathan."

      (2) One of the five captains over King Jehosha phat s army (2 Ch 17 1/5), probably father of Ishmael, "son of J." (2 Ch 23 1).

      (3) Ezr 10 (5 (AVhas"Johanan") = "Johanan"of Neh 12 22. 23 = "Jonathan" of Neh 12 11, "son" of Ehashib (Ezr 10 (j; but "grandson" in Neh 12 11). lie was high priest in Ezra s time = " Jonas" in 1 Esd 9 1 (AV "Joanan").

      (4) One of those who had married foreign wives (Ezr 10 28) = "Joannes" RV, "Johannes" AV (1 Esd

      (")) Son of Tobiah, the Ammonite, Nehemiah s opponent (Neh 6 IS, AV Mohanan").

      (6) Head of the priestly family of Amariah (Xeh 12 13).

      (7) A priest present at the dedication of the walls of Jerus (Neh 12 42).

      (5) The name in the Heb of 2 Ch 28 12. See JOHANAN, (7). DAVID FKA.VCIS ROBERTS

      JEHOIACHIN, je-hoi a-kin CPI^rVi , ylmya- kh tn, Jeli will uphold"; called also "Jecon iah" in

      Ch 3 1(5; Jer 24 1; rrij 1 ], ykhmujah, "Jeh will be stedfast," and "Coniali" in Jer 22 24.28; "rP??, konyahu, "Jeh has upheld him"; Loax^, loakeim): A king of Judah; son and successor of Jehoiakim; reigned three months and surrendered to Nebuchadnezzar; was carried to Babylon, where alter being there 37 years a prisoner, he died.

      I he story of his reign is told in 2 K 24 8-16

      and more briefly in 2 Ch 36 9-10. Then, after the

      reign of his successor Zedckiah and

      1. bources the final deportation are narrated, the

      account of his release from prison 37

      years afterward and the honor done him is given as

      the final paragraph of 2 K (25 27-30). The same

      thing is told at the (Mid of the Book of Jer (52 31-34). Neither for this reign nor for the succeeding is there the usual reference to state annals; these seem to have been discontinued after Jehoiakim. In Jer 22 2-1-30 there is a final pronouncement on this king, not so much upon the man as upon his inevi table fate, and a prediction that no descendant of his shall ever have prosperous rule in Judah.

      Of the brief reign of J. there is little to tell. It

      was rather a historic landmark than a reign; but

      its year, 597 BC, was important as the

      2. His date of the first deportation of Jewish Reign captives to Babylon (unless we except

      the company of hostages carried away in Jchoiakim s 3d [4th] year, Did 1 1-7). His coming to the throne was just at or near the time when Nebuchadnezzar s servants were besieging Jerus; and when the Chaldaean king s arrival in pei-son to superintend the siege made apparent the futility of resistance, J. surrendered to him. with all the royal household and the court. He was carried prisoner to Babylon, and with him ten thousand captives, comprising all the better and sturdier element of the people from prince to crafts man, leaving only the poorer sort to constitute the body of the nation under his successor /edekiah. With the prisoners were carried away also the most valuable treasures of the temple and the royal palace.

      Ever since Isaiah fostered the birth and education of a spiritually-minded remnant, for him the vital

      hope of Israel, the growth and influ-

      3. The Two ence of this- element in the nation Elements has been discernible, as well in the

      persecution it, has roused (see under MANASSEH), as in its fiber of sound progress. It is as if a sober sanity of reflection were curing the people of their empty idolatries. The feeling is well expressed in such a passage as I lab 2 IX 20. Hitherto, however, the power of this spiritual Israel has been latent, or at best mingled and pervasive among the various occupations and interests of the people. The surrender of Jehoiachin brings about a segmentation of Israel on an unheard-of principle: not the high and low in wealth or social position, but the weight and worth of all classes on the one side, who are marked for deportation, and the refuse element of all classes on the other, who are left at home. With which element of this strange sifting Jeremiah s prophetic hopes are identified appears in his parable of the Good and Bad Figs (Jer 24), in which he predicts spiritual integrity and upbuilding to the captives, and to the home-staying remainder, shame and calamity. Later on, he writes to the exiles in Babylon, advising them to make themselves at home and be good citizens (Jer 29 1-10). As for the hapless king, "this man Coniah," who is to be then- captive chief in a strange land, Jeremiah speaks of him in a strain in which the stern sense of Jeh s inexorable purpose is mingled with tender sym pathy as he predicts that this man shall never have a descendant on David s throne (Jer 22 24-30). It is as if he said, All as Jeh has ordained, but the pity of it!

      In the first year of Nebuchadnezzar s successor, perhaps by testamentary edict of Nebuchadnezzar himself, a strange thing occurred. 4. Thirty- J., who seems to have been a kind of seven Years hostage prisoner for his people, was Later released from prison, honored above

      all the other kings in similar case, and thenceforth to the end of his life had his portion at the royal table (2 K 25 27-30; Jer 52 31-34). This act of clemency may have been due to some such good influence at court as is described in the Book of Dnl; but also it was a tribute to the good conduct of that better element of the people of


      Jehoiada Jehoiakim

      which ho was hostage ami representative. It was the last event, of Judaea n royalty; and suggestive for the glimpse it seems to afford of a, people whom the Second Isaiah could address as redeemed and forgiven, and of a king taken from durance and judg ment (cf Isa 53 S), whose; career makes strangely vivid the. things that an; said of the mysterious "Servant of Jeh." JOHN FKANKLIN GBNTJNQ



      "Jeh knows"; ItoSds, lodde) .

      (1) Father of Benaiah, the ca])tain of David s body-guard (12 S 8 is; 20 2:5; 23 20.22; 1 K 1 S, etc). .). was "the son of a valiant man of Kab- zeel" (2 S 23 20), hut commentator.s read with I. XX and Ewald, "Benaiah (the son of Jehoiada) a man of valour." Kabzeel was a town belonging to Judah on the border of Edom in the S. (Josh 15 21). In 1 Ch 27 5, we read "Benaiah, the son of Jehoiada the priest, chief, RV, but, RVm has "chief minister" wrongly. Yet J. is nowhere else called a priest or even a Levite, though in 1 ( h 12 27 (Heb 2S) a J. is mentioned as a military "leader of the house of Aaron, who came to David to Hebron with other members of the house of Levi. In 1 Ch 27 :U there is named among David s counsellors, "J. the son of Benaiah," where some commentators would read with two MSS, "B., the son of J." though Curtis, Cril. ami Kxt-ycl. Comm. on the Books of Ch, 2 .)."), keeps the MT.

      (2) Priest in the reigns of Ahaziah, Queen Athaliah, and Jehoash (Joash) of Judah (2 K 11 412 Hi [Heb 17] = 2 Oh 23 124 14; 2 Ch 22 11; 24 14-16.17-20.22.25). In 2 K 12 10 (Heb 11) he is called "high priest," and is the first to be given that title, but as the priest lived in the temple, there is no meaning in saying that he "came up," so commentators omit the words, "and the chief priest." According to 2 Ch 22 11, he had married Jehoshabeath ( = Jehosheba), the daughter of the king, i.e. Jehoram.

      (a) The account in 2 Ch 23 1-21 differs in many respects from that in 2 K 11 4-20, but even the

      latter has its problems, and 1. Jehoiada (ZATW, 1885, 280 ff) pointed out and the two sources in it. This view is ac- Revolt cepted by many. A reader is struck

      against at once by the double reference to the

      Athaliah death of Athaliah (vs 16.20), and the

      construction of the Heb for "making a covenant" is different in ver 4 from that in ver 17. Stade holds that there is one narrative in 11 1 12.lS/>-20 and another in vs 13-18a.

      In the first, J. makes an agreement with the cap tains of the foreign body-guard, and arranges that both the incoming and outgoing temple-guard shall be kept in the temple at the time when the guard should be changed on the Sabbath, and also that the young prince, Jehoash, who had been kept in hiding, shall be proclaimed. The captains do this, and the prince is crowned and proclaimed (vs 4-12). Then officers are set up in the temple, and Jehoash is taken to the royal palace and enthroned. The revolt proves popular with the people of Jems and those of the district, and Athaliah is slain in the palace.

      But there are difficulties in this narrative, though tho above Drives the trend of events: ver 5 refers to a third of tho guard who "cunie in on the sabbath." and ver 7 to two companies who "go forth on the sabbath"; the Heb is, "I hey that enter the sabbath" and "they that go out of the sabbath." Ver 9 makes clear the connec tion between vs 5 and 7. But ver 6 introduces a diffi culty: it seems to denote a division of those who "enter" into three divisions, i.e. the two in ver (i and one in ver 5. If ver (i lie omitted, as is proposed by many, this diffi culty vanishes. But there still remains the question of the change of guards. Commentators say that "they who enter the sabbath" are those who leave the temple and enter their quarters at the beginning of the Sabbath,

      presumably, while "those who go out" are those who leave their quarters to mount guard. This Is not impossible as an explanation of tho Hob. It is further believed that the guard at the temple on tho Sabbath was double that on other days. The other explanation, hold by older commentators is that on the Sabbath the guard was only half its usual size; this gives another moaning to the Heb phrases. On the other hand, it may be held that the revolt took place at the close of the Sabbath, and that the double-sized guard was kept by J. even after the usual-sized one had come to take their place. It should be added that Vv ollhauscn proposed to read rT~"2 (<; i\\\\\\\\illir,th), "armlets" (cf Isa 3 19), for T^Ti? ( edhuih), "testimony," in ver 12; and in ver 10 the words "and all the people of the land" are held to be an addition.

      (h) The 2(1 narrative (vs 13-lSa) begins suddenly. Presumably its earlier part was identical with the earlier part of the 1st narrative, unless ver G was a part originally of this 2d account. Athaliah hears the noise of the people (ver 13, where "the guard" is a gloss and so to be omitted), and comes to the temple, where she witnesses the revolt and cries, "Treason! treason!" J. orders her to be put forth (omit "between the ranks" in ver 15), so that she should not be slain in the temple, and she is murdered at one of the palace entrances (ver 10, where 11V, following LXX of 2 Ch 23 15, tr a the first sentence wrongly: it should be "So they laid hands on her"). J. then makes the king and the people enter into a solemn covenant to be Jeh s people, and the result is the destruction of the temple of Baal, and the death of Mattan, its priest (vs IT.lSo). This 2d narrative gives a religious significance to the revolt, but it is incomplete. The other narrative presents a very natural course of events, for it was absolutely neces sary for J. to secure the allegiance of the royal foreign body-guard.

      (c) The account in 2 Ch 23 1-21, though following that of 2 K in the main, differs from it considerably. The guard is here; composed of Levites; it does not men tion tho foreign body-guard, and relates how tho revolt was planned with the Levites of the cities of Judah a method which would have become known to Athaliah and for which she would have made preparations, no doubt . Ch makes it a wholly religious movement, while 2 Iv gives two points of view. The value of the Chroni cler s account depends largely oil one s estimate of tho Books of Ch and one s views as to tho development of the Jewish priestly system. A. Van Hoonacker, Le ,vr, rilnre It n t it/m. dans la loi i t rlaitx I histoire dvs Hebreux, 93-100, defends the account iu 2 Ch.

      The part which J. played in the restoration of the temple buildings is described in 2 K 11 21 12 16 (Heb 12 1-17) !|2 Ch 24 1-14. Here 2. Jehoiada again the narratives of 2 K and 2 Ch and the differ to a large extent. Restoration (a) According to 2 K (i) the priests of the are commanded by Jehoash to devote

      Temple the dues or free-will offerings of the

      people to repairing the breaches in the temple. They fail to do so, and (ii) J. is sum moned by the king and rebuked. Then (iii) a new regulation is put into force: the offerings, except the guilt offerings and sin offerings, are no longer to be given to the priests, but to be put into a chest provided in the temple for the purpose, (iv) The money got in this way is devoted to repairing the temple, but (v) none of it is used to provide temple vessels.

      (b) Ch, on the other hand, (i) relates that the priests and Levites are commanded to go through Judah to collect the necessary money. They "has tened it not." Then (ii) J. is summoned to account for this disobedience, and (iii) a chest is put outside the temple to receive the tax commanded by Moses, (iv) This the people pay willingly, and the temple is repaired. There is such a surplus that (v) there is money also to provide vessels for the temple.

      It is at least questionable whether the additions in 2 Ch are trustworthy; the contradictions against 2 K are clear, and the latter gives the more likely


      Jehoiada Jehoiakim

      narrative, although Van Iloonacker (op. eit., 101 - 14) defends the former.

      According to 2 Ch 24 IT), J. lived to be 130 years old, and was buried among the kings a unique distinction.

      (3) AV in Neh 3 G = JOIADA (q.v.).

      (4) There is a Jehoiada, the priest mentioned in Jer 29 20, in whose stead Zephaniah was declared priest by Shemaiah in a letter.

      Giesebreeht takes him to be the same as the priest of Athaliah s time (see [2] above), but Duhm says that nothing is known of him. In any case, Zephaniah could not have been the direct successor of the well-known Jehoiada, and so the reference can scarcely be to him if it is to have any meaning.


      JEHOIAKIM, jp-hoi a-kim (Z ^ rP , yhd/jaklm, "Jeh will establish"; IcoaKeiji, lunhcltn): The name given him by Pharaoh-necoh, who raised him to the 1 hrone as vassal king in place of his brother Jehoa- haz, is changed from Eliakim (2 n p^X, elydklm, "God will establish"). The change compounds the name, after the royal Judaean custom, with that of Jeh; it may also imply that Nocoh claims Jeh s authorization for his act, as in a similar way Sen nacherib had claimed it for his invasion of Judah (2 K 18 2">). He has represented the campaign with which Josiah .interfered as undertaken by Divine command ( El, 2 Ch 35 21); this episode of it merely translates the authorization, rather arrogantly, into the conquered nation s dialect.

      A king of Judah, elder (half-) brother and suc cessor of Jehoahaz; reigned 1 1 years from GOS BC.

      /. Sources for His Life and Time. The circum-

      stances of his accession and raising of the indemnity

      to Pharaoh-necoh, followed by a brief

      1. Annalistic resume of his reign, are narrated in

      2 K 23 3424 G. The naming of t lie source for "the rest of his acts" (24 5) is the last ivfereneo we have to "the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah." The acccount in 2 Ch 36 . r > S, though briefer still, mentions Nebuchadnezzar s looting of the temple at some uncertain date in his reign. Neither account has any good to say of J.; to the writer of 2 K, however, his ill fortunes are duo to Jeh s retributive justice for the sins of Manasseh; while to the Chronicler the sum of his acts, apparently connected with the desecration of the sanctuary, is characterized as "the abomina tions which he did." For "the rest of his acts" we are referred, also for the last time, to the, "book of the kings of Israel and Judah."

      For the moral and spiritual chaos of the time, and

      for prophecies and incidents throwing much light

      on the king s character, Jeremiah has

      2. Prophetic a number of extended passages, not,

      however, in consecutive order.

      The main ones clearly identifiable with this reign are- 22 1 :{-!!), inveighing against the king s tyrannies and predicting his ignominious death; oh 26, dated in the beginning of his reign and again predicting (as had been predicted before in 7 12-15) the destruction of the temple; ch 25, dated in his 4th year and predicting the conquest of Judah and surrounding nations by Nebuchad nezzar; ch 36, dated in the 4th and 5th years, and telling the story of the roll of prophecy which the king destroyed ; oh 45, an appendix from the 4th year, reassuring Baruch the scribe, in terms of the larger prophetic scale, for his dismay at what he had to write; ch 46, also an appen dix, a reminiscence of the year of Carchemish, containing the oracle then pronounced against Egypt, and giving words of the larger comfort to Judah. The Book of the prophet Habakkuk, written in this reign, gives expression to the prophetic feeling of doubt and dismay at the unrequited ravages of the Chaldaeans against a people more righteous than they, with a sense of the value of stedfast faith and of Jeh s world-movement and purpose which explains the seeming enormity.

      //. Character and Events of His Reign. The

      reign of J. is not so significant for any personal im press of his upon his time as for the fact that it fell in one of the most momentous epochs of ancient

      history. By the fall of Nineveh in GOG to the assault of Nebuchadnezzar, t hen crown prince of the

      rising Bab empire, Assyria, "the rod 1. The of [Jeh s] anger" (Isa 10 5), ended

      Epoch its arrogant and inveterate sway

      over the nations. Nebuchadnezzar, coming soon after to the Chaldaean throne, followed up his victory by a vigorous campaign against Pharaoh-necoh, whom we; have seen at the end of Josiah s reign (see under JOSIAH) advancing toward the Euphrates in his attempt to secure Egyp do minion over Syria and Mesopotamia. The en counter took place in G05 at Carchemish on the northern Euphrates, where. Necoh was defeated and driven back to the borders of his own land, never more to renew his aggressions (2 K 24 7). The dominating world-empire was now in the hands of the Chaldaeans, "that bitter and hasty nation" (I lab 1 G); the first stage of the movement by which the world s civilization was passing from Sem to Aryan control. With this world-movement Israel s destiny was henceforth to be intimately involved; the prophets were already dimly aware of it, and were shaping their warnings and promises, as by a Divine instinct, to that end. It was on this larger scale of things that they worked; it had all along been their endeavor, and continued with in creasing clearness and fervor, to develop in Israel a conscience and stamina which should be a leaven ing power for good in the coming great era (of Isa

      2 2-4; Mie 4 1-3).

      Of all these prophetic meanings, however, neither the king nor the ruling classes had the faintest reali zation; they saw only the political 2. The exigencies of the moment. Nor did

      King s the king himself, in any patriotic way,

      Perverse rise even to the immediate occasion. Character As to policy, he was an unprincipled opportunist : vassal to Necoh to whom he owed his throne, until Necoh himself was de feated; enforced vassal to Nebuchadnezzar for

      3 years along with the other petty kings of Western Asia; then rebelling against the latter as soon as lie thought he could make anything by it. As to responsibility of administration, he had simply the temper of a despotic self-indulgent Oriental. He raised the immense fine that Necoh imposed upon him by a direct taxation, which he farmed out to unscrupulous officials. lie indulged himself with erecting costly royal buildings, employing for the purpose enforced and unpaid labor (Jer 22 13-17); while all just interests of his oppressed subjects went wholly unregarded. As to religion, he let mat ters go on as they had been under Manasseh, prob ably introducing also the still more strange and heathenish rites from Egypt and the East of which we see the effects in Ezk 8 5-17. And meanwhile the reformed temple-worship which Josiah had introduced seems to have become a mere formal and perfunctory matter, to which, if we may judge by his conspicuous absence from fast and festal occasions (e.g. Jer 26, 36), the king paid no atten tion. His impious act of cutting up and burning Jeremiah s roll (36 23), as also his vindictive pur suit and murder of Uriah for prophesying in the spirit of Jeremiah (26 20-23), reveal his antipathy to any word that does not prophesy "smooth things" (of Isa 30 10), and in fact a downright perversity to the name and will of Jeh.

      With the onset of the Ohaldaean power, prophecy, as represented in the great seers whose words remain to us,

      reached a crisis which only time and the 3. The consistent sense of its larger issues could

      T> k ...;- enable it to weather. Isaiah, in his time, Y ~ llc had stood for the inviolability of /ion, and

      Attitude a miraculous deliverance had vindicated

      his sublime faith. But with Jeremiah, conditions had changed. The idea thus engendered, that the temple was bound to stand and with it Jems,

      Jehoiarib Jehoshaphat



      an idea confirmed by Josiah s centralizing reforms had heroine a supers! ition and a presumption (cf Jer i -I. an.l Jeremiah had reached the conviction that it, with it" wooden rites and glaring al)uses,niust go: thai nothing short of a dean sweep of the old Miaous fetishes could cu?c the inveterate imspiriUiality of the nation. This conviction of his must needs seem to many "ko an in consistency to set prophecy against itself. And when t he rhaldaean appeared on t he seene. his counse of sn ,- mission and prediction of captivity would se n . double inconsistencv not otilv a traversing of a tested prophei \\\\\\\\ , "la "reason to the state. This was the situation that |1C had to encounter; and for it he gav^ his tender fecamgs his liberty, his life. It is in this reign of .1. that f sake of Jell s word and purpose, he is engulfed in the deep ragedy of his career. And in this he must be vir- ua v ahme. Habakkuk is indeed with him m sym pathy; but his vision is not so clear; he must, aisheartenins doubts, and cherish the fail f the righteous illab 2 4), and wait until the \\\\\\\\ision Of Jell s selre purpose clears (Hab 8 1-3). I H" 1 Wf"** themselves are thus having such an equivocal crisis we ,an imagine how forlorn is the plight of .Id, a " remnant who are dependent on prophetic faith and courage guide them through the depths. The humble nucleus of the true Israel, which is some day to be the nations redeeming element, i.s undergoing u stern seasoning.

      \\\\\\\\fter Syria fell into Nebuchadnezzar s power, he seems to have established his headquarters I or some years at Riblah; and alter .). 4. Harass- attempted to revolt from his authority, ing and he sent, against him guerilla bands

      Death from the neighboring nations, and de

      tachments from his Chaldaean garri sons, who harassed him with raids and depredations. In 2 Ch 36 0.7, it is related that Nebuchadnezzar carried some of the vessels of the temple to Baby lon and bound the king in fetters to carry him also to Babylon the latter purpose apparently not carried out. This was in J. s -1th year. In Dnl 1 1.2, though ascribed to Jehoiakim s 3d year, this same event is related as the result of a, siege of Jerus. It is ambiguously intimated also that the king was deported; and among "the seed royal and of the nobles" who were of the company were Daniel and his three companions (Dnl 1 3.6). The manner of J s death is obscure. It is merely said (2 K 24 (>) that he "slept, with his fathers" ; ^ but Jos I 1 /,/, X, vi, 3), perhaps assuming that Jeremiah s prediction (Jer 22 1 .)) was fulfilled, states that Neb uchadnezzar slew him and east his body outside the walls unburied. JOHN* FRANKLIN GENUNG

      JEHOIARIB, je-hoi a-rib PT. W , "Jell pleads or "contends"): A priest in Jerus (1 Ch 9 10); the name occurs again in 1 Ch 24 7 as the name of a family among, the 24 courses of priests = the family Joiarib (l" 1 "!^" 1 , yili/drlbh, same meaning as above, Neh 12 6), the head of which is Mattenai in Neh 12 19. In Neh 11 10 we should probably read "Jedaiah and Joiarib" for "Jedaiah the son of Joiarib" (cf 1 Ch 9 10). Jehoiarib = Joarib in 1 Mace 2 1.

      JEHONADAB, jf-hon a-dab P~:VP , if lulu fi- (Uidl>li, either "Jeh is noble" or "liberal," or "Jeh has impelled") = Jonadab (2""" 1 , yonadhabh, same meaning):

      (1) Jehonadab in Heb of 2 S 13 5; but Jonadab in KV, and in Heb and KV of 13 3.32.35; son of Shimeah, King David s brother. He was friendly with Amnon liis cousin, and is said to be "a very shrewd [RV "subtle"] man." He planned to get Tamar to wait upon Amnon. Two years after, when Absalom had murdered Amnon, and David had heard that all the king s sons were; assassinated, J. assured him that, only Amnon was killed; and his reassuring tone is justified (ver 35); possibly he knew of Absalom s intentions. LXX, Luc, has "Jonathan" in 13 3 ff; and in 2 S 21 21 , 1 Ch 20 7, there is mentioned a son of Shimei (= "Shim- ea," 1 Ch 20 7 = "Shammah," 1 S 16 <)), whose name is Jonathan. See JONATHAN, (4).

      (2) Jehonadab in 2 K 10 15.23; in Heb of Jer 35 S.I 1.1(>.1S = Jonadab in Jer 35 0. 10.19, and I A of 35 S. 1-1. 1C). IS, "son" of Rechab, of the Kenite clan (1- Ch 2 55). J. is described in 2 K 10 as an ally of Jehu in the abolition of Baal-worship in Samaria. Jehu met him after slaying the son of Ahab (10 15); the second part, of the verse should probably be tr 1 And he greeted him and said t_o him, Is thy heart upright [with me] as my heart is with thee? And Jehonadab answered, Yes. Then spake Jehu [so LXX], If so, give me thy hand. In Jer 35 (where EV has Jonadab throughout), he is palled the "Father" of the Recliabites, who derived from him their ordinances for their nomadic life and abstention from wine. See RKCHAB, Ri> CHAIUTKS. DAVID FRANCIS ROBKKTS

      JEHONATHAN, je-hon a-than ("""rP , ll/uii, "Jeh has given"): The name is the same as Jonathan: the Heb has the two forms for_the same person sometimes; sometimes only one is found. See JONATHAN. The form "Jehonathan" occurs as follows in KV:

      (1) A Levite who took part in teaching the Torah in the cities of Judah under Jehoshaphat (2 Ch 17 S KV and Heb).

      (2) Head of the priestly family of Shemaiah (Xeh 12 1SKV and Hebj.

      (3) AV and Ileb in 1 Ch 27 25; see JONATHAN, (7).

      JEHORAM, je-ho ram, written also in the abbre viated form, JORAM (tyyirtj, ifhurum, ZTT ,, "Jeh is high"; RV retains "Joram" for Ileb yhoram in 2 K 9 15-24):

      (1) Ninth king of Israel (2 K 1 179 2S), son of Ahab and Jezebel, successor to his brother Aha/iah, who died childless. He began to reign 853 BC, and reigned 12 years (2 K 3 1; 8 10).

      The statement in 2 K 1 17. "the second year of Je- horani " follows a system of chronology common to the Lueian group of MSS, in which the 1st year of Jehosha phat falls in the llth year of Omri; the 24th year of Jehoshaphat in the 1st year of Ahaziah; and the 1st year of Jchoram. in the 2d year of Jehoram of Judah. The double chronology (2 K 1 17 and 2 K. 3 D is due to the intention of the compiler of K to refer all the acts of Klisha to the reign of Jehoram. thus dislocating the order of events in that reign. Klisha, however, survived Jehoram many years, and it is possible that some of the events are to be referred to subsequent reigns.

      It is difficult to estimate the religious character

      of J. Apparently the fierce fanaticism of Jezebel

      and the boldness of Ahab reappear

      1. His in the son in the form of duplicity and Religious superstition. The attempt of Jezebel Policy to substitute Baal for Jeh had failed.

      The people were on the side of Jeh. Otherwise Jehu could not have carried out his bloody reform. All the worshippers of Baal in the land could be gathered into one temple of Baal (2 K 10 IS IT). Kvidently J. feared the people. Accordingly he posed as a reformer by putting away the pillar of Baal (2 K 3 2), while secretly he worshipped Baal (3 13). Nevertheless, when he got into straits, he expected to receive the help of Jeh (3 13b). He had not learned that a dual nature is as impossible as a union of Baal and Jeh.

      Immediately upon his accession, J. came into conflict with Mesha, king of Moab (2 K 3 4ff).

      The account of the conflict is of special

      2. The interest because of the supplementary Moabite information concerning Mesha fur- War nished by the Moabite Stone. There

      we learn (11. 1-S) that Moab became tributary to Israel in the days of Omri, and remained so for forty years, but that it rebelled in the days of Ahab. This probably brings us to the statement in 2 K 3 4 ff that Mesha "rendered unto the king of



      Jehoiarib Jehoshaphat

      Israel the wool of a hundred thousand lambs, and ol a hundred thousand rams," and that "when Ahah was dead, .... the king of Aloab rebelled against the king of Israel." The victories of Alesha, glorifiec by t_he AI S, possibly took place before the events oi 2 K 3 4 ff. Accordingly, J. resolved to recover the allegiance of the Aloabites. He called to his aid the ally of his father, Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, and the latter s vassal, the king of Edom. J. was enter tained at Jerus (Jos, Ant, IX, iii, 1). The allies inarched against Aloab by the longer route, around the southern end of the Dead Sea, indicating that Aloab was fortified against attack from the W., and that Israel was weak in the East Jordan country. After the allies had been miraculously delivered from perishing for lack of water, they devastated the land and sacked the cities, and finally they succeeded in shutting up Aiesha in Kir-hareseth. Driven to despair, Alesha offered his eldest son upon the wall as a burnt offering to Clicmosh. This seems to have caused the tide to turn, for "there was great wrath against Israel." and the allies returned to their own land, apparently having failed to secure a last ing advantage.

      Assuming that 2 K 4-8 belong to the reign of J.,

      it appears that the Syrians made frequent incursions

      into the land of Israel, perhaps more

      3. The in the nature of plundering robber Conflicts bands than invasions by a regular army with Syria (2 KG). Finally, however, Ben-hadad

      in person invaded the country and be sieged Samaria. The inhabitants were reduced to horrible straits by famine, when the oppressors took sudden flight and Israel was saved. In the years 840, 848, and 845, Shahnaneser II invaded Syria. It is probable that during this period J. recovered Ramoth-gilead, which had fallen to Syria under Ahab. Hazael succeeded Ben-hadad as ruler of Syria., and his first ac|, after having murdered his predecessor, was to regain Ramoth-gilead. In the defence of the city, J., who was assisted by his nephew, Ahaziah, was wounded, and returned to Jezreel to be healed of his wounds.

      J. left the army at Ramoth-gilead under the com mand of Jehu, a popular captain of the host. While J. was at Jezreel, Elisha sent a prophet

      4. The Con- to anoint Jehu as king of Israel. Jehu spiracy of had been a witness of the dramatic Jehu scene when Elijah hurled the curse

      of Jeh at Ahab for his crime against Naboth. Jehu at once found in himself the instru ment to bring the curse to fufilment. Accordingly, he conspired his crime against J. With a company of horsemen he proceeded to Jc/reel, where Ahaziah was visiting his sick uncle, J. J. suspected treach ery, and, in company with Ahaziah, he rode out to meet Jehu. On his question, "Is it peace, Jehu?" he received a brutal reply that no longer left him in doubt, as to the intention of the conspirator. As J. turned to flee, Jehu drew his bow and shot him in the back so that the arrow pierced his heart. His dead body was thrown into the plat of ground that had belonged to Naboth.

      (2) King of Judah, son of Jehoshaphat (2 K 8 16-24; 2 Ch 21 1-20), he began to rule about 849 and reigned 8 years. With reference to the chronological difficulty introduced by 2 K 1 17, see (1) above.

      In the beginning of the reigns of Ahab and Je hoshaphat, an attempt was made to end the old feud between Israel and Judah. At the 1. His suggestion of Ahab, the two kingdoms,

      Marriage for the first lime, joined forces against the common foe from the N., the Syrians. To seal the alliance, Athaliah, daughter of Jezebel and Ahab, was married to J., son of Je hoshaphat. Thus Jehoram was brother-in-law to

      (1) above. No doubt this was considered as a mas ter stroke of conciliatory policy by the parties inter ested. However, it proved disastrous for Judah. Beyond a doubt., the unholy zeal of Jezebel included the Baalizing of Judah as well as of Israel. This marriage was a step in that direction.

      "A man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife." J. did so. "He; walked in the ways of the kings of Israel, as did the house of Ahab" (2 K 8 18) Idolatry According to 2 Ch 21 11.13, J. not only accepted the religion of Athaliah, but he became a persecutor, compelling the inhabit ants of Jerus and of the land to become apostates. Because of his gross idolatry and his wickedness he is said (2 Ch 21 12 ff ) to have received a de nunciatory letter from the prophet 3. The Elijah, which, however, had no effect

      Letter of on him. But this leads to a chrono- Ehjah logical difficulty. Was Elijah still

      alive? The inference from 2 K 3 11 is that he was not . Then, too, the Chronicler ot her- wise never mentions Elijah. Oettli is of the opinion that one should either read "Elisha" for "Elijah," or else consider the letter to have been the con ception of a later writer, who felt that Elijah must have taken note of the wickedness of J. and his wife, Athaliah, daughter of Ahab. In the latter event the letter might be called a haggadic Alidrash.

      A man s religion cannot be divorced from his character. Baalism had in it the elements of tyranny and civic unrighteousness. In keeping with his religion, and in Character true oriental fashion, J. began his reign by murdering his brothers, and other princes of the land, to whom Jehoshaphat had given valuable gifts and responsible positions. The only event belonging to his reign re corded in K is the revolt of Edom Revolt of Edom was subdued by David, and, Edom probably with the exception of a tem

      porary revolt under Solomon (1 K 11 ff), it had remained subject to the united king dom or to Judah until the revolt under J. The text is somewhat obscure, but both accounts indicate that the expedition of J. against Edom ended in failure. In the account we are told that at the same time Libnah revolted.

      Perhaps the revolt of Libnah should be taken in connection with the invasion of the Philis and of tlie Arabians, mentioned in 2 Ch 21 6. The Raid Libnah was located on the south- into Judah western border of Judah. Since it was a border city, it is possible that the compiler of K considered it as belonging to 1 hihstia. In the account in Ch, J. is represented as having lost all his possessions and all his family, save Jehoahaz, the youngest of his sons, when the town was sacked and the palace plundered bv the invading force of Philis and Arabians. The account appears to be based upon reliable sources.

      In his last days, he was afflicted with a frightful disease in the bowels. His death was unregretted, and his burial without honor. Con trast, however, 2 K 8 24 with 2 Ch Death 21 20. Ahaziah, also called Jehoahaz,

      his younger son, then became king m his stead. & K. A!OSIMAN

      JEHOSHABEATH, je-hf.-shab r-ath (T,^^ , y e hoshabh*ath, "Jeh is an oath"): In 2 Ch 22 11 = JEHOSHEHA (q.v.j of 2 K 11 2.

      JEHOSHAPHAT, jr-hosh a-fat (EEirirP, yho- shdphat, "Jeh has judged"):

      (1) King of Judah. See separate article.

      (2) Son of Ahilud. He was recorder under David

      Jehoshaphat Jehovah-Jireh



      (2 S 8 1C.; 20 4 3).

      (3) Son of Issarhar t for one lliolll

      (I) Son o Nortliern I in 9 20 an of \\\\\\\\ inishi."

      (">) \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (hut n JiisiiAPiiAT (q.v.

      1 ( li 18 I.")) and Solninon (I K

      Solomon s overseer in for tin; royal household of 1 lie year (1 K 4 17). Nimshi, and father of Jehu, king of rael r2 K 9 2.14). 1 iis name is omitted 1 K 19 Hi, \\\\\\\\vhere Jehu is called "son

      Hel))in 1 (Mi 15 2 1 ; KV correctly DAVID Fu.vxns HOIIKKTS

      JEHOSHAPHAT, jr-hosl/a-fat (EtlTirV; , yJnl- sl/n/ilult, "Jeli judges"): The 4th king of Judah, soli of Asa! His inother was A/.ubah, the daughter of Shilhi, of whom nothing further is known. He was 3."> years of aue at his accession, and reigned 2~> veai s, c S73 M .l BC. The history of his reign is c,,ntaine<! in 1 K 22 11 .">() and in 2 (Mi 17 1 21 1. The narrative in 1 K 22 1 3.~>u and in 2 K 3 1 ff belongs to (he history of the Northern Kingdom. The absence from K of the details con tained in 2 (Mi affords no presumption against their truth. Neither do high numbers, embellished statements, and the coloring of 1 he writer s own age destroy (he historical perspective.

      The reign of J. appears to have been one of un

      usual religious activity. It was, however, charac

      terized not so much by striking reli-

      1. His gious measures as it was by 1 he religious Religious spirit, that pervaded every act. of the Policy king, who sought the favor of Jell in

      every detail of his life (2 Ch 17 3.4). lie evidently felt, that. ;i nation s character is de termined by its religion. Accordingly, he made it. his duty to purify tin national worship. The "sodomites," i.e. those who practised immorality in the worship of Jeh in the temple precincts, were banished from the land (1 K 22 40). The Asherim were taken out of Judah (2 CMi 17 0; 19 3), and the people from Beer-sheba to the. hill-country of Ephraim were brought back unto Jeh, the God of their fathers" (19 4). Because of his zeal for Jeh, J. is rewarded with power and riches and honor in abundance" (17 o).

      Believing that religion and morals, the founda

      tion and bulwarks of civilization, suffer from igno

      rance, J. introduced a system of public

      2. His ins; ruction for the whole land (2 CMi System of 17 7i f). He appointed a commission, Public In- composed of princes, Levites and struction priests, to go from city to city to in

      struct the people. Their instruction was to be based on the one true foundation of sound morals and healthy religious life, "the book of 1 he law of Jeh" (17 7-0).

      Next iii importance to J. s system of public in

      struction, was his provision for the better admin

      istration of justice. lie appointed

      3. His judges to preside over courts of coin- Judicial mon pleas, which he established in all Institutions the fortified cities of Judah. In addi

      tion to these local courts, two courts of appeal, an ecclesiastical and a civil court, were established at Jems to be presided over by priests, Levites, and leading nobles as judges. At the head of the ecclesiastical court of appeal was the high priest, and a layman, "the ruler of the house of Judah," headed the civil court of appeal (2 (Mi 19 4-11). The insistence that a judge was to be in character like Jeh, with whom there is "no iniquity .... nor respect of persons, nor taking of bribes" (19 7), is wort hy of note.

      According to 2 Ch 17 2, J. began his reign with defensive measures against Israel. Furthermore, he built castles and cities of store in the land of

      4. His

      Military Defences

      5. His

      Foreign Policy

      1 he had many works," probably mili- es, "in the cities of Judah" (17 13). He appears to have had a large standing army, including cavalry (1 K 22 4; 2 Ch 17 14 ff). However, the numbers in 2 Ch 17 14 ff seem to be impossibly high. , and security at home were followed and peace abroad. The fact that the IMiilis and the Arabians brought tribute (17 11), and that Edom had no king (1 K 22 47), but a deputy instead, who possibly was appointed by J., would indicate that he held the suzerainty over the nations and tribes bordering Judah on the S. and W. Holding the suzerainty over the weaker nations, and being allied with the stronger, .J. secured the peace for the greater part of his reign (I Ch 17 10) that fostered the internal development, of the kingdom.

      In contrast to the former kings of Judah, J. saw

      greater benefit in an alliance with Israel than in

      civil war. Accordingly, the old feud

      6. His between 1he two kingdoms (1 K 14 Alliance 30; 15 0) was dropped, and J. made with Ahab peace with Israel (22 44). The po litical union was cemented by the

      marriage of Jehoram, son of J., to Alhaliah, daughter of Aha!) and Jezebel. Shortly after the marriage, J. joined Ahab in a campaign against Syria (2 Ch 18 1-3). In view of the subordinate position that J. seems to take in the campaign (1 K 22 4.30), and in view of the military service rendered to Jehoram (2 K 3 4 IT), Judah .seems to have become a dependency of Israel. Nevertheless, the union may have contributed to the welfare and prosperity of Judah, and it may have enabled J. to hold the suzerainty over the neighboring nations. However, the final outcome of the alliance with the house of Omri was disastrous for Judah. The introduction into Judah of Baalism more than counterbalanced any political and material advantage gained, and in the succeeding reigns it indirectly led to the almost total extinction of the royal family of Judah (11 1 ff).

      In spite of the denunciation of the prophet Jehu

      for his expedition with Ahab, thus "helping] the

      wicked" (2 Ch 19 2), J. entered into

      7. His Al- a similar alliance with Jehoram of Israel liance with (2K34ff). On the invitation of Je- Jehoram horam to join him in an expedition

      against, Moab, J. was ready with the same set speech of acceptance as in t he ease of Ahab (2 X 3 7; cf 1 K 22 4). For the details of the expedition see JKHOKA.M, (1).

      The Chronicler has given us a very remarkable account of a victory gained by J. over the Moabites and Ammonites. No doubt he made use of a current historical Midr. Many find the historical basis of the Midr in the events recorded in 2 K 3 4 ff. However, the localities are different, and there a defeat is recorded, while in this case we have a victory. The story in outline bears the stamp of probability. 1 K 22 45 seems to suggest wars of J. that arc not men- tioned in K. The tribes mentioned in the account are represented as trying to make permanent settle ment in Judah (2 Ch 20 11). In their advance t hrough t he S. of Judah, t hey were doubt less harassei 1 by the shepherd population of the country. J., according to his custom, sought the help of Jeh. The invading forces fell to quarreling among them selves (2 Ch 20 23), and destroyed one another. The spoil was great because the invaders had brought all their goods with them, expecting to remain in the land.

      8. Victory over the Moabites and Am monites



      Jehoshaphat Jehovah-Jireh

      The destruction of J. s fleet is recorded in 1 K 22 4S.49 and in 2 Ch 20 35-37. However, the

      two accounts are quite different. 9. Destruc- According lo K, J. built ships of Tar- tion of Je- shish to sail to Ophir for gold, but the hoshaphat s vessels were wrecked at Ezion-geber. Fleet Thereupon Aha/iah offered to assist

      J. with seamen, but J. refused to enter into 1he alliance. According to Ch the alliance had been formed, and together they built ships at Ezion-geber, which were destroyed because J. had made an alliance with the wicked king of Israel. In view of J. s other alliances, the Chronicler may be in the. right. Ch, however, misunderstood the term "ships of Tarshish."

      at hand at the resurrection. This, too, was an ordinary place for Jewish graves in precxilic times (2 K 23 6, etc). The valley today, esp. that part adjacent to the temple, is crowded with Moslem and Jewish graves. A worthless tradition indicates the tomb of Jehoshaphat himself close to the so- called "Pillar of Absalom." See KiX(; s VALE. There is not the slightest reason for believing that this is the spot referred to by Joel indeed lie may have spoken of an ideal spot only. The valley of the Kidron is a iiahal ("ravine"), not an \\\\\\\\~i/irk ("broad valley"). It is impossible not to suspect that there is some connection between the name Jehoshaphat and the name of a village near the head of this valley Shdphal; perhaps at one time


      J. died at the age of (>0. Jos says (Ant, IX, iii, 2) that he was buried in a magnificent manner,

      for he had imitated the actions of 10. His David. The kingdom was left to

      Death Jehoram, who inaugurated the begin

      ning of his reign by causing the mas sacre of his brethren. S. K. MosiMAN

      JEHOSHAPHAT, VALLEY OF (EBfflrP p)227, *cmek y hdshuphdt; the latter word means "Jeh judge! h," and entek, "wide," "open valley"; LXX he koilds I osaphdt) : The name is used in Joel 3 2.12 of the scene of Judgment: "Let the nations bestir themselves, and come up to the valley of Jehosha phat; for there will I sit to judge all the nations round about" (ver 12) . "The valley of decision" (or "sharp judgment") is another name the prophet gives to this spot (ver 14). Some have identified it with the valley ( emek) of BERACAH (q.v.) of 2 Ch 20 2t>, where King Jehoshaphat obtained a great victory, but this is improbable.

      Since the 4th cent. AD the KIDRON (q.v.) valley has been named the Valley of J. The tradition is now strongest among the Moslems who point out the exact scene of the Judgment; the Bridge As Kirtit, dividing heaven and hell, is to stretch across this valley from the Ilarnm area to the Mount of Olives. It is, however, the ambition of every pious Jew to be buried on the slopes of this valley, to be

      it was Wddy Shdphaf, which name would readily suggest the traditional one. See GEHENNA.


      , "Jeh is an oath"): Called "Jehosha- beath"in2 Ch 22 11; daughter of Jehoram king of Judah, possibly by a wife other than Athaliah (2 K 11 2). According to 2 Ch 22 11, she was the wife of Jehoiada, the priest . She hid Jehoash, the young son of King Ahaziah, and so saved his life from Queen Athaliah.

      JEHOSHUA, je-hosh n-a (5Tp!T , yhushn"\\\\\\\\ "Jeh is deliverance," or "is opulence"): The usual Heb form of the name "Joshua"; it occurs in AV of Nu 13 16 (ARV "Hoshea"); and in some editions of AV in 1 Ch 7 27, where others have the form "Jehoshuah" (h being wrongly added at the end). See JOSHUA, son of Nun.

      JEHOVAH, jf>-hd va, je-hf/va. NAMES OF, II, 5.

      See GOD,

      JEHOVAH-JIREH, jn-hf/va-jl rc (~T rnrr > ynhwcfi yir ch, "Jeh sees"): The name given by Abraham to the place where he had sacrificed a ram provided by God, instead of his son Isaac (Gen 22 14). The meaning plainly is that the Lord sees and provides for the necessities of His

      Jehovah-Nissi Jehu



      servants. There is an allusion to VCT S where Abraham says, "( .(id will provide himself [I!Ym "will sec for himself"] t lie lanili for a burnt offering." The ver ill A\\\\\\\\ l pics on to connect the incident with the popular proverb, "In the mount of the Lord it shall lie seen" (KV "provided"), KYm suggests "he shall be seen." "The mount of .Ich" in other places denotes the temple hill at .lerus (Ps 24 3; Isa 2 3, etc). \\\\\\\\Yith chanties of the punctuation very different readings have been sug gested. According to Swete s text : "And A. called the name of that place |the| Lord war [aorist | in order that they may say today: In the mountain [the] Lord mix xi < " (aorist ). I, XX reads, "In the mountain .leh seeth," or "will see." If there is merelv a verbal connection between the clauses we should most naturally read, "In the mount of ,Ieh one is seen [appears]," i.e. men, people, appear the reference being to the custom of visiting the temple at pilgrimages (Driver, 111)11, s.v.K Hut if the connection of the proverb with the name Jehovah-jireh" depends on the double sense of the word "HOP," then the best, explanation may be, .Jeh sees the needs of those who come to worship before Him on Zion, and there "is seen," i.e. reveals Him self to them by answering their prayers and supply ing their wants. I lis "seeing," in ot her words, takes practical effect in a "being seen" (ibid).

      W. Ewt\\\\\\\\<i

      JEHOVAH-NISSI, j.-nis I (^D? mm, yalnceh N/NN7, "Jeh is my banner"): S:> Moses named the altar which he reared to signalize the defeat of the Amalekites by Israel under Joshua, at Rephidim (Ex 17 15). LXX translates "the Lord my refuge," de riving ///.s-.s-7 from C" , nils, "to flee." Tg Onkelos reads, "Moses built an altar and worshipped on it before Jeh, who had wrought for him miracles" (To" , iil.fNln). The suggestion is that the people should rally round (lod as an army gathers round its standard, lie it is who leads them to victory.


      JEHOVAH-SHALOM, j.-sha lom (21518 mm, yahweh xhilloin, "Jeh is peace"): This was the name given by Gideon to the altar lie built at Ophra. in allusion to the word spoken to him by the Lord, "Peace be unto thee" (Jgs 6 24). It is equivalent to "Jeh is well disposed."

      JEHOVAH-SHAMMAH, j.-slmm a (matt mm, ydfnrch shammdh, "Jeh is there"): The name to be given to the new Jerus, restored and glorified, as seen in the vision of Ezk (48 8") in; cf Rev 21 3). Jeh returns to the temple which He had forsaken, and from that time forward the fact of supreme importance is that lie is there, dwelling in the midst of His people.

      JEHOVAH-TSIDKENU (giDKENU), j.-tsid- ke im, tsid ke-nu ( ? ;p.~.I mm, ijnlurck ^idh/penu, "Jeh [is] our righteousness"): The symbolic name given (1 ) to the king who is to reign over the restored Israel (Jer 23 15); (2) to the state or capital (33 16).

      JEHOZABAD, jr-hoz a-bad ("nfim , ifhoza- bhd lfi, "Jeli has bestowed"):

      (1) A servant of King Jehoash of Judah. Ac cording^ K 12 LM (22), he was a son of Shomer,

      but 2 Ch 24 2(5 makes ]iim "son of Shimrith the Moabitess."

      (2) A Korahite doorkeei)er, son of Obed-eilom (1 Ch 26 4).

      (3) A Hen jamil e, one of King Jehoshaphat , s warriors (2 Ch 17 18).

      JEHOZADAK, jn-hoz a-dak (P~IprT , ifhdca- (Ilid/c, "Jeli is righteous"): Priest at the; time of the captivitv under Nebuchadrezzar (1 Ch 6 14.15 [Heb 6 40.41]). He was the father of Joshua (Jeshua) the priest (Hag 1 1 .12.14; 22,1; Zee 611). A\\\\\\\\ has Josedech in Hag and Zee. Same as "Jo/adak" (p"!^!" 1 , yoqiidhak, same meaning) in Ezr 3 2.S; 5 2 ; 10 IS; Xeh 12 2(5; and = "Josedek" (AY"Josedec")of 1 Ksd 5 5, IS. 5(5; 6 2; 9 P.); Sir 49 12.

      JEHU, je liu (X ? m , i/i lin; meaning uncertain, perhaps "Jeh is he"; 1 K 19 1(5.17; 2 K 9, 10; Eiov, Kioii): Son of Jehoshaphat, and descendant of Nimshi, hence commonly called "the son of Nimshi"; 10th king of Israel, and founder of its lYth Dynasty. Jehu reigned for 2S years. His accession may be reckoned at c 752 P>C (some dale a few years lat er).

      Jehu s Tribute from Obelisk of Shalmaneser.

      A soldier of fortune, J. appears first as an officer

      in the bod} -guard of Ahab. To himself we owe

      the information that he was present

      1. Officer at the judicial murder of Xaboth, and of Ahab that Naboth s sons were put to death

      with their father (2 K 9 2(5). He was in attendance when Ahab drove fr im Samaria to inspect his new possession in Jezreel, and was wit ness of the dramatic encounter at the vineyard between the king and the prophet Elijah (cf 1 K 21 16ff)._ Years after, J._ reminded Bidkar, his captain (lit. "thirdsman," in chariot), of the doom they had there heard pronounced upon Ahab and his house (2 K 9 25ft). It was in fulfilment of this doom that J. at that time ordered the body of the slain Jehoram to be thrown into the inclosure which had once been Naboth s (ver 2(5). Ahab s temporary repentance averted the punishment from himself for a few years (1 K 21 27-29), but the blow fell at the battle of Ramoth-gilead, and J. would not be unmindful of the prophet s words as he beheld the dogs licking Ahab s blood as they washed his chariot "by the pool of Samaria" (22 3S). A different fate awaited Ahab s two sons. The elder, Ahaziah, died, after a short reign, from the effects of an accident (2 K 1). He

      2. Jehoram was succeeded by his brother Jehoram, at Ramoth- who toward the close of his reign of gilead and 12 years (2 K 3 1) determined on an Jezreel attempt to recover Ramoth-gilead,

      where his father had been fatally stricken, from Hazael, of Syria. Ramoth-gilead was taken (2 K 9 14), but in the attack the Israel- it ish king was severely wounded, and was taken to Jezreel to be healed of his wounds (ver 15). The city meanwhile was left in charge of J. and his fellow-captains. At Jezreel he was visited by Ahaziah, of Judah, who had taken part with him in the war (8 28.29; 9 10).

      The time was now ripe for the execution of the predicted vengeance on the house of Ahab, and to Elisha the prophet, the successor of Elijah, it fell



      Jehovah-Nissi Jehu

      to take the decisive step which precipitated the

      crisis. Hazael and J. had already been named to

      Elijah as the persons who were to

      3. The execute the Divine judgment, the one Anointing as king of Syria, the other as king of Jehu of Israel (1 K 19 15-17). Elijah was

      doubtless aware of this commission, which it was now his part, as respected J., to ful fil. A messenger was hast ily dispatched to Ramoth- gilead, with instructions to seek out J., take him apart, anoint him king of Israel in Jeh s name, and charge him with the task of utterly destroying the house of Ahab in punishment for the righteous blood shed by Ahab and Je/ebel. The messenger was then to flee. This was done, and J., the sacred oil poured on his head, found himself alone with this appalling trust committed to him (2 K 9 1-10). Events now moved rapidly. J. s companions were naturally eager to know what had happened,

      and on learning that J. had been

      4. The anointed king, they at once impro- Revolution vised a throne by throwing their gar- Death of ments on the top of some steps, blew Jehoram the trumpet, and proclaimed, "J. js

      king." Not a moment was lost. No one was permitted to leave t he city t o carry forth tid ings, and J. himself, with characteristic impetuos ity, set out, with a small body of horsemen, in his chariot, to Jezreel. Bidkar was (here as charioteer (9 25). As they came within sight of the city, a watchman reported their advance, and messengers were sent, to inquire as to their errand. These were ordered to fall into the rear. This conduct awaken ed suspicion, and Jehoram and Ahaziah who was still with his invalided kinsman ordered their chariots, and proceeded in person to meet, J. The companies met at the ill-omened field of Naboth, and there the first, stroke of vengeance fell. The anxious query, "Is it peace?" was answered by a storm of denunciation from J., and on Jehoram turning to flee, an arrow from J. s powerful bow shot, him through the heart, arid he sank dead in his chariot. Ahaziah likewise was pursued, and smitten "at the ascent of (Uir, which is by Ibleani." He died at Megiddo, and was taken to Jerus for burial in the sepulcher of the kings (9 11-28). A somewhat variant account of Ahaziah s death is given in 2 Ch 22 9. It is possible that J. came to Alegiddo or its neighborhood, and had to do with his end t here.

      The slaughter of Jehoram was at once followed by that of the chief instigator of all the crimes for which

      the house of Ahab suffered the queen- 6. Death mother Jezebel. Hot from the pur- of Jezebel suit of Ahaziah, J. pressed on Jezreel.

      Jezebel, now an aged woman, but still defiant, had painted and attired herself, and, looking from her window, met him as he drove into the palace court, with the insulting question, "Is it peace, thou Zimri, thy master s murderer?" (cf 1 K 16 9-12). J. s answer was an appeal for aid from those within. Two or three eunuchs of the palace gave signs of their concurrence. These, at J. s bidding, threw Jezebel down into the court yard, where, lying in her blood, she was trodden under foot by the chariot horses. When, a, little later, her remains were sought for burial, she was found to have been almost wholly devoured by the dogs a lurid commentary on Elijah s earlier threatening, which was now recalled (2 K 9 30- 37). J. was an intrepid minister of judgment, but the pitiless zeal, needless cruelty, and, afterward, deceit, with which he executed his mission, with draw our sympathy from him, as it did that of a later prophet (Hos 1 4).

      The next acts of J. reveal yet more clearly his thoroughness of purpose and promptitude of action,

      while they afford fresh exhibitions of his ruthless- ness and unscrupulousness of spirit. Samaria was the capital of the kingdom, and head-

      6. Slaughter quarters of the Baal-worship hit ro of Ahab s duced by Jezebel, though it is recorded Descend- of Jehoram that he had removed, at ants least temporarily, an obelisk of Baal

      which his father" had set up (2 K 3 2; cf 10 26). The city was still held for the house of Ahab, and 70 of Ahab s "sons" to be taken here in the large sense of male descendants resided in it (10 1.6). J. here adopted a bold and astute policy. He sent letters to Samaria challenging those in authority to set up one of their master s sons as king, and fight for the city and the king dom. The governors knew well that they could make no effective resistance to J., and at, once humbly tendered their submission. J., in a second message, bade them prove their sincerity by de livering to him the heads of the 70 princes of Ahab s house in baskets. This they did, by their act irrevocably committing themselves to J. s cause (ver 9). The ghastly relics were piled up in two heaps at the gate of Jezreel a horrible object- lesson to any still inclined to hesitate in their alle giance. Friends and partisans of the royal house shared the fate of its members (ver 11).

      Apart- from the faultinoss in the agent s motive, the deeds now recounted fell within the letter of J. s com mission. As much cannot be said of the t.i deeds of blood that follow. .1. had killed

      7. Slaughter Aha//iah, king of Judah. Now, on his way of Ahaziah s to Samaria, he met a companyof -42 persons, Rrothr^n described as "brethren of Ahaziah"-

      eu evidently blood-relations of various de grees, as Ahaziah s own brethren had been earlier slain by the Arabians C2 Ch 21 17; 22 1) and, on learning who they were, and of their purpose to visit their kinsfolk at Jezreel, gave orders that they be slain on the spot, and their bodies ignominiously thrown in to the pit (or "cistern") of the shearing-house where he had encountered them. It was a cruel excess for \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\liicli no sufficient justification can be pleaded (2 K 10 12-14).

      Still less can the craft and violence be condoned

      by which, when he reached Samaria, J. evinced his

      "zeal for Jeh" (ver 16) in the ext irpa-

      8. Massacre 1 ion of the worshippers of Baal. J. of the Wor- had secured on his side the support of shippers of a notable man Jehonadab the son of Baal Rechab (vs 15. Hi; cf Jer 35 6-19)

      and his entrance into Samaria was sig nalized by further slaying of all adherents of Ahab. Then, doubtless to the amazement, of many, J. proclaimed himself an enthusiastic follower of Baal. A great festival was organized, to which all prophets, worshippers, and priests of Baal were invited from every part of Israel. J. himself took the leading part in the sacrifice (ver 25). Vestments were dis tributed to distinguish the true worshippers of Baal from others. Then when all were safely gathered into "the house of Baal," the gates were closed, and 80 soldiers were sent in to massacre the whole de luded company in cold blood. None escaped. The temple of Baal was broken up. Thus, indeed, "J. destroyed Baal out of Israel" (ver 28), but at what a frightful cost of falsehood and treacherous deal ing! (2 K 10 1S-2S).

      The history of J. in the Bible is chiefly the history

      of his revolution as now narrated. His reign itself

      is summed up in a few vs, chiefly occu-

      9. Wars pied with the attacks made by Hazael, with Hazael king of Syria, on the trans-Jordanic

      territories of Israel (10 32.33). These districts were oven-tin, and remained lost to Israel till the reign of J. s great-grandson, Jeroboam II (2 K 14 28).

      It is in another direction, viz. to the annals of Assyria, we have to look for any further information we possess on the reign of J. In these annals, fortunately, some interesting notices are preserved. In 854 13C was fought

      Jehubbah Jeremiah



      the pi-eat battle of Karkar fa place between Aleppo and Hamathi, when Shalmaneser II, king of Assyria, de feated a powerful combination formed m AccMrn an utxainst him i I lamascus. Hamath. Pliilistia, JLU. Assyrian Amm ,.,,., Among tho allies on thisoc- JNotlCeS casion is inentiotied "Aliabbu of Sir ilaa."

      who look the t hird place with 2,000 chariots and lO.OOO footmen. There is a dillieulty in supposing Aliiil) to have been still reigning as late as S51. and \\\\\\\\Vell- hausen, Kamphaiisen and others have suggested that A hall s name has been confused with that of his successor Jehoram in the Assyr annals. Kit t el, in his Ilixiuru / tin: II, hr, !!.; (II. 2:53, IOT) is disposed to accept this view, (i. Smith, in his. I. // ri:\\\\\\\\,,iuin Canon ( 179), is of the opinion that the tribute lists were often carelessly compiled and in error as to names. The point of interest is that from this t line Israel was evidently a tributary of Assyria.

      With this accord the further notices of Israel in the

      inscriptions of Shalmaneser II. two in number. Both

      belong to the year S12 BO and relate

      11 Tribute to J. On Shalmaneser s Black Obelisk

      is a pictorial representation of "the tribute

      or Jenu O f j __ S()I1 ,,f omri." An ambassador

      kneels before the conqueror, and presents

      his Kifts. They include silver, gold, a gold cup, gold

      vessels, a golden ladle, lead, a stalf for the king s hand,

      scepters. An allusion to the same event occurs in the

      annals of Shalmaneser s campaign against Hazael of

      Syria in this year. "At that time I received the tribute

      of tin 1 Tynans, Sidonians, of .1., .son of Omri."

      Then 1 are some indications that in his latter years, which were clouded with misfortune, J. associated with himself his son Jehoahaz in the government (cf 2 K 13 1.10, where Jehoahaz comes to tin 1 throne in 1 ho 23d, and dies in the 37th year of Jehoash of Judah 14 years yet has a total reign of 17 years). J. is not mentioned in Ch, except in- cidentnllv in connection wit li the death of Ahaziah (2 Ch 22 9), and as the grandfather of Jehoash (25 17).

      The character of J. is apparent from the acts re corded of him. His energy, determination, prompti tude, and zeal fitted him for the work he had to do. It was rough work, and was executed with relentless thoroughness. Probably gentler meas ures would have failed to eradicate Baal-worship from Israel. His impetuosity was evinced in his furious driving (2 K 9 20). He was bold, daring, unscrupulous, and masterful and astute in his policy. But one seeks in vain in his character for any touch of magnanimity, or of the finer qualities of the ruler. His "zeal for Jeh" was too largely a cloak for merely worldly ambition. The blood shed in which his rule was founded early provoked a reaction, and his closing years were dark with trouble 1 . ITe is specially condemned for tolerating the worship of the golden calves (2 K 10 29-31). Nevertheless the throne was secured to his dynasty for four generations (10 30; cf 15 12).

      \\\\\\\\V. SHAW CALDECOTT

      JEHUBBAH, jo-hub a (ran 1 ;, ifhtibbah, meaning unknown): A descendant of Asher, mentioned in 1 Ch 7 31, where lyre is "2ni , ufhubbah, "and Hubbah," but K"thlbh is H2rr , ijahbah; LXX B follows Iy re.

      JEHUCAL, je-hii kal (bDIPp , ifhukhal, probably meaning "Jeh is able"): A courtier sent by King Zedekiah to Jeremiah to ask the prophet to pray for the king and the people (Jor 37 3). Most VSS except LXX, with 38 1, have "Jucal" (br^" , II uk luil, same meaning).

      JEHUD, je. hud (TTT , u luUh): A town in the lot of Dan named between Baalath and Bene-berak (Josh 19 45,). The only possible identification seems to be with el-Yehudlyeh, which lies about S miles K. of Jaffa.

      JEHUDI, jMiii d! p-prr , ,flnWil, properly "a Jew"): An officer of King Jehoiakim (Jer 36 14.21. 2Mj. He was sent by the princes to summon Baruch to read the roll containing Jeremiah s

      prophecies to them; he afterward read them to the king, who destroyed them. His name is note worthy, as also is that of his grandfather Cushi (i.e. "Ethiopian"), and the two are said to point to a foreign origin.

      JEHUDIJAH, je-hu-dl ja (1 Ch 4 IS AV). See HA-JEHUDIJAH.

      JEHUEL, jr-hu el (K lhlbh btfTP, ifha rl; but lyre biSrrp , ///* *Y/, i.e. "Jehiel" AV, in 2 Ch 29 14): A Levite; see JEHIEL, (5).

      JEHUSH, je hush (1 Ch 8 39). See Jicrsn, (3).

      JEIEL, je-I el (X" 1 ^") , // J fr~, meaning unknown):

      (1) A Reubenite (1 Ch 5 7).

      (2) In 1 Ch 8 29, added in RV from 9 3. r ), where Iv thlbh is "Jeuel," an ancestor of King Saul; AV "Jehiel."

      (3) One of David s mighty men (1 Ch 11 44). AV is "Jehiel"; K thibh is "Jeuel."

      (4) A Levite, keeper of the ark with Obed-edom (1 Ch 15 1S.21; 16 5; 2 Ch 20 14), called "Je- hiair in 1 Ch 15 24.

      (5) A Levite (1 Ch 16 5) = "Jaazid" of 1 Ch 15 IS (q.v.).

      ((5) A scribe under King Uzziah (2 Ch 26 11).

      (7) A chief of the Levites, presenit at King Jo- siah s great Passover fcuist (2 Ch 35 9).

      (S) One of those who had married foreign wives (Ezr 10 43) = "Juol" in 1 Esd 9 35.

      (9) AVin2 Ch 29 14; see JEHIEL, (5).

      (10) AV in Ezr 8 13; see JEUEL, (3).


      JEKABZELL, jn-kab zn-el ( >pP-"!> irtablif el, "God gathers"; Neh 11 25). See KABZEEL.

      JEKAMEAM, jek-a-me am, je-kam e-am (2^^^ , ifkairi am, probably "may kinsman establish"): Head of a Lcvitical house (1 Ch 23 19; 24 23). The meaning of the name depends upon thai of C^ ( am) in compound names; see III X, 40, 51 ff.

      JEKAMIAH, jck-a-mi a (rP^ , ifkanujdh, "may Jeh establish"):

      (1) A Judahite, son of Shallum (1 Ch 2 41).

      (2) A son of King Jeconiah (Jehoiachin); in AV "Jecamiah" (1 Ch 3 18).

      JEKUTHIEL, jc-ku thi-el (s^p , u kuthicl, meaning doubtful): A Judahite (1 Ch 4 18). The meaning may be "preservation of God," or perhaps the same as bsipp 1 ?, yokth c el, "Joktheel," the name of a place in Josh 15 38; 2 K 14 7.

      JEMIMAH, je"-ml ma (H p^ a 1 , ifmimah, p(>rhaps a diminutive meaning "little dove"): The first daughter of Job (42 14), born after his restoration from affliction.

      JEMNAAN, jem nft-an ( Itfivaav, Icnnuinn): A city on the coast of Pal; mentioned among those affected by the expedition of Holofernes (Jth 2 28; 3 1 ff). The name is used for Jabniel, generally called "Jamnia" by the Gr writers.

      JEMUEL, jg-mu el (SSIW, ifmu ii, meaning unknown): A "son" of Simeon (Gen 46 10; Ex 6 15) = "Nemuel" in Nu 26 12; 1 Ch 4 24.

      Syr version has "Jemuel" in the 4 passages, hut Gray ( II I \\\\\\\\ , 307, n. (>) thinks "Jomuel" is more {)rol)ably a cor rection in Gen than "Nemuel" in Nu.

      JEOPARD, jep ard, JEOPARDY, jep ar-di: The Eng. word referred originally to a game where



      Jehubbah Jeremiah

      the chances were even (from OFr. jeu parti); trans ferred thence to designate any great risk. In the NT, represented by the Gr vb. kinduneud (Lk 8 23; 1 Cor 15 30). In the OT (Jgs 5 18) for a Hob idiom, "despise the soul," i.e. they placed a small value upon their lives (Vulg "offered their souls to death"); for elliptical expression, "went with their lives," in 2 S 23 17 in.

      JEPHTHAH, jcf tha (nrupi, yiphtdh, "opened," or "opener," probably signifying "Jeh will open"; l4>9a, Icphlhae; used as the name of a place, as in Josh 15 43; 19 14; of a man, Jgs 10 612 7): Ninth judge of the Israelites. His antecedents are obscure. Assuming Giload to be the actual name of his father, his mother was a harlot-. He was driven from home on account of his illegit imacy, and went to the land of Tob in Eastern Syria (Jgs 11 2.3). Here he and his followers lived t ho life of freebooters.

      The Israelites beyond the Jordan being in danger of an invasion by the Ammonites, J. was invited by the elders of Gilead to be their leader (11 5.6). Remembering how they had expelled him from their territory and his heritage, J. demanded of them that in the event of success in the struggle with the Am monites, he was to be continued as leader. This condition being accepted he returned to Giload (11 7-1 1). The account of the diplomacy used by J. to prevent the Ammonites from invading Gilead is possibly an interpolation, and is thought by many interpreters to be a compilation from Nu 20 21. It is of great interest, however, not only because of the fairness of the argument used (11 12-28), but also by virtue of the fact that it con tains a history of the journey of the Israelites from Lower Egypt to the banks of the Jordan. This history is distinguished from that of the Pent chiefly by the things omitted. If diplomacy was tried, it failed to dissuade the Ammonites from seek ing to invade Israel. J. prepared for battle, but before taking the field paused at Mizpeh of Gilead, and registered a vow that if he were successful in battle, he would offer as a burnt offering to Jeh whatsoever should first come from his doors to greet him upon his return (11 29-31). The battle is fought, J. is the victor, and now his vow returns to him with anguish and sorrow. Returning to his home, the first to greet him is his daughter and only child. The father s sorrow and the courage of the daughter are the only bright lights on this sordid, cruel conception of God and of the nature of sacri fice. That the sacrifice was made seems certain from the narrative, although some critics choose to substitute for the actual death of the maiden the setting the girl apart for a life of perpetual virginity. The Israelitish laws concerning sacri fices and the language used in 11 39 are the chief arguments for the latter interpretation. The entire narrative, however, will hardly bear this construction (11 34-40).

      J. was judge in Israel for 6 years, but appears only once more in the Scripture narrative. The men of Ephraim, offended because they had had no share in the victory over the Ammonites, made war upon Gilead, but were put to rout by the forces under J. (12 1-6). C. E. SCHENK

      JEPHUNNEH, je-fun c (HSE 1 ^ , ifphunnch, mean ing uncertain) :

      (1) Father of Caleb (Nu 13 6; 14 6.30, etc).

      According to Nu 13 6, he was of the tribe of Judah; according to 32 12; Josh 14 6, a Kenizzite; the Keniz- zites were incorporated in Judah (cf 1 Ch 4 13-15).

      (2) A son of Jether, an Asherite (1 Ch 7 38).

      JERAH, je ra (H"^ , yerah) : A son of Joktan (Gen 10 26 j 1 Ch 1*20). No district Jerah has

      been discovered. However, Yurakh in Yemen and Yarah in Hijaz are places named by the Arab. geographers. The fact that the word in Heb means "moon" has led to the following suggestions: the Baiul Hilal ("sons of the new moon") in the N. of Yemen; Ghubb el-Kamar ("the bay of the moon"), Jcbel el-Kamar ("the mountains of the moon") in Eastern Hadramant . But in Southern Arabia wor ship of the moon has caused the word to bulk largely in place-names.

      JERAHMEEL, jP-ra mP-c-l (5Xprn% y e rahm cl, "may God have compassion!"):

      (1) In 1 Ch 2, he is described as the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah by Tamar his daughter-in-law (Gen 38). In 1 S 27 10 is mentioned the neghcbh of the Jerahmeelites, j6"-ra m6-el-Its P^X Grn^n , ha-ifrah- m e eli, a collective noun), RV "the South of the Jerahmeelites." The latter is a tribal name in use probably before the proper name, above; their cities are mentioned in 1 S 30 29. Cheyne has radical views on J. See Eli, s.v. ; also T. Wit ton Davies in Review of Theology and Philosophy, III, 689-708 (May, 1908); and Cheyne s replies in Hibbcrt Journal, VII, 132-51 (October, 1908), and Decline and Fall of the Kingdom of Judah.

      (2) A Merarite Lovite, son of Kish (1 Ch 24 29).

      (3) "The king s son," RV and AVm (Jer 36 26). RVm, AV have "son of llammelech," taking the word TfSTSn as a proper name. He was "probably a royal prince, one who had a king among his an cestors but not necessarily son of the ruling king; so 38 6; 1 K 22 266; esp. Zcph 1 8 written at a time when the reigning king, Josiah, could not have had a grown-up son " (Driver, Jer, 224, n. c). J. was with two others commanded by Jchoiakirn to arrest Jeremiah and Baruch.


      JERECHU, jer P-ku, AV Jerechus, jor f -kus (1 Esd 5 22). See JERICHO.

      JERED, je red (TV) , ycredh, "descent"): A Judahite, father of Gedor (1 Ch 4 18). Sec also JARED.

      JEREMAI, jer fi-mi, jer-P-ma I C 1 ?"^ , yremay, meaning unknown): One of those who had married foreign wives (Ezr 10 33). See JERE.MIAS (1 Esd 9 34).

      JEREMIAH, jer-C-mi a ([a] irP^T , yirm r yahu, or [b] shorter form, "P )p"Y\\\\\\\\ yirm e ydh, both differently explained as "Jeh establishes [so Giesebrecht], whom Jeh casts," i.e. possibly, as Gesenius suggests, "appoints" [A. B. Davidson in HDB, II, 569a], and "Jeh looseneth" [the womb]; see BDB): The form (b) is used of Jeremiah t he prophet only in Jer 27 1 ; 28 5.6. 10.11. 126.15; 29 1; Ezr 1 1; DnI 9 2, while the other is found 116 t in Jer alone. In 1 Esd 1; 2 Esd 2 18, EV has "Jeremy," so AV in 2 Mace 2 1.5.7; Mt 2 17; 27 9; in Mt 16 14, AV has "Joremias," but RV in 2 Mace and Mt has "Jeremiah."

      (1) The prophet . See special article. Of the fol lowing, (2), (3) and (4) have form (a) above; the others the form (b).

      (2) Father of Hamutal (Hamital), the mother of King Jehoahaz and King Jehoiakim (2 K 23 31; 24 18 i| Jer 52 1).

      (3) A Rechabite (Jer 35 3).

      (4) In 1 Ch 12 13 (Heb 14), a Gadite.

      (5) In 1 Ch 12 10 (Heb 11), a Gadite.

      (6) In 1 Ch 12 4 (Heb 5), a Benjamite(?) or Judaean. (4), (5) and (6) all joined David at Ziklag.




      (7) Head of :i Manassilo family (1 Ch 5 24).

      (S) A priest who scaled the covenant with Nohe- iniah (Xeh 10 2), probably the same as he of 12 34 who took part in the procession at the dedication of t he walls of Jerus.

      (!)) A priest who wont to Jerus with Zerubbabel from exile and became head of a priestly family of that name (Xeh 12 1).


      JEREMIAH, jor-e-ml a:

      1 . Name and Person

      l>. I. ifc of Jeremiah

      ;5. The I crsoiial Character of Jeremiah

      4. The Prophecies of .Jeremiah

      , r >. The Hook of Jeremiah

      <i. Authenticity and integrity of the Book

      7. Relation to the LXX LITERATURE

      The name of one of the greatest prophets of

      Israel. The Ileb ? ,rp"52"l n , yirm f yahu, abbreviated

      to rPpTJ, yirm yah, signifies either

      1. Name "Job hurls" or "Jeh founds." LXX and Person roads Iep/x", Icrmiafi, and the Vulg

      ,J crania*. As this name also occurs not infrequently, the prophet is called "the son of Ililkiah" (l l), who is, however, not the high priest mentioned in 2 K 22 and 23, as it is merely stated that he was "of the priests that were in Anathoth" in the land of Benjamin. In Anathoth, now Attain, a .small village 1| hours N.E. of Jerus, lived a class of priests who belonged to a side line, not to the line of Zadok (of 1 K 2 26).

      J. was called by the Lord to the office of a prophet while still a youth (1 6) about 20 years of age, in

      the 13th year of King Josiah (12; 25

      2. Life of 3), in the year 627 BC, and was active Jeremiah in this capacity from this time on to

      the destruction of Jerus, 586 BC, under kings Josiah, Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah. Even after the fall of the capital city he prophesied in Egypt at least for several years, so that his work extended over a period of about 50 years in all. At first he probably lived in Anathoth, and put in his appearance publicly in Jerus only on the occasion of the great festivals; later he lived in Jerus, and was there during the terrible times of the siege and the destruction of the city.

      Although King Josiah was God-fearing and- willing to serve Jeh, and soon inaugurated his reformation according to the law of Jeh (in the 18th year of his reign), yet J., at the time when he was called to the prophetic office, was not left in doubt of the fact that the catastrophe of the judgment of God over the city would soon come (1 llff); and when, after a few years, the Book of the Law was found in the temple (2 K 22 and 23), J. preached "the words of this covenant" to the people in the town and throughout the land (11 1-8; 17 19-27), and exhorted to obedience to the Divine command; but in doing this then and afterward he became the object of much hostility, esp. in his native city, Anathoth. Even his own brethren or near rela tives entered into a conspiracy against him by de claring that he was a dangerous fanatic (12 6). However, the condition of J. under this pious king was the most happy in his career, and he lamented the latter s untimely death in sad lyrics, which the author of Ch was able to use (2 Ch 35 25), but which have not come down to our times.

      Much more unfavorable was the prophet s condi tion after the death of Josiah. Jehoahaz-Shallum, who ruled only 3 months, received the announce ment of his sentence from J. (22 10 ff). Jehoiakim (609-598 BC) in turn favored the heathen worship, and oppressed the people through his love of luxury and by the erection of grand structures (Jer 22 13ff). In addition, his politics were

      treacherous. He conspired with Egypt against his superior, Nebuchadnezzar. Epoch-making was the 4th year of Jehoiakim, in which, in the battle of Carehemish, the Chaldaeans gained the upper hand in Hither Asia, as J. had predicted (46 1-12). I ndor Jehoiakim J. delivered his great temple dis course (7-9; 10 17-25). The priests for this reason determined to have the prophet put to death (oh 26). However, influential elders inter ceded for him, and the princes yet showed some just ice. He was, however, abused by the authorities at the appeal of the priests (eh 20). According to 36 Iff, he was no longer permitted to enter the place of the temple. For this reason the Lord com manded him to collect his prophecies in a book- roll, and to have them read to the people by his faithful pupil Baruch (eh 36; cf ch 45). The book fell into the hands of the king, who burned it . However, J. dictated the book a second time to Baruch, together with new additions.

      Jehoiachin or Coniah (22 24 ff), the son of Je hoiakim, after a reign of 3 months, was taken into captivity to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar, together with a large number of his nobles and the best part of the people (Jer 24 1; 29 2), as the prophet had predicted (22 20-30). But conditions did not improve under Zedekiah (597-586 BC). _ This king was indeed not as hostile to J. as Jehoiakim had been; but all the more hostile were the princes and the generals, who were now in command after the better class of these had been deported to Baby lon. They continually planned rebellion against Babylon, while J. was compelled to oppose and put to naught every patriotic agitation of this kind. Finally, the Bab army came in order to punish the faithless vassal who had again entered into an alliance with Egypt. J. earnestly advised sub mission, but the king was too weak and too coward ly as against his nobles. A long siege resulted, which caused the direst sufferings in the life of J. The commanders threw him into a vile prison, charging him with being a traitor (37 11 ff). The king, who consulted him secretly, released him from prison, and put him into the "court of the guard" (37 17 ff), where he could move around freely, and could again prophesy. Now that the judgment had come, he could again speak of the hopeful future (chs 32, 33). Also chs 30 and 31, probably, were spoken about this time. But as he continued to preach submission to the people, those in authority cast him into a slimy cistern, from which the pity of a courtier, Ebed-melech, delivered him (39 15-18). He again returned to the court of the guard, where he remained until Jerus was taken.

      After the capture of the city, J. was treated with great consideration by the Babylonians, who knew that he had spoken in favor of their government (39 llff; 40 Iff). They gave him the choice of going to Babylon or of remaining in his native land. He decided for the latter, and went to the governor Gedaliah, at Mizpah, a man worthy of all confi dence. But when this man, after a short time, was murdered by conscienceless opponents, the Jews who had been left in Pal, becoming alarmed and fearing the vengeance of the Chaldaeans, determined to emigrate to Egypt. J. advised against this most earnestly, and threatened the vengeance of Jeh, if the people should insist upon their undertaking (42 Iff). But they insisted and even compelled the aged prophet to go with them (43 1 ff). Their first goal was Tahpanhes (Daphne), a town in Lower Egypt. At this place he still continued to preach the word of God to his fellow-Israelites; cf the latest of his preserved discourses in 43 8-13, as also the sermon in ch 44, delivered at a somewhat later time but yet before 570 BC. At that time J. must have been from 70 to 80 years old. He




      probably died soon after this in Egypt. The church Fathers report that ho was stoned to death at Daphne by the Jews (Jerome, Adv. Jorin, ii. 37; Tertullian, Contra Gnost., viii; Pseudepiphan,, De Proph., ch viii; Dorotheus, 146; Isidorus, Ort. et Obit. Pair., ch xxxviii). However, this report is not well founded. The same is the case with the rabbinical tradition, according to which he, in com pany with Baruch, was taken from Egypt to Baby lon by Nebuchadnezzar, and died there (Scdhcr Olam Rabhn 26).

      The Book of Jer gives us not only a fuller account

      of the life and career of its author than do the books

      of the other prophets, but we also

      3. Personal learn more about his own inner and Character personal life and feelings than we do of Jeremiah of Isaiah or any other prophet. From

      this source we learn that he was, by nature, gentle and tender in his feelings, and sym pathetic. A decided contrast to this is found in the hard and unmerciful judgment which it was his mission to announce. God made him strong and firm and immovable like iron for his mission (1 IS; 15 20). This contrast between his naturally warm personal feelings and his strict Divine mis sion not rarely appears in the heart -utterances found in his prophecies. At first he rejoiced when God spoke to him (15 10); but. soon these words of God were to his heart a source of pain and of suffering (15 17 ff). lie would have preferred not to utter them; and then they burned in his breast as a fire (20 7 IT; 239). He personally stood in need of love, and yet was not permitted to marry (16 If). He was compelled to forego 1 he pleasures of youth (15 17). He loved his people as nobody else, and yet was always compelled to prophesy evil for it, and seemed to be the enemy of his nat ion. This often caused him to despair. The enmity to which he fell a victim, on account of his declaration of nothing but the truth, he deeply felt; see his complaints (9 Iff; 12 of; 15 10; 17 14-18; 18 23, and often). In this sad antagonism between his heart and the commands of the Lord, he would perhaps wish that God had not spoken to him; he even cursed the day of his birth (15 10; 20 14-18; cf Job 3 1 ff). Such complaints are to be carefully distinguished from that which the Lord through His Spirit communicated to the prophet. God rebukes him for these complaints, and demands of him to repent and to trust and obey Him (15 19). This discipline makes him all the more unconquerable. Even his bitter denunciations of his enemies (11 20 ff; 15 15; 17 18; 18 21-23) originated in part in his passionate and deep nature, and show how great is the difference between him and that perfect Sufferer, who prayed even for His deadly enemies. But J. was nevertheless a type of that Suffering Saviour, more than any of the OT saints. He, as a priest, prayed for his people, until God forbade him to do so (7 10; 11 14; 14 11; 18 20). He was compelled more than all the others to suffer through the anger of God, which was to afflict his people. The people themselves also felt that he meant well to them. A proof of this is seen in the fact that the rebellious people, who always did the contrary of what he had commanded them, forced him, the unwelcome prophet of God, to go along with them, to Egypt, because they felt that he was their good genius.

      What J. was to preach was the judgment upon Judah. As the reason for this judgment J. every where mentioned the apostasy from

      4. The Jeh, the idolatry, which was practised Prophecies on bamoth, or the "high places" by of Jeremiah Judah, as this had been done by Israel.

      Many heathenish abuses had found their way into the life of the people. Outspoken

      heathenism had been introduced by such men as King Manasseh, even the sacrifice of children to the honor of Baal-Molech in the valley of Hinnom (7 31; 19 5; 32 35), and the worship of the queen of heaven" (7 18; 44 19). It is true that the reformation of Josiah swept away the worst of these abominations. But an inner return to Jeh did not result from this reformation. For the reason that the improvement had been more on the surface and outward, and was done to please the king, J. charges up to his people all their previous sins, and the guilt of the present generation was yet added to this (16 11 f). Together with religious insincerity went the moral corruption of the people, such as dis honesty, injustice, oppression of the helpless, slander, and the like. Compare the accusations found in 6 lff.7f.201T; 6 7.13; 7 of.!); 9 20.8; 17 9ff; 21 12; 22 13 ff; 23 10; 29 23, etc. Esp. to the spiritual leaders, the priests and prophets, are these things charged up.

      The judgment which is to come in the near future, as a punishment for the sins of the people, is from the outset declared to be the conquest of t lie count ry through an enemy from abroad. In this way the heated caldron with the face from the N., in the vision containing the call of the prophet (1 13 ff), is to be understood. This power in the N. is not named until the 4th year of Jehoiakim (ch 25), where Nebuchadnezzar is definitely designated as the conqueror. It is often thought, that, in the earlier years of his career, J. had in mind the Scythians when he spoke of the enemies from the N., esp. in chs 4-6. The Scythians (according to Herodotus i.!03ff) had, probably a few years before J. s call to the prophetic office, taken pos session of Media, then marched through Asia Minor, and even forced their way as far as Egypt. They crossed through Canaan, passing by on their march from E. to W., near Beth-shean (Scythopolis). The ravages of this fierce people probably influenced the language used by J. in his prophecies (cf 4 11 ff ; 5 15 ff; 6 3ff.22ff). But it is unthinkable that J. expected nothing more than a plundering and a booty-seeking expedition of the Scythian nomad hordes. Chariots, such as are described in 4 13, the Scythians did not possess. Moreover, it must not be forgotten that J. from the outset speaks of a deportation of his people to this foreign land (3 18; 5 19), while an exile of Israel in the country of the Scythians was out of the question. At all events from the 4th year of Jehoiakim, J. regards the Chaldaeans as the enemy who, according to his former announcement, would come from the N. It is possible that it was only in the course of time that he reached a clear conviction as to what nation was meant by the revelation from God. But, upon further reflection, he must have felt almost certain on this subject, esp. as Isaiah (39 6), Micah (4 10), and, soon after these, Habakkuk had named Baby lon as the power that was to carry out the judgment upon Israel. Other prophets, too, regard the Baby lonians as belonging to the northern group of na tions (cf Zee 6 8), because they always came from the N., and because they were the legal successors of the Assyrians.

      In contrast to optimistic prophets, who had hoped to remedy matters in Israel (6 14), J. .from the beginning predicted the destruction of the city and of the sanctuary I" as also the end of the Jewish na tion and the exile of the people through these enemies from abroad. According to 25 11; 29 10, the Bab supremacy (not exactly the exile) was to con- timiTrfoT7t)~yraTs; and after this, deliverance should come. Promises to this effect are found only now and then in the earlier years of the prophet (3 14 ff; 12 14 ff; 16 14 f). However, during the time of the siege and afterward, such predictions are

      Jeremiah Jeremy, Ep. of



      more frequent (cf 23 1 IT; 24 (if; 47 2-7; and in the "Book of Comfort," ch.- 30-33).

      Wlmt cli;ir;icteri/es this prophet is the spiritual inwardness of his religion; t he. external theocracy he delivers up to destruction, because its forms were not animated by ( Jod-fearing sentiments. _ Ex ternal circnnicision is of no value without inner purify of heart. The external temple will be de stroyed, because it has become the hiding-place of sinners. External sacrifices have no value, because those who offer them are lacking in spirituality, and this is displeasing to (!od. The law is abused and misinterpreted (8 8); the words of the prophets as a rule do not come from ( Jod. Even the Ark of the Covenant is eventually to make way for a glori ous presence of the Lord. The law is to be written in the hearts of men (31 . 51 ff). The glories of the Messianic, times the prophet does not describe in detail, but their spiritual character he repeatedly describes in the words "Jeh our righteousness" (23 0; 33 Ifi). However, we must not overesti mate the idealism of J. lie believed in a realistic restoration of the theocracy to a form, just as the other prophets (cf chs 31, 32, 38-40).

      As far as the form of his prophetic utterances is concerned, J. is of a poetical nature; but he was not only a poet. He often speaks in the meter of an elegy; but he is not bound by this, and readily passes over into other forms of rhythms and also at times into prosaic speech, when the contents of his discourses require it. The somewhat monoto nous and elegiac tone, which is in harmony with his sad message to the people, gives way to more lively and varied forms of expression, when the prophet speaks of other and foreign nations. In doing this lie often makes use of the utterances of earlier prophets.

      The first composition of the book is reported in 36 1 ff. In the 4th year of Jehoiakim, at the command of Jeh, he dictated all of the prophe- 6. The cies he had spoken down to this time

      Book of to his pupil Baruch, who wrote them Jeremiah on a roll. After the destruction of 1 his book-roll by the king, he would not be stopped from reproducing the contents again and making additions to it (36 32). In this we have the origin of the present Book of Jer. This book, however, not only received further additions, but has also been modified. While the discourses may originally have been arranged chronologically, and these reached only down to the 4th year of King Jehoiakim, we find in the book, as it is now, as early as 21 Iff; 23 Iff; 26 Iff, discourses from the times* of Zedekiah. However, the 2d edition (36 28) contained, no doubt, ch 25, with those addresses directed against the heathen nations extant at that time. The lack of order, from a chronological point of view, in the present book, is attributable also to the fact that historical accounts or appendices concerning the career of J. were added to the book in later times, e.g. chs 26,35,36 and others; and in these additions an; also found older discourses of the prophet. Beginning with ch 37, the story of tho prophet during the siege of Jerus and after the destruction of the city is reported, and in con nection with this are his words and discourses belonging to this period.

      It is a question whether these pieces, which are more narrative in character, and which are the prod uct of a contemporary, probably Baruch, at one time constituted a book by themselves, out of which they were later taken and incorporated in the book of the prophet, or whether they were inserted by Baruch. In favor of the first view, it may be urged that, they are not always found at their proper places chronologically; e.g. ch 26 is a part of the temple discourse in chs 7-9. However, this "Book

      of Baruch," which is claimed by some critics to have existed as a separate book beside that of Jer, would not furnish a connected biography, and does not seem to have been written for biographical purposes. It contains introductions to certain words and speeches of the prophet and statements of what t In consequences of these had been. Thus it is more probable that Baruch, at a later time, made supple mentary additions to the original book, which the prophet, had dictated without, any personal data. But in this work the prophet himself may have cooperated. At places, perhaps, the dictation of the prophet ends in a narrative of Baruch (19 14 20 0), or vice versa. Baruch seems to have written a historical introduction, and then J. dictated the prophecy (27 1; 18 1; 32 Iff, and others). Of course, the portions of the book which came from the pen of Baruch are to be regarded as an authentic account.

      However, critics have denied to J. and his pupil certain sections of the present book, and they claim

      that these belong to a later date. 6. Authen- Among these is 10 1-10, containing a ticity and warning to those in the exile against. Integrity of idolatry (and related to Isa 40 ff i, the Book which, it is claimed, could not possibly

      in this form and fulness be the work of J. Also 17 19-27 is without, reason denied to J., upon the ground that he could not have thought of emphasizing the Sabbath law. He was, however, no modern idealist, but respected also the Divine; ordinances (cf 11 1-8). Then ch 25 is rejected by some, while others attack esp. vs 12-14 and 27- 38; but in both cases without reason. On the other hand, we admit that ver 25 and also vs 13 f are later additions. The words, "all that is written in this book, which J. hath prophesied against all the nations," are probably a superscription, which has found its way into the text. In ver 20 the words, "and the king of Sheshach shall drink after them," are likewise considered spurious. Sheshach is rightly regarded here, as in 51 41, as a cipher for "Babel," but the use of At-bash (a cipher in which the order of the letters of the Heb alphabet is re versed, n for &5 , tJ for 3, etc, hence SIleSHaKH = BaBHeL, see the comms.) does not prove spurious- ness. The sentence is not found in the LXX. The attacks made on chs 30 and 31 are of little moment. 33 14-20 is not found in the LXX, and its contents, too, belong to the passages in Jer that are most, vigorously attacked. Critics regard J. as too spirit ual to have perpet uated the Levitical priesthood. In ch 39, vs 1.2.4-10 are evidently additions that do not belong to this place. The remaining port ion can stand. Among the discourses against the nations, chs 46-51, those in 46 1-12, spoken immediately pre ceding the battle of Carchemish, cannot be shown to be unauthentic; even vs 13-28 are also genuine. The fact, however, is that the text has suffered very much. Nor are there any satisfactory reasons against the prophecy in chs 47-49, if we assume that J. reasserted some of his utterances against the heathen nations that did not seem to have been entirely fulfilled. Chs 60 and 61, the discourses against Babylon, have the distinct impress of J. This impression is stronger than the doubts, which, however, are not without weight. The events in 61 59 ff, which are not to be called into question, presuppose longer addresses of J. against Babylon. The possibility, however, remains that the editing of these utterances as found in the present book dates from the time after 580 BC. That any in fluence of Deutero-Isaiah or later authors can be traced in Jer cannot be shown with any certainty. Ch 52 was written neither by Jeremiah nor for his book, but is taken from the Books of K, and is found there almost verbatim (2 K 24, 25).


      Jeremiah Jeremy, Ep. of

      A special problem is furnished by the relation of the text of Jer to the Alexandrian version of the Seventy (LXX). Not only does the Ileb form of 7 Relation book differ from the <ir materially, , T vv much more than this is the ease in other to tne LAA books of the OT, but the arrangement, too, is a different one. The oracle concerning the heathen nations (chs 46-51) is in the LXX found in the middle of ch 25, and that, too, in an altogether differ ent order (viz. 49 :5">tr.46; 50; 51: 47 1-7; 49 7-22; 49 l-5.2S-:{:-5.2:i-27; 48). in addition, the readings throughout the book in many cases are divergent, the text in the LXX being in general shorter and more com pact. The Gr text lias about 2,700 Heb words less than the authentic Heb text, and is thus about one-eighth shorter.

      As far as the insertion of the addresses against the heathen nations in ch 29 is concerned, the Or order is certainly not more original than is the Heb. It rather tears apart, awkwardly, what is united in ch 25, and has probably been caused by a misunderstanding. The words of 25 13 were regarded as a hint that here the discourses against the heathen were to follow. Then, too, the order of these discourses in the (ir text is lesy natural than the one in Heb. In regard to the readings of the text, it has been thought that the text of the LXX deserves the preference on account of its brevity, and that the Heb text had been increased by additions. However, in general, the Gr version is very free, and often is done without an understanding of the subject; and there are reasons to believe that the translator shortened the text, when he thought the style of Jeremiah too heavy. Then, too, where he met with repetitions, he probably would omit; or did so when he found trouble with the matter or the language. This does not deny that his tr in many places may be correct, and that addi tions may have been made to the Heb text.

      LITERATURE. Calvin, PrnclftionfN in, Librum Prn- pln-tiiie ./</ ft Tin- < n, (ieneva. 105:}; Sebastian Schmidt,

      t liinini iitnrii in liln-. iim/i/ni. ./</, Argent, 1(>S5. Modern

      coinm. by Ilit/.ig, Kwald. (!raf, Nagelsbach, Keil; also Cheyne (J ulpit Cumm.), Peake, Duhm, and von Orelli.


      El ISTLE OF.



      JEREMIAS, jer-e-ml as

      (1) Named unions the .sons of Baani as one of those; who had married foreign wives (1 Esd 9 134). In Ezr 10 33 we find, ".Icrcmai" among the sons of Hashum. In 1 Esd it should come in 9 33 before Alanasscs.

      (2) Sec JEREMIAH (general art.).

      JEREMIEL, jer-e-ml el (Lat Hicremihcl, al. Jcremii l, "El hurls" or "El appoints"): AVm and RV in 2 Esd 4 30 for AV "Uriel." He is here called the "archangel" who answers the questions raised by the souls of the righteous dead. He is perhaps identical with Ramiel of Apoc Bar or Kennel of Eth Enoch.

      JEREMOTH, jor f-moth ([a] nT^TP , and [b] rn" "P, ifrKinoth, [c,\\\\\\\\ niTQ H ?, y nttidtli, meaning un known): Of the following (1) has form (b), (">) 1 1n form (c), the rest (a).

      (1) In 1 Ch 7 8 (AV "Jerimoth"), and

      (2) In 1 Ch 8 14, Benjamites. Cf JEHOHAM, (2).

      (3) In 1 Ch 23 23, and (4) in 1 Ch 25 22 = "Jerimoth," 24 30; heads of Levitical houses.

      (5) A Naphtalite, one of David s tribal princes (1 Ch 27 19); AV "Jerimoth."

      (6) (7) (8) Men who had married foreign wives. In Ezr 10 20 ( = "Hieremoth," 1 Esd 9 27); ver 27 (="Jarimoth," 1 Esd 9 28); ver 29 ( = "Hiere- moth," 1 Esd 9 30); the ^ e re of the last is MWIT , Wramuth, "and Ramoth"; so RVm, AV.

      DAVID FRANCIS ROBERTS JEREMY, jer e-mi. See JEREMIAH (general art.).

      JEREMY, jer e-mi, THE EPISTLE OF ( Eiri- <rroX.T] Icpeptov, E pistol? Icremioii) :

      1. Name

      2. Canonicity and Position

      3. Contents

      4. Original Language

      , r >. Authorship. Date and Aim

      6. Text and Versions


      In MSS BA the title is simply "An Epistle of

      Jeremiah." But in B, etc, there is a superscription

      introducing the letter: "Copy of a letter

      1. Name which Jeremiah sent to the captives

      about to be led to Babylon by [Pesh adds Nebuchadnezzar] the king of the Babylonians, to make known to them what had been commanded him by God." What follows is a satirical exposure of the folly of idolatry, and not a letter. The idea of introducing this as a letter from Jeremiah was probably suggested by Jer 29 1 ff.

      The early Gr Fathers were- on the whole favorably disposed toward this tract, reckoning it to be a

      part of the Canon. It is therefore

      2. Canon- included in the lists of canonical icity and writings of Origen, Epiphanius, Cyril Position of Jerus and Atlianasius, and it was

      so authoritatively recognized by the Council of Laodicea (3GO AD).

      In most Or MSS of the LXX (BA Codd. March, Chisl, in the Syr Hex), it follows Lam as an independent piece, closing the supposed writings of Jeremiah. In the best- known printed edd of the LXX (Tischendorf, Swete.etc), the order is Jer, Bar, Lam, Ep. Jer. In F ritzsche, Lib. Apoc VT Gracci , Kp. Jer stands between Bar and Tob. But in Lat MSS, including those of the Vulg, it is ap pended to Bar, of which it forms ch 6, though it really has nothing to do with that book. This last is the case with Protestant edd (KY, etc) of the Apoc, a more intel ligible arrangement, as Jer and Lam do not occur in the Apoc, and the Bib. Barueh was Jeremiah s amanuensis.

      In the so-called letter (see 1, above) the author

      shows the absurdity and wickedness of heat lien

      worship. The Jews, for their sins, will

      3. Contents be- removed to Babylon, where they

      will remain 7 generations. In that land they will be templed to worship the gods of the people. The writer s aim is ostensibly to warn them beforehand by showing how helpless and use less the idols worshipped are, and how immoral as well as silly the rites of the Bab religion are. For similar polemics against idolatry, see Isa 44 9-19 (which in its earnestness resembles the Ep. Jer closely); Jer 10 3-9; Ps 115 4-8; 135 15-18; Wisd 13 10-19; 15 13-17.

      That the Ep. Jer was composed in Gr is the opin ion of practically all scholars. There are no marks

      of translation; the Gr is on the whole

      4. Original good, and abounds in such rhetorical Language terms as characterized the Gr of

      Northern Egypt about the beginning of otir era. There is no trace of a Heb original, though Origen has been mistakenly understood to say there was one in his day (see Schiirer, GJV\\\\\\\\ III, 467 f). Romanist writers defend a Heb original, and point to some Hebraisms (ver 44 and the use of the fut. for the past), but these can be matched in admittedly Hellenistic Gr writings.

      The writer was almost certainly a resident in Alexandria toward the close of the last cent. BC.

      The Gr of the book, the references to

      5. Author- Egyp religion (ver 19, where the Feast ship, Date of Lights at Sais Herod, ii.62 is and Aim referred to), and the allusion to the

      Ep. Jer in 2 Mace 2 2, denied by Schiirer, etc, make the above conclusion very probable. The author had in mind tin; dangers to the religion of his fellow-countrymen presented by the fascinating forms of idolatry existing at Alexandria. Certainly Jeremiah is not the author, for the book was written in Gr and never formed part of the Heb Canon. Besides, the treatment is far below the level of the genuine writings of that prophet.

      Jeriah Jeroboam



      (11 Tlir drrrk. -This ep. occurs in the principal MSS of tin- I- XX uncials .HA Q r conlain , - -->!, etc) and

      cursives .except ,0. .Hi. _ _".! i.

      fi T PX t I- / Si/rim: 1 follows the Or, but

      very freely. The Syr II follows the text of J! closely, often at, the expense of Syr

      Versions idioms.

      <:<,> Tin- l.nii n. Tho VuU? is made direct from the<ir. There is a ditl ei-ent I. at YS published by Sabatier in his lt,i,. S,irr. Lat I erttionc* Antiguas, II, 7:54 If. It is freer than t he Vtili:.

      ( 4 1 There are also Arabic (following A). Coptic (ed Quat- reniere, isicti. and K( hiopic eil Dillmann, 1 si! 1 , \\\\\\\\

      LITKKATIHK. -See under A POCKY PH \\\\\\\\ for C onun. and editions lint note in addition to the lit. mentioned in the art. the following: Keuseh. Erhlar. den II. liar itch, is."): ,; Daubanton. "Met Apok boek KTTKJTOA/J "leptfaov," Tin "l. Studii n, isss, iiii;-:is.


      JERIAH, jeWi a OTP~P , tfrlijilha, "founded of Jch"): In 1 Ch 23 lit; 24 23 = "Jcrijah" (rp-T , i/ rli/illi ), 26 31, head of a Levitical house: called chief of the I[el)nuites in 24 23 (<! ver30j.

      JERIBAI, jer i-hl, jer-i-ha l C^T > ?// / / "//, meaning uncertain): Otic of David s mighty men of the armies (1 ("a 11 !( ; one of the names not found in the list in 2 S 23 24-29a.

      JERICHO, jer i-kd ft lie word occurs in two forms. In the Pent, in 2 K 25 f> and in Ezr, Noli, Ch it is written irP" , y rehti; in" 1 !"?, y r iho, elsowheTo) : In 1 K 16 :H the final letter is H , //-", instead of 1, irai.v. The termination icniu is thought to preserve the peculiarities of the old Can. dialect. In the LXX we have the indeclinable form, le^x^, Icri- cho (Swe-to has the form lereicftd as well), both with and without the fern, art.; in the NT lepetx^, lercicho, once with the fern. art. The Arab, is cr-Rihu. According; to Dt 32 4 ( .) it stood opposite Nebo, while in 34 3 it is called a city grove of palm trees. It was .surrounded with a wall (Josh 2 1~>), and provided with a gate which was closed at night (2 5), and was ruled over by a king. When captured, vessels of brass and iron, large quantities of silver and gold, and a goodly Babylonish gar ment were found in it (7 21). It was on the western side of the Jordan, not far from the camp of Israel at Shittim, before crossing the river (2 1). The city was on the plains" (4 13), but so close to "the mountain" on the W . (probably the cliffs of Quarantania, the traditional scene of Christ s temptation) that it was within easy reach of the spies, protected by Rahab. It was in the lot of Benjamin (18 21 ), the border of which ascended to the "slope [EV "side"] of J. on the N." (18 12). Authorities are generally agreed in locating the ancient city at T*i es-Sultan, a mile and a half N.W. of modern J. Here there is a mound 1,200 ft. long and .50 ft. in height supporting 4 smaller mounds, the highest of which is 90 ft. above the base of the main mound.

      rieistoeene (or glacial) times, the sudden falling of the walls becomes easily credible to anyone who believes in tin- personality of (iod and in His power either to fore know the future or to direct at His will the, secondary causes with which man has to deal in Nature. The nar rative (Iocs not. state that tl)O blowing of 1 he rains horns of I liemsel ves ell ecled t lie falling of the walls. Jt, was simply said that at a specified juncture on the 7th day the walls would fall, and that they actually fell at that juncture. The miracle may, therefore, be regarded as either that of prophecy, in which the Creator by foretelling the course of things to Joshua, secured the junction of Divine and human activities which constitutes a true miracle, or we may regard the movements which brought down the walls to be the result of direct Divine action, such as is exerted by man when he produces an explosion of dyna mite at a particular time and place. Tin; phenomena are just such as occurred in (he earthquake of San Fran cisco in I .IOU. where, according to the report of the: scientific commission appointed by the state, "the most violent destruction of buildings was on t h,- made ground. This ground s. i-nis to have behaved during the earth quake very much in tho same way as jelly in a bowl, or as a semi-liquid in a tank." Santa Rosa, situated on tho valley floor, "underlain to a considerable depth by loose or slightly coherent geological formations ..... L O miles from the rift, was the most severely shaken town in the state and suffered the greatest disaster relatively to its population and extent" (Report, 1:5 and 15). Thus an earthquake, such as is easily provided for along the margin of this great Jordan crevasse, would produce exactly the phenomena here described, and its occurrence at the time and place foretold to Joshua constitutes it a miracle of the lirst magnitude.

      Notwithstanding the curse pronounced in Josh

      6 20 AV, prophesying that whosoever should rebuild the city "he shall lay the foundations thereof in his firstborn," it was rebuilt (I K 16 34) by Kiel the Bethelite in the days of Ahab. The curse was lit erally fulfilled. Still David s messengers arc; said to have "tarried at Jericho" in his day (2 S 10 f>; 1 Ch 19 5). In Elisha s time (2 K 2 5) there was a school of prophets there, while several other references to the; city oc< ur in the- OT and the Apoc (2 Ch 28 1"), where it is called "the citv of palm- trees"; 2 K 25 f>; Jer 39 5; Ezr 2 34; Neh 3 2;

      7 36; 1 Mace 9 50). Jos describes it and the fertile plain surrounding it, in glowing terms. _ In the time of Christ, it was an important place yield ing a large revenue to the royal family. But. the city which Herod rebuilt was on a higher elevation, at the base of the western mountain, probably at licil Jubr, where there are the ruins of a small fort. Jericho was the; place of rendezvous for Galilean pilgrims desiring to avoid Samaria, both in going to and in departing from Jerus, and it has been visited at all times by thousands of pilgrims, who go down from Jerus to bathe in the Jordan. The road lead ing from Jerus to Jericho is still infested by robbers who hide in the rocky caverns adjoining it, and ap pear without warning from the tributary gorges of the wadies which dissect the mountain wall. At the present time Jericho and the region about is occupied only by a few hundred miserable inhabit ants, deteriorated by the torrid climate; which pre vails at the low leve-1 about the he-ad of the Dead S. a. But the present barrenness of the region is largely due to the destruction of the aqueducts which formerly distributee! over the plain the waters brought down through the wadios which descend from the mountains of Judaea. The ruins of many of those are silent witnesses of the; cause of its de cay. Twelve aqueducts at various levels formerly branched from the Wddy Kelt, irrigating the plain both N. anel S. Remains of Rom masonry are> found in those. In the Middle Age-s they were so repaired that an abundance* and variety of crops wore raised, including whe>at, barley, millet, figs, grapes and sugar cane. See further PALESTINE (RECENT EXPLORATION). GEORGE FREDERICK WRIGHT

      JERIEL, je ri-e-1, jor i-ol (bSPT , y r rl"cl, "founded of God"; cf JERIAH): A chief of Issachar (1 Ch 7 2j.

      JERIJAH, je -rl ja (1 Ch 26 31). Se-e; JERIAH.



      Jeriah Jeroboam

      JERIMOTH, jor i-moth (see JERE.MOTH, [r]):

      (1) A Benjamite (1 Ch 7 7).

      (2) A Benjamite who joined David at Ziklag, or perhaps a Judaean (1 Ch 12 5 [Hob 6]).

      (3) In 1 Ch 24 30 = , IE RE MOTH, (4) (q.v.).

      (4) A Levite musician in David s time (1 Ch 25 4).

      (5) Son of David and father of Mahalath, Reho- boam s wife (2 Ch 11 18). He is not mentioned (2 S 3 2-5; 5 14-16; 1 Ch 3 1-9; 14 4-7) among the sons of David s wives, so Curtis (Ch, 3(59) thinks that he was either the son of a concubine, or possibly the name is a corruption of "Ithream" (S!p"]irP , yithr am, 1 Ch 3 3).

      (0) A Levite overseer in Hezekiah s time (2 Ch 31 13). DAVID FRANCIS ROBERTS

      JERIOTH, jer i-oth, jer i-oth (rHiPT , yri*dtl>, "[tent-] curtains"): In 1 Ch 2 IS, where MT is corrupt, Kittel in his comm. and in Bib. Heb reads "Caleb begat [children] of Azubah his wife, Jeriolh." Wellhausen (De (lent, ct Fam. Jud., 33) reads, "Caleb begat [children] of Azubah his wife, the daughter of Jorioth." According to EV, Caleb had two wives, but the context does not bear this out. J. H. Michaelis regarded J. as another name for Azu bah. See Curtis, Comm. on Ch, 92.

      JEROBOAM, jcr-o-bo am (Kp3T|, yaroWam; LXX lepopodfi, Jfu i-obodm, usually assumed to have been derived from 3"H and D7, and signifying the people contend," or, "he pleads the people s cause") : The name was borne by two kings of Israel.

      (1) Jeroboam I, son of Nebat, an Ephraimitc, and of Zeruah, a widow (1 K 11 26-40; 1214 20). He was the first king of Israel after the disrupt ion of the kingdom, and he reigned 22 years (937-915 BC).

      The history of J. is contained in 1 K 11 26-40;

      12 114 20; 2 Ch 10 111 4; 11 14-16; 12 15;

      13 3-20, and in an insertion in the

      1. Sources LXX after 1 K 12 24(a-z). This in

      sertion covers about the same ground as the MT, and the LXX elsewhere, with some additions and variations. The fact that it calls J. s mother a pornc (harlot.), and his wife the Egyp princess Ano (cf 1 K 11); that J. is punished by the deatii of his son before he has done any wrong; that the episode with the prophet s mantle does not occur until the meeting at Shechem; that J. is not proclaimed king at all all this proves the passage inferior to the MT. No doubt it is a fragment of some historical work, which, after the manner of the later Alidr, has combined history and tradition, making rather free use of the historical kernel.

      J., as a highly gifted and valorous young Ephraimite, comes to the notice of Solomon early

      in his reign (1 K 11 2S; cf 9 15.24).

      2. His Rise Having noticed his ability, the king and Revolt made him overseer of the fortifica

      tions and public work at Jerus, and placed him over the levy from the house of Joseph. The fact that the latter term may stand for the whole of the ten tribes (cf Am 66; 66; Ob ver 18) indicates the importance of the position, which, however, he used to plot against the king. No doubt he had the support of the people in his designs. Prejudices of long standing (2S1940f; 20 f) were augmented when Israelitish interests were made subservient to Judah and to the king, while enforced labor and burdensome taxation filled the people s hearts with bitterness and jealousy. J., the son of a widow, would be the first to feel the gall of oppression and to give voice to the suffering of the people. In addition, he had the approval of the prophet Ahijah of the old sanctuary of Shiloh, who, by tearing his new mantle into twelve pieces and giving ten of them to J., informed him that he

      was to become king of the ten tribes. Jos says (Ant, VIII, vii, 8) that J. was elevated by the words of the prophet, "and being a young man of warm temper, and ambitious of greatness, he could not be quiet," but tried to get the government into his hands at once. For the time, the plot failed, and J. fled to Egypt where he was received and kindly treated by Shishak, the successor to the father-in- law of Solomon.

      The genial and imposing personality of Solomon had been able to stem the tide of discontent ex cited by his oppressive regime, which at 3. The his death burst all restraints. Never-

      Revolt of theless, the northern tribes, at a popu- the Ten lar assembly held at Shechem, solemnly Tribes promised to serve Rehoboam, the son

      of Solomon, who had already been pro claimed king at Jerus, on condition that he would lighten the burdens that so unjustly rested upon them. Instead of receiving the mayna charta which they expected, the king, in a spirit of despotism, gave them a rough answer, and Jos says "the people were struck by his words, as it were, by an iron hammer" (Ant, VIII, viii, 3). But despotism lost the day. The rough answer of the king was met by the Marseillaise of the people:

      "What portion haye we in David . Neither have we inheritance in the son of Josse: To your tents, O Israel : Now see to thine own house, David" (1 K 12 10).

      Seeing the turn affairs had taken, but still unwill ing to make any concessions, Rehoboam sent Adoram, who had been over the levy for many years (1 K 5 14; 12 IS), and who no doubt had quelled dissatisfaction before, to force the people to submission, possibly by the very methods he had threatened to employ (1 K 12 14). However, the attempt failed. The aged Adoram was stoned to death, while Rehoboam was obliged to flee ignomini- ously back to Jerus, king only of Judah (1 K 12 20). Thus the great work of David for a united kingdom was shattered by inferiors, who put per sonal ambitions above great ideals.

      As soon as J. heard that Solomon was dead, he

      returned from his forced exile in Egypt and took

      up his residence in his native town,

      4. The Zeredah, in the hill country of Ephraim Election (LXX 1 K 12 20 ff). The northern

      tribes, having rejected the house of David, now turned to the leader, and perhaps insti gator of the revolution. Jeroboam was sent for and raised to the throne by the choice and approval of the popular assembly. Divinely set apart for his task, and having the approval of the people, J. nevertheless failed to rise to the greatness of his opportunities, and his kingdom degenerated into a more military monarchy, never stronger than the ruler who chanced to occupy the throne. In trying to avoid the Scylla that threatened its freedom and faith (1 K 11 33), the nation steered into the Charybdis of revolution and anarchy in which it finally perished.

      Immediately upon his accession, J. fortified Shechem, the largest city in Central Israel, and

      made it his capital. Later he fortified

      5. Political Penuel in the E. Jordan country. Ac- Events cording to 1 K 14 17, Tirzah was the

      capital during the latter part of his reign. About J. s external relations very little is known beyond the fact that there was war between him and Rehoboam constantly (1 K 14 30). In 2 Ch 13 2-20 we read of an inglorious war with Abijah of Judah. When Shishak invaded Judah (1 K 14 25 f), he did not spare Israel, as appears from his inscription on the temple at Karnak, where a list of the towns captured by him is given. These belong to Northern Israel as well as to Judah,

      Jeroboam Jerusalem



      showing thai Shishak exacted tribute there, even if he used violence only in Judah. The fad thai ,]. successfully managed :i revolution but. failed to establish a dynasty shows that his strength lay in the power of hi s personality more than in the soundness of his principles.

      Despite the success of the revolution politically,

      .1. descried in the halo surrounding the temple and

      its ritual a danger which threatened

      6. His the permanency of his kingdom. He Religious justifiably dreaded a reaction in favor Policy of the house of David, should the

      people make repeated religious pil grimages 1o .lerus after the first passion of the rebel lion had spent itself. He therefore resolved to establish national sanctuaries in Israel. Accord ingly, lie fixed on Bethel, which from time imme morial \\\\\\\\vas one of the chief sanctuaries of the land (den 28 10; 35 1; Hos 12 4), and Dan, also a holy place since the conquest, as the chief centers of worship for Israel. J. now made "two calves of gold" as symbols of the strength and creative power of Jeh, and set them up in the sanctuaries at Bethel and Dan, where altars and other sacred objects already existed. It appears that many of the priests st ill in the land were opposed to his image-worship (2 Ch 11 KMT). Accordingly, he found it necessary to institute anew, non-Levitical priesthood (1 K 13 33). A new and popular festi val on the model of Hie feasts at Jerus was also established. J. s policy might, have been considered as a clever political move, had it not contained the dangerous appeal to the lower instincts of the masses, that led them into the immoralities of heathenism and hastened the destruction of the nation. J. sacrificed the higher interests of reli gion to politics. This was the sin of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, wherewith he made Israel to sin" (I K 12 30; 16 26).

      It may be that many of the prophets sanctioned

      J. s religious policy. Whatever the attitude of the

      majority may have been, there was

      7. Hostility no doubt a party who strenuously of the opposed the image- worship. Prophets (1) The anonymous prophet. On

      the very day on which J. inaugurated the worship at the sanctuary at Bethel "a man of dod out of Judah" appeared at Bethel and pub licly denounced the service. The import of his message was that the royal altar should some day be desecrated by a ruler from the house of David. The prophet was saved from the wrath of the king only by a miracle. "The altar also was rent, and the" ashes poured out from the altar." This narra tive of 1 K 13 is usually assumed to belong to a later time, but whatever the date of compilation, the general historicity of the account is lit tie affected by it .

      (2) The prophet Ahijah. At a later date, when J. had realized his ambition, but not the ideal which the prophet had set before him, Ahijah predicted the consequences of his evil policy. J. s eldest son had fallen sick. He thought of Ahijah, now old and blind, and sent the queen in disguise to learn the issue of the sickness. The prophet bade her to announce to J. that the house of J. should be extirpated root and branch; that the people whom he had seduced to idolatry should be uprooted from the land and transported beyond the river; and, severest of all, that her son should die.

      8. His J. died in the 22d year of his reign, Death having "bequeathed to posterity the

      reputation of an apostate and a suc cession of endless revolutions."

      S. K. MOSIMAN

      (2) Jeroboam H (2 K 14 23-29), son of Joash and 13th king of Israel; 4th sovereign of the dy

      nasty of Jehu. He reigned 41 years. His accession may be placed c 7 ( .)S BC (some date lower J.

      J. came into power on the crest of the wave of prosperity that followed the crushing of the su premacy of Damascus by his father.

      1. His By his great victory at Aphek, followed Warlike by others, Joash had regained the ter- Policy ritory lost to Israel in the reigns of Jehu

      and Jehoahaz (2 K 13 17.2")). This sat isfied Joash, or his death prevented further host ili- ties. J., however, then a young man, resolved on a war of retaliation against Damascus, and on further conquests. The condition of the eastern world favored his projects, for Assyria was at the time engaged, under Shalmaneser III and Assurdan III, in a life-and-death struggle with Armenia. Syria being weakened, J. determined on a bold attempt to conquer and annex the whole kingdom of which Damascus was the capital. The steps of the cam paign by which this was accomplished are unknown to us. The result only is recorded, that not only the intermediate territory fell into J. s hands, but that Damascus itself was captured (2 K 14 28). Haniath was taken, and thus were restored the eastern boundaries of the kingdom, as they were in the- time of David (1 Ch 13 o). From the time of Joshua "the entrance of Ilamath" (Josh 13 5), a narrow pass leading into the valley of the Lebanons, had been the accepted northern boundary of the promised land. This involved the subjection of Moab and Ammon, probably already tributaries of Damascus.

      J. s long reign of over 40 years gave time for the

      collected tribute; of this greatly increased territory

      to flow into the; coffers of Samaria, and

      2. New the exactions would be ruthlessly en- Social forced. The prophet Amos, a con- Conditions temporary of J. in his later years,

      dwells on the cruelties inflicted on the trans-Jordanic tribes by Ha/ad, who "threshed dilead with threshing instruments of iron" (Am 1 3). All this would be remembered now, and wealth to which the Northern Kingdom had been unaccustomed flowed into its treasuries. The hovels of unburned brick in which the citizens had lived were replaced by "houses of hewn stone" (Am 5 11). The ivory house which Ahab built in Samaria (1 K 22 39; decorations only are meant) was imitated, and there were many "great houses" (Am 3 In). The sovereign had both a winter and a summer palace. The description of a banqueting scene within one of these palatial abodes is lifelike in its portraiture. The guests st ret died themselves upon the silken cushions of the couches, eating the flesh of lambs and stall-fed calves, drinking wine from huge bowls, singing idle songs to the sound of viols, themselves perfumed and anointed with oil (Am 6 4-6). Meanwhile, they were not grieved for the affliction of Joseph, and oared nothing for the wrongdoing of which the country was full. Side by side with this luxury, the poor of the land were in the utmost distress. A case in which a man was sold into slavery for the price of a pair of shoes seems to have come to the prophet s knowledge, and is twice referred to by him (Am 2 6; 8 6).

      With all this, and as part of the social organiza tion, religion of a kind flourished. Ritual took the place of righteousness; and in a

      3. Growth memorable passage, Amos denounces of Cere- the substitution of the one for the monial other (Am 5 21 ff). The worship Worship took place in the sanctuaries of the

      golden calves, where the votaries prostrated themselves before the altar clothed in garments taken in cruel pledge, and drank sacri ficial wine bought with the money of those who were



      Jeroboam Jerusalem

      fined for non-attendance there (Am 2 S). There were subsidiary temples and altars at Gilgal and Becrsheba (Am 44; 55; 8 14). Both of these places had associations with the early history of the nation, and would be attended by worshippers from Judah as well as from Israel.

      Toward the close of his reign, it would appear

      that J. had determined upon adding greater splendor

      and dignity to the central shrine, in

      4. Mission correspondence with the increased of Amos wealth of the nation. Amos, about

      the same time, received a commission to go to Bethel and testify against the whole pro ceedings there. He was to pronounce that these sanctuaries should belaid waste, and that Jeh would raise the sword against the house of J. (Am 7 9). On hearing his denunciation, made probably as he stood beside the altar, Amaziah, the priest of Bethel, sent a messenger to the king at Samaria, to tell him of the "conspiracy" of Amos, and that the land was not able to bear all his words. The messenger bore the report that Amos had declared "J. shall die by the sword," which Amos had not done. When the messenger had gone, priest and prophet had a heated controversy, and new threatenings were uttered (Am 7 10-17).

      The large extension of territory acquired for

      Israel by J. is declared to have been the realization

      of a prophecy uttered earlier by Jonah,

      5. Prophecy the son of Amittai (2 K 14 25) of Jonah the same whose mission to Nineveh

      forms the subject of the Book of Jon (1 1). It is also indicated that the relief which had now come was the only alternative to the utter ex tinction of Israel. But Jeh sent Israel a "saviour" (2 K 13 5), associated by some with the Assyr king Ramman-nirari III, who crushed Damascus, and left Syria an easy prey, first to Jehoash, then to J. (see JEHOASH), but whom the historian seems to connect with J. himself (2 K 14 2(5.27).

      J. was succeeded on his death by his weak son Zechariah (ver 29). \\\\\\\\V. SHAW CALDKCOTT

      JEROHAM, jp-rd ham (En ~P , ynlham, "may he be compassionate!"):

      (1) An Ephraimite, the father of Elkanah, and grandfather of Samuel (1 S 1 1; 1 Ch 6 27.34 [Ileb 12.19]): Jerahmeel is the name in LXX, B, in 1 S and in LXX, L+MSS, in 1 Ch.

      (2) A Benjarnite (1 Ch 8 27), apparently = JEREMOTH, (2) (cf ver 14), and probably the same as IK; of 1 Ch 9 8.

      (3) Ancestor of a priest in Jerus (1 Ch 9 12 = Neh 11 12).

      (4) A man of Gedor, father of two of David s Benjamite recruits at Ziklag, though (Jedor might be a town in Southern Judah (1 Ch 12 7 [Ileb S]j.

      (5) Father of Azarel, David s tribal chief over Dan (1 Ch 27 22).

      (6) Fattier of Azariah, one of the captains who supported Jehoiada in overthrowing Queen Atha- liah (2 Ch 23 1). DAVID FHANCIS ROBERTS

      JERUBBAAL, jor-u-ba al, jo-rul/a-al (-?5^ , y rubba*<d, "let Baal contend"): The name given to Gideon by his father, Joash, and the people in recognition of his destruction of the altar of Baal at Ophrah (Jgs 6 32). For this name the form "Jerubbcsheth" (2 S 11 21) was substituted after the analogy of "Ishbosheth" and "Mephibosheth," in which boshcth, the Hob word for "shame," dis placed the word ba^al, no doubt because the name resembled one given in honor of Baal. See GIDEON.

      JERUBBESHETH, jer-ub-be sheth, jS-rub S- eheth (niBST?, yrubbesheth, see JERUBBAAL for

      meaning): It, is found once (2 S 11 21) for JE RUBBAAL.

      The word r.Tl 3 , buahcth, "shameful thing," was sub stituted by later editors of tlio text for b"3 . ba al, "lord," in the text of Jer 3 24; Hos 9 10; in 2 S 2 8, etc, we tind Ish-bosheth=Eshbaal (Ishbaal) in 1 Ch 8 33; 9 39. The reason for this was reluctance to pro nounce the word Bn nl, which had by their time been associated with Canaanitic forms of worship. In 2 S 11 21 LXX, Luc. has "Jeroboal," which LXX, B, has cor rupted to Jeroboam." Cf MERIHBAAL; MEPHIBOSHETH; and see (Hi, Intro, 400 If. For a NT case cf Rom 11 4 and see Sanday and lleadlam ad loc. See JERUUHAAL. DAVID FRANCIS ROBERTS

      JERUEL, je--ro7/el, jer ot>-el (^T?, yru el, "founded by El";: Jahaziel prophesied that King Jehoshaphat should meet the hordes of Moabites and Ammonites, after they had come up by the "ascent of Ziz," "at the end of the valley [i.e. wddy], before the wilderness of Jeruel" (2 Ch 20 16). The particular part of the wilderness intended, it- unknown. Cheyne (Eli) thinks this may be an error for the Jo/reel of Judah, mentioned in Josh 15 56, etc. See JEZREKL.

      JERUSALEM, je-roT/sa-lem :

      1. I i IF. NAME

      1. In Cuneiform

      2. In Hebrew

      3. In Greek and Latin

      4. The Meaning of Jerusalem

      5. Other Names


      1. Geology

      2. Climate and Rainfall

      3. The Natural Springs


      1. The Mountains Around

      2. The Valleys

      3. The Hills*


      1. Description of Josephus

      2. Summary of the Names of the Five Hills

      3. The Akra

      4. The Lower City

      5. City of David and Zion


      1. Robinson

      2. Wilson, and the Palestine Exploration Fund (1805)

      3. Warren and Conder

      4. Maudslay f>. Schick

      (i. Clermont-Ganneau 7. Bliss and Dickie

      5. Jerusalem Archaeological Societies V 1 . THE CITY S WALLS AND GATES

      1. The Existing Walls

      2. Wilson s Theory

      3. The Existing Gates

      4. Buried Remains of Earlier Walls

      5. The Great Dam of the Tyropoeon

      6. Ruins of Ancient Gates

      7. Josephus Description of the Walls

      8. First Wall

      9. Second Wall 10. Third Wall

      1 1. Date of Second Wall

      12. Nehemiah s Account of the Walls

      13. Valley (iate

      14. Dung Gate

      15. Fountain ( late li. Water Gate 17. Horse Gate IS. Sheep ( late 1!). Fish Gate

      20. "Old Gate"

      21. (iate of Ephraim

      22. Tower of the Furnaces

      23. The Gate of Benjamin

      24. Upper (iate of the Temple

      25. The Earlier Walls


      1. Gihon: The Natural Spring

      2. The Aqueduct of the Canaanites

      3. Warren s Shaft

      4. Hezekiah s "Siloam" Aqueduct

      5. Other Aqueducts at Gihon 0. Blr E<i nub

      7. Varieties of Cisterns

      8. Birket Israel

      9. Pool of Bethesda

      10. The Twin Pools

      11. Birket Haininam el Batrak





      i \\\\\\\\


      i . I 1


      10 17.


      HirL-,1 Mtimillu

      liiil.-,! , .< Sultiiii

      " Si)lotiHin s I ools "

      how-Level Aqueduct

      llif- h-l.cvel Aqueduct

      Dates of Construction of I hese Aqueducts


      TIC .\\\\\\\\ i, SITUS

      1. "The Tombs of the Kings

      2. " Herod s Tomb"

      3. " Absalom s Tomb"

      4. The " Egyptian Tomb"

      5. The "(iarilen Tomb"

      (i. Tomb of "Simon the Just "

      7. ( M her Antiquities

      s. Ecclesiastical sites


      1. Tell el-Amarna Correspondence

      2. Joshua s ( omiuest

      3 site of the Jebusite Citj

      4. David

      5. Expansion of the C it.v (i. Solomon

      7 Solomon s City Wall

      s. The Disruption (033 BC)

      <>. Invasion of Shishak (02S BC) 10 Citv Plundered by Arabs ll Haiael King of Syria Bought Oil ^797 BC) 1" Capture of the City by Jehoash of Israel 13 r/,/J.ah s Refortiflcation (770-/40 B( i 14 -Mia/, Allies with Assyria (730-72S BC> 15 Ile/ekiah s (ireat Works 10 His Religious Reforms 17 Manasseh s Alliance with Assyria is. His Repair of the Walls

      10 Josiah and Religious Reforms (040-000 IK ) 20 Jeremiah Prophesies the Approaching Doom >1 Nebuchadnezzar Twice Takes Jerusalem (5S<) BC)

      22. Cyrus and the First Return (5:58 BC 1 )

      23. Nehemiah Rebuilds the Walls

      24. Bagohi Governor

      25. Alexander the (ireat 20. The Ptolemaic Rule

      27. Antiochus the (ireat

      28. Hellenization of the City under Antiochus Epiphanes

      20. Capture of the City (170 BC)

      :H). Capture of 108 BC

      31. Attempted Suppression of Judaism

      32 The Maccabean Rebellion

      33. The Dedication of the Temple (165 BC)

      34 Defeat of Judas and Capture of the City

      35. His Death (101 BC)

      30. Jonathan s Restorations

      37. Surrender of City to Antiochus Sidetes (134

      BC) 3S. Hasmonean Buildings

      Rome s Intervention 40.

      ! I .

      Pompey Takes the City by Storm Julius "Caesar Appoints Antipas

      42. 13

      i I 15.

      ir,. 47. IS i .i 50

      Procurator (47 BC)

      Parthian Invasion

      Reign of Herod the Great (37-4 BC) Herod s Great Buildings Herod Archelaus (4 BC-0 AD) Pontius Pilate King Agrippa

      Rising against Florus and Defeat of Callus The City Besieged by Titus (70 AD) Party Divisions within the Besieged Walls

      51. Capture and t tter Destruction of the City

      52. Rebellion of Bar-Cochba

      53. Hadrian Builds .Klia Capitolina

      54. Constantino Builds the Church of the Anas- tasls

      55. The Empress Eudoxia Rebuilds the Walls 50. Justinian

      57. Chosroes II Captures the City 5S. Heracleus Enters It in Triumph 50. Clemency of Omar

      00. The Seljuk Turks and Their Cruelties

      01. Crusaders Capture the City in 1099

      02. The Kharizimians

      03. ottoman Turks Obtain the City (1517 AD)

      X. MollKHN jKHrs.M.KM

      1 . Jews and " Zionism"

      2. Christian Buildings and Institutions LITERATURE

      /. The Name. The earliest mention of Jerus is

      in the Am Tab (14f>0 BC), where it appears in the

      .. y form Uru-sa-lim; allied with this we

      have Ur-sa-li-immu on the Assyr monu-

      Cuneiform ment8 o f the 8th cent. BC.

      The most ancient Bib. form is C.-1ir"P, y nlsJiu- /f///, shortened in Ps 76 2 (cf Gen 14 18) to Salem, but in MT we have it vocalized: Cbll^ T, tfrusha- laim. In Jer 26 18; Est 2 G; 2 Ch 25 1; 32 Owe

      4. The Meaning of Jeru salem

      have D^sfiFn^ , ifntfifitilayim, a form which occurs

      on the Jewish coins of the Revolt and also in Jewish

      literature; it is commonly used by

      2. In modern Talmtidic Jews. The form Hebrew with the ending -aim or -ayim is in terpreted by some as being a dual, re ferring to the upper and lower Jerus, but such forms occur in other names as implying special solemnity; such a pronunciation is both local and late.

      In the LXX wo get lepovaaXri/j. (Icrousalhn),

      constantly reflecting the earliest and the common

      Heb pronunciation, the initial letter

      3. In Gr being probably unaspirated; soon, and Latin however, we meet with Iepov<ra\\\\\\\\-fin

      (Hicroii^ilf-ni) with the aspirate the common form in Jos, and lepoo-oXu^a (Hierosdluma) in Mace (Books 11-IV), and in Strabo. This last form has been carried over into the Lat writers, Cicero, Pliny, Tacitus and Suetonius. It was re placed in official use for some centuries by Hadrian s Aelia Capitolina, which occurs as late as Jerome, but it again comes into common use in the docu ments of the Crusades, while Solyma occurs at various periods as a poetic abbreviation.

      In the NT we have lepoixraXij/x (Hierousaltm), particularly in the writings of St. Luke and St. Paul, and TO. lepoff&\\\\\\\\vfj.a (id Hierosoluma) elsewhere. The AV of 1()11 has lerosalem in the OT and Hieru- salem in the NT. The form Jerusalem first occurs in French writings of the 12th cent.

      With regard to the meaning of the original name there is no concurrence of opinion. The oldest known form, Uru-sa-lim, has been considered by many to mean either the "City of Peace " or the "City of [the god] Salem," but other inter preters, considering the name as of Heb origin, interpret it as the "pos session of peace" or "foundation of peace." It is one of the ironies of history that a city which in all its long history has seen so little peace and for whose possession such rivers of blood have been shed should have such a possible meaning for its name.

      Other names for the city occur. For the name Jebus see JEHUS. In Isa 29 1, occurs the name bfcpl.X , ari cl, probably "the hearth of 5. Other God, " and in 1 26 the "city of right- Names eousness." In Ps 72 10; Jer 32 24 f; Ezk 7 23, we have the term "VISTl, ha- lr, "the city" in contrast to "the land." A whole group of names is connected with the idea of the sanctity of the site; Ir ha-lfodhesh, the; "holy city" occurs in Isa 48 2; 52 1; Neh 11 1, and yrushtila i/i>n ha-lfdhoshah, "Jerusalem the holy is inscribed on Simon s coins. In Mt 4 5; 27 53 we have 77 ayia. :r6Ais, he fuigia polls, "the holy city," and in Philo, lep(nro\\\\\\\\Ls, Hieropolis, with the same

      In Arab, the common name is Beit el Makdis, "the holy house," or el Mukaddas, "the holy," or the common name, used by the Moslems everywhere today, el Rials, a shortened form of el Kilds esh Sheref, "the noble sanctuary."

      Non-Moslems usually use the Arab, form Yeru- salem.

      //. Geology, Climate and Springs. -The geology of the site and environs of Jerus is comparatively simple, when studied in connection 1. Geology with that of the land of Pal as a whole (see GEOLOGY OF PALESTINE). The outstanding feature is that the rocks consist en tirely of various forms of limestone, with strata containing flints; there are no primary rocks, no sandstone (such as comes to the surface on the E. of the Jordan) and no volcanic rocks. The lime-




      stone formations are in regular strata dipping toward the S.E., with an angle of about 10.

      On the high hills overlooking Jerus on the E., S.E. and S.W. there still remain strata of consider able thickness of those chalky limestones of the post-Tertiary period which crown so many hilltops of Pal, and once covered the whole land. On the "Mount of Olives," for example, occurs a layer of conglomerate limestone known as Nuri, or "fire- stone," and another thicker deposit, known as Kcfkuli, of which two distinct strata can be dis tinguished. In these layers, esp. the latter, occur pockets containing marl or haur, and in both there are bands of flint.

      Over the actual city s site all this has been de nuded long ages ago. Here we have three layers of limestone of varying density very clearly dis tinguished by all the native builders and masons:

      (1) Mizzch hclu, lit. sweet mizzeh," a hard, reddish-grey layer capable of polish, and reaching in places to a depth of 70 ft. or more. The "holy rock" in the temple-area belongs to this layer, and much of the ancient building stone was of this nature.

      (2) Below this is the Mclekeh or "royal" layer, which, though not very thick 35 ft. or so has been of great importance in the history of the city. This rock is peculiar in that when first exposed to the air it. is often so soft that it can be cut with a knife, but under the influence of the atmosphere it hardens to make a stone of considerable durability, useful for ordinary buildings. The great impor tance of this layer, however, lies in the fact that in it have been excavated the hundreds of caverns, cisterns, tombs and aqueducts which honeycomb the city s site.

      (3) Under the Mclekeh is a Cenomanian limestone of great durability, known as Mizzch Ychiidch, or "Jewish mi/.zeh." It is a highly valued building stone, though hard to work. Geologically it is distinguished from Mizzch hdit by its containing ammonites. Characteristically it is a yellowish- grey stone, sometimes slightly reddish. A variety of a distinctly reddish appearance, known as Miz zch alunar, or "red mizzeh," makes a very orna mental stone for columns, tombstones, etc; it takes a high polish and is sometimes locally known as marble."

      This deep layer, which underlies the whole city, comes to the surface in the Kidron valley, and its impermeability is probably the explanation of the appearance there of the one true spring, the "Vir gin s Fount." The water over the site and environs of Jerus percolates with ease the upper layer, but is conducted to the surface by this hard layer; the comparatively superficial source of the water of this spring accounts for the poorness of its quality.

      The broad features of the climate of Jerus have probably remained the same throughout history, although there is plenty of evidence 2. Climate that there have been cycles of greater and and lesser abundance of rain. The

      Rainfall almost countless cisterns belonging to all ages upon the site and the long and complicated conduits for bringing water from a distance, testify that over the greater part of his tory the rainfall must have been, as at present, only seasonal.

      As a whole, the climate of Jerus may be con sidered healthy. The common diseases should be largely preventable under an enlightened govern ment; even the malaria which is so prevalent is to a large extent an importation from the low-lying country, and could be stopped at once, were efficient means taken for destroying the carriers of infection, the abundant Anopheles mosquitoes. On account of its altitude and its exposed position, almost upon

      the watershed, wind, rain and cold are all more excessive than in the maritime plains or the Jordan valley. Although the winter s cold is severely felt, on account of its coinciding with the days of heaviest rainfall (cf Ezr 10 9), and also because of the dwellings and clothes of the inhabitants being suited for enduring heat more than cold, the actual lowest cold recorded is only 25 F., and frost occurs only on perhaps a dozen nights in an average year. During the rainless summer months the mean tem perature rises steadily until August, when it reaches 73.6 F., but the days of greatest heat, with tem perature over 100 F. in the shade at times, occur commonly in September. In midsummer the cool northwest breezes, which generally blow during the afternoons and early night, do much to make life healthy. The most unpleasant days occur in May and from the middle of September until the end of October, when the dry southeast winds the sirocco blow hot and stifling from over the deserts, carrying with them at times fine dust sufficient in quantity to produce a marked haze in the atmosphere. At such times all vegetation droops, and most human beings, esp. residents not brought up under such conditions, suffer more or less from depression and physical discomfort; malarial, "sandfly," and other fevers are apt to be peculiarly prevalent. "At that time shall it be said . . . . to Jerus, A hot wind from the bare heights in the wilderness toward the daughter of my people, not to winnow, nor to cleanse" (Jer 4 11).

      During the late summer except at spells of sirocco heavy "dews" occur at night, and at the end of September or beginning of October the "former" rains fall not uncommonly in tropical downpours accompanied by thunder. After this there is frequently a dry spell of several weeks, and then the winter s rain falls in December, January and February. In some seasons an abundant rainfall in March gives peculiar satisfaction to the inhabit ants by filling up the cisterns late in the season and by producing an abundant harvest. The average rainfall is about 26 in., the maximum recorded in the city being 42.95 in. in the season 1S77-78, and the minimum being 12.5 in. in 1S69-70. An abun dant rainfall is not only important for storage, for replenishment of the springs and for the crops, but as the city s sewage largely accumulates in the very primitive drains all through the dry season, it requires a considerable force of water to remove it. Snow falls heavily in some seasons, causing considerable destruction to the badly built roofs and to the trees; in the winter of 1910-11 a fall of 9 in. occurred.

      There is only one actual spring in the Jerus area, and even to this some authorities would deny the name of true spring on account of the comparatively shallow source of its origin; this is the intermittent spring known today as *Ain Umm ed deraj (lit. "spring of the mother of the steps"), called by the native Christians *Ain Sitti Miriam (the "spring of the Lady Mary"), and by Europeans commonly called "The Virgin s Fount." All the archaeological evidence points to this as the original source of attraction of earliest occu pants of the site; in the OT this spring is known as GIHON (q.v.). The water arises in the actual bottom, though apparent west side, of the Kidron valley some 300 yds. due S. of the south wall of the Haram. The approach to the spring is down two flights of steps, an upper of 16 leading to a small level platform, covered by a modern arch, and a lower, narrower flight of 14 steps, which ends at the mouth of a small cave. The water has its actual source in a long cleft (perhaps 16 ft. long) running E. and

      3. The

      Natural Springs




      \\\\\\\\Y in the rocky bottom of the Kidron valley, now ni-inv feet below the present surface. The western or higher end of the deft is at the very entrance ot the cave but most, of the water gushes forth from the lower and wider part which lies underneath the steps. When the water is scanty, the women of Siloam creep down into the cavity under the steps and till their water-skins there; at such times no water at all finds its way into the cave. At the far end of the cave is the opening of that system pi ancient tunnel-aqueducts which is described in VI below. This spring is "intermittent," the water rising rapidly and gushing forth with considerable force, several times in the 21 hours alter the ramy season, and only once or twice in the dry. This intermittent" condition of springs is not uncom mon in Pal, and is explained by the accumulation of the underground water in certain cavities or cracks in the rock, which together make up a reser voir which empties itself by syphon action. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ here the accumulated water reaches the bend of the syphon, the overflow commences and continues to rim until the reservoir is emptied. Such a phe nomenon is naturally attributed to supernatural agency by the ignorant- in this rase, among the modern fdlahin, to a dragon and natives, specially Jews, vi sit the source, even today, at times of its overflow, for healing. Whether this intermittent condition of the fountain is very ancient it is im possible to say, but, as Jerome (Comm. in Esa, 80) speaks of it, it, was probably present in NT times, and if so we have a strong argument for finding here the "Pool of Bethesda." See BETHESDA.

      In ancient times all the water flowed down the open, rocky valley, but at an early period a wall was constructed to bank up the water and convert the source into a pool. Without such an arrange ment no water could find its way into the cave and the tunnels. The tunnels, described below (VI), were constructed for the purpose (1) of reaching the water supply from within the city walls, and (2)_ of preventing the enemies of the Jews from getting at the water (2 Ch 32 1). The water of this source, though used for all purposes by the people of Siloam, is brackish to the taste, and contains a considerable percentage of sewage; it is quite unfit for drinking. This condition is doubtless due to the wide distribution of sewage, both intentionally (for irrigation of the gardens) and unintentionally (through leaking sewers, etc), over the soil over lying the rocks from which the water flows. In earlier times the water was certainly purer, and it is probable, too, that the fountain was more copious, as now hundreds of cisterns imprison the waters which once found their way through the soil to the deep sources of the spring.

      The waters of the Virgin s Fount find their way through the Siloam tunnel and out at *Ain Sttwdn (the "spring" of Siloam), into the Pool of Siloam, and from this source descend into the Kidron valley to water the numerous vegetable gardens belonging to the village of Siloam (see SILOAM).

      The second source of water in Jems is the deep well known as lilr Eyi/ub, "Job s well," which is situated a little below the point where the Kidron valley and Hinnom meet. In all probability Jt derives its modern name from a legend in the Koran (Sura 38 f). 10-11) which narrates that God com manded Job to stamp with his foot, whereupon a spring miraculously burst up. The well, which had been quite lost sight of, was rediscovered by the Crusaders in 1 1 Si AD, and was by them cleaned out . It is 12") ft. dec]). The supply of water in this well is practically inexhaustible, although the quality is no better than that of the "Virgin s Fount"; after several days of heavy rain the water overflows underground and bursts out a few yards lower

      down the valley as a little stream. It, continues to run for a few days after a heavy fall of rain is over, and this "flowing Kidron" is a great source of attraction to the native residents of Jems, who pour forth from the city to enjoy the rare sight of running water. Somewhere in the neighborhood ot /> ?/ Eyyub must have lain En-Rogd, but if that were once an actual spring, its source is now buried under the great mass of rubbish accumulated here isee EN-HOC ;KL).

      Nearly 600 yds. S. of Blr Eyytib is a small gravelly- basin where, when the Jiir Eyytib overflows, a small spring called A in. d Lozek (the "spring ot the almond") bursts forth. It is not a true spring, but is due to some of the water of Job s well which finds its way along an ancient rock-cut aqueduct on the west side of t he Wiuly en Nur, bursting up here.

      The only ot her possible sit e of a spring in the Jerus Q.TG&iBiheHammdme8hShef&, "the bath of healing. This is an underground rock-basin in the Tyropceon valley, within the city walls, in which water collects by percolation through the debris of the city. Though once a reservoir with probably rock-cut, channels conducting water to it, it is now a deep well with arches erected over it at various periods, as the rubbish of the city gradually accumulated through the centuries. There is no evidence what ever of there being any natural fountain, and the water is, in the dry season, practically pure sewage, though used in a neighboring Turkish bath.

      (i A. Smith thinks that the JACKALS WELL (q v ) mentioned by Nehemiah (2 13), which must have been situated in the Valley of Hinnom, may possibly have been a temporary spring arising there for a few years in consequence of an earthquake, but it is extremely likely that any well sunk then would tap water flowing along the bed of the valley. There is no such "spring" or "well" there today. _

      ///. The Natural Site. Modern Jerus occupies a situation defined geographically as 31 46 45" N. lat by 35 13 25" E. long. It lies in the midst of a bare and rocky plateau, the environs being one of the most stony and least fruitful districts in the habitable parts of Pal, with shallow, grey or reddish soil and many outcrops of bare limestone. Like- all the hill slopes with a southeasterly aspect, it is so thoroughly exposed to the full blaze of the summer sun that in its natural condition the sit; would be more or less barren. Today, however, as a result of diligent cultivation and frequent watering, a considerable growth of trees and shrubs has been produced in the rapidly extending suburbs. The only fruit tree which reaches perfection around Jerus is the olive.

      The site of Jerus is shut in by a rough triangle ot higher mountain ridges: to the W. runs the mam ridge, or water parting, of Judaea, 1. The which here makes a sweep to the west-

      Mountains ward. From this ridge a spur runs Around S.E. and E., culminating due E. of the city in the MOUNT OF OLIVES (q.v.), nearly 2,700 ft. above sea-level and about 300 ft. above the mean level of the ancient city. Another spur, known as Jebel Deir abu Tor, 2,550 ft. high, runs E. from the plateau of el Bukci a and lies S.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ . of the city; it is the traditional "Hill of Evil Coun sel." The city site is thus dominated on all sides by these higher ranges "the mountains [that] are round about Jerus" (Ps 125 2) so that while on the one hand the ancient city was hidden, at any considerable distance, from any direction except the S.E., it is only through this open gap toward the desert and the mountains of Moab that any wide outlook is obtainable. This strange vision of wilder ness and distant mountain wall often of exquisite loveliness in the light of the setting sun must all through the ages have been the most familiar and the




      most potent of scenic influences to the inhabitants of Jerus.

      Within the enfolding hills the city s proper site is demarked by two main valleys. That on the W.

      and S.W. commences in a hollow occu- 2. The pied by the Moslem cemetery around

      Valleys the pool Birket Mamilla. The valley

      runs due E. toward the modern Jaffa Gate, and there bends S., being known in this upper part of its course as the Wddy el Mes. In this south ern course it is traversed by a great dam, along which the modern Bethlehem road runs, which converts a large area of the valley bod into a groat pool, the Birket es Sultan. Below this the valley under the name of Wddy er Rdbdbi bends S.E., then E., and finally S.E. again, until near Bir Eyyub it joins the western valley to form the Wddy en Ndr, 670 ft. bo- low its origin. This valley has been very generally identified as the Valley of Hinnom (see HINNOM).

      Hills and Valleys of Jerusalem with Modern Names.

      The eastern valley takes a wider sweep. Com mencing high up in the plateau to the N. of the city, near the great water-parting, it descends as a wide and open valley in a southeasterly direction until, where it is crossed by the Great North Road, being here known as Wddy clJoz (the "Valley of the Wal nuts"), it turns more directly E. It gradually curves to the S., and as it runs E. of the city walls, it, receives the name of Wddy Xitti Miriam (the "Valley of the Lady Mary"). Below the S.E. corner of the temple-area, near the traditional "Tomb of Absalom," the valley rapidly deepens and takes a direction slightly to the W. of S. It passes the "Virgin s Fount," and a quarter of a mile lower it is joined by el Wad from the N., and a little farther on by the Wddy er Rdbabi from the \\\\\\\\V. South of Bir Eyyub, the valley formed by their union is con tinued under the name of Wddy en Ndr to the Dead Sea. This western valley is that commonly known as the Brook Kidron, or, more shortly, the "Brook" (nahal), or ravine (see KIDRON), but named from the 5th cent, onward by Christians the VALLEY OF JEHOSHAPHAT (q.v.). The rocky tongue of land inclosed between these deep ravines, an area, roughly speaking, a little over one mile long by half a mile wide, is further subdivided into a number of distinct hills by some shallower valleys. The most

      prominent of these indeed the only one noticeable to the superficial observer today is the great central valley known to modern times by the single name el Wad, "the valley." It commences in a slight depression of the ground a little N. of the modern "Damascus Gate," and after entering the city at this gate it rapidly deepens a fact largely disguised today by the great accumulation of rub bish in its course. It traverses the city with the llaram to its east, and the Christian and Moslem quarters on rapidly rising ground to its west. Its course is observed near the Bab ex Xilseleh, whore it is crossed by an ancient causeway, but farther S. the valley reappears, having the walls of the llaram (near the "wailing place" and "Robinson s arch") on the E., and stoop cliffs crossed by houses of the Jewish quarter on the W. It leaves the city at the "Dung Gate," and passes with an open curve to the E., until it roaches the Pool of Siloam, below which it merges in the Wddy Sitti Miriam. This is the course of the main valley, but a branch of great importance in the ancient topography of the city starts some 50 yds. to the W. of the modern Jaffa Gate and runs down the fiinmikat Allun, gen erally known to travelers as "David s Street," and thus easterly, along the Tank bdb es Kilxeleh, until it merges in the main valley. The main valley is usually considered to be the TyropciHMi, or "Cheese mongers Valley" of Jos, but some writers have attempted to confine the name esp. to this western arm of it.

      Another interior valley, which is known rather by the rock contours, than by surface observations, being largely filled up today, cuts diagonally across the N.E. corner of the modern city. It has no modern name, though it is sometimes called "St. Anne s Valley." It arises in the plateau near "Herod s Gate," known as es Sahra, and entering the city about 100 yds. to the E. of that gate, runs S.S.E., and loaves the city between the N.E. angle of the Haram and the Golden Gate, joining the Kidron valley farther S.E. The Birket Israel runs across the width of this valley, which had far more influence in determining the ancient topography of the city than has boon popularly recognized. There is an artificially made valley between the Haram and the buildings to its north, and there is thought by many to be a valley between the S.E. hill, commonly called "Ophol" and the temple-area. Such, then, are the valleys, great and small, by which the historic hills on which the city stood are defined. All of them, particularly in their southern parts, were considerably deeper in ancient times, and in places the accumulated debris is 80 ft. or more. All of them were originally torrent beds, dry except immediately after heavy rain. The only perennial outflow of water is the scanty and intermittent stream which overflows from the Pool of Siloam, and is used to irrigate the gardens in the Wddy Xitti Miriam.

      The E. and W. valleys isolate a roughly quadri lateral tongue of land running from N.W.W. to S.S.E., and tilted so as to face S.E. 3. The This tongue is further subdivided by

      Hills el Wad into two long ridges, which

      merge into each other in the plateau to the N. The western ridge has its actual origin considerably N. of the modern wall, being part of the high ground lying between the modern Jaffa road to the W., and the commencement of the Kidron valley to the E. Within the city walls it rises as high as 2,581 ft. near the northwestern corner. It is divided by the west branch of the Tyropoeon valley into two parts: a northern part the north western hill on which is situated today the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and the greater part of the "Christian quarter" of the city, and a southern hill- -




      the southwestern which is connected with the northwestern hill by but a. narrow saddle 50 yds. widt near the Jaffa Gate. This hill sustains the citadel (the so-called "Tower of David"), the bar racks and the Armenian quarter wit hin the walls, and the Coenaculum and adjacent buildings outside the walls. This hill is from 2,500 to 2,350 ft. high along its summit, but drops rapidly on its south western, southern and southeastern sides. In its central part it falls much more gently toward the eastern hill across the now largely filled valley d Watl.

      The eastern ridge may be reckoned as beginning at the rocky hill < l-I Idli <mii/<fi popularly known as Gordon s Calvary but the wide trench made here by quarrying somewhat obscures this fact. The ridge may for convenience be regarded a.s presenting three parts, the northeastern, central or central-eastern, and southeastern summits. The northeastern hill within the modern wall supports the .Moslem quarter, and rises in places to a height of over 2,500 ft.; it narrows to a mere neck near the "Ecce Homo" arch, where it is joined to the bar racks, on the site of the ancient Antonia. Under the present surface it is here separated from the temple summit by a dee]) rocky trench.

      The central, or central-eastern, summit is that appearing as cs Xuklini, the sacred temple rock, which is 2,401 ft. high. This is the highest point from which the ground rapidly falls E., \\\\\\\\Y., and S., but the natural contours of the adjacent ground are much obscured by the great substructures which have been made to sustain the temple platform.

      The sloping, southeastern, hill, S. of the temple- area appears today, at any rate, to have a steady fall of from 2,350 ft. just 8. of the II aram southern wall to a little over 2, 100 ft. near the Pool of Siloam. It is a narrow ridge running in a somewhat curved direction, with a summit near 200 ft. above the Kidron and 100 ft. above the bed of the Tyropceon. In length it is not more than GOO yds., in width, at its widest, only 150 yds., but its chief feature, its natural strength, is today greatly obscured on ac count of the rubbish which slopes down its sides and largely fills up its surrounding valleys. In earlier times, at least three of its sides were protected by deep valleys, and probably on quite two-thirds of its circumference its summit was surrounded by natural rocky scarps. According to Professor Guthe, this hill is divided from the higher ground to the N. by a depression 12 ft, deep and 30-50 yds. wide, but this lias not been confirmed by other ob servers. The city covering so hilly a site as this must ever have consisted, as it does today, of houses terraced on steep slopes with stairways for streets.

      IV. General Topography of Jerusalem. From the foregoing description of the "natural site," it will be seen that we have to deal with 5 natural subdivisions or hills, two on the western and three on the eastern ridges.

      In discussing the topography it is useful to com mence with the description of Jos, wherein he gives to these 5 areas the names common in 1. Descrip- his day (BJ , V, iv, 1,2). He says: tion of "The city was built upon two hills

      Josephus which are opposite to one another and have a valley to divide them asunder. . Now the Valley of the Cheesemongers, as it was called, and was that which distinguished the hill of the upper city from that of the lower, ex tended, as far as Siloam" (ib, V, iv, 1). Here we get the first prominent physical feature, the bisec tion of the city-site into two main hills. Farther on, however, in the same passage one-, it must be admitted, of some obscurity Jos distinguishes 5 distinct regions:

      (1) The I /,// ( ,/,/ or I /,/,<-, Market I lan:

      (The hill) "which sustains the upper city is much higher and in length more direct. Accordingly, it was called the citadel (<(>povpiov, phrouriori) of King David . . . but it is by us called the Upper Market Place." This is without dispute the southwestern hill.

      (2) A km and Lower City: "The other hill, which was called Akra, and sustains the lower citv, was double-curved" (d^iKvpros, amphikurtos) . The description can apply only to the semicircular shape of the southeastern hill, as viewed from the "upper city." These names, "Akra" and "Lower City," are, with reservations, therefore, to be ap plied to the southeastern hill.

      (3) jrin Tii/ii/lc Hill: Josephus description here is curious, on account of its indefiniteness, but then; can be no question as to which hill he intends. He writes: "Over against this is a third hill, but naturally lower than the Akra and parted formerly from the other by aflat valley. However, in those times when the Hasmoneans reigned, they did away with this valley, wishing to connect the city with the temple; and cutting down the summit "of the Akra, they made it lower, so that the temple might be visible over it." Comparison wit hot her passages shows that this "third hill" is the central-eastern the "Temple Hill."

      (4) Bezetha: "It was Agrippa who encompassed the parts added to the old city with this wall (i.e. the third wall) which had been all naked before; for a.s the city grew more populous, it gradually crept beyond its old limits, and those parts of i t that stood northward of the Temple, and joined that hill to the city, made it considerably larger, and occasioned that hill which is in number the fourth, and is called Bezetha, to be inhabited also. It lies over against the tow r er Antonia, but is divided from it by a deep valley, which was dug on purpose. .... This new-built part of the city was called Bezetha in our language, which, if interpreted in the Or language, may be called the New City. " This is clearly the northeastern hill.

      (5) The Northern Quarter of the City: From the account of the walls given by Jos, it is evident that the northern part of his "first wall" ran along the northern edge of the southwestern hill; the second wall inclosed the inhabited part of the north western hill. Thus Jos writes: "The second wall took its beginning from the gate which they called Gennath in the first wall, and inclosing the northern quarter only reached to the Antonia." This area is not described as a separate hill, as the inhabited area, except on the S., was defined by no natural valleys, and besides covering the northwestern hill, must have; extended into the Tyropceon valley.

      Here then we have Josephus names for these five districts: (1) Southwestern Hill, "Upper City"

      and "Upper Market Place"; also the 2. Summary 1 hrourion, or "fortress of David." of Names From the 4th cent. AD, this hill has of the Five also been known as "Zion," and on it Hills today is the so-called "Tower of

      David," built on the foundations of two of Herod s great towers.

      (2) Northwestern Hill: "The northern quarter of the city." This district does not appear to have had any other name in OT or NT, though some of the older authorities would place the "Akra" here (see infra}. Today it is the "Christian quarter" of Jerus, which centers round the Church of the I loly Sepulchre.

      (3) Northeastern Hill: "Bezetha" or "New City," e\\\\\\\\-en now a somewhat sparsely inhabited area, has no name in Bib. literature.

      (4) Ccntral-cdtitrrtt Hill: The "third hill" of Jos, clearly the site of the Temple which, as Jos says (HJ, V, v), "was built upon a strong hill." In




      earlier times it was the "threshing-floor of Araunah the Jebusite." On the question whether it has any claims to be the Moriah of Gen 22 2, as it is called in 2 Ch 3 1, see MORIAH. The temple hill is also in many of the Heb writings called Zion, on which point see ZION.

      (5) Southeastern Hill: This Jos calls "Akra" and "Lower City," but while on the one hand these names require some elucidation, there are other names which have at one period or another come to be applied to this hill, viz. "City of David," "Zion" and "Ophel." These names for this hill we shall now deal with in order.

      In spite of the very definite description of Jos, there has been considerable difference of opinion regarding the situation of the "Akra." 3. The Various parts of the northwestern,

      Akra the northeastern, the southeastern

      hills, and even the central-eastern it self, have been suggested by earlier authorities, but instead of considering the various arguments, now largely out of date, for other proposed sites, it will be better to deal with the positive arguments for the southeastern hill. Jos states that in his day the term "Akra" was applied to the southeastern hill, but in references to the earlier history it is clear that the Akra was not a whole hill, but a definite fortress (&/<pa, dkni = "fortress").

      (1) It was situated on the site, or on part of the site, which was considered in the days of the Macca bees to have been the "City of David." Antiochus Epiphanes (168 BC), after destroying Jems, "forti fied the city of David with a great and strong wall, with strong towers and it became unto them an Akra" (1 Mace 1 33-36). The formidable for tress known henceforth as "the Akra" became a constant menace to the Jews, until at length, in 142 BC, it was captured by Simon, who not only razed the whole fortress, but, according to Jos (Ant, XIII, vi, 7; BJ, V, iv, 1), actually cut down the hill on which it stood. He says that "they all, labouring zealously, demolished the hill, and ceasing not from the work night and day for three whole years, brought it to a level and even slope, so that the Temple became the highest of all after the Akra and the hill upon which it was built had been removed" (Ant, XIII, vi, 7). The fact that at the time of Jos this hill was evidently lower than the temple hill is in itself sufficient argument against any theory v. hich would place the Akra on the northwestern or southwestern hills. (2) The Akra was close to the temple (1 Mace 13 52), and from its walls the garrison could actually overlook it (1 Mace 14 36). Before the hill was cut down it obscured the temple site (ib). (3) It is identified by Jos as forming part, at least, of the lower city, which (see below) bordered upon the temple (cf BJ, I, i, 4; V, iv, 1; vi, 1). (4) The LXX identifies the Akra with Millo (2 S 6 9; 1 K 9 15-24; 2 Ch 32 5).

      Allowing that the original Akra of the Syrians was on the southeastern hill, it is still a matter of Borne difficulty to determine whereabouts it stood, esp. as, if the statements of Jos are correct, the nat ural configuration of the ground has been greatly altered. The most prominent point upon the southeastern hill, in the neighborhood of Gihon, appears to have been occupied by the Jebusite for tress of ZION (q.v.), but the site of the Akra can hardly be identical with this, for this became the "City of David," and here were the venerated tombs of David and the; Judaean kings, which must have been destroyed if this hill was, as Jos states, cut down. On this arid other grounds we must look for a site farther north. Sir Charles Watson (I EFS, 1906, 1907) has produced strong topo graphical and literary arguments for placing it

      where the al Aksa mosque is today; other writers are more inclined to put it farther south, some where in the neighborhood of the massive tower discovered by Warren on the "Ophel" wall (see MILLO). If the account of Jos, written two cen turies after the events, is to be taken as literal, then Watson s view is the more probable.

      Jos, as we have seen, identified the Akra of his

      day with the Lower City. This latter is not a

      name occurring in the Bible because,

      4. The as will be shown, the OT name for Lower City this part was "City of David." That

      by Lower City Jos means the south eastern hill is shown by many facts. It is actually the lowest part of the city, as compared with the "Upper City," Temple Hill and the Bezel ha; it is, as Jos describes, separated from the Upper City by a deep valley the Tyropceon; this southeastern hill is "double-curved," as Jos describes, and lastly several passages in his writings show that tlu; Lower City was associated with the Temple on the one end and the Pool of Siloam at the other (cf Ant, XIV, xvi, 2; BJ, II, xvii, 5; IV, ix, 12; VI, vi, 3; vii, 2).

      In the wider sense the "Lower City" must have included, not only the section of the city covering the southeastern hill up to the temple precincts, where were the palaces (BJ, V, vi, 1; VI, vi, 3), and the homes of the well-to-do, but also that in the valley of the Tyropoeon from Siloam up to the "Council House," which was near the northern "first wall" (cf BJ, V, iv, 2), a part doubtless inhabited by the poorest.

      It is clear (2 S 6 7; 1 Ch 11 5) that the citadel

      "Zion" of the Jebusites became the "City of David,"

      or as G. A. Smith calls it, "David s

      5. City of Burg," after its capture by the He- David and brews. The arguments for placing Zion "Zion" on the southeastern hill are

      given elsewhere (see ZION), but a few acts relevant esp. to the "City of David" may be mentioned here: the capture of the Jebusite city by means of the gutter (2 S 6 8), which is most reason ably explained as "Warren s Shaft" (see VII); the references to David s halt on his flight (2 S 16 23), and his sending Solomon to Gihon to be crowned (1 K 1 33), and the common expression "up," used in describing the transference of the Ark from the City of David to the Temple Hill (1 K 8 1; 2 Ch 5 2; cf 1 K 9 24), are all consistent with this view. More convincing are the references to Hezekiah s aqueduct which brought the waters of Gihon "down on the west side of the city of David" (2 Ch 32 30); the mention of the City of David as adjacent to the Pool of Shelah (or Shiloah; cf Isa 8 6), and the "king s garden" in Neh 3 15, and the position of the Fountain Gate in this passage and Neh 12 37; and the statement that Manasseh built "an outer wall to the City of David, on the west side of Gihon" in the nahal, i.e. the Kidron valley (2 Ch 33 14).

      The name appears to have had a wider significance as the city grew. Originally "City of David" was only the name of the Jebusite fort, but later it be came equivalent to the whole southeastern hill. In the same way, Akra was originally the name of the Syrian fort, but the name became extended to the whole southeastern hill. Jos looks upon "City of David" and "Akra" as synonymous, and applies to both the name "Lower City." For the names Ophel and Ophlas see OPHEL.

      V. Excavations and Antiquities. During the last hundred years explorations and excavations of a suc cession of engineers and archaeologists have furnished an enormous mass of observations for the understanding of the condition of ancient Jerus. Some of the more important are as follows:

      In 1833 Messrs. Bonomi, Oatherwood and Arundale made a first thorough survey of the Haram (temple-area),








      a work which was the foundation of all subsequent maps

      f ,r i ;s^ lU un7idn l !n U .s^. the famous America,}

      traveler and divine Rev. B. Kobinson, D.D., visited

      the land as the representative of an Ameri-

      I Robinson can society, and made a series of brilliant

      II topographical investigations of profound imnortancc to all students of the Holy Land, even today

      is . .lerus was surveyed by Lieuts Aldrich and Svmonds of the Royal Kngineers and the data acquired were used for a map constructed by \\\\\\\\ an de Vile

      l)U !^^7 an AnK-in. ... T. Barclay, P.. .Hsh,d another map of .lerus and its ens irons "from actual and minute

      Sll In Tsr,o-!;;M)e Vogue in the course of some elaborate researches in Syria Explored the site of the sanctuary.

      In 18(54-05 a comm ttee was formed in London to con sider the sanitary condition of .lerus, esp. with a view to

      furnishing the city with a satisfactory water- rt -iTT-1 siiDplv and Ladv Burdett-Coutts gave

      2. Wilson | U 5 Ki W ard a proper survey of .lerus and and the its environs as a preliminary step- ( a l>-

      Palestine tain (later Lieutenant-General Sir ( haries)

      Wilson U.K., was lent by the Ordnance Exploration Sul . v( , v i )( ., Kir tment of (irciit Britain for Fund, 1865 the purpose. The results of tins survey

      and of certain tentative excavations and observations made at the same time, were so <-""r- aging that in lsr,5 -The I alestme Exploration Fund" was constituted, "for the purpose f ,|t Vustorv archaeology, geography. geology, and natural historj

      0f Du e ring Ly i867 n - d 70 Captain (later Lieutenant-Geueral

      Sir Charles) Warren, U.K., carried out a series of most

      exciting and original excavations all over

      9 Warren t he site of -lerns, esp. around the Uarn m.

      d. Warren | )ul . in ,, 1S 7ii 7. r > Lieutenant (later Lieu-

      and Conder tenant-Coloneli ronder, U.K., in the

      course of the great survey of Western Pal,

      made further contributions to our knowledge of the Holy

      O i t v

      " In 1875 Mr Henry Maudslay, taking advantage of the occasion of the rebuilding of "Bishop Gobafs Boys School," made a careful examination of the remarkable rock cuttings which are n()W . nl()| . ( , ()1 . 1( , ss incorporated into the school buildings, and made considerable excavations, the results being described in PEFS (April, 1875),

      In 1SS1 Professor Gut he made a scries of important excavations on the southeastern hill, commonly called "Ophel," and also near the Pool of Siloam; his reports were published in ZDt V, 1SS2.

      The s inve year (1SS1) the famous Siloam inscription was discovered and was first reported by Herr Baurath Schick a resident in .lerns who from l<s<>(> until his death in 1901 made a long series of observations of the highest importance on the topography of Jerus. He had unique opportunities for scientifically examining the buildings in the gforom.and the results of his study Of the details of that locality are incorporated in his wonder ful Temple model. He also made a detailed report of the ancient aqueducts of the city. Most important of all were the records lie so patiently and faithfully kept of the rock levels in all parts of the city s site whenever the digging of foundations for buildings or other excavations gave access to the rock. His contributions to the PEF and ZDI V run into hundreds of articles.

      M. Olermont-Canneau, who was resident in Jerus in

      the French consular service, made for many years, from

      1SSO onward, a large number of acute

      A Plormnnt observations on the archaeology of Jerus

      and its environs, many of which were pub-

      Ganneau lished by the PEF. Another name

      honored i n connection with the careful

      study of the topography of Jerusover somewhat the same

      period is that of Ke\\\\\\\\ . Selah Merrill, D.D.,for many years

      I .S. consul in Jerus.

      In 1X94-97 the Palestine Exploration Fund conducted

      an elaborate series of excavations with a view to determin

      ing in particular the course of the ancient

      7 R1ic;q southern walls under the direction of Mr.

      T. .1. miss (son of Rev. Daniel Bliss, D.I).,

      then president of the Syrian Protestant

      Dickie College, Beirnn. assisted by Air. A. O.

      Dickie as architect. After picking up

      the buried foundations of walls at the southeastern

      corner where " Maudslay s scarp" was exposed in the

      Protestant cemetery. Bliss and Dickie followed them all

      the way to the Pool of Siloam. across the Tyropoeon and

      on to ""Ophel" and also in other directions. Dis

      coveries of great interest, were also made in the neigh

      borhood of the Pool of Siloam (see SII.OAM).

      Following upon these excavations a number of private Investigations have been made by the Augustinians in a large estate they have acquired oil the E. side of the traditional hill of Zion.

      In 1909-1 1 a party of Englishmen, under Captain the Hon. M. Parker, made a number of explorations with very elaborate tunnels upon the hill of Ophel, imme

      cou ., 0. bcniCK

      diately above the Virgin s Fount. In the course of their work they cleaned out the whole Siloam aqueduct, find ing some new passages; they reconstructed the Siloam Pool and they completed Warren s previous investiga tion in the neighborhood of what has been known as Warren s Shaft."

      There are several societies constantly engaged in ob serving new facts connected with the topography of ancient Jerus, notably the School of Ar- ft Tprncia chaeology connected with the University i A of St. Stephens, under the Dominicans;

      lem Ar- tn( , American School of Archaeology; the

      chaeological (ierman School of Bib. Archaeology under Societies Professor Dalman, and the Palestine Ex ploration Fund.

      VI. The City s Walls and Cafes. Although the existing walls of .Jems go buck in their present form to hut the days of Suleiman tlic Mag- 1. The nifieent, c 1542 AD, their study is an

      Existing essential preliminary to the under- Walls standing of the ancient walls. The

      total circuit of the modern walls is 4,326 yds., or nearly 2|- miles, their average height is 35 ft., and they have altogether 35 towers and 8 jr ;i t(> s one of which is walled up. They make a rough square, with the four sides facing the cardinal points of the compass. The masonry is of various kinds, and on every side there are evidences that the present walls are a patchwork of many periods. The northern wall, from near the northwestern angle to some distance E. of the "Damascus Gate," lies parallel with, though somewhat inside of, an ancient fosse, and it and the gate itself evidently follow ancient lines. The eastern and western walls, following as they do a general direction along the edges of deep valleys, must be more or less along the course of earlier walls. The eastern wall, from a lit t le south of St . Stephen s Gate to the southeastern angle, contains many ancient courses, and the gen eral line is at least as old as the time of Herod the (Ireaf the stretch of western wall from the so- called "Tower of David" to the southwestern corner is certainly along an ancient line and has persisted through very many centuries. This line of wall was allowed to remain undestroyed when Titus leveled the remainder. At the northwestern angle are some remains known as Kaln at Jalwl ("Goliath s castle"), which, though largely mediae val, contain a rocky core and some masonry of Herodian times, which are commonly accepted as the relics of the lofty tower Psephinus.

      The course of the southern wall has long been a difficulty; it is certainly not the line of wall before Titus; it has none of the natural ad- 2. Wilson s vantages of the western and eastern Theory walls, and there are no traces of any

      great rock fosse, such as is to be found OTI the north. The eastern end is largely built upon the lower courses of Herod s southern wall for his enlarged temple-platform, and in it are still to he found walled up the triple, single and double gates which lead up to the Temple. The irregular line followed by the remainder of this wall has not until recent times received any explanation. Sir Charles Wilson (Golgotha and the Holy Sepulchre) suggests the probable explanation that the line of wall from the southwestern to the "Zion Gate" was deter mined by the legionary camp which stood on the part of the city now covered by the barracks and the Armenian quarter. Allowing that the remains of the first wall on the N. and W. were utilized for this fortified camp (from 70-132 AD), and supposing the camp to have occupied the area of 50 acres, as was the case with various European Rom camps, whose remains are known, the southern camp wall would have run along the line of the existing south ern walls. This line of fortification having been thus selected appears to have been followed through the greater part of the succeeding centuries down to modern times. The line connecting the two ex-

      *.. ift.




      tremities of the southern wall, thus determined by the temple-platform and legionary camp, respec tively, was probably that first followed by the south ern wall of Hadrian s city Jillia.

      Of the 8 existing city gates, on the west side there is but one, Bub cl Khulil (the "Gate of Hebron"),

      commonly known to travelers as the 3. The Jaffa Gate. It is probably the^site of

      Existing several earlier gates. On the N. there Gates are 3 gates, Bab Abd ul Ha mid (named

      after the sultan who made it) or the "New Gate"; Bab cl amud ("Gate of the Columns"), now commonly called the "Damascus Gate," but more anciently known as "St. Stephen s Gate," and clearly, from the existing remains, the site of an earlier gateway; and, still farther east, the Bab es Suhirah ("Gate of the Plain"), or "Herod s Gate." On the east side the only open gate is the Bab d *Asbat ("Gate of the Tribes"), commonly called by native Christians, Bab s //// Miriam ("Gate of the Lady Mary"), but in European guide-books called "St. Stephen s Gale." A little farther S., near the northeastern corner of the liar am is the great walled-up Byzantine Gate, known as Bab cd Daharlych ("Gate of the Conqueror"), but to Euro peans as the "Golden Gate." This structure has been variously ascribed to Justinian and Heraclius, but there are massive blocks which belong to a more ancient structure, and early Christian tra dition places the "Beautiful Gate" of the Temple here. In the 1 southern wall are two city gates; one, insignificant and mean, occupies the center of el Wad and is known as Bab el Mugharibeh ("Gate of the Moors"), and to Europeans as the "Dung Gate"; the other, which is on the crown of I lie western hill, traditional Zion, is the important Bab \\\\\\\\t-hl, Daand ("Gate of the Prophet David"), or the "Zion ( late."

      All these gates assumed their present form at the time of the reconstruction of the walls by Suleiman the Magnificent, but the more important ones occupy the sites of earlier gates. Their names have- varied very much even since the times of the Cru saders. The multiplicity of names for these va rious gates they all have two or three today and their frequent changes are worth noticing in con nection with the fact that in the OT history sonic of the gates appear to have had two or more names.

      St. Stephen s Gato.

      As has been mentioned, the course of the present southern wall is the result of Rom reconstruction of the city since the time of Titus. To Warren, Guthe, Maudslay and Bliss we owe a great deal of certain knowledge of its more ancient course. These explorers have shown that in all the pre-Rom period (and at least one period since) the contin uation southward of the western and eastern ridges, as well as the wide valley between an area now but sparsely inhabited was the site of at once the most crowded life, and the most stirring scenes in

      the Heb history of the city. The sanctity of the Holy Sepulchre has caused the city life to center itself more and more; around that sanctuary, thereby greatly confusing the ancient topography for many centuries.

      (1) Warren s excavations revealed: (a) a mas sive masonry wall 40 ft . E. of the Golden Gate,

      which curved toward the W. at its 4. Buried northern end, following the ancient Remains rock contours at this spot. It is of Earlier probable that this was the eastern Walls wall of the city in pre-Herodian times.

      Unfortunately the existence- of a large Moslem cemetery outside the eastern wall of the llaram precludes the possibility of any more exca vations in this neighborhood, (b) More important remains in the southeastern hill, commonly known as "Ophel." Here commencing at the south eastern angle of the llaram, Warren uncovered a wall 14.1- ft. thick running S. for 90 ft. and then S.\\\\\\\\V. along the edge of the hill for 700 ft, This wall, which shows at least two periods of construc tion, abuts on the sanctuary wall with a straight joint. Along its course were found 4 small towers with a projection of (5 ft. and a face from 22 to 2S ft. broad, and a great corner tower projecting 41.} ft. from the wall and with a face SO ft. broad. The face of this great tower consists of stones one to two ft . high and 2 or 3 ft . long; it is founded upon rock and stands to the height of (it) ft. Warren considers that this may be ha-mighdal ha-yo^e or "tower that standeth out" of Nell 3 25.

      (2) In 1SS1 Professor Guthe picked up frag mentary traces of this city-wall farther south, and in the excavations of Captain Parker (1910-11) further fragments of massive walls and a very an cient gate have been found.

      (3) Maudslay s excavations were on the south western hill, on tin 1 site occupied by "Bishop Gobat s School" for boys, and in the adjoining Anglo- German cemetery. The school is built over a great mass of scarped rock 45 ft. sq., which rises to a height of 20 ft . from a platform which surrounds it and with which it is connected by a rock-cut stairway; upon this massive foundation must have stood a great tower at what was in ancient times the southwestern corner of the city. From this point a scarj) facing westward was traced for 100 ft. northward toward the modern southwestern angle of the walls, while a rock scarp, in places 40 ft . high on the outer or southern side and at least 14 ft. on the inner face, was followed for 250 ft. eastward until it reached another great, rock pro jection with a face of 43 ft. Although no stones were found in situ, it is evident that such great rock cuttings must have supported a wall and tower of extraordinary strength, and hundreds of massive squared stones belonging to this wall are now in corporated in neighboring buildings.

      (4) Bliss and Dickie s work commenced at the southeastern extremity of Maudslay s scarp, where was the above-mentioned massive projection for a tower,and here were found several courses of masonry still in situ. This tower appears to have been the point of divergence of two distinct lines of wall, one of which ran in a direction N.E., skirting the edge of the southeastern hill, and probably joined tin- line of the modern walls at the ruined masonry tower known as Burj d Kebrit, and another run ning S.E. down toward the Pool of Siloain, along the edge of the \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ adi/ cr Rdbdbi (Hinnom). The former of these walls cannot be very ancient, be cause of the occurrence of late Byzantine mold ings in its foundations. The coenaculum was in cluded in the city somewhere about 435-450 AD (see IX, 55), and also in the 14th cent. Bliss con siders it probable that this is the wall built in 1239



      by Frederick II, and it is certainly that depicted in the ma]) of Marino Sanuto (1321 AD). Although these masonry remain.- are thus comparatively late, there were some reasons for t (linking t hat at a much earlier dale a wall look a similar direction along the edue of the soul h western hill : and it is an attractive theorv, though unsupported by any very definite archaeological evidence, that the wall of Solomon took also this general line. The wall running S.E. from the tower, along the edge of the gorge of Hinnom, is historically of much greater importance. Bliss s investigations showed that here were remains belonging to several periods, covering altogether considerably over a millennium. The upper line of wall was of fine masonry, with stones 1 ft. by 3 ft. in si/e, beautifully jointed and finely dressed; in some places this wall was founded upon^tho remains of the lower wall, in others a layer of debris intervened. It, is impossible that this upper wall can be pre-Kom, and Bliss ascribes it to the Empress Eudoxia, (see IX, ;">.">). The lower wall rested upon the rock and showed at least 3 periods of construc tion. In the earliest the stones had broad margins and were carefully jointed, without mortar. This may have been the work of Solomon or one of tin early kings of Judah. The later remains are evi dently of the nature of repairs, and include the work of the later Judaean kings, and of Nehemiah and of all the wall-repairers, down to the destruction in 70 AD. At somewhat irregular intervals along the wall were lowers of very similar projection and breadth to those found on Warren s wall on the southeastern hill. The wall foundations were traced except for an interval where they passed under a Jewish cemetery all the way to the mouth of the Tyropceon valley. The upper wall disap peared (the stones having been all removed for later buildings) before the Jewish cemetery was reached. During most, periods, if not indeed in all, the wall was carried across the mouth of the Tyropceon valley upon a great dam of which the

      5. The massive foundations still exist under Great Dam the ground, some f>0 ft. to the E. of of the the slighter dam which today supports Tyropceon the Hirlctlil JJauira (see SILOAM). This

      ancient dam evidently once supported a pool in the mouth of the Tyropu on, and it showed evidences of having undergone but tressing and other changes and repairs. Although it is clear that dur ing the greater part of Jewish history, before and after the captivity, the southern wall of Jerus crossed upon this dam, there were remains of walls found which tended to show that at one period, at any rate, the wall circled round the two Siloam pools, leaving them outside the fortifications.

      In the stretch of wa.ll from "Maudslay s Sear])" to the Tyropu on valley remains of 2 city gates

      were found, and doubtful indications

      6. Ruins of of 2 others. The ruins of the first of Ancient these gates are now included in the Gates new extension of the Anglo-German

      cemetery. The gate had door sills, with sockets, of 1 periods superimposed upon each other; the width of the entrance was X ft. 10 in. during the earliest, and X ft. at the latest period. The character of the masonry tended to show that, the gat e belonged to t he upper wall, which is appar ently entirely of the Christian era. If this is so, this Cannot be the "Gate of the Gai" of Neh 3 13, although the earli T gate may have occupied this site. Bliss suggests as a probable position for this gate an interval bet ween t he two contiguous towers IV and V, a lit t le farther to the E.

      Another gate was a small one, 4 ft. 10. in. wide, marked only by t he cut t ings in the rock for the door sockets. It lay si little to theW. of the city gate next t o be described, and bot h from it s posit ion and

      its insignificance, it does not appear to have been an entrance to the city; it may, as Bliss suggests, have given access to a tower, now destroyed.

      The second great city gateway was found some 200 ft. S. of the ttirki t <>l Hamra, close to the south eastern angle of the ancient wall. The existing remains are bonded into walls of the earlier period, but. the three superimposed door sills, with their sockets to be seen uncovered today in silu mark three distinct, periods of long duration. The gate gave access to the great main street running down the Tyropu on, underneath which ran a great rock-cut, drain, which probably traversed the whole central valley of the city. During the last two periods of t he gate s use, a tower was erected at the exact, southeastern angle to protect the entrance. The 1 earliest remains here probably belong to the Jewish kings, and it. is very probable that we have here the gate called by Neh (3 13) the "Dung Gate." Bliss considered that it might be the "Fountain Gate" (Neh 3 15), which, however, was probablv more; to the E., although Bliss could find no remains of it surviving. The repairs and alterations here have; been so extensive that its disappearance is in no way surprising. The Foun tain Gate is almost, certainly identical with the "Gate between the Two Walls," through which Zedekiah and his men of war fled (2 K 25 4; Jer 39 4; 52 7).

      The most definite account of the old walls is that of Jos (BJ , V, iv, 1, 2), and though it referred pri marily to the existing walls of his day,

      7. Josephus it is a convenient one for commencing Description the historical survey. He describes of the Walls three walls. The first wall "began

      on the N., at the tower called Ilippi- cus, and extended as far as the Xistus, and then joining at the Council House, ended at the west ern cloister of the temple." On the course of this section of the wall there is no dispute. The tower Hippicus was close to the present Jaffa Gate 1 , and the wall ran from here almost due W. to the temple-area along the southern edge of the western arm of the Tyropceon (see III, 2, above). It is probable that the Hard cd Dawaych, a street run ning nearly parallel with the neigh-

      8. First boring "David Street," but high up Wall above it, lies above the foundations

      of this wall. It must have crossed the main Tyropoeon near the Tank bah cs Silsilel, and joined the western cloisters close to where the Mi h !,</>/( h, the present "Council House," is sit uated.

      Jos traces the southern course of the first wall thus: "It. began at the same place [i.e. Hippicus], and extended through a place called liethso to the gate of the Essenes; and after that it went south ward, having its bending above the fountain Siloam, when it also bends again toward the E. at Solomon s Pool, and reaches as far as a certain place which they called Ophlas, where it was joined to the eastern cloister of the temple." Although the main course of this wall has now been followed with pick and shovel, several points are still uncertain. Bethso is not known, but must have been close to the southwestern angle, which, as we have seen, was situated where "Bishop Gobat s School" is today. It is very probably identical with the "Tower of the Furnaces" of Neh 3 11, while the "Gate of the Essenes" must have been near, if not identical with, the "Gate of the Gai" of ver 13. The description of Jos certainly seems to imply that the mouth of the Siloam aqueduct ("fountain of Siloam") and the pools were both outside the fortification. We have seen from these indications in the underground remains that this was the case at one period. Solomon s Pool is very probably represented by the



      modern Birkctd Hamra. It is clour that the wall from here to the southeastern angle of the temple- platform followed the edge of the southeastern hill, and coincided farther north with the old wall ex cavated by Warren. As will be shown below, this first wall was the main fortification of the city from the time of the kings of Judah onward. In the time of Jos, this first wall had 60 towers.

      Probable Course of the Three Walls Described by Josephus.

      The "Sccnnrt Wall" w:m |.r..lialily;i.|,l...l in I IIP .lays nf til.- HasmoiioaM rul.-rs tlio "Third Wall" was coininenrecl l,v Hcrud A-rippa 1 and hurnu.tly tini.-lu-il shortly licfW.- thi; .-irge liy Titus.

      The Second Wall of Jos "took its beginning from that gate which they called ( icmiath, which be longed to the first wall: it only en- 9. Second compassed the northern quarter of the Wall city and reached as far as the tower

      Antonia" (ib). In no part of Jerus topography has there been more disagreement than upon this wall, both as regards its curve and as regards its date of origin. Unfortunately, we have no idea at all where the "date ( Icnnath" was. The Tower Antonia we know. The line must have passed in a curved or zigzag direction from some unknown point on the first wall, i.e. between the Jaffa date and the Haram to the Antonia. A con siderable number of authorities in the past and a few careful students today would identify the general course of this wall with that of the modern northern wall. The greatest objections to this view are that no really satisfactory alternative course has been laid down for the third wall (see below), and that it must have run far N. of the Antonia, a course which does not seem to agree with the description of Jos, which states that the wall "went up" to the Antonia. On the other hand, no certain remains of any city wall within the present north wall have ever been found; fragments have been reported by various observers (e.g. the piece referred to as forming the eastern wall of the so-called "Pool of Hezekiah"; see VII, ii, below), but in an area so frequently desolated and rebuilt upon where the demand for squared stones must always have been great it is probable that the traces, if surviving at all, are very scanty. This is the case; with the south wall excavated by Bliss (see VI), and that neighborhood has for many

      centuries been unbuilt upon. It is quite probable that the area included within the second wall may have been quite small, merely the buildings which clustered along the sides of the Tyropoeon. Its 40 towers may have been small and built close together, because the position was, from the mili tary aspect, weak. It must be remembered that it was the unsatisfactory state of the second wall which necessitated a third wall. There is no abso lute reason why it may not have excluded tin- greater part of the northwestern hill and with it the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre but there is no proof that it did. The date of the second wall is unknown (see below).

      This third wall, which was commenced after the time of Christ by Herod Agrippa I, is described in more detail by Jos. It was begun 10. Third upon an elaborate plan, but was not Wall finished in its original design because

      Agrippa feared Claudius Caesar, "lest he should suspect that so strong a wall was built in order to make some innovation in public affairs" (HJ , V, iv, 2). It, however, at the time of the siege, was of a breadth of over 18 ft., and a height of 40 ft., and had 90 massive towers. Jos describes it as beginning at the tower Ilippicus (near (he Jaffa date), "where it reached as far as the north quarter of the city, and the tower Psephinus." This might} tower, 13o ft. high, was at the northwestern corner and overlooked the whole city. From it, according to Jos (BJ , V, vi, 3), there was a view of Arabia (Moab) at sunrising, and also of "the utmost limits of the Ileb possessions at the Sea westward." From this corner the wall turned eastward until it came over against the monuments of Helene of Adiabeno, a statement, however, which must be read in connection with another passage (Ant, XX, iv, 3), where it says that this tomb "was distant no more than 3 furlongs from (lie city of Jerus." The wall then "extended to a very great length" and passed by the sepulchral caverns of tin- kings which may well be the so-called "Solomon s Quarries," and it then bent at the "Tower of the Corner," at a monument which is called the Monu ment of the Fuller (not identified), and joined to the old wall at the Kidron valley.

      The commonly accepted theory is that a great part of this line of wall is that pursued by the modern north wall, and KaTat d Jultid, or rather the foundation of it, that marks the site of Psephinus. The Damascus date is certainly on the line of some earlier gate. The "Tower of the Corner" was prob ably about where the modern Herod s date is, or a little more to the E., and the course of the wall was from here very probably along the southern edge of the "St. Anne s Valley," joining on to corner of ihellnrfini a little S. of the present St. Stephen s date. This course of the wall fits in well with the description of Jos. If the so-called "Tombs of the Kings" are really those of Queen Helena of Adiabene and her family, then the distance given as 3 fur longs is not as far out as the distance to the modern wall; the distance is actually 3^ furlongs.

      Others, following the learned Dr. Robinson, find it impossible to believe that the total circuit of the walls was so small, and would carry the third wall considerably farther north, making the general line of the modern north wall coincide with the second wall of Jos. The supporters of this view point to the description of the extensive view from Psephinus, and contend that this presupposed a site on still higher ground, e.g. where the present Russian buildings now are. They also claim that the state ment that the wall came "over against" the monu ment of Queen Helena certainly should mean very much nearer that, monument than the present walls. Dr. Robinson and others who have followed him



      have pointed to various fragments which they claim to have been pieces of t lie missing wall. The present, writer, after very many years residence in Jems, watching the buildings which in the last 25 years have sprung up over the area across which this line of wall is claimed to have run, has never seen _ a trace of wall foundations or of fosse which was in the very least convincing; while on the other hand this area now being rapidly covered by the modern suburb of Jerus presents almost everywhere below the surface virgin rock. Then 1 is no evidence of any more buildings than occasional scattered Horn villas, with mosaic floors. The present writer has rather unwillingly come to the opinion that the city walls were never farther north than the line they follow today. With respect to the objection raised that there could not possibly have been room enough between the two walls for the "Camp of the As syrians," where Titus pitched his camp (/^/, V, vii, 3), any probable line for the second wall would leave a mean of 1,000 ft. between the two walls, and in several directions considerably more. The proba ble position of the "Camp of the Assyrians" would, according to this view, be in the high ground (the northwestern hill) now occupied by the Christian quarter of the modern city. The question of what the population of Jerus was at this period is dis cussed in IX, 49, below. For the other great build ings of the city at this period, see also IX, 43-44, below.

      Taking then the walls of Jerus as described by Jos, we may work backward and see how the walls

      ran in earlier periods. The third wall 11. Date of does not concern vis any more, as it Second was built after the Crucifixion. With

      Wall respect to the second wall, there is a

      great deal of difference of opinion re garding its origin. Some consider, like Sir Charles Watson, that it does not go back earlier than the

      Probable Course of Walls and Position of the Principal

      (ititcs from Hozckiah till Long after Nehemiah.

      (Tho N.E. corner is necessarily doubtful.)

      N.B. The fortress /ic.n, r. nainod liy David "City of David," became in later times "Akra," the fortress of the Syrians.

      Hasmoneans; whereas others (e.g. G. A. Smith), be cause of the expression in 2 Ch 32 5 that Ilezekiah, after repairing the wall, raised "another wall with out," think that this wall goes back as far as this

      monarch. The evidence is inconclusive, but the most probable view seems to be that the "first wall," as described by Jos, was the only circuit of wall from the kings of Judah down to the 2d cent. BC, and perhaps later.

      The most complete Scriptural description we

      have of the walls and gates of Jerus is that given by

      Nehemiah. His account is valuable,

      12. Nehe- not only as a record of what he did, miah s but of what had been the state of the Account of walls before the exile. It is perfectly the Walls clear that considerable traces of the

      old walls and gates remained, and that his one endeavor was to restore what had been before even though it produced a city enclosure much larger than necessary at his time. The relevant passages arc Neh 2 13-15, the account of his night ride; 3 1-32, the description of the re building; and 12 31-39, the routes of the two pro cessions at the dedication.

      In the first account we learn that Nehemiah went out by night by the VALLEY GATE (q.v.), or

      Gate of the Gai, agate (that is, opening)

      13. Valley into the Gai Hinnom, and probably at Gate or near the gate discovered by Bliss

      in what is now part of the Anglo- German cemetery; he passed from it to the Dung Gate, and from here viewed the walls of the city.

      This, with considerable assurance, may

      14. Dung be located at the ruined foundations Gate of a gate discovered by Bliss at the

      southeastern corner of the city. The line of wall clearly followed the south edge of the southwestern hill from the Anglo-German cemetery to this point. He then proceeded to the Fountain

      Gate, the site of which has not been re-

      15. Fountain covered, but, as there must have been Gate water running out here (as today) from

      the mouth of the Siloam tunnel, is very appropriately named here. Near by was the KING S POOL (q.v.), probably the pool now deeply buried which is today represented by the Birket el Hamra. Here Nehemiah apparently thought of turning into the city, "but there was no place for the beast that was under me to pass" (2 14), so he went up by the Nahal (Kidron), viewed the walls from there, and then retraced his steps to the Valley Gate. There is another possibility, and that is that the King s Pool was the pool (which certainly existed) at Gihon, in which case the Fountain Gate may also have been in that neighborhood.

      All the archaeological evidence is in favor of the wall having crossed the mouth of the Tyropoeon by the great dam at this time, and the propinquity of this structure to the Fountain Gate is seen in Neh 3 15, where we read that Shallum built the Fountain Gate "and covered it, and set up the doors thereof .... and the bars thereof, and the wall of the pool of Shelah [see SILOAM] by the KING S GARDEN [q.v.], even unto the stairs that go down from the city of David." All these localities were close together at the mouth of el Wad.

      Passing from here we can follow the circuit of the city from the accounts of the rebuilding of the walls in Neh 3 15 f. The wall from here was carried "over against the sepulchres of David," which we know to have stood in the original "City of David" above Gihon, past "the pool that was made," and "the house of the Gibbonm" (mighty men) both unknown sites. It is clear that the wall is being carried along the edge of the south eastern hill toward the temple. We read of two angles in the wall both needed by the geographical conditions the high priest s house, of "the tower that standeth out" (supposed to have been un earthed by Warren), and the wall of the OPHEL (q.v.).




      There is also mention of a Water Gate in this

      position, which is just where one would expect a

      road to lead from the temple-area down

      16. Water to Gihon. From the great number of Gate companies engaged in building, it may

      be inferred that all along this stretch of wall from the Tyropceon to the temple, the de struction of the walls had been specially great.

      Proceeding N., we come to the Horse Gate.

      This was close to the entry to the king s house

      (2 K 11 10; 2 Ch 23 15; Jer 31

      17. Horse 40). The expression used, "above" Gate the Horse Gate, may imply that the

      gate itself may have been uninjured; it may have been a kind of rock-cut passage or tunnel. It cannot have been far from the present southeastern angle of the city. Thence "repaired the priests, every one over against his own house" the houses of these people being to the E. of the temple. Then comes the GATE OP HAMMIPHKAD (q.v.), the ascent (or "upper chamber," m) of the

      corner, and finally the SHEEP GATE

      18. Sheep (q.v.), which was repaired by the Gate goldsmiths and merchants. This last

      gate was the point from which the circuit of the repairs was traced. The references, Neh 3 1.31; 12 39, clearly show that it was at the eastern extremity of the north wall.

      The details of the gates and buildings in the north wall as described by Nehemiah, are difficult, and certainty is impossible; this side must always neces sarily have been the weak side for defence because it was protected by no, or at best by very little, natural valley. As has been said, we cannot be certain whether Nehemiah is describing a wall which on its western two-thirds corresponded with the first or the second wall of Jos. Taking the first, theory as probable, we may plan it as follows: W. of the Sheep Gate two towers are mentioned (Neh 3 1; 12 39). Of these HAXANEI, (q.v.) was more easterly than HAMMEAH (q.v.), and, too, it would appear from Zee 14 10 to have been the most northerly point of the city. Probably then two towers occupied the important hill where afterward stood the fortress Baris and, later, the Antonia. At the Hammeah tower the wall would descend into the Tyropoeon to join the eastern extremity of the first wall where in the time of Jos stood the Council House (BJ , V, iv, 2).

      It is generally considered that the FISH GATE

      (q.v.) (Neh 33; 12 39; Zeph 1 10; 2 Ch 33

      14) stood across the Tyropoeon in

      19. Fish much the same way as the modern Gate Damascus Gate does now, only con siderably farther S. It was probably

      so called because here the men of Tyre sold their fish (Neh 13 16). It is very probably identical with the "Middle Gate" of Jer 39 3. With this region are associated the MISHXEH (q.v.) or "sec ond quarter" (Zeph 1 10m) and the MAKTESH (q.v.) or "mortar" (Zeph 1 11).

      The next gate westward, after apparently a con siderable interval, is tr d in EV the "OLD GATE" (q.v.), but is more correctly the "Gate

      20. "Old of the old . . . ."; what the word thus Gate" qualified is, is doubtful. Neh 36m

      suggests "old city" or "old wall," whereas Mitchell (Wall of Jems according to the hook of Neh) proposes "old pool," taking the pool in question to be the so-called "Pool of Hczekiah." According to the view here accepted, that the account of Neh refers only to the first wall, the ex pression "old wall" would be peculiarly suitable. as here must have been some part of that first wall which went back unaltered to the time of Solomon. The western wall to the extent of 400 cubits had been rebuilt after its destruction by Jehoash, king

      of Israel (see IX, 12, below), and Manasseh had repaired all the wall from Gihon round N. and then W. to the Fish Gate. This gate has also been identified with the Slia*ar ha-Pinndh, or "Corner Gate," of 2 K 14 13; 2 Ch 25 23; Jer 31 38; Zee 14 10, and with the Sha\\\\\\\\ir ha-Ri shon, or "First Gate, "of Zee 14 10, which is identified as the same as the Corner Gate; indeed ri shon ("first") is prob ably a textual error for i/axhdn ("old")- If this is so, this "Gate of the Old" or "Corner Gate" must, have stood near the northwestern corner of the city, somewhere near the present Jaffa Gate.

      The next gate mentioned is the Gate of Ephraim

      (Neh 12 39), which, according to 2 K 14 13;

      2 Ch 25 23, was 400 cubits or 600 ft,

      21. Gate of from the Corner Gate. This must Ephraim have been somewhere on the western

      wall; it is scarcely possible to believe, as some writers would suggest, that there could have been no single gate between the Corner Gate near the northwestern corner and the Valley Gate on the southern wall.

      The "Broad Wall" appears to correspond to the

      southern stretch of the western wall

      22. Tower as far as the "Tower of the Furnaces" of the or ovens, which was probably the Furnaces extremely important corner tower

      now incorporated in "Bishop Gobat s School." This circuit of the walls satisfies fairly well all the conditions; the difficulties are chiefly on the N. and W. It is a problem how the Gate of Ephraim comes to be omitted in the account of the repairs, but G. A. Smith suggests that it may be indicated by the expression, "throne of the governor beyond the river" (Xeh 3 7). See, however, Mitchell (loc.cit.). If the theory be accepted that the second wall already existed, the Corner Gate and the Fish Gate will have to be placed farther north.

      Probable Course of Solomon s Wall.

      In OT as in later times, some of the gates appear to have received different names at various times.

      Thus the Sheep Gate, at the north- 23. The eastern angle, appears to be identical Gate of with the Gate of Benjamin or Upper Benjamin Gate of Benjamin (Jer 20 2; 37 13;

      38 7); the prophet was going, appar ently, the nearest way to his home in Anathoth.





      The Tpper (late of (he Temple (2 K 15 of>; 2 Ch 27 :i; cf 2 Ch 23 20; Ezk 9 2) is probably another name for the same gate. It 24. Upper must be remembered the gates were, Gate of the as excavations have- shown us, re- Temple duced to a minimum in fortified sites: they were sources of weakness.

      The general outline of the walls and gates thus followed is in the main that exist ing from Nehemiah back until the early Judaea n monarchy, and possi bly to Solomon.

      centered round it. The three sources of supply have been (1) springs, (2) cisterns, (o) aqueducts.

      (1) Tin: inilnrul .s /;//// f/.s have been described in II, ;>; but connected with them, and esp. with the city s greatest and most venerated source, the (iihon, there are certain antiquarian remains of great interest.

      (a) The "Virgin s Fount," ancient Gihon, arises,

      as has been described (II, 8), in a rocky cleft in the

      Kid rou valley bottom; under natural

      1. Gihon: conditions the water would run along

      The Natural the valley bed, now deeply buried

      Spring under debris of the ancient city, and

      doubtless when the earliest settlers

      made their dwellings in the caves (which have been

      excavated) on the sides of the valley near the spring,


      Of the various destructions and repairs which occurred during the time of the monarchy, a suffi cient account is given in IX below, on 25. The the history. Solomon was probably Earlier the first to inclose the northwestern

      Walls hill within the walls, and to him usually

      is ascribed all the northern and western stretch of the "First Wall"; whether his wall ran down to the mouth of the Tyropocon, or only skirted the summit of the northwestern hill is un certain, but, the latter view is probable. David was protected by the powerful fortifications of the Jebusites, which probably inclosed only the south eastern hill; he added to the defences the fortress MILLO (q.v.). It is quite possible that the original Jebusitecity had but one gate, on the N. (2 S 15 2), but the city must have overflowed its narrow limits during David s reign and have needed an extended and powerful defence, such as Solomon made, to secure- the capital. For the varied history and situation of the walls in the post-Bib, period, see IN ("History"), below.

      VII. Antiquarian Remains Connected with the Water- Supply. - 1 n a cit y like Jerus, where the prob lem of a water-supply must always have been one of the greatest, it is only natural that some of the most ancient and important works should have

      they and their flocks lived on the banks of a stream of running water in a sequestered valley among waterless hills. From, however, a comparatively early period at the least 2000 BC efforts were made to retain some of the water, and a solid stone dam was built which converted the sources into a pool of considerable depth. Either then, or some what later, excavations were made in the cliffs over hanging the pool, whereby some at least of these waters were conducted, by means of a tunnel, into the heart of the southeastern hill, "Ophel," so that the source could be reached from within the city walls. There are today two systems of tunnels which arc usually classed as one under the name of the "Siloam aqueduct," but the two systems are probably many centuries apart in age. The older tunnel begins in a cave near the source and then runs westward for a distance of 67 ft.; at the inner

      end of the tunnel there is a perpendicu- 2. The lar shaft which ascends for over 40 ft.

      Aqueduct and opens into a lofty rock-cut passage of the which runs, with a slight lateral curva-

      Canaanites ture, to the N., in the direction of the

      surface. The upper end has been partially destroyed, and the roof, which had fallen in, was long ago partially restored by a masonry arch. At this part of the passage the floor is




      abruptly interrupted across its whole width by a deep chasm which Warren partially excavated, !mt which Parker lias since conclusively shown to end blindly. It is clear thai this great gallery, which is 8 to 9 ft. wide, and in places as high or higher, was constructed (a natural cavern possibly utilized in the process) to enable the inhabitants of the walled- in city above it to reach the spring. It is in fact a similar work to the great water-passage at GEZEK (q.v.), which commenced in a rock-cut pit 26 ft. deep and descended with steps, to a depth of 94 ft. 6 in. below the level of the rock surface; the slop ing passage was 23 ft. high and 13 ft. broad. This passage which could be dated with certainty as before 1500 BC, and almost certainly as early as 2000 BC, was cut out with flint knives and apparently was made entirely to reach a great underground source of water. The discovery of this ( iezer well-passage has thrown a flood of light upon the "Warren s Shaft" in Jerus, which would appear to have

      3. Warren s been made for an exactly similar pur- Shaft pose. The chasm mentioned before

      may have been an effort to reach the source from a higher point, or it may have been made, or later adapted, to prevent ingress by means of the system of tunnels into the city. This passage is in all probability the watercourse" ("1122, gin- nur) of 2 S 5 8 up which, apparently, Joab and his men (1 Ch 11 6) secretly made their way; they must have waded through the water at the source, ascended the perpendicular shaft (a feat performed in 1910 by some British officers without any assistance from ladders), and then made their way into the heart of the city along the great tunnel. Judging by the similar Gezer water tunnel, this great work may not only have 1 existed in David s time, but may have been constructed as much as 1,000 years before.

      The true Siloam tunnel is a considerably later

      work. It branches off from the older aqueduct at

      a point 67 ft. from the entrance, and

      4. Heze- after running an exceedingly winding kiah s course of 1,682 ft., it empties itself "Siloam" into the Pool of Siloam (total length Aqueduct 1,749 ft.). The whole canal is rock cut ;

      it is 2 to 3 ft . wide, and varies in height from 16ft. at the south end to 4 ft . (Jin. at the lowest- point , near t he middle. The condil ion of t his t unnel has recently been greatly changed through Captain Parker s party having cleared out the accumulated silt of centuries; before this, parts of the channel could be traversed only with the greatest, difficulty and discomfort. The primitive nature of this con struction is shown by the many false passages made, and also by the extensive curves which greatly add to its length. This latter may also be partly due to the workmen following line s of soft, strata . M. Clermont-CJanneau and others have thought that one or more of the great curves may have been made deliberately to avoid the tombs of the kings of Judah. The method of construction of the tunnel is narrated in the Siloam Inscription (see SILOAM). It was begun simultaneously from each end, and the two parties met in the middle. It is a remarkable thing that there is a difference of level of only one foot at each end; but, the lofty height of the soul hern end is probably due to a lowering of the floor here after the junction was effected. It is practically certain that this great work is that referred to in 2 K 20 20: Now the rest of the acts of Hezekiah, and all his might, and how he made the pool, and the conduit, and brought water into the city, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?" And in 2 Ch 32 30: "This same Hezekiah also stopped the upper spring of the waters of Gihon, and brought them straight down on the west side of the city of David."

      In addition to these two conduits, which have a direct. Scriptural interest, there are remains of at

      leas), two other aqueducts which take 5. Other their origin at the Virgin s Fount Aqueducts one a channel deeply cut in rock along at Gihon the western sides of the Kidron valley,

      found by Capt ain Parker, and t he of her a built channel, lined with very good cement, which takes its rise at a lower level than any of the other

      Tlio Water-Supply.

      conduits close to the before-mentioned rocky cleft from which the water rises, and runs in a verv wind ing direction along the western side of the Kidron. Tliis the present writer has described in / AVsS, 1902. One of these, perhaps more probably the former, may_be the conduit, which is referred to as Shiloah (sMo a A), or "conducted" (Isa 8 (J), before the const ruction of Hezekiah s work (see SILOAM).

      There are other caves and rock-cut, channels around the ancient Gihon which cannot, fully be described here, but which abundantly confirm the sand it y of 1 he site.

      (h) Bir Euunl) has a depth of 12o ft.; the water collects at the bottom in a large rock-hewn chamber, and it, is clear that it has been deep s Bir ened at some period, because at, the Eyyub depth of 113 ft. there is a collecting chamber which is now replaced by I lie deeper one. Various rock-cut passages or si air- cases wen- found by Warren in the neighborhood of this well.

      (2) Tin: cid<-nix a ml taiilcn. Every ancient, site in the hill country of Pal is riddled with cisterns for the storage of rain water. In 7. Varieties Jerus for very many centuries the of Cisterns private resident has depended largely upon the water collected from the roof of his house for all domestic purposes. Such cisterns lie either under or alongside the dwelling. Many of the earliest of these excavations are bottle-shaped, with a comparatively narrow mouth cut, through the hard Mizzch ami a large rounded excavation made in the underlying Mdekeh(see II, 1 above). Other ancient cisterns arc cavities hewn in the rock, of irregular shape, with a roof of harder rock and often several openings. The later forms an; vaulted over, and are either cut in the rock or sometimes partially built in the super-lying rubbish.




      For mere public purposes large cisterns were made in the IJnniin, or teni|)le-are:t. Some 3 dozen are known and planned; (lie largest is calculated to contain 3,000.000 gallons. Such structures were made lamely for the religious ritual, hut, as we shall SOP they li.-ivc been supplied by other sources than the rainfall. In many parts of the city open tanks have been const ruct <<!. such a tank being known in \\\\\\\\rab. as a birkeh, or, followed by :i vowel, birket. With most of these there is considerable doubt as to their date of const ruct ion. but probably none oi them, in their present form at any rate, antedates the Horn period.

      Within the city walls the largest reservoir is I /) ///,(/ Ixrael which extends from the northeastern aimle of the llnriun westward for 3i>0 8. Birket ft. It is I2n ft. wide and was origi- Israel nally 80 f t . deep, hut has in recent years

      been largely tilled up by the city s refuse. The eastern and western ends of this pool are partially rock-cut and partly masonry, _t he masonry of the former being a great dam 45ft. thick, t he lower part of which is continuous with the ancient eastern wall of the temple-area. The sides of the pool are entirely masonry because this reservoir is built across the width of the valley referred to before (III, 2) as St. Anne s Valley." Other parts of this valley are filled with debris to the depth of KM) ft. The original bottom of the reservoir is covered with a layer of about 1<) in. of very hard concrete and cement. There was a great conduit at the eastern end of the pool built of mas sive stones, and connected with the pool by a per forated stone with three round holes ~>\\\\\\\\ in. in diame ter. The position of this outlet shows that all water over a depth of 22 ft. must have flowed away. Some authorities consider this pool to have been prcexilic. By early Christian pilgrims it was identi fied as the "Sheep" Pool" of .In 5 2, and at a later period, until quite recent times, it was supposed to have been the Pool of Bethesda.

      9. Pool of The discovery, a few years ago, of the Bethesda long-lost I ixrina in the neighborhood

      of the "Church of St. Anne," which was without doubt the Pool of Bethesda of the .~>th rent. AD, has caused this identification to be abandoned. See BKTIIKSDA.

      To the W. of the Hirket Intel are the "twin pools which extend under the roadway in the neighbor hood of the "Ecce Homo" arch. The

      10. The western one is 10~> ft. by 20 ft. and the Twin Pools eastern 127ft. by 2()ft. M.Clermont-

      Ganneau considers them to be iden tical with the Pool Struthius of Jos (/*./, V, xi, 4), but others, considering that they are actually made in the fosse; of the Antonia, give them a later date of origin. In connection with these pools a great aqueduct was discovered in 1S71, 2.1-3 ft. wide and in places 12 ft . high, running from the neighborhood of the Damascus Gate --but destroyed farther north and from the pools another aqueduct runs in the direct ion of the IJaram.

      On the northwestern hill, between the Jaffa Gate and the Church of the Sepulchre there is a large

      open reservoir, known to the modern

      11. Birket inhabitants of the city as liirkd IJmti- Hammam mam d liatrak, "the Pool of the Pa- el Batrak triarch s Bath." It is 240 ft. long

      (X. to S.), 144 ft. broad and 1!) 21 ft. deep. The cement lining of the bottom is cracked and practically useless. The eastern wall of this pool is particularly massive, and forms the base of the remarkably level street Hunt en Xa^irn, or "Christian Street"; it is a not improbable theory that this is actually a fragment of the long-sought "second" wall. If so, the pool, which is proved to have once extended (H) ft. farther north, may have

      been constructed originally as part of the fosse. On the other hand, this pool appears to have been the Amygdalon Pool, or "Pool of the Tower" CpbTt Ein r2~i2, b rt khatk ha-mighdaliri) , men tioned by .Jos (/;./, V, xi, 4), which was the scene of the activities of the 10th legion, and this seems inconsistent with the previous theory, as the events described seem to imply that the second wall ran outside the pool. The popular travelers name, "Pool of Ile/,ekiah," given to this reservoir is due to the theory, now quite discredited, that this is the pool referred to in _ K 20 20, "He made the pool, and the conduit, and brought water into the city." Other earlier topographists have identified it as the "upper pool" of Isa 7 > , 36 2.

      The /)///,-(/ lliinnniun d Jlulmk is supplied with water from (he Birket Mamilla, about \\\\\\\\ mile to the W. This large pool, 21)3 ft. long by 12. Birket l .)3 ft. broad and HH ft. deep, lies Mamilla in the midst of a large; Moslem ceme tery at the head of the Wady Mes, the first beginning of the \\\\\\\\Vudy er Riibdbi (Hinnom). The aqueduct which connects the two pools springs from the eastern end of the Jiirl.-rt Mamilla, runs a somewhat winding course and enters the city near the .Jaffa ( late. The aqueduct is in bad repair, and the water it carries, chiefly during heavy rain, is filthy. In the Middle Ages it was supposed that this was the "Upper Pool of Gihon" (see GlHON), but this and likewise the "highway of the FULLER S Fn-:u>" (q.v.) are now located elsewhere. Wilson and others have suggested that if is the "Serpent s Pool" of Jos (Ji.I, V, iii, 2). Titus leveled "all the places from Scopus to Herod s monument which adjoins the pool called, that of the Serpent." Like many such identifications, there; is not very much to be said for or against it ; it is probable that the, pool existed at the- time of the sie-ge. It is likely that this is the Helh Mcuui of the Talm (Talm Bab, Erubliln 5ll>; Sanli<-iUu ut- 2ia; B re j sh~ilh Kabba 51). The liirkd r.s tiultnn is a large pool or, more strictly spe aking, inclosure ")-")5 ft. X. and S. by 220 ft. E. and W. It is bounded on 13. Birket the- \\\\\\\\V. and N. by a great curve of the es Sultan low-level aqueduct, as it passes along and then across the \\\\\\\\Vady cr Rdbdbi. The southern side consists of a massive dam across the valley over which the Bethlehem carriage road runs. The name may signify either the "great" pool or be connected with the fact that it was re constructed in the 10th cent . by the sultan Suleiman ibn Selim, as is re-corded on an inscription upon a wavside fountain upon the southern wall. This pool is registered in the cartulary of the Holy Sepulchre as the Lacus German!, after the name of a knight of Germanus, who built or renovated the pool in 1 1 70 AD. Probably a great part of t he- pool is a catchment area, and the true reservoir is the rock-cut birkeh at the southern end, which has recently been cleaned out. It is extremely difficult to believe that uneler any conditions any large pro- port ion of the whole; area could ever have even been filleel. Today the reservoir at the lower end holds, aft er t he rainy season, some 10 or 12 ft . of very dirty water, chiefly the street drainage of the Jaffa road, while* the^ upper two-thirds of the inclosure is used as a cattle market on Fridays. The water is now used for sprinkling the dusty roads in dry seasons. The> Pool of Siloam and the now dry Birket el Un mm are de-scribed under SILOAM (q.v.).

      There are other tanks of considerable size in and around the city, e.g. the Birket Silti Miriam, near "St. Stephen s Gate," an uncemented pool in the Wady Joz, connected with which there is a rock- cut aqueduct and e>thers, but they are not of suffi cient historical importance to merit description here.




      (3) The conduits bringing water to the city from a distance are called the "high-level" and "low- level" aqueducts respectively, because

      14. "Solo- they reached the city at different levels mon s the former probably somewhere Pools" near the present Jaffa Ciate, the latter

      at the temple-platform.

      The low-level aqueduct which, though out of

      repair, can still be followed along its whole course,

      conveyed water from three great pools

      15. Low- in the Wady ^ A rids, 7 miles S. of Level Jerus. They are usually called "Solo- Aqueduct mon s pools," in reference perhaps

      partly to Eccl 26: "I made me pools of water, to water therefrom the forest where trees were reared," but, as any mighty work in Pal is apt to be referred to the wise king of Israel, much stress cannot be laid on the name. These three storage reservoirs are constructed across the breadth of the valley, the lowest and largest being 5S2 ft. long by 177 ft. broad and, at the lowest end, 50 ft. deep. Although the overflow waters of \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\in cs *SY//<7/, commonly known as the "sealed fountain" (cf Cant 4 12), reach the pools, the chief function was probably to collect the flood waters from the winter rains, and the water was passed from tank to tank after purification. There are in all four springs

      P L A IN

      or THE




      in this valley which supply the aqueduct which still conveys water to Bethlehem, where it passes through the hill by means of a tunnel and then, after running, winding along the sides of the hill, it enters another tunnel now converted into a storage tank for Jerus; from this it runs along the mountain sides and along

      the southern slopes of the site of Jerus to the Ilararn. The total length of this aqueduct is nearly 12 miles, but at a later date the supply was increased by the construction of a long extension of the conduit for a further 28 miles to Wdily *Arrfib on the road to Hebron, another 5 miles directly S. of the pools. Here, too, there is a reservoir, the Birket el *Arrftb, for the collection of the flood-water, and also several small springs, which are conducted in a number of underground rock-cut channels to the aqueduct. The total length of the low-level aqueduct is about 40 miles, and the fall in level from Birket el *Arrtib (2,645 ft. above sea-level) at its far end to el Kds, the termination in the Harani Jerus (2,410 ft. above sea-level), is 235 ft.

      The high-level aqueduct commences in a remark able chain of wells connected with a tunnel, about 4 miles long, in the }\\\\\\\\ ddy Blur, "the

      16. High- Valley of Wells." Upward of 50 Level w r ells along the valley bottom sup- Aqueduct plied each its quotient; the water

      thence passed through a pool where the solid matter settled, and traversed a tunnel 1,700 ft. long into the Art as valley. Here, where its level was 150 ft. above that of the low-level aque duct, the conduit received the waters of the "sealed fountain," and finally "delivered them in Jerus at a level of about 20 ft. above that of the Jaffa Gate" i Wilson). The most remarkable feature of this conduit is the inverted syphon of perforated lime stone blocks, forming a stone t ube 15 in. in diameter, which carried the water across the valley near Rachel s Tomb. On a number of these blocks, Lat inscriptions with the names of cent urions of the

      time of Severus (195 AD) have been

      17. Dates found, and this has led many to fix of Con- a date to this great work. So good struction of an authority as Wilson, however, con- These siders that these inscriptions may refer Aqueducts to repairs, and that the work is more

      probably Herodian. l"nless the ac counts of Jos (BJ, V, iv, 4; II, xvii, <)) are exag gerated, Herod must have had some means of bringing abundant running water into the city at the level obtained by this conduit. The late Dr. Schick even suggested a date as early as Ilyrcanus (135-125 BC). With regard to the low-level aque duct, we have two definite data. First Jos (Ant, XVIII, iii, 2) states that Pontius Pilate "undertook to bring a current of water to Jerus, and did it with the sacred money, and derived the origin of the stream from the distance of 200 furlongs," over 22 miles; in BJ, II, ix, 4 he is said to have brought the water "from 400 furlongs" probably a copyist s error. But these references must cither be to restorations or to the extension from Wady *Arrub to Wady Arias (28 miles), for the low-level aqueduct from the pools to Jerus is certainly the same con struction as the aqueduct from these pools to the "Frank Mountain/ the Herodium, and that, according to the definite statements of Jos (Ant, XV, ix, 4; BJ, I, xxi, 10), was made by Herod the (Ireat. On the whole the usual view is that the high-level aqueduct was the work of Severus, the low-level that of Herod, with an extension south ward by Pontius Pilate.

      Jerus still benefits somewhat from the low-level aqueduct which is in repair as far as Bethlehem, though all that reaches the city comes only through a solitary 4-in. pipe. The high-level aqueduct is hopelessly destroyed and can be traced only in places; the wells of Wady Bldr are choked and use less, and the long winding aqueduct to Wady ^Arrtib is quite broken.

      VIII. Tombs, Antiquarian Remains, and Ec clesiastical Sites. Needless to say all the known ancient tombs in the Jerus area have been rifled of



      their contents long ago. The so-called Tombs ol the Kings in the \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ < nly <l ./< >- are actually the monu ment ol (,)ueen Helena of Adiabene,

      1. The a convert to Judaism (c -IS AD). Jos "Tombs of (A n I, XX, iv, . ,) states that her hones, the Kings" with those of members of her family,

      were buried "at the pyramids," which were 3 in number and distant from Jerus 3 fur longs. A lleb inscription upon a sarcophagus found here by De Saiilcy ran: nrOblS mS , (Vlnlli malkrlhah), "(,>ueen Sarah," possibly the Jewish name of (^ueen Helena.

      On the western side of the \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ndij 1 1 Mi s uhe higher part of Ilinnom),

      is a very interesting Gr

      2. "Herod s tomb containing beauti- Tomb" fully carved sarcophagi.

      These are commonly \\\\\\\\ known as "Herod s Tombs" (although \\\\\\\\^

      Herod the Great was buried on the \\\\\\\\

      Herodiuin), and, according to Schick, \\\\\\\\

      one of the sarcophagi may have be longed to Mariamnc, Herod s wife. A more probable theory is thai this is the tomb of the high priest Ananias; (/*./, V, xii, 2).

      On the eastern side of ihe Kidron,

      near the southeastern angle of the

      llnrntn, are 3 conspicuous

      3. "Absa- tombs. The most, north- lom s erly, Tnntiir Fcr on, goner- Tomb" ally called "Absalom s

      Tomb," is a Gr-Jewish tomb of the Hasmonean ])eriod, and, according to Condor, possibly the tomb of Alexander Jannaeus (Ill)Ii, art. "Jerusalem"). 8. of this is 1 he tra ditional "(irotto of St. .James," which we know by a square Hob inscription over the pillars to be Ihe family tomb of certain members of the priestly family (1 Ch 24 15), of the BemHazlr. It may belong to the century before Christ.

      The adjoining traditional tomb of Zachariah is a monolithic monument cut out of the living rock, 1(> ft. sq. and 30 ft. high. It has square pilasters at the corners, Ionic, pillars between, and a pyramidal top. Its origin is unknown; its traditional name is due to Our Lord s word in Mt 23 3.">; Lk 11 .11 Csee ZACHAKIAH).

      A little farther down the, valley of

      ihe Kidron, at the commencement of

      the village of Siloam, is

      4. The another rock-cut 1omb, the so-called

      "Egyptian Kgyp Tomb, or according to some, Tomb" "ihe tomb of Solomon s Egyp wife."

      It is a monolith IS ft. sq. and 11 ft. high, and the interior has at, one time been used as a chapel. It is now Russian property. It probably belongs to much the same period as the three before- meut ionod t ombs, and, like t hem, shows strong Egyp influence.

      The so-called "Tombs of the Judges" belong to the Horn period, as do the scores of similar excava tions in the same valley. The "Tombs of iho 1 rophots" on the western slopes of the Mount of Olives are now considered to belong to the 4th or 5th Christ ian cent ury.

      Near the knoll over Jeremiah s Grotto, to the W. and NAN ., are a great number of tombs, mostly Christian. The more- northerly members of the group are now included in the property of the Dominicans attached to the Church of St. Stephen, but one, the southernmost, has attracted

      a great deal of attention because it was sup posed by the late General Gordon to be the tomb

      of Christ. In its condition when 6. The found it was without doubt., like its

      "Garden neighbors, a Christian tomb of about Tomb" the ">th cent., and it was full of

      skeletons. Whether it, may originally have boon a Jewish tomb is unproved; it, cer tainly could not have boon recognized as a site of any sanctity until General Gordon promulgated his theory (see / AV- N, 1S92, 120-24; see also GOL- (JOTHA).

      /{[lor fl<de ifTT (Pf.T)

      Plan Showing Results of Warren s Excavations at " Robinson s Arch."

      The Jews greatly venerate a tomb on the eastern

      side of the Wudy el Joz, not far S. of the great

      North Road; they consider it to be

      6. Tomb of the tomb of Simon the Just, but it is "Simon the in all probability not a Jewish tomb Just" at all.

      Only passing mention can here be

      made of certain remains of interest connected with

      the exterior walls of the Hnram. The foundation

      walls of the temple-platform are built,

      7. Other specially upon the E., S. and W., of Antiquities magnificent blocks of smooth, drafted

      masonry with an average height of 3 J- ft . One line, known as the "master course," runs for GOO ft. westward from the southeastern angle, with blocks 7ft. high. Near the southeastern angle at the foundation itself, certain of the blocks wore found by the Palestine Exploration Fund engineers to be marked with Phoen characters, which it was supposed by many at the time of their discovery indicated their Solomonic origin. It is now gen-




      (Tally held that these "masons marks" may just as well have been used in the lime of Herod the (Ireat, and on other grounds it is held that all this magnificent masonry is due to the vast, reconstruc tion of the Temple which this great monarch initiated (see TEMPLE). In the western wall of the Ham in, between the southwestern corner and the "Jewish wailing place," lies "Robinson s Arch." It is the spring of an arch 50 ft. wide, projecting from the temple-wall; the bridge arising from it had a span of 50 ft., and the pier on the farther side was discovered by Warren. Under the bridge ran a contemporary paved Rom street, and beneath the unbroken pavement was found, lying inside a rock aqueduct, a voussoir of an older bridge. This bridge connected the temple-inclosure with the upper city in the days of the Hasinonean kings. It was broken down in 63 BC by the Jews in anticipation of the attack of Pompey (Ant, XIV, iv, 2; B.l , I, vii, 2), but was rebuilt by Herod in 19 BC (HJ, VI, viii, 1 ; vi, 2), and finally destroyed in 70 AD.

      Nearly (500 ft. farther N., along this western temple-wall is Wilson s Arch, which lies under the surface within the causeway which crosses the Tyropccon to the Bah <.s Xilxelch of the llaram; although not itself very ancient there- are here, deeper down, arches belonging to the Herodian causeway which here approached the temple- platform.

      With regard to the common ecclesiastical sites visited by pious pilgrims little need be said here. The congeries of churches that is in- 8. Eccle- eluded under that name of Church siastical of the Holy Sepulchre includes a great Sites many minor sites of the scenes of the

      Passion which have no serious claims. Besides the Holy Sepulchre itself which, apart from its situation, cannot be proved or disproved, as it has actually been destroyed --the only impor tant site is that of "Mount" Calvary." All that can be said is that if the Sepulchre is genuine, then the site may be also; it is today the hollo wed-out

      Robinson s Arch.

      shell of a rocky knoll incased in marble and other stones and riddled with chapels. See GOLGOTHA.

      The coenaculum, close to the Moslem "Tomb of David" (a site which has no serious claims), has been upheld by Professor Sanday (Sacred Sites of the Gospels) as one which has a very strong tradition

      in its favor. The most important evidence is that of Epiphanias, who states that when Hadrian visited Jerus in 130, one of the few buildings left standing was "the little Church of (iod, on the site where the disciples, returning after the Ascension of the Saviour from Olivet, had gone up to the Upper room, for there it had been built, that is to say in the quarter of Zion." In connection with this spot there has been pointed out from early Christian times the site of the House of Caiaphas and the site of the death of the Virgin Mary the Dormitio Sanctae Virginia. It is in consequence of this latter tradition that the German Roman Catholics have now erected here their magnificent, new church of the Dormition. A rival line of traditions locates the tomb of the Virgin in the Kidron valley near Gethsemane, where there is a remarkable under ground chapel belonging to the Greeks.

      IX. History. Pre-Israelite per in/I. The begin nings of Jerus are long before recorded history: at various points in the neighborhood, e.g. at el Bukei\\\\\\\\i to the S.W., and at the northern extremity of the Mount of Olives to the N.E., were very large settlements of Paleolithic, man, long before the dawn of history, as is proved by the enormous quantities of celts scattered over the surface. It is certain that the city s site itself was occupied many centuries before David, and it is a traditional view that the city called SALEM (q.v.) (C,en 14 18), over which Melchizedek was king, was identical with Jerus.

      The first certain reference to this city is about

      1450 BC, when the name Ur-u-salem occurs in

      several letters belonging to the Am

      1. Tell el- Tab correspondence. In 7 of these Amarna letters occurs the name Alxl Kliihn, Corre- and it is clear that this man was spondence "king," or governor of the city, as the

      representative of Pharaoh of Egypt. In this correspondence Abd Khiba represents him self as hard pressed to uphold the rights of his suzerain against the hostile forces which threaten to overwhelm him. Incidentally we may gather that the place was then a fortified city, guarded partly by mercenary Egyp troops, and there are reasons for thinking that the then ruler of Egypt, Amenhotep IV, had made it a sanctuary of his god At en the sun-disc. Some territory, possibly ex tending as far west as Ajalon, seems to have been under the jurisdiction of the governor. Professor Sayce has stated that Abd Khiba was probably a Hittite chief, but this is doubtful. The corre spondence closes abruptly, leaving us in uncer tainty with regard to the fate of the writer, but we know that the domination of Egypt over Pal suffered an eclipse about this time.

      At the time of Joshua s invasion of Canaan,

      ADOXI-ZEDEK (q.v.) is mentioned (Josh 10 1-27)

      as king of Jerus; he united with the

      2. Joshua s kings of Hebron, Jarmuth, Lachish Conquest and Eglon to fight against the Gibe >n-

      ites who had made peace with Joshua; the o kings were defeated and, being captured in hiding at the cave Makkedah, were all slain. An other king, ADOM-UKZEK (q.v.) (whom some identify with Adoni-zedek), \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ as defeated by Judah after the death of Joshua, and after being mutilated was brought to Jerus and died there (Jgs 1 1-7), after which it is recorded (ver 8) that Judah "fought, against Jerus, and took it .... and set the city on fire." But it is clear that the city remained in the hands of the "Jebusites" for some years more (Jgs 1 21; 19 11), although it was theoretically reck oned on the southern border of Benjamin (Josh 15 8; 18 1G.28). David, after he had reigned 1\\\\\\\\ years at Hebron, determined to make the place his capital and, about 1000 BC, captured the city.




      I p to this event it is probable that Jerus was like other contemporary fortified sites, a compara- t ively small place encircled wit h power- 3. Site of fill walls, with but one or perhaps two the Jebu- gates; it is very generally admitted site City that this city occupied the ridge to the S. of the temple long incorrectly called "Ophel." and that its walls stood upon steep rocky scarps above the Kidron valley on t lie one side, and the Tvropu on on the other. We have every reason to believe that the great system of tunnels, known as "Warren s Shaft" (see VII, 15, above) existed all through this period.

      Jerusalem of the Jolmsitos, as Captured by David.

      The account of the capture of Jerus by David is obscure, but it seems a probable explanation of a difficult passage (2 S 5 0-9) if 4. David we conclude that the Jebusites, relying upon the extraordinary strength of their position, challenged David: Thou shalt not come in hither, but the blind and the lame shall turn thee away" (ver 6 m), and that David directed his followers to go up the "watercourse" and smite the "lame and the blind" a term he in his turn applies mockingly to the Jebusites. "And Joab the son of Zeruiah went up first, and was made chief" (1 Ch 11 (5). It seems at least probable that David s men captured the city through a sur prise attack up the great tunnels ( see VI I, 3, above). David having captured the stronghold "Zion," renamed it the "City of David" and took up his residence there 1 ; he added to the strength of the fortifications "round about from the MILLO [q.v.] and onward"; with the assistance of Phoen work men supplied by Hiram, king of Tyre, he built him self "a house of cedar" (2 S 5 11 ; cf 7 2). The ark of Jeh was brought from the house of Obed-edom and lodged in a tent (2 S 6 17) in the "city of David" (cf 1 K 8 1). The threshing-floor of Araunah (2 S 24 IK), or Oman (1 Ch 21 15), the Jebusite, was later purchased as the future site of the temple.

      The Jerus which David captured was small and compact, but there are indications that during his reign it must have increased considerably by the growth of suburbs outside the Jebusite walls. The population must have been increased from several

      sources. The influx of David s followers doubtless

      caused many of the older inhabitants to be crowded

      out of the walled area. There ap-

      5. Expan- pear to have been a large garrison sion of (2 S 16 18; 20 7), many officials and the City priests and their families (2 S 8 16-

      18; 20 23-20; 23 S ff), and the various members of David s own family and their relatives (2 S 6 KMtJ; 14 24.2S; 1 K 1 5.5)5, etc). It is impossible to suppose that all these were crowded into so narrow an area, while the incidental mention t hat Absalom lived two whole years in Jerus wit hout seeing the king s face implies suburbs (2 S 14 24. 28). The new dwellings could probably extend northward toward the site of the future temple and northwestward into and up the Tyropceon valley along the great north road. It is improbable that they could have occupied much of the western hill. With the accession of Solomon, the increased magnificence of the court, the foreign wives and

      their establishments, the new officials

      6. Solomon and the great number of work people

      brought to the city for Solomon s great buildings must necessarily have enormously swelled the resident population, while the recorded build ings of the city, the temple, the king s house, the House of the Daughter of Pharaoh, the House of the Forest of Lebanon, the Throne Hall and the Pillared Hall (1 K 7 1-8) must have altered the whole aspect of the site. In consequence of these new buildings, t he sanctuary together wit h the houses of the common folk, a new wall for the city was necessary, and we have a statement- twice made that Solomon built "the wall of Jerus round about" (1 K 3 1; 9 15); it is also recorded that he built Millo (9 15.24; 11 27), and that "he repaired the breach of the city of David his father" (11 27). The question of the Millo is discussed elsewhere (see MILLO); the breach" re ferred to may have been the connecting wall needed to include the Millo within the complete circle of fortifications, or else some part of David s fortifica tion which his death had left incomplete.

      As regards the "Wall of Jerus" which Solomon built, it is practically certain that it was, on the X.

      and W., that described by Jos as the

      7. Solo- First Wall (see VI, 7 above). The mon s City vast rock-cut scarps at the south- Wall western corner testify to the massive- ness of the building. Whether the

      whole of the southwestern hill was included is a matter of doubt. Inasmuch as there are indicat ions at Bliss s tower (see VI, 4<7 above) of an ancient wall running northeasterly, and inclosing the summit of the southwestern hill, it would appear highly prob able that Solomon s wall followed that line; in this case this wall must have crossed the Tyropceon at somewhat the line of the existing southern wall, and then have run southeasterly to join the western wall of the old city of the Jebusites. The temple and palace buildings were all inclosed in a wall of finished masonry which made it a fortified place by itself as it appears to have been t hrough Heb history and these walls, where external to the rest of the city, formed part of the whole circle of fortification.

      Although Solomon built so magnificent a house for Jeh, he erected in the neighborhood shrines to other local gods (1 K 11 7.8), a lapse ascribed largely to the influence of his foreign wives and con sequent foreign alliances.

      The disruption of the kingdom must have been

      a severe blow to Jerus, which was left the capital, no

      longer of a united state, but of a petty

      8. The tribe. The resources which were at

      Disruption the command of Solomon for the

      (933 BC) building up of the city were suddenly

      cut off by Jeroboam s avowed policy,

      while the long state of war which existed between




      the two peoples ;i state lasting 60 years (1 K 14 30; 15 6.16; 22 44) must have been very inju rious to the growth of commerce and the arts of peace.

      In the 5th year of Rehoboam (928), Shishak

      (Sheshonk) king of Egypt came up against Jems

      (1 K 14 25 ff) and took "the fenced

      9. Invasion cities of Judah" (2 Ch 12 4AV). It of Shishak has been commonly supposed that he (928 BC) besieged and captured Jerus itself, but

      as there is no account of (he destruction of fortifications and as the name of this city has not been deciphered upon the Egyp records of this campaign, it is at least as probable, and is as con sistent with the Scriptural references, that Shishak was bought off with "the treasures of the house of Jeh, and the treasures of (he king s house" and "all the shields of gold which Solomon had made" (1 K 14 26).

      ll is clear that by the reign of Jehoshaphat the city had again largely recovered its importance

      (cf 1 K 22), but in his son Jehoram s

      10. City reign (849-842 BC) Judah was in- Plundered vaded and (he royal house was pillaged by Arabs by Philis and Arabs 2 Ch 21 16-17).

      Ahaziah (842 BCi, .Jehoram s son, came to grief while visiting his maternal relative at Jez- reel, and after being wounded in his chariot, near Ibleam, and expiring at Megiddo, his body was carried to Jerus and there- buried (2 K 9 27 L Ni. Jerus was now the scene* of the dramatic events which center round the usurpation and death of Queen Athaliah (2 K 11 16; 2 Ch 23 15) and the coronation and reforms of her grandson Joash (2 K 12 1-16; 2 Ch 24 1-14). After the death of the good priest. Jehoiada, it is recorded (2 Ch 24 15 i f) that the king was led astray by the princes of Judah and forsook the house of Jeh, as a consequence

      of which the Syrians under Hazael

      11. Hazael came against Judah and Jerus, slew King of the princes and spoiled (he land, Joash Syria giving him much treasure from both Bought Off palace and temple (2 K 12 17.18; (797 BC) 2 Ch 24 23). Finally Joash was as sassinated (2 K 12 20.21; 2 Ch 24

      25) "at the house of Millo, on the way that goeth down to Silla."

      During the reign of Amaziah (797-729 BC), the

      murdered king s son, a victory over Edom appears

      to have so elated (he king that he

      12. Capture wantonly challenged Jehoash of Israel of the City to battle (2K14Sf). The two by Jehoash armies met at Beth-shemesh, and Judah of Israel was defeated and "fled every man to

      his tent." Jerus was unable to offer any resistance to the victors, and Jehoash "brake down the wall of Jerus from the gate of Ephraim unto the corner gate, 400 cubits" and then returned to Samaria, loaded with plunder and hostages (ver 14). Fifteen years later, Amaziah was assassinated iit Lachish whither he had fled from a conspiracy; nevertheless they brought his body upon horses, and he was buried in Jerus.

      Doubtless it was a remembrance of the humilia tion which his father had undergone which made

      Uzziah (Azariah) strengthen his posi-

      13. Uzziah s tion. He subdued the Philis and the Refortifica- Arabs in Cur, and put the Ammonites tion (779- to tribute (2 Ch 26 7.8). He "built 740 BC) towers in Jerus at the corner gate,

      and at the valley gate, and at the turnings [LXX] of the walls, and fortified them" (ver 9). He is also described as having made in Jerus "engines, invented by skilful men, to be on the towers and upon the battlements, wherewith to shoot arrows and great stones" (ver 15). The cily during its long peace with its northern neigh

      bors appears to have recovered something of her prosperity in the days of Solomon. During his reign the city was visited by a great earthquake (Zee 14 4 Am 1 1 ; cf Isa 9 10; 29 6 ; Am 4 11 ; 8 8). Jotham, his son, built "the upper gate of the house of Jeh" (2 K 15 35; 2 Ch 27 3), probably the same as the "upper gate of Benjamin" (Jer 20 2). He also built much on the wall of Ophel probably the ancient fortress of Zion on the southeastern hill (2 Ch 27 3); see OPHKL.

      His son Ahaz was soon to have cause to be thank ful for his father s and grandfather s work in forti fying (he city, for now its walls were

      14. Ahaz successful in defence against the. Allies with kings of Syria and Israel (2 K 16 Assyria 5.6); but Ahaz, feeling the weakness (736-728 of his lit t le kingdom, bought with silver BC) and gold from the house of Jeh the

      alliance of Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria. He met the king at Damascus and paid him a compliment by having an altar similar to his made for his own ritual in the temple (vs 10-12). Jlis reign is darkened by a record of heathen prac tices, and specially by his making "his son to pass through the fire" as a human sacrifice in, appar ently, the Valley of Hinnom (1 K 16 3-4; cf 2 Ch 28 3).

      Ilezekiah (727-699 BC), his son, succeeded to the

      kingdom at a time of surpassing danger. Samaria,

      and with it the last of Israel s kingdom,

      15. Heze- had fallen. Assyria had with difh- kiah s Great cult v been bought off, the people were Works largely apostate, yet Jerus was never so

      great and so inviolate to prophet ic eves (Isa 7 4f; 8 8.10; 10 28 f; 14 25-32, etc). Early in his reign, the uprising of the Chaldaean Merodach- balac Ian against Assyria relieved Judah of her great est danger, and Ilezekiah entered into friendly relations wit h t his new king of Babylon, showing his messengers all his treasures (Isa 39 1.2). At this time or soon after, Ilezekiah appears to have undertaken great works in fitting his capital for the troublous times which lay before him. He sealed the waters of Cihon and brought them within the city to prevent 1 he kings of Assyria from getting access to them (2 K 20 20; 2 Ch 32 4.30). See Si LOAM.

      It is certain, if their tunnel was to be of any use, the southwestern hill must have been entirely en closed, and it is at least highly probable that in the account (2 Ch 32 5), he "built up all the wall that was broken down, and built towers thereon [in], and the other wall without," the last phrase may refer to the stretch of wall along the edge of the southwestern hill to Siloam. On (he other hand, if that was the work of Solomon, "the other wall" may have been the great buttressed dam, with a wall across it which closed the mouth of the Tyro- poeon, which was an essential part of his scheme of preventing a besieging army from getting access to water. He also strengthened MILLO (q.v.), on the southeastern hill. Secure in these fortifications, which made Jerus one of the strongest walled cities in Western Asia, Ilezekiah, assisted, as we learn from Sennacherib s descriptions, by Arab merce naries, was able to buy off the great, Assyr king and to keep his city inviolate (2 K 18 13-16). A second threatened attack on the city appears to be referred to in 2 K 19 9-37.

      Hezekiah undertook reforms. "He removed the

      high places, and brake the pillars, and cut down

      the Asherah: and he brake in pieces

      16. His the brazen serpent that Moses had Religious made and .... he called it Nehush- Reforms tan," i.e. a piece of brass (2 K 18 4).

      Manasseh succeeded his father when but 12, and reigned 55 years (698-643) in Jerus (2 K 21 1). He was tributary to Esarhaddon



      moated by Assyr i >>y mv i*v>

      cuneiform tablets recently found at (lexer belonging to this Assvr monarch s reign (PEFS, 1905, 200,

      and Ashurl)ani]);il, as \\\\\\\\ve kno\\\\\\\\v from their inscrip tions; in one of the hitter s he is referred to as king "of the city of Jndah." The king of Assyria who, it is said ("2 Ch 33 11; of Ant, X, iii, 2), carried Manasseh in chains to Babylon, was probably Ashur- banipal. How thoroughly the country was per meated by Assyr influence is witnessed by Hie two cun 1


      The same influence, extending to the religious .sphere, is seen in the record (2 K 21 f)) that Ma nasseh "built, altars for all the host of

      17. Ma- heaven in the two courts of the house nasseh s of .Jeh." There are other references Alliance to the idolatrous practices introduced with by this king (cf .Jer 7 IS; 2 K 23 5. Assyria 11.12, etc). Ho i S( > nue( l Jf nis from

      one <>nd to the other with the innocent blood of martyrs faithful to Jeh (2 K 21 16; cf Jer 19 1). Probably during this long reign of external peace the population of the city much in creased, particularly by the influx of foreigners

      from less isolated regions. Of _ this

      18. His king s improvements to the fortifica- Repair of tions of Jerus we have the statement the Walls (2 Ch 33 14), "He built an outer wall

      to the city of David, on the west side of Ciihon in the valley, even to the entrance at the fish gate." This must have been a new or rebuilt wall for the whole eastern side of the city. _ He also compassed about the OPHEL (q.v.) and raised it to a very great height.

      Manasseh was the first of the Judahic kings to be buried away from the royal tombs. He was buried (as was his son Amon) "in the garden of his own house, in the garden of Uzza" (2 K 21 18). These maybe the tombs referred to (Ezk 43 7-9) as too near the temple precincts.

      In the reign of Josiah was found the "Book of

      the Law," and the king in consequence instituted

      radical reforms (2 K 22, 23). Kidron

      19. Josiah smoked with the burnings of the and Reli- Ashcrah and of the vessels of Baal, and gious Tophethinthe Valley of Hinnom was de- Reforms filed. At length after a reign of 31 years (640-609 (2 K 23 29.30), Josiah, in endeavor- BC) ing to intercept Pharaoh-necoh from

      combining with the king of Babylon, was defeated and slain at Megiddo and was buried "in his own sepulchre" in Jerus probably in the same locality whore his father and grandfather lay buried. Jehoahaz, after a reign of but 3 months, was carried captive (2 K 23 34) by Necoh to Egypt, whore he died and apparently was buried among strangers (Jer 22 10-12). His brother Eliakim, renamed Jehoiakim, succeeded. In the 4th year of his reign, Egypt was defeated at Car- chemish by the Babylonians, and as a_consequonee Jehoiakim had to change from subjection to Egypt to that of Babylon (1 K 23 35 ff ). During this time

      Jeremiah was actively foretelling in

      20. Jere- streets and courts of Jerus (5 1, etc) the miah approaching ruin of the city, messages Prophesies which were received with contempt the Ap- and anger by the king and court (Jer preaching 36 23). In consequence of his revolt Doom against Babylon, bands of Chaldaeans,

      Syrians, Moabites and Ammonites came against him (2 K 24 2), and his death was inglorious (2 K 24 6; Jer 22 18.19).

      His son Jehoiachin, who succeeded him, went out with all his household and surrendered to the approaching Nebuchadnezzar (597), and was car ried to Babylon where he passed more than 37 years (2 K 25 27-30). Jorus was despoiled of all its treasures and all its important inhabitants. The

      king of Babylon s nominee, Zcdekiah, after 11

      years rebelled against him, and consequently Jerus

      was besieged for a year and a half until

      21. Nebu- "famine was sore in the city." On the chadnezzar 9th of Ab all the men of war "fled by Twice night by the way of the gate between Takes the two walls, which was by the king s Jerusalem garden," i.e. near the mouth of the (586 BC) Tyropocon, and the king "went by

      the way of the Arabah," but was over taken and captured "in the plains of Jericho." A terrible punishment followed his faithlessness to Babylon (2 K 25 1-7). Hie city and the temple wore despoiled and burnt; the walls of Jerus wore broken down, and none but the poorest of the land "to be vinedressers and husbandmen" wore left behind (2 K 25 8 f; 2 Ch 36 17 f). It is probable that the ark was removed also at this time.

      With the destruction of their city, the hopes of the best elements in Judah turned with longing to

      the thought of her restoration. It is

      22. Cyrus possible that some of the remnant left and the in the land may have kept up some First Return semblance of the worship of Jeh at (538 BC) the temple-site. At length, however,

      when in 538 Cyrus the Persian became master of the Bab empire, among many acts of a similar nature for the shrines of Assyr and Bab gods, he gave permission to Jews to return to rebuild the house of Jeh (Ezr 1 If). Over 40,000 (Ezr 1,2) under Sheshbazzar, prince of Judah (Ezr 1 8.11), governor of a province, returned, bringing with 1 hem the sacred vessels of the temple. The daily sacri fices were renewed and the feasts and fasts restored (3 3-7), and later the foundations of the restored temple were laid (3 10; 5 16), but on account of the opposition of the people of the land and the Samaritans, the building was not completed until 20 years later (6 15).

      The graphic description of the rebuilding of the

      walls of Jerus in 445 by Nehemiah gives us the

      fullest account we have of these forti-

      23. Nehe- fications at any ancient period. It is miah Re- clear that Nehemiah set himself to builds the restore the walls, as far as possible, Walls in their condition before the exile.

      The work was done hurriedly and under conditions of danger, half the workers being armed with swords, spears and bows to protect the others, and every workman was a soldier (Neh 4 13.16-21). The rebuilding took 52 days, but could not have been done at all had not much of the material lain to hand in the piles of ruined masonry. Doubtless the haste and limited resources resulted in a wall far weaker than that Nebuchadnezzar destroyed 142 years previously, but it followed the same out line and had the same general structure.

      For the next 100 years we have scarcely any

      historical knowledge of Jerus. A glimpse is

      afforded by the papyri of Elephant ine

      24. Bagohi where we read of a Jewish community Governor in Upper Egypt petitioning Bagohi, the

      governor of "Judaea, for permission to rebuild their own temple to Jeh in Egypt; inci dentally they mention that they had already sent an unsuccessful petition to Johanan the high priest and his colleagues in Jerus. In another document we gather that this petition to the Pers governor was granted. These documents must date about 411-407 BC. Later, probably about 350, we have somewhat ambiguous references to the destruc tion of Jerus and the captivity of numbers of Jews in the time of Artaxerxes (III) Ochus (358- 337 BC).

      With the battle of Issus and Alexander s Pales tinian campaign (c 332 BC), we are upon surer




      historical ground, though the details of the account

      (Ant, XI, viii, 4) of Alexander s visit to Jerus itself

      are considered of doubtful authenticity.

      25. Alex- After his death (323 BC), Pal suffered ander the much from its position, between the Great Ptolemies of Egypt and the Seleucidae

      of Antioch. Each became in turn its suzerain, and indeed at one time the tribute ap pears to have been divided between them (Ant, XII, iv, 1).

      In 3 21 Ptolemy Sotcr invaded Pal, and, it is said (Ant, XII, i, 1), captured Jerus by a ruse, entering

      the city on the Sabbath as if anxious

      26. The to offer sacrifice. He carried away Ptolemaic many of his Jewish prisoners to Egypt Rule and settled them there. In the

      struggles between the contending monarchies, although Pal suffered, the capital itself, mi account of its isolated position, remained undis turbed, under the suzerainty of Egypt. In 217 BC, Ptolemy (IV) Philopator, after his victory over Antiochus III at Raphia, visited the temple at Jerus and offered sacrifices; he is reported (3 Mace 1) to have entered the "Holy of Holies." The comparative prosperity of the city during the Egyp domination is witnessed to by Hccataeus of Abdera, who is quoted by Jos; he even puts the population of the city at 120,000, which is probably an exaggeration.

      At length in 198, Antiochus the Great having conquered Coele-Syria in the epoch-making battle

      at Banias, the Jews of their own accord

      27. Anti- went over to him and supplied his ochus the army with plentiful provisions; they Great assisted him in besieging the Egyp

      garrison in the AKHA (q.v.) (Atit, XII, iii, 3). Jos produces letters in which Antiochus records his gratification at the reception given him by the Jews and grants them various privileges (ib). We have an account of the prosperity of the city about this time (190-180 BC) by Jesus ben Sira in the Book of Ecclus; it is a city of crowded life and manifold activities. He refers in glowing terms to the great high priest, Simon ben Onias (226-199 BC), who (Ecclus 50 1-4) had repaired and fortified the temple and strengthened the walls against, a siege. The letter of Aristeas, dated probably at the close of this great man s life (c 200 BC), gives a similar picture. It is here stated that the compass of the city was 40 stadia. The very considerable prosperity and religious liberty which the Jews had enjoyed under the Egyptians were soon menaced under the new ruler; the taxes were in creased, and very soon fidelity to the tenets of

      Judaism came to be regarded as

      28. Helleni- treachery to the Seleucid rule. Under zation of Antiochus Epiphanes the Helleniza- the City tion of the nation grew apace (2 Mace under An- 49-12; Ant, XII, v, 1); at the request tiochus of the Hellenizing party a "place of Epiphanes exercise" was erected in Jerus (1 Mace

      1 14; 2 Mace 4 7f). The Gymna sium was built and was soon thronged by young priests; the Gr hat the petasos became the fashionable headdress in Jerus. The Hellenistic party, which was composed of the aristocracy, was so loud in its professed devotion to the king s wishes that it is not to be wondered at that Antiochus, who, on a visit to the city, had been received with rap turous greetings, came to think that the poor and pious who resisted him from religious motives were largely infected with leanings toward his enemies in Egypt. The actual open rupture began when tidings reached Antiochus, after a victorious though politically barren campaign in Egypt, that Jerus had risen in his rear on behalf of the house of Ptol emy. Jason, the renegade high priest, who had

      been hiding across the Jordan, had, on the false report of the death of Antiochus, suddenly returned and re-possessed himself of the city. Only the Akra remained to Syria, and this was crowded with Menelaus and those of his followers who had escaped the sword of Jason. Antiochus lost no time; he hastened (170 BC) against Jerus with a

      29. Capture great army, captured the city, massa- of the City cred the people and despoiled the (170 BC) temple (1 Mace 1 20-24; Ant, XII,

      v, 3). Two years later Antiochus, balked by Rome in Egypt (Polyb. xxix.27; Livy xlv.12), appears to have determined that in Jerus, at any rate, he would have no sympathizers with Egypt. He sent his chief collector of tribute (1

      Mace 1 29), who attacked the city

      30. Capture with strong force and, by means of of 168 BC stratagem, entered it (ver 30). After

      he had despoiled it, he set it on fire and pulled down both dwellings and walls. He massacred the men, and many of the women and children he sold as slaves (1 Mace 1 31-35; 2 Mace 5 24). He sac rificed swine (or at least a sow) upon the holy altar,

      and caused the high priest, himself

      31. At- a Greek in all his sympathies to par- tempted take of the impure sacrificial feasts; Suppression he tried by barbarous cruelties to sup- of Judaism press the ritual of circumcision (Ant,

      XII, v, 4). In everything he endeav ored, in conjunction with the strong Hellenizing party, to organize Jerus as a Gr city, and to secure his position he built a strong wall, and a great tower for the Akra, and, having furnished it well with armor and victuals, he left a strong garrison (1 Mace 1 33-35) . But the Syrians had overreached 1 hemselves this time, and the reaction against persecution and attempted religious suppression produced the great uprising of the Maccabeans.

      The defeat and retirement of the Syrian com mander Lysias, followed by the death of Antiochus

      Epiphanes, led to an entire reversal

      32. The of policy on the part of the Council of Maccabean the boy-king, Antiochus V. A general Rebellion amnesty was granted, with leave to

      restore the temple-worship in its an cestral forms. The following year (165 BC) Judas Maccabaeus found "the sanctuary desolate, and the altar profaned, the gates burned up, and shrubs growing in the courts as in a forest .... and the priests chambers pulled down" (1 Mace 4 38). He at once saw to the reconstruction of the altar and restored the temple-services, an event celebrated

      ever after as the "Feast of the Ded-

      33. The ication," or hdnukkah (I Mace 4 52- Dedication 59; 2 Mace 10 1-11; Ant, XII, vii, 7; of the cf Jn 10 22). Judas also "builded up Temple Mt. Zion," i.e. the temple-hill, making (165 BC) it, a fortress with "high walls and strong

      towers round about," and set a garrison in it (1 Mace 4 41-61).

      The Hellenizing party suffered in the reaction, and the Syrian garrison in the Akra, Syria s one

      hold on Judaea, was closely invested,

      34. Defeat but though Judas had defeated three of Judas Syrian armies in the open, he could not and Capture expel this garrison. In 163 BC a great of the City Syrian army, with a camel corps and

      many elephants, came to the relief of the hard-pressed garrison. Lysias, accompanied by the boy-king himself (Antiochus V), approached the city from the S. via BETH-ZUB (q.v.). At Beth-zachariah the Jews were defeated, and Judas brother Eleazar was slain, and Jerus was soon captured. The fort on Mt. Zion which surrounded the sanctuary was surrendered by treaty, but when the king saw its strength, he broke his oath and destroyed the fortifications (1 Mace 6




      62). But, oven in this desperate state Judas and his followers \\\\\\\\vere saved. A certain pretender, Philip, raised a rebellion in a distant part of the empire, and Lysias was obliged to patch up a truce with the nationalist, Jews more favorable to Judas than before his defeat; the garrison in the Akra remained, however, to remind the Jews that they were not independent. In 161 BC another Syrian general, Nicanor, was sent against Judas, but lie was at first won over to friendship and when, later, at the instigation of the Hellenistic, parly, he was compelled to attack Judas, he did so with hastily raised levies and was defeated at Adasa, a little N. of Jerus. Judas was, however, not long suffered to celebrate his triumph. A month later Bacchides appeared before Jerus, and in April, 161, Judas was slain in battle with him at Berea.

      35. His Both the city and the land were re- Death garrisoned by Syrians; nevertheless, (161 BC) by 152, Jonathan, .hulas brother, who

      was residing at Michmash, was virtual ruler of the land, and by astute negotiation between Demetrius and Alexander, the rival claimants to the throne of Antioch, Jonathan gained more t.han any of his family had ever done. He was appointed high priest and slrtitcyos, or deputy for the king, in Judaea. He repaired the city and restored the temple-fortress with squared stones (1 Mace 10 10-11). He made the walls higher and built up a

      great part of the eastern wall which

      36. Jona- had been destroyed and "repaired that than s which was called Caphenatha" (1 Restora- Mace 12 36-37; Ant, XIII, v, ii); tions he also made a great mound between

      the Akra and the city to isolate the Syrian garrison (ib).

      Simon, who succeeded Jonathan, finally captured the Akra in 139, and, according to Jos (Ant, XIII,

      vi, 7), not only destroyed it, but par-

      37. Sur- tially leveled the very hill on which it render of stood (see, however, 1 Mace 14 36.37). City to John Hyrcanus, 5 years later (134 BC), Antiochus was besieged in Jerus by Antiochus Sidetes Sidetes in the 4th year of his reign; (134 BC) during the siege the Syrian king raised

      100 towers each 3 stories high against the northern wall possibly these may subsequently have been used for the foundations of the second wall. Antiochus was finally bought off by the giving of hostages and by heavy tribute, which Hyrcanus is said to have obtained by opening the sepulcher of David. Nevertheless the king "broke down the fortifications that encompassed the city" (Ant, XIII, viii, 2-4).

      During the more prosperous days of the Has- monean rulers, several important buildings were

      erected. There was a great palace on

      38. Has- the western (southwestern) hill over- monean looking the temple (Ant, XX, viii, 11), Buildings and connected with it at one time by

      means of a bridge across the Tyro- poeon, and on the northern side of the temple a citadel which may (see VIII, 7 above) have been the successor of one here in precxilic times known as the Baris; this, later on, Herod enlarged into the Antonia (Ant, XV, xi, 4; BJ, V, v, 8).

      In consequence of the quarrel of the later Has- monean princes, further troubles fell upon the city.

      In 65 BC, Hyrcanus II, under the

      39. Rome s instigation of Antipas the Idumaean, Intervention rebelled against his brother Aristobulus,

      to whom he had recently surrendered his claim to sovereignty. With the assistance of Aretas, king of the Nabataeans, he besieged Aristo bulus in the temple. The Rom general Scaurus, however, by order of Pompey, compelled Aretas to retire, and then lent his assistance to Aristo

      bulus, who overcame his brother (Ant, XIV, ii, 1-3). Two years later (63 BC) Pompey, having been met by the ambassadors of both parties, bear ing presents, as well as of the Pharisees, carne him self to compose the quarrel of the rival factions, and, being shut out of the city, took it by

      40. Pompey storm. He entered the "Holy of Takes the Holies," but left the temple treasures City by unharmed. The walls of the city were Storm demolished ; I lyrcanus II was reinst at ed

      high priest, but Aristobulus was car ried a prisoner to Home, and the city became tributary to the Horn Empire (Ant, XIV, iv, 1-4; BJ, I, vii, 1-7). The Syrian proconsul, M. Lucin- ius Crassus, going upon his expedition against the Parthians in 55 BC, carried off from the temple the money which Pompey had left (Ant, XIV, vii, 1).

      In 47 BC Antipater, who for 10 years had been gaining power as a self-appointed adviser to the weak

      Hyrcanus, was made a Rom citizen

      41. Julius and appointed procurator in return Caesar for very material services which he had Appoints been able to render to Julius Caesar Antipater in Egypt (Ant, XIV, viii, 1, 3, 5) ; at Procurator the same time Caesar granted to (47 BC) Hyrcanus permission to rebuild the

      walls of Jerus besides other privileges (Ant, XIV, x, 5). Antipater made his eldest son, Phasaelus, governor of Jerus, and committed Galilee to the care of his able younger son, Herod.

      In 40 BC Herod succeeded his father as procu rator of Judaea by order of the Rom Senate, but the

      same year the Parthians under Pacorus

      42. Parthian and Barzapharncs captured and plun- Invasion dcred Jerus (Ant, XIV, xiii, 3.4) and

      reestablished Antigonus (BJ, I, xiii, 13). Herod removed his family and treasures to Massada and, having been appointed king of Judaea by Antony, returned, after various adventures, in 37 BC. Assisted by Sosius, the Rom proconsul, he took Jerus by storm after a 5 months siege; by the promise of liberal reward he restrained the soldiers from sacking the city (Ant, XIV, xvi, 2-3).

      During the reign of this great monarch Jerus as sumed a magnificence surpassing that of all other ages.

      In 24 BC the king built, his vast palace

      43. Reign in the upper city on the southwestern of Herod hill, near where today are the Turkish the Great barracks and the Armenian Quarter. (37-4 BC) He rebuilt the fortress to the N. of the

      temple the ancient Baris on a great scale with 4 lofty corner towers, and renamed it the Antonia in honor of his patron. He celebrated games in a new theater, and constructed a hippodrome (BJ, II, iii, 1) or amphitheater (Ant, XV, viii, 1). He must necessarily have strengthened and repaired the walls, but such work was outshone by the 4 great towers which he erected, Hippicus, Pharsael

      and Mariamne, near the present Jaffa

      44. Herod s Gate the foundations of the first two Great are supposed to be incorporated in the Buildings present so-called "Tower of David"-

      and the lofty octagonal tower, Psephi- nus, farther to the N.W. The development of Herod s plans for the reconstruction of the temple was commenced in 19 BC, but they were not com pleted till 64 AD (Jn 2 20; Mt 24 1.2; Lk 21 5.6). The sanctuary itself was built by 1,000 specially trained priests within a space of 18 months (11-10 BC). The conception was magnificent, and resulted in a mass of buildings of size and beauty far surpassing anything that had stood there before. Practically all the remains of the foundations of the temple-enclosure now surviving in connection with the Ilaram belong to this period. In 4 BC the year of the Nativity occurred the disturbances fol lowing upon the destruction of the Golden Eagle




      which Herod had erected over the great gate of the temple, and shortly aftenvard Herod died, having previously shut up many of the leading Je\\\\\\\\vs in the hippodrome with orders that they should be slain when he passed away (BJ, 1, xxxiii, 0). The ac cession of Archelaus was signalized by Passover riots which ended in the death of 3,000, an after- result of the affair of the Golden Eagle.

      Tomb of David.

      Thinking that order had been restored, Archelaus

      set out for Rome to have his title confirmed. During

      his absence Sabinus, the Rom proc-

      45. Herod urat or, by mismanagement and greed, Archelaus raised the city about his ears, and the (4BC-6 AD) next Passover was celebrated by a

      massacre, street fighting and open robbery. Yarns, the governor of Syria, who had hastened to the help of his subordinate 1 , suppressed the rebellion with ruthless severity and crucified 2,000 Jews. Archelaus returned shortly afterward as t thnarch, an office which he retained until his exile in 6 AD. During the procuratorship of Coponius (6-10 AD) another Passover riot occurred in conse quence of the aggravating conduct of some Sa maritans.

      During the procuratorship of Pontius Pilate (2(5-37 AD) there were several disturbances, cul minating in a riot consequent upon

      46. Pontius his taking some of the "corban" or Pilate sacred offerings of the temple for the

      construction of an aqueduct (Ant, XYIII, iii, 2) probably part at least of the "low- level aqueduct" (see YII, 1~>, above). Herod Agrippa 1 inclosed the suburbs, which had grown up N. of the second wall and of the temple, by what Jos calls the "Third \\\\\\\\Yall" (see Y, above).

      His son, King Agrippa, built about 56 AD a large addition to the old Hasmonean palace, from

      which he could overlook the temple-

      47. King area. This act was a cause of offence Agrippa to the Jews who built a wall on the

      western boundary of the Inner Court to shut off his view. In the quarrel which ensued the Jews were successful in gaining the support of Nero (Ant, XX, viii, 11). In (54 AD the long rebuilding of the temple-courts, which had been begun in 19 BC, was concluded. The 1S.OOO work men thrown out of employment appear to have been given "unemployed work" in paving the city with white stone" (Ant, XX, ix, 6-7).

      Finally the long-smouldering discontent of the Jews against the Romans burst forth into open

      rebellion under the criminal incom-

      48. Rising petence of Gessius Floras, 66 AD against (Ant, XX, xi, 1,). Palaces and pub- Florus and lie buildings were fired by the angered Defeat of multitude, and after but two days Gallus siege, the Antonia itself was captured,

      set on fire and its garrison slain (BJ, II, xvii, 6-7). Cestius Gallus, hastening from Syria,

      was soon engaged in a siege of the city. The third wall was captured and the suburb BK/ETHA (q.v.) burnt, but, when about to renew the attack upon the second wall, Gallus appears to have been seized with panic, and his partial withdrawal developed into an inglorious retreat in which he was pursued by the Jews down the pass to the Beth-horons as far as Antipatris (BJ, II, xix).

      This victory cost the Jews dearly in the long run,

      as it led to the campaign of Vespasian and the

      eventual crushing of all their national

      49. The hopes. Vespasian commenced the con- City Be- quest in the north, and advanced by sieged by slow and certain steps. Being recalled Titus to Rome as emperor in the midst of (70 AD) the war, the work of besieging and

      capturing the city itself fell to his son Titus. None of the many calamities which had happened to the city are to be compared with this terrible siege. In none had the city been so mag nificent, its fortifications so powerful, its population so crowded. It was Passover time, but, in addition to the crowds assembled for this event, vast num bers had hurried there, flying from the advancing Rom army. The loss of life was enormous; ref ugees to Titus gave 600,000 as the number dead (BJ, \\\\\\\\, xiii, 7), but this seems incredible. The total population today within the walls cannot be more than 20,000, and the total population of modern Jerus, which covers a far greater area, than that of those days, cannot at the most liberal esti mate exceed 80,000. Three times this, or, say, a quarter of a million, seems to be the utmost that is credible, and many would place the numbers at far less.

      The siege commenced on the 14th of Nisan, 70

      AD, and ended on the 8th of Elul, a total of 134

      days. The, city was distracted by

      50. Party internal feuds. Simon held the upper Divisions and lower cities; John of Gischala, the within the temple and "Ophel"; the Idumaeans, Besieged introduced by the Zealots, fought only Walls for themselves, until they relieved the

      city of their terrors. Yet another party, too weak to make its counsels felt, was for peace with Rome, a policy which, if taken in time, would have found in Titus a spirit of reason and mercy. The miseries of the siege and the destruc tion of life and property were at least as much the work of the Jews themselves as of their conquerors. On the loth day of the siege the third wall (Agrip- pa s), which had been but hastily finished upon the approach of the Romans, was captured; the second wall was finally taken on the 24th day; on the 72d day the Antonia fell, and 12 days later the daily sacrifice ceased. On the 105th day the ominous

      9th of Ab the temple and the lower

      51. Capture city were burnt, and the last day and Utter found the whole city in flames. Only Destruction the three great towers of Herod, Hip- of the City picus, Pharsael and Mariamne, with

      the western walls, were spared to pro tect the camp of the Xth Legion which was left to guard the site, and "in order to demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it was and how well fortified"; the rest of the city was dug up to its foundations (BJ, YII, i, 1).

      For 60 years after its capture silence reigns over Jerus.

      We know that the site continued to bo garrisoned, but

      it was not to any extent rebuilt. In l. JO

      en T> t, 1 ^ " "^ was v s i. lt>< ^ ^ v Hadrian, who found

      QA. KeD | )U k f ( .\\\\\\\\ v buildings standing. T\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\o years

      lion of Bar- later (i:$2-:>5 AD) occurred the last great

      Cochba rebellion of the Jews in the uprising of

      Bar-( ocliba (. sou of a star"), who was

      encouraged by the rabbi Akiba. With

      the suppression of this last effort for freedom by Julius

      Severus, the remaining traces of Judaism were stamped

      out, and it is even said (Talm Jerus, Tn ( i n ltli 4) that the

      very site of the temple was ploughed up by T. Annius

      Jerusalem Jerusalem, New



      Rufus An altar of Jupiter was placed upon the tcmpli - site and lews were excluded from .lerus on pain of death.

      modating 3.000 worshippers. This was replaced in 691 \\\\\\\\l> bvtiie magnilicent. Kulibrt rn Suhrah, or " Dome of the Rock " built bv Alxl tit M<drk, t he 10th khalif. For some

      In 13S Hadrian rebuilt the city, giving it the name

      centuries t he relations of the Christians and Moslems ap

      Klia Capitolina. The line of 1 he Soul hern wall

      pear to have been friendly: the historian el Mukaddasi,

      was probably determined o\\\\\\\\ tne ^

      writ in" in 9*5 describes the Christians and Jews as

      fort iliea i- in of the great Rom legionary 53 Hadrian ,, ti,,. western (southwestern) hill.

      having the upper hand in Jerus. In 9U9 Pal passed into

      r;l " " " . ,r .,,,,,.. ,| the power of the Kgvp dynasty, and in 1010 tier ruier,

      Builds and it ,. Pi- ,, be .hi, as h, V n . 1 the pow l^OT.Ul j^f/^^ y of ^ e churches , which, how-

      rp Ijo 1 1 n e o I I 1 1 e \\\\\\\\ 1 M m -^ s i

      ever, were restored ill a poor way.

      rail- \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ e Know ilial the area occupied I)J Capitolina t| u > cnenaculuin and the traditional " 1 omb of ])a\\\\\\\\id" was outride th<- walls in the 4th cent \\\\\\\\n equestrian statue of Hadrian was placed t i II lir .if Holies" i lerome Cumin on .

      In 1077 Isar el Atsis, a leader of the Seljuk Turks con quered 1 al from the X., drove out the Egyptians and massacred 3.000 of the inhabitants of KCi TVio Jerus The cruelty of the Turks in

      on the site of the Hol.\\\\\\\\ ol Uolli - MI Isa 2 S; ML 24 lf>). An inscription now existing in tin- southern wall of tho temple-area, in which occurs the ameof Hadrian, may have belonged to I Ins monument while a stone bead, discovered in the neighborhood of

      DU - L contrast, be it noted, with the conduct of Seljuk the u-ab Moslems was the immediate Turks and cause of the Crusades. In 1098 the city T . was retaken by the Egyp Arabs, and the following year was again captured after

      Il t l IS SO H IT -M ) \\\\\\\\ 1 (I PS ilf^O IllliV iltlVl" 1) h ) M J-,t (1 i) III

      statue. Either Hadrian himself, or one of the Antonine t i ., i ..mi ile of \\\\\\\\ en -is on the no ft h western

      Cruelties a 10 days seige bv the soldiers of the First Crusade, and Godfrey de Bouillon became

      emperors, erected a , tempi! ol v i n " hill when- subsequently was built the Church of the Holv Sepulchre (Kuseb., Life <>/ Coiitanlinc, LLL, .>).

      .... h _ ,i,,. i,,iti- ^iii.^ which nonears

      the first king (ireat building activity marked the next SO peaceful years of Lat rule: numbers of churches were built, but, until toward the end of

      The habit of pilgrimage to the riolj sue.s, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\nii n ippi to have had its mots far back in the 2d cent, (see urner, io n >\\\\\\\\ // tin iral SVi<r/iYx 1 551, quoted by Randay,

      _., this period, the walls were neglected. In 61. Cru- , 177 they were repaired, but 10 years

      "" "" en . , ,", ;. - -. 7C,i seems t o ha VI- increas-

      saders Cap- later failed to resist the arms of the vic-

      Rarred Site* nf tnr i/<i.<;>cix, < > Miji w " inglv flourished in the next two centuries; beyond this we know little of the city. In 333 AD, by order of Constantino, the new church

      turp the torious Saladin. The city surrendered, but IMQQ the inhabitants were spared. In 1192 City in 1099 saladin repaired the walls, but in 1219 they were dismantled by orders of the sul

      of the Vnastasis, marking th supposed site of the llol.\\\\\\\\ Sepulchre was begun. The traditions .-, n- anlin" this site and the Holy Cross 54. UOnSK H- a[lll ,, oc | ,,, navo | u .,. n f : ,,md there, are re- tine Builds corded some time after the events and are the Church of doubtful veracity. The building must have been magnificent, and covered a 01 tne considerably larger area than that of the Anastasis existing church. In 3ii2 Julian is said to have attempted Io rebuild the temple, but the work was interrupted by an explosion. The story is

      tan of Damascus. In 1229 the emperor Frederick II of Germany obtained the Holy City by treaty, on condition

      that hi did not restore the fortifications, a stipulation which being broken by the inhabitants 10 years later brought down upon them the vengeance of the emir of Kerak. Nevertheless, in 1243 the city was again restored to the Christians unconditionally. The following year, however, the Kharizinuan Tartars a wild savage horde from Central Asia burst into Pal, carrying destruction before them; they seized Jerus, massacred the people,

      d At some uncertain date before 450 the coenaculum and "Church of the Holy /ion" were incorporated within the wills This is the condition depicted in the Madeba Mosaic and also that described by Buchoriua who writing between 34~> 50 \\\\\\\\l>. states that the circuit of the walls "now receives within itself Mt. /ion, which was once outside and which, lying on the southern side, overhangs ,. ;t ,,!,.: " li is nossible this was the work

      62. The and rifled the tombs of the Lat kings. Khari- Three years later they were ejected from Pal bv the Egyptians who in their turn retained it until, in 1517, they were con quered bv the Ottoman Turks, who still hold it The greatest of their sultans, Suleiman the Magnilicent, built the present walls in 1542. In 1832 Mohammed Ali with his Egyp forces came

      the citv like a citaciei. i of the emperor Yalent inian who is known to have done some reconstruction of the walls. In 450 the empress Kudoxia. the widow of Theodosius I took up her residence in .lerus and rebuilt the walls upon their ancient lines, bringing the KK TV,^ whole of the southwestern hill, as well as 60. ine the |, ()() , of siloam. within the circuit Empress (Kva-arius. Uittt. Eccles., 1, 22). At any Eudoxia rate, this inclusion of the pool existed in uuuAia ^^ ^ ( ^ described bv Antoninus Martyr- in 51)0 M) and it is confirmed by Bliss s

      co rn-f, , ad captured the city, but 2 years later bd. Ottoman ti)u , f ( ,n a f,; n r0 se against his rule and for Turks Ob- a time actually gained possession of the tain the i v. except the citadel, making their \\\\\\\\ 1K1-7 entrance through the mam dram. I In- City in loll i,,. s jeged citadel was relieved by the arrival of Ibrahim Pasha from Egypt with rein forcements. The citv and land were restored to the Ottoman Turks bv the Great Powers in 1S40. X Modern Jerusalem. The modern city of Jerus has about 75,000 inhabitants, of whom over two-thirds are

      the Walls W u-k (see above VI, 4). She also built the church of St. Stephen, that at the Pool of Siloam and others. Tin- emperor Justinian, who was perhaps the greatest of the Christian builders, erected the great Church of vt Ma:-v. the remains of which are now

      Jews. I ntil about 50 years ago the city 1 T^wcand was confined within its Kith-cent, walls, I. jewsc u th(i d()()rs ()f its g a tes locked every night, Zionism and even here there were considerable areas unoccupied. Since then, and par ticularly during the last 25 years, there has been a

      Kfi Tnctin considered by some authorities to be in- 5b. Justin- ( . ()I .. )( , nit( ,,| in ,1,,. el Ak.ia Mosque: he built ian also a Church of St. Sophia" in the " I ra-torinm." i.e. onthesiteof theAntonia (see however PR.ETOKIUM), and a hospital to the \\\\\\\\V. of the temple. The silt- of the temple itself appears to have remained in ruins down to the 7th cent. In f>i I 1 al was conquered by the Pers __ , Chosroes 1 I, and the Jerus churches, includ- 57. ChOS- in ,, t | l;l(i (lf Hie Holy Sepulchre, were de- roes II st roved an event which did much to prepare Canturpc; the wav for the Moslem architects of half Vsuyiuicv ;i ccntm , y | a t(.|-, who freely used the columns the Lity ()f these ruined churches in the building of the " Dome of the Rock." In ( ,20 TTeracleiis. ha\\\\\\\\hiL meanwhile made peace with the successor of Chosroes II. reached .Terns in triumph, bearing back the captured fragment of the ..- cross. He entered the city through the 00. ilerac- -cuide,, Gate" which indeed is believed leUS Enters by many to have reached its present form r t : n through his restorations. The triumph ". of Christendom was but short. Seven Inumph vra ,. s ,. a ,.|i,. r had occurred the historic flight of Mohammed from Mecca (the Hegiral and in r>37 the victorious followers of the Prophet appeared in the Holv City. After a short siege. it capitulated, but the khalif Omar treated the Christians with generous mercy. The Christian sites 59 Clem- were spared, but upon the temple-site, which up to this had apparently been oe- ency Ol cupied bv no important Christian building Omar but was of peculiar sanctity to the Mos lems through Mohammed s alleged visions there, a wooden mosque was erected, capable of accom

      rapid growth of suburbs to the N., ?s.^., and U . of the old citv. This has been largely due to the steady stream of immigrant Jews from every part of the world particularly from Russia, Roumania. Yemin, Persia Bokhara, the Caucasus, and from all parts of the Turkish empire. This influx of Jews, a large proportion of whom are extremely poor, has led to settlements or "colonies" of various classes of Jews being erected all over the plateau to the N. an area never built upon before but also on other sides of the city. With the exception of the Bokhara Colony, which .has some fine buildings and occupies a lofty and salubrious situation, most of the settlements are mean cottages or ugly alms- houses With the exception of a couple of hospitals there is no Jewish public building of any architectural pretensions. The "/ionist" movement, which has drawn so manv Jews to Jerus, cannot be called a suc cess as far as this citv is concerned, as the settlers and their children as a rule either steadily deteriorate physi cally and morally from constant attacks of malaria, combined with pauperism and want of work or, in the case of the energetic and enlightened, they emigrate- to America esp.: this emigration has been much stimu lated of late bv the new law whereby Jews and ( hris- tians must now, like Moslems, do military service. The foreign Christian population represents all na tions and ail sects; the Roman church is rapidly sur passing all other sects or religions in the importance or their buildings. The Russians are well represented by their extensive enclosure, which includes a large cat h< dral a hospital, extensive hospice in several blocks, and a handsome residence for the consul-general, and by the churches and other buildings on the Mount of Olives. The Germans have a successful colony belonging to tne "Temple" sect to the W. of Jerus near the railway sta-




      tion, and are worthily represented by several handsome buildings, e.g. the Protestant "Church of the Redeemer," built on the site and on the ground plan of a fine church belonging to the Knights of St. .John, the new (Roman Catholic) Church of the Dormitton on "Mount Zion," with an adjoining Benedictine convent, a very handsome Roman Catholic hospice outside the Damascus Gate, the Kaiserin Augusta Victoria Sanatorium on the Mount of Olives, and a Protestant Johan niter Hospice in the city, a large general hospital and a leper hospital, a consulate and two large schools. In influence, both secular and religious, the Germans have rapidly gained ground in the last 2 decades. British influence has much diminished, relatively. The British Ophthalmic Hospital, belonging to the "Order of the Knights of St. John," the Eng. Mission Hospital, belonging to the London 9 PVir ctian Jews Society, the Bishop (iobat s School cnnsuan aiu i Eng. College connected with the Buildings Church Missionary Society, 3 Anglican an d churches, of which the handsome St.

      T +-+,,+;^o George s Collegiate Church adjoins the re- b sidence of the Anglican bishop, and a few small schools comprise the extent of public buildings connected with British societies. France and the Roman Catholic church are worthily represented by

      talked-of improvements. There are numerous hotels, besides extensive accommodations in the religious hos pices, and no less than 15 hospitals and asylums.

      LITERATURE. This is enormous, but of very unequal value and much of it out of date. For all purposes the best book of reference is Jems from Die Earliest Times to AD 70, 2 vols, by Principal G. A. Smith. It contains references to all the lit. To this book and to its author it is impossible for the present writer adequately to ex press his indebtedness, and no attempt at acknowledg ment in detail has been made in this art. In supple ment of the above, Jems, by Dr. Selah Merrill, and Jems in Bible. Times, by Professor Lewis B. Pat on, will be found useful. The latter is a condensed account, esp. valuable for its illustrations and its copious references. Of the arts, in the recent Bible Dictionaries on Jerus, that by (louder in IIDB is perhaps the must valuable. Of guide-books, Baedeker s Guideto Pal am! Syria (1911), by Socin and Benzinger, anil Barnabe Moistermann s (R.C.) A>a> Guide to the Holy Lund (,1909), will be found useful; also Hanauer s Walks about Jerus.

      On Geology, Climate and Water-Supply: Hull s "Memoir on Physical Geography and Geology of Ara bian Petraea, Pal, and Adjoining Districts," I EF; and


      the Dominican monastery and seminary connected with the handsome church of St. Stephen rebuilt on the plan of an old Christian church by the Ratisboii (Jesuit) Schools, the Hospital of St. Louis, the hospice and Church of St. Augustine, and the monastery and seminary of the "white fathers" or Freres <le In mission aluinenne, whose headquarters center round the beautifully re stored Church of St. Anne. Not far from here are the convent and school of the Sceurs de Sion, at the Ecce Homo Church. Also inside the walls near the New Gate is the residence of the Lat Patriarch a cardinal of the Church of Rome with a church, the school of the Freres de la doctrine chretienne, and the schools, hospi tal and convent of the Franciscans, who are recognized among their coreligionists as the " parish priests" in the city, having been established there longer than the numerous other orders.

      All the various nationalities are under their respective consuls and enjoy extra-territorial rights. Besides the Turkish post-office, which is very inefficiently managed, the Austrians, Germans, French, Russians and Italians all have post-offices open to all, with special "Levant" stamps. The American mail is delivered at the French post-office. There are four chief banks, French, Ger man, Ottoman and Anglo-Pal (Jewish). As may be supposed, on account of the demand for land for Jewish settlements or for Christian schools or convents, .the price of such property has risen enormously. Unfortu nately in recent years all owners of land and Moslems have not been slow to copy the foreigners have taken to inclosing their property with high and unsightly walls, greatly spoiling both the walks around the city and the prospects from many points of view. The increased development of carriage traffic has led to considerable dust in the dry season, and mud in winter, as the roads are metaled with very soft limestone. The Jems-Jaffa Railway (a Fr. company). 54 miles long, which was opened in 1892, has steadily increased its traffic year by year, and is now a very paying concern. There is no real municipal water-supply, and no public sewers for the new suburbs though the old city is drained by a leaking, ill-constructed mediaeval sewer, which opens just below the Jewish settlement in the Kidron and runs down the WAdy en NAr. A water-supply, new sewers, electric trams and electric lights for the streets, are all much-

      Blankenhorn," Geology of the Nearer Environs of Jerus,"

      ZDPV. 1905; Chaplin, "Climate of Jerus." 1 Kl S, 1SS3; Glaishcr. "Mcteorol. Observations in Pal," .special pamphlet of the Palestine Exploration Fund; Hilder- scheid, "Die Niederschlagsverhaltnisse Pal in alter u. neuer Zeit," ZDl V (1902); Huntington, Pal and Its Transformation (1911); Andrew Watt, "Climate in Hebron." etc, Journal of the Scottish Metrnrolot/iml So ciety (1900-11); Schick, "Die Wasserversorgung dcr Stadt Jerus," ZDl V, 1S7S; Wilson "Water Supply of Jerus," Proeeedinus of the Victoria Institute, 1900; Mas- terman, in H 11 , 1905.

      On Archaeology and Topography: PEF, vol on Jerus, with accompanying maps and plans; Clermont- Ganneau, Archaeological Researches, I, 1 S99 (I KFr, William, Holy City (1X40); Robinson, Bil>. Researches (1S56); Wilson, Recnrery of _ Jerus (1S71); Warren Underground Jerus (1S7(>); Vincent, i nderi/ronnd ./<- rusalem (1911) ; Guthe, "Ausgrabungenin Jerus," Zl)P\\\\\\\\~, V; Bliss and Dickie, Excavations in Jems (1894-97); Sanday, Sacred Sites of the Gospels (1903); Mitchell, "The Wall of Jerus according to the Book of Neh," JBL (1903); Wilson, Golgotha and the Hot,/ Sepulchre (1906); Kuemmel, Malerialien z. Topographie dcs alien Jerus; also numerous reports in the PKFS; Zeitschrift des deutsrhen Pal Vrrcitis; and the Rente, bibUque.

      On History: besides Bible, Apoc, works of Jos. and History of Tacitus: Besant and Palmer. History of Jems; Oonder, Ji/da.s Marcabncus and Latin Kinr/dom of Jerus; Le Strange, Pal under the Moslems (1S90) ; C. F. Kent, Biblical Geography and History (1911). Bevan, Jerus under the High-Priests; Watson, The Story of Jerus.

      E. W. G. MASTERMAN

      JERUSALEM, NEW ( lepouo-aXV KCUVT|, Hic- rousaltm kftine): This name occurs in Rev 21 2 (ver 10, "holy city"). The conception is based on prophecies which predict, a glorious future to Jerus a ter the judgment (Isa 52 1). In Rev, however, it is not descriptive of any actual locality on earth, but allegorically depicts" the final state of the church ("the bride," "the wife of the Lamb," 21 2.9), when the new heaven and the new earth shall

      Jerusha Jesse



      have conic into being. Tin- picture is drawn from a twofold point of view: the new Jerus is a restora tion of Paradise (21 0; 22 1.2.14); it. is also the ideal of the theocracy realized (21 3. 12. 14.22). The latter viewpoint explains the peculiar representa tion that (lie city descends "out. of heaven from (iod" (21 2.10), which characterizes it as, on the one hand, a product of (Jod s supernatural work manship, and as, on the other hand, the culmination of the historic process of redemption. In other NT passages, where the theocratic point, of view is less prominent, the antitypical Jerus appears as having its seat in heaven instead of, as here, coming down from heaven to earth (cf 4 2(5; lie 11 10; 12 22). See also RE VIOLATION OF Jonx.


      JERUSHA, je-roT/sha (STpT , ifnlnliiT, "taken possession of," i.e. "married"): Jn 2 K 15 33 = "Jerushah" (m81T) , ifnlxhah, same meaning) of 2 Ch 27 1, the mother of King Jot ham of Judah. Zadok was her father s name; he may be the priest of 1 Ch 6 12 (Heb 5 38).

      JESHAIAH, je-sha ya, jP-shi a ([n] ^rP^E 1 ? , ifxha*- yaliii; \\\\\\\\li\\\\\\\\ r"P"T!T , i/ xha*i/ah, "deliverance of Jeh"; [2] [3] below have form [a], the others form [b]) :

      (1) Son of Hananiah, and grandson of Zerub- babel, according to 1 Ch 3 21, AV "Jesaiah."

      But commentators follow Heb (and RVm) in the first part of the verse, and LXX, Vulg, >Syr in the second part, thus reading- "And the son of Hananiah [was] Pelatiah, and Jeshaiah [was] his son, and Arnan his son," etc, thus making .1 a grandson of Hananiah.

      (2) A "son" of Jeduthun, and like him a temple musician; head of the family of that name (1 Ch 25 3.15).

      (3) A Levite, ancestor of Shelemoth, one of David s treasurers (1 Ch 26 25).

      (4) A descendant of Elain; he went with Ezra from Babylon to Jerus (Ezr 8 7) = "Jesias" (RV), "Josias" (AV), 1 Esd 8 33.

      (5) A descendant of Merari and a contemporary of Ezra (Ezr 8 19) = "Osaias" of 1 Esd 8 48.

      (G) A Benjarnite (Xch 11 7), AV "Jesaiah."


      JESHANAH, jesh a-na, jf-sha na (H:TTn , ifsha- nah): A town named with Bethel and Ephron among the places taken by Abijah from Jeroboam (2 Ch 13 19). Most scholars are agreed that the same name should be read instead of "TEH, ha-shen, in 1 S 7 12. It is probably identical with the Iffdvas, Isdnas, of Jos (Ant, XIV, xv, 12). It is represented by the modern *Ain Sinia, 3| miles N. of Bethel, with a spring and interesting ancient remains.

      JESHARELAH, jesh-a-re la (n&ntt 1 ; , ysar elah, meaning doubtful): One of the (or probably a family of) Levitical musicians (1 Ch 25 14), called "Asharelah" in ver 2. The names should be written "Asarelah" and "Jesarelah."

      JESHEBEAB, jp-sheb o-ab P^TIT , ycshebh abh, meaning uncertain): A Levite of the 14th course (1 Ch 24 13). Kittel and Gray (HPN, 24) read with LXX, A, "Ishbaal"; the name is omitted in LXX, B, and the change in MT as well as the omission in LXX may be due to the word ba al forming part of the name. Cf JERUBBESHETH.

      JESHER, je sher ("1^, ycsher, or "I1IP , ycsher, "uprightness"): A son of Caleb (1 Ch 2 18).

      JESHIMON, jo-she mon, jesh i-mon (fa^tn , ha-y shlmun, "the desert," and in RV so tr 1 ; but in AV, Nu 21 20; 23 28; 1 S 23 19.24; 26 1.3,

      "Jeshimon" as a place-name. In Nu LXX reads f| epT)(j.os, he eremoK, "the desert"; in 1 S LXX reads Iecro-ai(j.6v, I essaimori) . In these passages probably two districts are referred to: (1) The "desert" N. of the Dead Sea, which was overlooked from Pisgah (Xu 21 20; 23 2S). This is the ban; and sterile hind, saturated with salt, lying on each side of the Jordan X. of the Dead Sea, where for miles practi cally no vegetable life can exist. (2) The sterile plateau W. of the steep cliffs bordering the western shores of the Dead Sea. Here, between the lower slopes of the Judaean hills, where thousands of Bed ouin live and herd their flocks, and the more fertile borders of the sea with their oases (M in Fcshkhah, A in July, etc), is a broad strip of utterly waterless land, the soft chalky hills of which are, for all but, a few short weeks, destitute of practically any vegeta- tion. Tin 4 Hill of Hachilah was on the edge of this desert, (1 S 23 19; 26 1.3), and the Arabah was to its south (1 S 23 24). It is possible that the refer ences in Nu may also apply to this region.

      The word "Jeshimon" (ifshlmon) is often used as a common noun in referring to the desert of Sinai (Dt 32 10; Ps 78 40; 106 14; Isa 43 19, etc), and except in the first two of these references, when we have "wilderness," it is always tr 1 "desert." Although used in 7 passages in poetical parallelism to midhlmr, tr d "wilderness," it really means a much more hopeless place; in a midhbar animals can be pastured, but a y shimon is a desolate waste. E. W. G. MASTERMAN

      JESHISHAI, je-shish ft-I pTS"T], yshlshay, "aged"): A Gadite chief (and family?) (1 Ch 5 14).

      JESHOHAIAH, jesh-f)-ha ya, jesh-d-hl a y e shohaynh, meaning unknown): A prince in Simeon (1 Ch 4 3(5).

      JESHUA, jesh Q-a, JESHUAH, je-shu a yeshu" , "Jeh is deliverance" or "opulence"; cf JOSHUA) :

      (1) AV "Jeshuah," head of the 9th course of priests, and possibly of "the house of Jeshua" (1 Ch 24 11; Ezr 2" 3(5; Neh 7 39).

      (2) A Levite of Hezekiah s time (2 Ch 31 15).

      (3) Son of Jozadak = Joshua the high priest (Ezr

      2 2; 3 2.8; 4 3; 5 2; 10 18; Neh 7 7; 12 1.7.10. 26); see JOSHUA (4) = "Jesus" (1 Esd 5 48 and Sir 49 12).

      (4) A man of Pahath-moab, some of whose de scendants returned from Babylon to Jerus with Zerubbabel (Ezr 2 6; Neh 7 11) = "Jesus" (1 Esd 5 S).

      (5) Head of a Levitical house which had over sight of the workmen in the temple (Ezr 2 40;

      3 9; Neh 7 43). He is mentioned again in Neh 8 7 as taking part in explaining the Torah to the people, in 9 4 f (cf 12 8) as leading in the wor ship, and in 10 9 (Heb 10) as sealing the covenant ; this J. is called son of Azaniah (Neh 10 9). To these references should be added probably Neh 12 24, where commentators read, "Jeshua, Binnui, Kad- miel" for "Jeshua the son of Kadmiel." Perhaps Jozabad (Ezr 8 33) is a "son" of this same Jeshua; cf Ezr 8 33 = 1 Esd 8 63, where AV is "Jesu," RV "Jesus." He is the same as Jessue (AV), Jesus (RV) (1 Esd 5 26).

      (6) Father of Ezer, a repairer of the wall (Neh 3 19).

      (7) JOSHUA, son of Nun (Neh 8 17) (q.v.).


      JESHUA, jesh Q-a, je-shu a (IPIttP , yeshu a *): A place occupied by the children of Judah after their return from captivity (Neh 11 26), evidently, from the places named with it, in the extreme S. of Judah. It may correspond with the Shema of Josh 15 26,



      Jerusha Jesse

      and possibly to the Sheba of 19 2. The site may be Khirbct Sa*weh, a ruin upon a prominent hill, Tell en 8d*weh, 12 miles E.N.E. of Beersheba. The hill is surrounded by a wall of large blocks of stone. PEF, III, 409-10, Sh XXV.

      JESHURUN, jo-slm rim, jesh u-run CP13T, ifshunln, "upright one," Dt 32 15; 33 5.26; Lsa 44 2): LXX tr- s it "the beloved one" (riyawrj/j.^vos, ti/(ipi Mnos, the perf. part, passive of agapdo), and in Isa 44 2 adds "Israel"; Vulg lias dilcctus in Dt 32 15, elsewhere rcctissitnus; Aq., Symm., Tlieod. have "upright." For the form, Duhm compares "P ^7, z bhuliin, Zebulun. (1) The name used to be explained as a diminutive form, a pet name, and some, e.g. Cornill, Schultz (OT Theol, ET, II, 29, n.12) still explain it so, "the righteous little people." But there is no evidence that- the ending -art had a diminutive force. (2) Most moderns take it as a poetical or ideal title of Israel, derived from "Yil 1 ? , ydshdr, "upright"; it is held to contain a tacit reference to the word Israel (5Sjnip"^, yisrd cl), of which the first three consonants are almost the same as those of "Jeshunm"; in Nu 23 10 the term "the righteous ones" (D"HTL "> , yxhdnm) is supposed to contain a similar reference . Most commentators compare also "the Book of Jashar," and it has been held that "Jashar" is similarly a name by which Israel is called. See JASHAU.

      Following Barber (ZATW, 1885, 161 ff), com mentators hold that, in Isa this new name, a coinage due to the author of Second Isaiah and adopted in Dt, stands in contrast, to Jacob, "the supplanter," as his name was explained by the Hebrews (cf Hos 12 2-4). Israel is here given a new name, "the upright, pious one," and with the new name goes a ne\\\\\\\\v chance in life, to live up to its meaning. Driver (Dt, Ml) says that in Dt 32 15 "where the context is of declension from its ideal [it is] applied reproach fully. Nomen Recti pro Israele ponens, ironice eos perstringit qui a rectitudine defecerant (Calv.). Elsewhere it is used as a title of honor." AV has "Jesurun" in Isa 44 2.


      JESIAH, jf-sl a (1 Ch 23 20 AV). See ISSHIAII.

      JESIAS, je-sl as ( Ico-ias, leslas; AV Josias [1 Esd 8 33]): Corresponding to Jeshaiah, son of Athaliah (Ezr 8 7).

      JESIMIEL, jr-sim i-el ( ^TC^ , iftlmicl, "God establishes";: A prince of Simeon (1 Ch 4 36).

      JESSE, jes d ptT, yishay, meaning doubtful; according to Gescnius it = "wealthy"; Olshausen, Cram., 277 f, conjectures !"P TlJ") , yah, "Jeh exists"; Wellhausen [1 S 14 49] explains it as " l t?"QX , ubhishny [see AHISHAI]; Ieo-o-a, lessai; Ruth 4 17.22; 1 S 16; 17; 20; 22; 25 10; 2 S 20 1; 23 1; 1 K 12 16; 1 Ch 10 14; 12 18; Ps 72 20; Isa 11 1.10 [ = Rom 15 12]); Mt 1 5.6; Acts 13 22): Son of Obed, grandson of Boaz, and father of King David. The grouping of the refer ences to J. in 1 S is bound up with that of the grouping of the whole narrative of David and Saul. See SAMUEL, BOOKS OF. There seem to be three main veins in the narrative, so far as J. is concerned.

      (1) In 1 S 16 1-13, where J. is called the Bethle- hemite. Samuel is sent to seek among J. s sons a successor to Saul.

      Both Samuel and J. fail to discern at first Jeh s choice, Samuel thinking that it vyould be the eldest son (ver 6), while J. had not thought it worth while to call the young est to the feast (ver 11).

      (2) (a) In 1 S 16 14-23, Saul is mentally dis turbed, and is advised to get a harpist. David "the son of J. the Bethlehemite" is recommended by a courtier, and Saul sends to J. for David.

      "And J. took ten loaves [so emend and translate, and not as KV, "an ass laden with bread"], and a [skin] bottle of wine, and a kid, and sent them" to Saul as a present with David, who becomes a courtier of Saul s witli his father s consent.

      (6) The next mention of J is in three contemp tuous references by Saul to David as "the son of J." in 20 27.30.31, part of the quarrel-scene between Saul and Jonathan. (But it is not quite certain if ch 20 belongs to the same source as 16 14-23.) In answer to the first reference, Jonathan calls his friend "David," and Saul repeats the phrase "the son of J.," abusing Jonathan personally (ver 30, where the meaning is uncertain). The reference to David as "the son of J." here and in the following verse is contemptuous, not because of any reproach that might attach itself to J., but, as Budde remarks, because "an upstart is always contemptuously referred to under his father s name" in courts and society. History repeats itself!

      (<) Further references of a like kind are in the passage, 22 0-2:5, viz. in vs 7.8.13 by Saul, and repeated by Doeg in ver .(.

      ((/) The final one of this group is in 25 10, where Xabal sarcastically asks "Who is David? and who is the son of J . V "

      (3) The parts of 17 18 5 which are omitted by LXX B, i.e. 17 12-31. 41. 4Xb.oO.55 18 (>. Here J. is mentioned as "an Ephrathite of Beth-lehem- judah" (ver 12, not "that" Ephrathite, which is a grammatically impossible tr of the MT), Ephrath or Ephrathah being another name for Bethlehem, or rather for the district. He is further said to have eight sons (ver 12), of whom the three eldest had followed Saul to the war (ver 13).

      J. sends David, the shepherd, to his brothers with pro visions (ver 17). Afterward David, on being brought to Saul and asked who he is, answers, "1 am the son of thy servant .). the Bcthlehemite" (ver 58). J. is also de scribed (ver 12) as being "in the days of Saul an old man, advanced in years" (so emend and translate, not as RV, "stricken in. //carx among men"). The mention of his having 8 sons in ver 12 is not in agreement with 1 ("h 2 13-15, -vyhich gives only 7 sons with two sisters, but where Syr gives S, adding, from 27 18, Klihu which MT has there probably by corruption (Curtis, Ch, 88). 1 S 16 10 should be tr<i "and .1. made his 7 sons to pass before Samuel" (not as KV, AV, "seven of his sons"). Budde (Kurz. Hand-Komm., "Samuel," 114) holds 16 1-13 to be a late Midr, and (ib, 123 f) omits () "that" in 17 12; (l>) also " and he had 8 sons" as due to a wrong inference from 16 10; (r) the names of the 3 eldest in 17 13; (d) ver 146; he then changes 15o, and reads thus: (12) " .Vow D. was the son of an Ephrathiteof Bethlenem- Judali, whose name was J., who was .... [years] old at the time of Saul. (13) And the 3 eldest sons of J. had marched with Saul to the war, (14) and David was the youngest, (15) and David had remained to feed his father s sheep at Bethlehem. (1(5) Now the 1 hilis came," etc.

      According to all these narratives in 1 S, whether all 3 be entirely independent of one another or not, J. had land in Bethlehem, probably outside the town wall, like Boaz (see BOAZ) his grandfather (Ruth 4 17). In 22 3.4 David intrusts his father and mother to the care of the king of Moab, but from 20 29 some have inferred that J. was dead (although most critics assign 22 3 at any rate to the same stratum as ch 20).

      Jonathan tells Saul that David wanted to attend a family sacrificial feast at Bethlehem (20 29). MT reads, "And he, my brother, has commanded me," whereas we should probably read with LXX, "and my brethren have commanded me," i.e. the members of the clan, as we have farther on in the verse, "Let me get away, 1 pray thee, and see my brethren." As to J. s daughters, see ABIGAIL; NAHASH.

      (4) Of the other references to J., the most note worthy is that in Isa 11 1 : "There shall come forth a shoot out of the stock of Jesse, and a branch out of

      Jesting Jesus Christ



      his rod.- shall hear fruit," i.e. out of .Jesse s roots (ef llev 5 .". "Why .1. and not David?" asks Duhm; and lie answers, "Because the Messiah will he a M-cotid David, rather than a descendant ot David." Marti explains it to mean that lie will he, not from David, hut from a collateral line oi descent. Duhm s explanation surest s a paral lelism between David and Christ, of whom the former mav he treated as a type similar to Aaron and Melch i/edek in He. Sa nl mi^ht pour cont empt ujxin "the son of .).," hut Isaiah has given J. hero a name ahove all Heh names, and thus does Provi dence mock society. See also ROOT OF JKSSK. DAVID KKA\\\\\\\\CIS ROBERTS

      JESTING, jest ing: I sed from Tindale down as the tr of eiV/iaTreX/a, t lilnt /x lia (Kph 5 4). Aris totle uses the original in his Klliic* iv.14 as an equivalent, of "quick-witted," from its root mean- in,!.; "something easily turned," adding _that, since 1 the majority of people love excessive 1 jesting;, tin- word is apt to he degraded. This is the case here, where 1 it clearly has a flavor of the coarse or licen tious.

      JESUI, jes fi-I. See Isnvi.

      JESUITES, jes fi-Tts. See ISHVI.

      JESURUN, je-su nm, jes n-nm. See JKSHOU-.V

      JESUS, je zus ( Irio-oiis, It-sods, for "LTrp,

      y hoshu 11 ) .

      (\\\\\\\\) Joshua, son of Xun (AV Acts 7 4.">; He 4 S; c f 1 Mace 2 >>; 2 Ksd 7 :*7).

      (2) (:>) High priest and Levite. See JESHUA, 2, 5.

      (4) Son of Sirach. See SIKACII.

      (o) An ancestor of .h-sus (Lk 3 29, AV "Jose").

      (6) (7) See the next three articles.

      JESUS CHRIST, je zus krlst ( I^o-ovs XpurT<5s,


      PAH ! 1. 1 NTKODUCTORY

      I. THE Son i:s 1. In ( ieneral

      _ . Denial of Existence of Jesus

      : >. Kxtra-Chrisiiaii Notices V. The ( iospels

      1 i The S\\\\\\\\ nopt ics il. i The l- ourth ( iospel

      II. TII i; PIIKI- s RATION

      1. Botli Cent ile and Jewish

      L . OT Preparation

      :i. Post-exilian Preparation

      111. TllE ( )CT\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ All!) SlTl A 1 ION

      1. The Land

      Its Divisions 2. Political Sit nation

      ( lianges in Territory :(. The Ueligious Sects

      ( 1 ) The Scribes

      (2) The Pharisees ( . >) Tile Sadducees .-I i The Kssenes

      IV. THE ( iiiio.Noi.ix; Y

      1. Date of the Birth of Jesus

      2. Date of Bapl ism

      :;. I.enuMh of Ministry 1. Date of Christ s Death


      I . The "Modern" At I it ude

      L . Supernatural in the (iospels

      II. TII i-; Si KS.-I \\\\\\\\ H.-.III i-

      i llcscrvo of Jesus and Modern Criticism 2. A ( irou ing Ke\\\\\\\\ elation

      III. KIM, DOM \\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\ i> A rocA I.YI SE

      I. The Kingdom Present or Future ? L . Apocalypt ic Beliefs

      IV. THE CH \\\\\\\\H\\\\\\\\CI EH AND CLAIMS

      1. Denial of Christ s Moral Perfection 2. Sinlessness and the Messianic Claim


      1. Divisions of the History

      2. Not a ( omplete "Life"



      I. Til K \\\\\\\\ATIVITY

      1 . Hidden Piet v in Judaism

      2. Birth of the Baptist

      :$. The Annunciation and Its Results

      4. The Birth at Bethlehem

      (1) The Census of Quirinius (2i Jesus Born

      5. The Incidents of the Infancy

      i 1 i The Visit of t lie Shepherds

      (2) The Circumcision and Presentation in thu Temple

      (:{) Visit of the Magi

      (i. Flight to Ktfypt and Return to Xazareth 7. (juestifins and ( )l)ji-ctions

      ( 1) The, Virgin Uirtli

      (2) The (ienealoKies


      1. The Human Development

      2. Jesus in the Temple


      1. The Preaching of John The ( omiug Christ

      2. Jesus Is Baptized IV. Tn K TEMPTATION-

      1. Temptation Follows Baptism

      2. Nature of the Temptation :{. Stages of the Temptation

      Its Typical Character


      I. THE TESTIMONIES OF TIIK BAPTIST 1 . The Synoptics and John 2. Threefold Witness of the Baptist II. Tin: FIKST DISCIPLES

      1 . Spiritual Accret ion

      2. "Son of Man" and "Son of Cod"


      1. The First Miracle

      2. The First Passover, and Cleansing of the Temple :{. The Visit- of Nicodemus

      4. Jesus and John


      1. Withdrawal to Calilee

      2. The Living Water : ,. The True Worship

      4. Work and Its Reward


      1. The Scene

      2. The Time

      Fir. -<t rrrioil Fnnii thf /ir,/i /i >i i >,</ of the .\\\\\\\\flnixtru in Galilee till the Mi.-i.tii.>u of the Twdee


      1. Healing of Nobleman s Son

      2. The Visit to Nazareth

      :i. Call of the Four Disciples 4. At Capernaum

      ) Christ s Teaching

      /,; The Demoniac in the Synagogue Demon- Possession : Its Reality

      c) Peter s Wife s Mother

      (I) The Kventful Kvening


      1. The First Circuit

      2. Capernaum Incidents

      (i) Cure of the Paralytic,

      h) ("all and Feast of Matthew

      3. The Unnamed Jerusalem Feast a) The Healing at Bethesda

      6) Son and Father

      r) The Threefold Witness

      4. Sabbath Controversies

      a) Plucking of the Kars of Grain l>) The Man with the Withered Hand r) Withdrawal to the Sea , r >. The Choosing of the Twelve

      a) The Apostolic: Function

      b) The Lists r) The Men


      1. The Sermon on the Mount n) The Blessings

      b) True Righteousness the Old and the -Sew

      r) Religion and Hypocrisy True and False


      ,1) The True Good and Cure for Care <) Relation to the World s Evil the Conclu sion

      2. Intervening Incidents

      a) Healing of the Centurion s Servant

      b) The Widow of Xain s Son Raised

      c) Embassy of John s Disciples Christ and His Generation

      d) The First Anointing the Woman \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ho ^ as a Sinner



      Jesting Jesus Christ

      3. Second Galilean Circuit Events at Capernaum

      a) Galilee Revisited

      b) Cure of Demoniac Discourse on Blasphemy The Sign of Jonah

      <) Christ s Mother and Brethren

      4. Teaching in Parables Parables of the Kingdom



      1. Crossing of tlie Lake -Stilling of the Storm

      a) Aspirants for Disciple-ship

      b) The Storm Calmed

      2. The Gadarene (Gcrasene) Demoniac

      3. Jairus Daughter Raised Woman with Issue of Blood

      a) Jairus Appeal and Its Result

      b) The Afllicted Woman Cured

      4. Incidents of Third Circuit

      5. The Twelve Sent Fofth Discourse of Jesus

      a) The Commission

      b) Counsels and Warnings

      Second Period After the Mixxion

      I. FKOM THK DEATH OF THE 15 \\\\\\\\I-TI-T TILL Tin: DIS


      1. Tlio Murder of the Baptist and Herod s Alarms

      2. The Feeding of the Five Thousand

      3. Walking on the Sea

      4. (iennesaret Discourse on the Bread of Life Peter s First Confession


      1. Jesus and Tradition Outward and Inward Purity

      2. Retirement to Tyre and Sidon the Syrophoeni- cian Woman

      3. At Decapolis New Miracles

      a) The Deaf Man

      b) Feeding of the Four Thousand

      4. Leaven of the Pharisees, etc -Cure of Blind Man

      5. At Caosarea Philippi the (ireat Confession - First Announcement of Passioti

      0. The Transfiguration the Kpileplic Boy


      1. (ialilee and Capernaum

      a) Second Announcement of the Passion 6) The Temple Tax

      c) Discourse on (ireat ness and Forgiveness

      (1) Greatness in Humility

      (2) Tolerance

      (3) The Krring Brother

      (4) Parable of I nmerciful Servant

      2. The Feast of Tabernacles -Discourse s, etc o) The Private; Journey Divided Opinions 6) Christ s Self-Witness

      c) The Woman Taken in Adultery

      d) The Cure of the Blind Man

      e) The (iood Shepherd Chronological Note



      1. Rejected by Samaria

      2. Mission of the Seventy

      3. The Lawyer s Question Parable of (iood Samaritan

      4. Discourses, Parables, and Miracles a) Original to Luke

      6) The infirm Woman the Dropsied Man

      c) Parable of the Great Supper

      d) Counting the Cost

      5. Martha and Mary

      (i. Feast of the Dedication


      1. [ arables of Lost Sheep, Lost Piece of Silver and Prodigal Son

      2. Parables of the Tnjust Steward and the Rich Man and Lazarus

      3. The Summons to Bethany Raising of Lazarus III. FROM THE RETIREMENT TO FPHRAIM TILL THE


      1. Retreat to Ephraim

      2. The Journey Resumed

      3. Cure of the Lepers

      4. Pharisaic Questionings a) Divorce

      6) Coming of the Kingdom c) Parable of the Unjust Judge

      5. The Spirit of the Kingdom

      a) Parable of Pharisee and Publican

      b) Blessing of the Babes

      c) The Rich Young Ruler

      G. Third Announcement of the Passion 7. The Rewards of the; Kingdom

      a) Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard

      6) The Sons of Zebedee

      8. Jesus at Jericho

      a) The Cure of Bartimaeus

      b) Zacchaeus the Publican c; Parable of the Pounds

      Arrival at Bethany



      1 . The Chronology

      2. The Anointing at Bethany

      3. The Entry into Jerusalem

      Jesus Weeping over Jerusalem Return to Beth any

      4. Cursing of the Fig Tree 1 Second Cleansing e>f the Temple;

      Were There Two Cleansings ?

      5. The Eventful Tuesday

      a) The Demand for Authority Parables

      (1) The Two Sons the Wicked Husbandmen

      (2) The Marriage of the King s Son

      b) Ensnaring Questions, ete:

      (1) Tribute to Caesar the Resurre ction the ( ireat Commandment

      (2) David s Son and Lord r) The (ireat Denunciation d) The Widow s Offering

      <) The Visit of the- (i reeks

      /) Discourse; on the Last Things

      ,j) Parables of Ten Virgins, Talents and Last


      (_i. A Day of Retirement 7. An Atmosphere of Plotting .In, las and the

      Priests II. FROM THE L\\\\\\\\ST SUPPER TILL Tin: CROSS

      1 . The Chronology

      2. The Last Supper

      ID Tlie; Preparation

      6) Dispute about Precedence --Washing e>f the Disciples Feet Departure of Judas

      c) The Lord s Supper

      d) The Last Discourses Intercessory Prayer i ) The Depart tire and Warning

      3. (iethsemane -the Betrayal and Arrest

      a) Agony in t he ( iarden

      b) Betrayal by Judas Jesus Arrested

      4. Trial be-fore the Sanhedrin Le-gal and Historical Aspects

      a) lie-fore; Annas and Caiaphas the I njust Judgment

      l>) The Threefold Denial

      c) Re-morse and Suicide of Judas ">. Trial before Pilate;

      n) Tin- Attitude of the Accusers 6) The Attitude of Pilate

      (1) Jesus Sent to llerod

      (2) " Not This Man, but Barabbas "

      (3) " Fce-e He>mo"

      (4) A Last Appe-al Pilate Yields <) The Attitude eif Jesus


      1. The ( rucilixion n) On the; Way

      6) Between the Thieves the Superscription the Seamless Robe

      c) The Mocking the Penitent Thief Je-sus and His Mother

      d) Tht; (ire-at Darkness the Cry of Desertion <) Last Words and De-ath of Jesus

      /) The Spear-Thrust Farthquako and Rending of the Veil

      2. The Burial

      d) The New Tomb

      b) The (iuarel of Soldiers


      The; Resurrection a Fundame-ntal Fact

      1. The Resurrection

      a) The Faster Morning the Open Tomb

      (1) The; Angel and the- Keepers

      (2) Visit of the; Worm-n

      (3) The; Ange-lie Me-ssage;

      b) Visit e>f Peter and John Appearance- to Mary Re-port to the- Dise-iple-s Incredulity

      <) Other Faster-Day Appearances (Enimaus. Jerusalem)

      d) The; Se-e-onel Appearance to the Eleven the Denibt of Thomas

      e) The Galilean Appearances

      (1; At the Se-a of Tiberias the Draught of

      Fishes Peter s Restoration (2) On the Mountain the; Great Commis sion Baptism /) Appearance te> James (/) The Last Meeting

      2. The Ascension


      1. After the Ascension

      2. Revelation through the Spirit

      3. (ie)spels and Epistle s

      4. Fact of Christ s Lordship



      r>. Significance of Christ s Person t> Sinriilieance of the ( ross and Resurrection 7. Hope of the Advent LiTio it AT i HI:

      Jesus Christ: The Founder of the Christian re ligion; the promised Messiah and Saviour of the world; the Lord and Head of the Christian church.

      /. The Names. (\\\\\\\\ ) "Jesus" (Icxtms) is the Gr

      equivalent of the I lei) "Joshua" f""i"ir^ , y e hdshu a ^,

      meaning "Jeh.ovah is salvation." It

      1. Jesus stands therefore in the LXX and

      A poo for "Joshua, and in Acts 7 4") and He 4 S likewise represents the ()T Joshua; hence in RV is iu these passages rendered "Joshua." In Mt 1 21 the name is commanded by the angel to lie given to the son of Mary, "for it is lie that, shall save his people from their sins" (see, below on "Nativity"). It is the personal name of the Lord in the Gospels and the Acts, but generally _in the Epistles appears in combination with "Christ" or other appellative (alone in Horn 3 20; 4 24; 1 Cor 12 3; 2 Cor 11 4; Phil 2 10; 1 Thess 4 M; He 7 22; 10 Ml, etc).

      (2) "Christ" (Clirixt<>n) .is the Or equivalent of the Ileb "Messiah" (,rPTL" , m<l*fn a h; of in the

      XT, Jn 1 4l ; 4 2r>, "Messiah"),

      2. Christ meaning "anointed" (see MKSSIAH).

      It designates Jesus as the fuliiller of the Messianic hopes of the ( )T and of the Jewish people, it will be seen below that Jesus Himself made this claim. After the resurrection it became the current title for Jesus in the apostolic church. Most frequently in the Epistles lie is called "Jesus Christ," sometimes "Christ Jesus" (Rom 8 1.2. oil; 1 Cor 1 2.30; 4 l.~>; Eph 1 1; Phil 1 1; Col 1 4.28 AY; 1 Thess 2 14, etc), often "Christ" alone (Rom 1 10 AV; 6 O.X; 6 4.x. 9; 8 10, etc). In this case "Christ " has acquired the force of a proper name. Very frequently the term is associated with "Lord" (kiirios) "the [or "our"| Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 11 17; 15 11 AV; 16 31 AV; 20 21; 28 31; Kom 1 7; 5 1.11; 13 14; 1 Cor 16 2)5, etc).

      //. Order of Treatment. In studying, as it is proposed to do in this art., the earthly history of Jesus and His place in the faith of the apostolic church, it will be convenient to pursue the following order:

      First, as introductory to the whole study, certain questions relating to the sources of our knowledge of Jesus, and to the preparation for, and circum stances of. His historical appearance, invite care ful attention (Part I I.

      Xext, still as preliminary to the proper narra tive of the life of Jesus, it is desirable to consider certain problems arising out of the presentation of that life in the dospels with which modern thought is more specially concerned, as determining the at I it tide in which t he narratives are approached. Such are the problems of the miracles, the Messiah- ship, the sinless character and supernatural claims of Jesus (Part IIj.

      The way is t hen open for treatment in order of the actual events of Christ s life and ministry, so far as recorded. These fall into many stages, from His nativity and baptism till His death, resurrection and ascension (Part III).

      A final division will deal with Jesus as the exalted Lord in the aspects in which He is presented in the teaching of the Fpistles and remaining writings of the XT (Part IV;.


      I. The Sources. -The principal, and practically the only sources for our knowledge of Jesus Christ are the four Canonical Gospels distinction being made in these between the first three (Synop tic) Gospels, and the Gospel of John. Nothing,

      either in the few notices of Christ in non-Christian

      authors, or in t he references in the other books of the

      XT, or in later Christian lit., adds to

      1. In Gen- the information which the Gospels eral already supply. The so-called apocry phal (lospels are worthless as authori ties (see s.v.j; the few additional sayings of Christ (cf Acts 20 M")) found in outside writings are of doubtful genuineness (cf a collection of these in West cot t s I n In i In tin Xtmly of the (Vo.s/7,s, Appendix C; see also LOCIA).

      It marks the excess to which skepticism has gone

      that writers are found in recent, years who deny the

      very existence of Jesus Christ (Kalt-

      2. Denial hol f, ])<is Ch.rj.stus- Problem, and Die of Existence Entstehung des Christenthums; Jensen, of Jesus Dux Gilgamesch-Epos, 1; Drews, Die

      Christusmythe; of on Kalthoff, Schweit zer, The. Quest of the Historical Jeans, ET, 313 IT; Jensen is reviewed in the writer s The, Resurrection of Jesn.t, ch ix). The extravagance of such skep ticism is its sufficient refutation.

      Of notices outside the Christian circles the fol lowing may be referred to.

      (1) Jos< i>hns. There is the famous

      3. Extra- passage in Jos, Aid, XVIII, iii, 3, Christian commencing, "Xow there was about Notices this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be

      lawful to call him a man," etc. It is not unlikely that Jos had some reference to Jesus, but most agree 1 that the passage in question, if not entirely spurious, has been the subject of Chris tian interpolation (on the lit. and different views, see Schiirer, Jeirixh P>i>lc in the Time of Christ, l)iv II, vol II, 143 ff; in support of interpolation, Kdersheim on "Josephus," in Did. of Christ. Bioy.).

      (2) Tueitns. The Horn historian, Tacitus, in a well-known passage relating to the persecution of Nero (.l/m.xy.44), tells how the Christians, already "a great multitude" (ingens multitude), derived their name "from one Christus, who was executed in the reign of Tiberius by the procurator of Judaea, Pontius Pilate."

      (3) Suetonius also, in his account of Claudius, speaks of the Jews as expelled from Koine for the raising of tumults at the instigation of one "Chres- tus" (impulsore Chreslo), plainly a mistake for "( hrist us." The incident is doubtless that referred to in Acts 18 2.

      The four Gospels, then, with their rich contents, remain as our primary sources for the knowledge of the earthly life of Jesus.

      4. The (1) The Xynoiitics. It may be taken Gospels for granted as the result of the best

      criticism that the first three Gospels (Mt, Mk, Lk) all fall well within the apostolic age (of Harnack, Altchr. Lit., Pref; see GOSPELS). The favorite theory at present of the relations of these 1 Gospels is, that Mk is an independent Gospel, resting on the teaching of Peter; that Mt and Lk have, as sources the Gospel of Mk and a collection of discourses, probably attributable to the apostle Matthew (now commonly called Q); and that Lk has a third, well-authenticated source (Lk 1 1-4) peculiar to himself. The present writer is disposed to allow more independence to the evangelists in the embodying of a tradition common to all; in any case, the sources named are of unexceptionable authority, and furnish a strong guaranty for the reliability of t he narrat ives. The supreme guaranty of their trustworthiness, however, is found in the narratives themselves; for who in that (or any) age could imagine a figure so unique and perfect as that of Jesus, or invent the incomparable sayings and parables that proceeded from His lips? Much of ( hrist s teaching is high as heaven above the minds of men still.



      (2) The. Fourth Gospel The Fourth Gospel stands apart from the Synoptics in dealing mainly with another set of incidents (the Jerusalem ministry), and discourses of a more private and intimate kind than those belonging to the Galilean teaching. Its aim, too, is doctrinal to show that Jesus is "the Son of God," and its style and mode of conception are very different from those of the Synoptic Gospels. Its contents touch their narratives in only a few points (as in Jn 6 4-21). Where they do, the resemblance is manifest. It is obvious that the reminiscences which the Gospel contains have been long brooded over by the apostle, and that a certain interpretative element blends with his narration of incidents and discourse s. This, however, does not warrant us in throwing doubt, with so many, on the genuineness of the Gospel, for which the external evidence is exceptionally strong (cf Sanday, The Criticism of the Fourth Gospel; Drummorid, Character and Authorship of the Fourth Gospel; and see JOHN, GOSPEL, OF). The Gospel is accepted here as a genuine record of the sayings and doings of Jesus which it narrates.

      //. The Preparation. In the Gospels and

      throughout the NT Jesus appears as the goal of

      OT revelation, and the point to which

      1. Both all providential developments tended. Gentile and He came, Paul says, in "the fulness Jewish of the time" (Gal 4 4). It has often

      been shown how, politically, intellec tually, morally, everything in the Graeco-Roman world was ready for such a universal religion as Jesus brought into it (cf Baur s Hist of the Church in the First Three Cents., ET, ch i). The prepa ration in Israel is seen alike in God s revelations to, and dealings with, the chosen people in the patriarchal, Mosaic, monarchical and prophetic periods, and in the developments of the Jewish mind in the centuries immediately before Christ.

      As special lines in the OT preparation may be noted the ideas of the Messianic king, a ruler of

      David s house, whose reign would be

      2. OTPrep- righteous, perpetual, universal (cf Isa aration 7 139 7; 32 1.2; Jer 33 15.16; Ps

      2 1-10, etc); of a Righteous Sufferer (Ps 22, etc), whose suiTerings are in Isa 63 declared to have an expiatory and redeeming character; and of a Messianic kingdom, which, breaking the bounds of nationalism, would extend through the whole earth and embrace all peoples (cf Isa 60; Ps 87; Dnl 2 44; 7 27, etc). The kingdom, at the same time, is now conceived of under a more spiritual aspect. Its chief blessings are forgiveness and righteousness.

      The age succeeding the return from exile wit nessed a manifold preparation for the advent of

      Christ. Here may be observed the

      3. Post- decentralization of the Jewish religious exilian ideals through the rise of synagogue Preparation worship and the widespread dispersion

      of the race; the contact with Hellenic culture (as in Philo); but esp. the marked sharpen ing of Messianic expectations. Some of these were of a crude apocalyptic character (see APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE; ESCHATOLOGY OF THE OT); many were political and revolutionary; but some were of a purer and more spiritual kind (cf Lk 2 25.38). To these purer elements Jesus attached Himself in His preaching of the kingdom and of Himself as its Lord. Even in the gentile world, it is told, there was an expectation of a great One who about this time would come from Judaea (Tac. Hist, v.13; Suet. Vespas. 4).

      ///. The Outward Situation. Of all lands Pal was the most fitted to be the scene of the culminat ing revelation of God s grace in the person and work of Jesus Christ, as before it was fitted to be

      1. The


      the abode of the people chosen to receive and pre serve the revelations that prepared the way for that final manifestation. At once cen tral and secluded at the junction of the three great continents of the Old World, Asia, Africa and Europe the highway of nations in war and commerce touching mighty powers on every hand, Egypt, Syria, Assyria, kingdoms of Asia Minor, as formerly more ancient empires, Hittite and Babylonian, now in contact with Greece and Rome, yet singularly inclosed by mountain, desert, Jordan gorge, and Great Sea, from ready entrance of foreign influ ences, Pal has a place of its own in the history of revelation, which only a Divine wisdom can have given it (cf Stanley, /Sinai and Palestine, Part II, ch ii; G. A. Smith, Hist. Geog. of the Holy Land, Book I, chs i, ii; Lange, Life of Christ, 1, 246 IT).

      Its divisions. Pal, in the Rom period, was di vided into four well-defined provinces or districts Judaea, with Jerus as its center, in the S., the strong hold of Jewish conservatism; Samaria, in the middle, peopled from Assyrian times by mixed settlers (2 K 17 24-34), preponderatingly heathen in origin, yet now professing the Jewish religion, claiming Jewish descent (cf Jn 4 12), possessing a copy of the law (Sam Pent), and a temple of their own at Gerizim (the original temple, built by Manasseh, c 409 BC, was destroyed by John Hvrcanus, 109 BC); Galilee "Galilee of the Gentiles" (Mt 4 15; cf Isa 9 1) in the N., the chief scene of Christ s ministry, freer and more cosmopolitan in spirit, through a large infusion of gentile population, and contact with traders, etc, of varied nationalities: these in Western Pal, while on the E., "beyond Jordan," was Peraea, divided up into Peraea proper, Batanaea, Gaulonitis, Ituraea, Trachonitis, Decapolis, etc (cf Mt 4 25; 19 1; Lk 3 1). The feeling of bitterness between Jews and Samaritans was intense (Jn 4 9). The language of the people throughout was ARAMAIC (q.v.), but a knowledge of the Gr tongue was widely diffused, especially in the N., where intercourse with Gr-speaking peoples was habitual (the NT writings are in Gr). Jesus doubtless used the native dialect in His ordinary teaching, but it is highly probable that He also knew Gr, and was acquainted with OT Scriptures in that language (the LXX). In this case He may have sometimes used it in His preach ing (cf Roberts, Discussions on the Gospels).

      The miserable story of the vicissitudes of the Jewish people in the cent, succeeding the great persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes 2. Political and the Maccabean revolt a story Situation made up of faction, intrigue, Wars, murders, massacres, of growing degen eracy of rulers and nation, of repeated sackings of Jerus and terrible slaughters till Herod, the Idumaean, misnamed "the Great," ascended the throne by favor of the Romans (37 BC), must be read in the books relating to the period (Ewald, Hist of Israel, V; Milman, Hist of Jews; Schiirer, Hist of the Jewish People in Time of Christ, Div I, Vol I; Stanley, Jewish Church, HI, etc). Rome s power, first invited by Judas Maccabaeus (161 BC), was finally established by Pompey s capture of Jerus (63 BC). Herod s w r ay to the throne was tracked by crime and bloodshed, and murder of those most nearly related to him marked every step in his advance. His taste for splendid buildings palace, temple (Mt 24 1; Jn 2 20), fortresses, cities (Se- baste, Caesarea, etc) and lavish magnificence of his royal estate and administration, could not con ceal the hideousness of his crafty, unscrupulous selfishness, his cold-blooded cruelty, his tyrannous oppression of his subjects. "Better be Herod s hog than his son," was the comment of Augustus, when he heard of the dying king s unnatural doings.



      Ch<t>i<jex in Irrritori/. At, the time of Christ s birth, the whole of Pal was united under Herod s rule, but on Herod s death, after a long reign of 37 (or, count ing from his actual accession, 34 )_ years, his dominions were, in accordance with his will, confirmed by Home, divided. .Judaea and Samaria (a few towns except ed) fell to his son Arclielaus (Mt 2 I - ), with the title of "et hnarch"; Galilee and Peraea were given to Herod Antipas, aiiotlier son, with the title of "ten-arch" (Mt 14 1; Lk 3 1.19; 23 7; Acts 13 D; Herod Philip, a third son, re ceived Ituraea, Trachonitis, and other parts of the northern trans-.Jordanic territory, likewise as "te- trarch" (Lk 3 1; cf Mt 14 3; .Nik 6 17). A few years later, the tyranny of Archelaus provoked an appeal of his subjects to Augustus, and Archelaus, summoned to Home, was banished to Gaul (7 AD). Thereafter Judaea, with Samaria, was governed by a Roman procurator, under the oversight, of the prefect of Syria.

      In the religious situation the chief fact of interest

      is the place occupied and prominent, part- played

      by the religious sects- the Pharisees,

      3. The Re- the Sadducees, and (though unmen-

      ligious tioned in the ( lospels, these had an

      Sects important, influence on the early

      history of the church) the Essenes.

      The rise and characteristics of these sects can here

      only be alluded to (see special arts.).

      (1) The xcrH>e*. From the days of Ezra zealous attention had been given to the study of the law, and an order of men had arisen the "scribes"- whose special business it was to guard, develop and expound the law. Through their labors, scrupulous observance of the law, and, with it, of the innumer able regulations intended to preserve the law, and apply it, in detail to conduct, (the so-called "tradi tion of the elders," Alt 15 2 f f ), became the ideal of righteousness. The sects first appear in the Mac- cabean age. The Maccabean conflict reveals the existence of a party known as the "Assidaeans" (Heb hn^uUnui), or "pious" ones, opposed to the lax Hellenizing tendencies of the times, and staunch observers of the law. These in the beginning gave brave support, to Judas Maccabaeus, and doubtless then embraced the best elements of the nation.

      (2) The- I hiiritv i t*. -From them, by a process of deterioration too natural in such cases, developed the party of legalists known in the Gospels as the "Pharisees" ("separated"), on which Christ s stern est rebukes fell for their self-righteousness, ostenta tion, pride and lack of sympathy and charity (Mt 6 2 IT; 23; Lk 18 9-14). They gloried in an excessive scrupulosity in the observance of the ex ternals of the law, even in trivialities. To them the multitude that, knew not, the law were "accursed" (Jn 7 -lit). To this party the great body of the scribes and rabbis belonged, and its powerful influ ence was eagerly sought by contending factions in the state.

      (3) The SadilucccH. Alongside of the Pharisees were the "Sadducees" (probably from "Zadok") rather a political and aristocratic clique than a religious sect, into whose possession the honors of the high-priesthood and other influential offices hereditarily passed. They are first met with by name under John Ilyrcanus (135-106 BC). _ The Sadducees received only the law of Moses, inter preted it, in a literal, secularist ic spirit, rejected the Pharisaic- traditions and believed in neither resur rection, angel nor spirit (Acts 23 8). Usually in rivalry with the Pharisees, they are found combin ing with these to destroy Jesus (Mt 26 3-5.57).

      (4) The Essence. The t hird party, the "Essenes," differed from both (some derive also from the As sidaeans) in living in fraternities apart from the general community, chiefly in the desert of Engedi,

      on the N.W. shore of the Dead Sea, though some were found also in villages and towns; in rejecting animal sacrifices, etc, sending only gifts of incense to the temple; in practising celibacy and community of goods; in the wearing of white garments; in certain customs (as greeting the sunrise with prayers) sug gestive of oriental influence. They forbade slavery, war, oaths, were given to occult studies, had secret doctrines and books, etc. As remarked, they do not appear in the Gospel, but on account of cer tain resemblances, some have sought to establish a connection between them and John the Baptist and Jesus. In reality, however, nothing could be more opposed than Essenisrn to the essential ideas and spirit, of Christ s teaching (cf Schiirer, as above, Div II, Vol II, ISSff; Kuenen, Hibbert Lects on \\\\\\\\otitntal Reliyitmx and U nirersdl Religions, 199- 20S; Lightfoot, (Was.sw/<.s, 114-79).

      IV. The Chronology. The leading chronological questions connected with the life of Jesus are dis cussed in detail elsewhere (CuiiON OP THE NT; QriitiNirs, etc); here it is sufficient, to indicate the general scheme of dating adopted in the present art., and some of the grounds on which it is preferred. The chief questions relate to the dates of the birth and baptism of Jesus, the duration of the ministry and the date of the crucifixion.

      Though challenged by some (Caspar!, Bosanquet,

      Conder, etc, put it as late as 1 BC) the usual date

      for the death of Herod the Great,

      1. Date of March, 4 BC (year of Home 750), may the Birth be assumed as correct (for grounds of of Jesus this dating, see Schiirer, op. cit., Div

      I, Vol I, 464-67). The birth of Jesus was before, and apparently not very long before, this event (Mt 2). It may therefore be placed with probability in the latter part, of the previous year (5 BC), the ordinary dating of the commencement of the Christian era being thus, as is generally recog nized, four years too late. There is no certainty as to the month or day of the birth. The Christmas date, December 25, is first met with in the W. in the 4th cent, (the eastern date was January 6), _and was then possibly borrowed from a pagan festival. December, in the winter season, seems unlikely, as unsuitable for the pasturing of flocks (Lk 2 8), though this objection is perhaps not decisive (Andrews, Conder). A more probable date is a couple of months earlier. The synchronism with Quirinius (Lk 2 2) is considered in connection with the nativity. The earlier datings of 6, 7, or even 8 BC, suggested by Ramsay, Mackinlay and others, on grounds of the assumed Rom census, astronomi cal phenomena, etc, appear to leave too long an interval before the death of Herod, and conflict with other data, as Lk 3 1 (see below).

      John is said by Luke to have begun to preach and

      baptize "in the fifteenth year of Tiberius" (Lk 3

      1), and Jesus "was about thirty years

      2. Date of of age" (ver 23) when He was bap- Baptism tized by John, and entered on His

      ministry. If the 15th year of Tiberius is dated, as seems most likely, from his association with Augustus as colleague in the government, 765 AUC, or 12 AD (Tac. Ann. i.3; Suet, on Augustus, 97), and if Jesus may be supposed to have been baptized about 6 months after John commenced his work, these data combine in bring ing us to the year 780 AUC, or 27 AD, as the year of Our Lord s baptism, in agreement, with our former conclusion as to the date of His birth in 5 BC. To place the birth earlier is to make Jesus 32 or 33 years of age at His baptism an unwar rantable extension of the "about." In accord with this is the statement in Jn 2 20 that the temple had been 46 years in building (it began in 20-19 BC) at the time of Christ s first Passover; therefore in



      Jesus Christ

      780 AUC, or 27 AD (cf Schiircr, op. cit., Div I, Vol I, 410).

      The determination of the precise duration of Our

      Lord s ministry involves more doubtful elements.

      Setting aside, as too arbitrary, schemes

      3. Length which would, with some of the early of Ministry Fathers, compress the whole ministry

      into little over a single year (Browne, Hort, etc) a view which involves without authority the rejection of the mention of the Passover in Jn 6 4 there remains the choice between a two years and a three years ministry. Both have able advocates (Turner in art. "Chronology," and Sanday in art. "Jesus Christ," in HDB, advocate the two years scheme; Farrar, Ramsay, D. Smith, etc, adhere to the three years scheme). An important point is the view taken of the un named "feast" in Jn 5 1. John has already named a Passover Christ s first in 2 13.23; another, which Jesus did not attend, is named in 6 4; the final Passover, at which He was crucified, appears in all the evangelists. If the "feast" of Jn 6 1 (the art. is probably to be omitted) is also, as some think, a Passover, then John has four Passovers, and a three years ministry becomes necessary. It is claimed, however, that in this case the "feast" would almost certainly have been named. It still does not follow, even if a minor feast say Purim is intended, that we are shut up to a two years ministry. Mr. Turner certainly goes beyond his evidence in affirming that "while two years must, not more than two years can, be allowed for the interval from Jn 2 13.23 to Jn 11 55." The two years scheme involves, as will be seen on con sideration of details, a serious overcrowding and arbitrary transposition of incidents, which speak to the need of longer time. We shall assume that the ministry lasted for three years, reserving reasons till the narrative is examined.

      On the hypothesis now accepted, the crucifixion

      of Jesus took place at the Passover of 30 AD. On

      the two years scheme it would fall a

      4. Date of year earlier. On both sides it is Christ s agreed that it occurred on the Friday Death of the week of the Passover, but it

      is disputed whether this Friday was the 14th or the loth day of the month. The (iospel of John is pleaded for the former date, the Synoptics for the latter. The question will be considered in connection with the time of the Last Supper. Meanwhile it is to be observed that, if the 15th is the correct date, there seems reason to believe that the 15th of Xisan fell on a Friday in the year just named, 783 AUC, or 30 AD. We accept this pro visionally as the date of the crucifixion.


      /. The Miracles. Everyone is aware that the presence of miracle in the Gospels is a chief ground of the rejection of its history by the 1. The representatives of the "modern" school.

      "Modern" It is not questioned that it is a super- Attitude natural person whose picture is pre sented in the Gospels. There is no real difference between the Synoptics and John in this respect. "Even the oldest Gospel," writes Bousset, "is written from the standpoint of faith; already for Mark, Jesus is not only the Messiah of the Jewish people, but the miraculous eternal Son of God, whose glory shone in the world" (Was wissen wir von Jesus ? 54, 57). But the same writer, interpreting the "modern" spirit, declares that no account embracing supernatural events can be accepted as historical. "The main characteristic of this modern mode of thinking," he says, "rests upon the determination to try to explain every thing that takes place in the world by natural

      causes, or to express it in another form it, rests on the determined assertion of universal laws to which all phenomena, natural and spiritual, are subject" (What /.s Relit/ion . ET, 283).

      With such an assumption it is clear that the Gospels are condemned before they are read. Not only is Jesus there a supernatural 2. Super- person, but He is presented as super natural in natural in character, in works, in the Gospels claims (see below); He performs miracles; He has a supernatural birth, and a supernatural resurrection. All this is swept away. It may be allowed that lie had remarkable gifts of healing, but these are in the class of "faith- cures" (thus Harnack), and not truly supernatural. When one seeks the justification for this self- confident dogmatism, it is difficult to discover it, except on the ground of a pantheistic or monistic theory of the universe which excludes the personal God of Christianity. If God is the Author and Sus- tainer of the natural system, which lie rules for moral ends, it is impossible to see why, for high ends of revelation and redemption, a supernatural econ omy should not be engrafted on the natural, achiev ing ends which could not otherwise be attained. This does not of course touch the question of evi dence for any particular miracle, which must be judged of from its connection with the person of the worker, and the character of the apostolic witnesses. The well-meant effort to explain all miracles through the action of unknown natural laws which is what Dr. Sanday calls "making both ends meet" ( I.iff of Christ in Recent Research, 302) breaks down in the presence of such miracles as the instanta neous cleansing of the leper, restoration of sight to the blind, the raising of the dead, acts which plainly imply an exercise of creative power. In such a life as Christ s, transcendence of the ordinary powers of Nature is surely to be looked for.

      //. The Messiahship. A difficulty has been found in the fact that in all the Gospels Jesus knew Him self to be the Messiah at least from

      1. Reserve the time of His baptism, yet did not, of Jesus even to His disciples, unreservedly and Modern announce Himself as such till after Criticism Peter s great, confession at Caesarea

      Philippi (Mf 16 13 ff). On this seem ing secrecy the bold hypothesis has been built that Jesus in reality never made the claim to Mes siahship, and that the passages which imply the contrary in Mk (the original Gospel) are unhis- torical (Wrede; cf on this and other theories, Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus, ET; Sanday, The Lift- of Christ in Recent Research). So extreme an opinion is rejected by most ; but modern critics vie with each other in the freedom with which they treat the testimony of the evangel ists on this subject. Baldensperger, e.g., supposes that Jesus did not attain full certainty on His Messiahship till near the time of Peter s confession, and arbitrarily transposes the earlier sections in which the title "Son of Man" occurs till after that event (Das Selbstbewusstsein Jesn, 2d ed, 240). Bousset thinks that Jesus adopted the Messianic role as the only one open to Him, but bore it as a "burden" (cf his Jesus ). Schweitzer connects it with apocalyptic ideas of a wildly fantastic char acter (op. cit., ch xix).

      There is, however, no need for supposing that

      Peter s confession marks the first dawn of this

      knowledge in the minds of the apostles.

      2. A Rather was it, the exalted expression Growing of a faith already present , which had Revelation long been maturing. The baptism

      and temptation, with the use of the title "Son of Man," the tone of authority in His teaching, His miracles, and many special incidents.



      show, as clearly as do I lie discourses in John, that .Icsiis was from I lie beginning fully conscious of His vocation, and His reserve in the use ot the t it le sprang, not from any doubt in His own mind as to His right to it, Inn from His desire to avoid false associat ions t ill I he t rue nat ure of I lis Messiah- ship should he revealed. "The Messiahship was in process of self-re vela t ion throughout to those who had eyes to see it (cf .In 6 tit) 71). What it in volved will he seen lat er.

      ///. Kingdom and Apocalypse. Connected with

      the Messiahship is the idea of the "Kingdom of

      God" or "of heaven," which some in

      1. The modern times would interpret in a Kingdom purely eschatological sense, in the Present or light of .Jewish apocalyptic conceptions Future? (.Johannes Weiss, Schweitzer, etc).

      The kingdom is not a tiling of the present, 1ml wholly a thing of the future, 1o be introduced by convulsions of Nature and the 1 of the Son of Man. The language of the Lord s Prayer, "Thy kingdom come," is quoted in support of this contention, but the next petition should guard against so violent an inference. "Thy will be done," Jesus teaches His disciples to pray, "as in heaven, so on earth" (Ml. 6 10). The kingdom is the reign of (lod in human hearts and lives in this world as well as in the next. It would not be wrong to define it as consisting essentially in the supremacy of ( iod s will in human hearts and human affairs, and in every department of these; affairs. As Jesus describes the kingdom, it has, in the plain meaning of His words, a present being on earth, though its perfection is in eternity. The parables in Mt 13 and elsewhere exhibit it as founded by the sowing of the word of truth (Sower), as a mingling of good and evil elements (Tares), as growing from small beginnings to large propor tions (Mustard Seed), as gradually leavening hu manity (Leaven), as of priceless value (Treasure; Pearl; cf Mt 6 33); as terminating in a judgment (Tares, Dragnet); as perfected in the world to come (Mt 13 43). It was a kingdom spiritual in nature ( Lk 17 20.21), universal in range (Mt 8 11; 21 -13, etc), developing from a principle of life within (Mk 4 20-29), and issuing in victory over all opposition (Mt 21 44).

      It is difficult to pronounce on Ihe extent to which Jesus was acquainted with current apocalyptic

      beliefs, or allowed these to color the

      2. Apoca- imagery of parts of His teachings, lyptic These beliefs certainly did not furnish Beliefs the substance of His teaching, and it

      may be doubted whether they more than superficially affected even its form. Jewish apocalyptic knew nothing of a deatli and resurrec tion of the Messiah and of His return in glory to bring in an everlasting kingdom. What Jesus taught on these subjects sprang from His own Messianic consciousness, with the certainty He had of His triumph over death and His exaltation to the right hand of (lod. It was in OT prophecy, not in late Jewish apocalypse, that His thoughts of the future triumph of His kingdom were grounded, and from the vivid imagery of the prophets He borrowed most of the clothing of these thoughts. Isa 63, e.g., predicts not only the rejection and death of the Servant of Jehovah (vs 3.7-9.12), but the prolongation of His days and His victorious reign (vs 10-12). Dnl, not the Book of Kn, is the source of the title, "Son of Man," and of the imagery of coming on the clouds of heaven (Dnl 7 13). The ideas of resurrection, etc, have their ground in the ( )T (see KsriiAToi/x.Y OF THE OT). With the extravagant, unspiritual forms into which these conceptions were thrown in the Jewish apoca lyptic books His teaching had nothing in common.

      The new apocalyptic school represented by Schweit zer reduces the history of Jesus to folly, fanaticism and hopeless disillusionment .

      IV. The Character and Claims. Where the ( lospels present us in Jesus with the image of a

      flawless character in the words of the 1. Denial writer to the Hebrews, "holy, guileless, of Christ s undefiled, separated from sinners" (He Moral Per- 7 20) modern criticism is driven In fection an inexorable necessity to deprive Jesus

      of His sinless perfection, and to impute to Him the error, frailty, and moral infirmity that belong to ordinary mortals. In Schweitzer s por traiture (cf op. cit.), He is an apocalyptic enthusias tic, ruled by illusory ideals, deceiving Himself and others as to who He was, and as to the impending end of the world. Those who show a more ad equate appreciation of Christ s spiritual greatness are still prevented by their humanitarian estimate of His person and their denial of the supernatural in history from recognizing the possibility of His sinlessness. It may confidently be said that there is hardly a single writer of the modern school who grants Christ s moral perfection. To do so would be to admit a miracle in humanity, and we have heard that miracle is by the highest rational neces sity excluded. This, however, is precisely the point on which the modern so-called "historical-critical" mode of presentation most obviously breaks down. The ideal of perfect holiness in the Gospels which has fascinated the conscience of Christendom for 18 cents., and attests itself anew to every candid reader, is not thus lightly to be got rid of, or ex plained away as the invention of a church gathered out (without the help of the ideal) promiscuously from Jews and Gentiles. It was not the church least of all such a church that created Christ, but Christ that created the church.

      (1) The sinlessness assured. The sinlessness of Jesus is a da/urn in the Gospels. Over against a sinful world He stands as a Saviour who is Himself without sin. His is the one life in humanity in which is presented a perfect knowledge and unbroken fellowship with the Father, undeviating obedience to His will, unswerving devotion under the severest strain of temptation and suffering to the highest. ideal of goodness. The ethical ideal was never raised to so absolute a height as it is in the teaching of Jesus, and the miracle is that, high as it is in its unsullied purity, the character of Jesus corresponds with it, and realizes it. Word and life for once in history perfectly agree. Jesus, with the keenest sensitiveness to sin in thought, and feeling as in deed, is conscious of no sin in Himself, confesses no sin, disclaims the presence of it, speaks and acts con tinually on the assumption that He is without it. Those who knew Him best declared Him to be without sin (1 Pet 2 22; 1 Jn 3 5; cf 2 Cor 6 21). The Gospels must be rent in pieces before this image of a perfect holiness can be effaced from them.

      (2) What this implies. How is this phenomenon of a sinless personality in Jesus to be explained? It is itself a miracle, and can only be made credible by a creative miracle in Christ s origin. It may be argued that a Virgin Birth does not of itself secure sinlessness, but it will hardly be disputed that at. least a sinless personality implies miracle in its production. It is precisely because of this that the modern spirit feels bound to reject it. In the Gospels it is not the Virgin Birth by itself which is invoked to explain Christ s sinlessness, but the supernatural conception by the Holy Spirit (Lk 1 3f>). It is because of this conception that the birth is a virgin one. No explanation of the super natural element in Christ s Person is more rational or credible (see below on "Nativity").



      If Jesus from the first was conscious of Himself as without sin, and if, as the converse of this, He

      knew Himself as standing in an un- 2. Sinless- broken filial fellowship with the Father, ness and He must early have become conscious the Mes- of His special vocation, and learnt to sianic Claim distinguish Himself from others as

      one called to bless and save them. Here is the true germ of His Messianic consciousness, from which everything subsequently is unfolded. He stood in a rapport with the Father which opened His spirit lo a full, clear revelation of the Father s will regarding Himself, His mission, the kingdom He came to found, His sufferings as the means of salvation to the world, the glory that awaited Him when His earthly work was done. In the light of this revelation He read the OT Scriptures and saw His course there made plain. When the hour had come He went to John for baptism, and His brief, eventful ministry, which should end in the cross, began. This is the reading of events which intro duces consistency and purpose into the life of Jesus, and it is this we mean to follow in the sketch now to be given.


      The wonderful story of the life of the world s Redeemer which we are now to endeavor to trace falls naturally into several divisions:

      1. Divisions A. From the Nativity to the Bap- of the His- tism and Temptation.

      tory B. The Karly Judaean Ministry.

      C. The (ialilean Ministry and Visits to the Feasts.

      1). The Last Journey to Jerusalem.

      E. The Passion AYeek Betrayal, Trial, and Cru cifixion.

      F. The Resurrection and Ascension.

      To avoid misconception, it is important to

      remember, that, rich as are the narratives of the

      Gospels, materials do not exist for

      2. Not a a complete biography or "Life" of Complete Jesus. There is a gap, broken only "Life" by a single incident, from His infancy

      till His 30th year; there are cycles of events out of myriads left unrecorded (Jn 21 25); there are sayings, parables, longer discourses, con nected with particular occasions; there are general summaries of periods of activity comprised in a few verses. The evangelists, too, present their materials each from his own standpoint Matthew from the theocratic, Mark from that of Christ s practical activity, Luke from the universalistic and human-sympathetic, John from the Divine. In re producing the history respect, must, be had to this focusing from distinct points of view.


      /. The Nativity. OT prophecy expired with the promise on its lips, "Behold, I send my messenger,

      and he shall prepare the way before 1. Hidden me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, will Piety in suddenly come to his temple; and the Judaism messenger of the covenant, whom ye

      desire, behold, he comet h, saith Je hovah of hosts" (Mai 3 1). In the years immedi ately before Christ s birth the air was tremulous with the sense of impending great events. The fortune s of the Jewish people were at their lowest ebb. Pharisaic formalism, Sadducean unbelief, fanatical Zealotry, Herodian sycophantism, Roman oppression, seemed to have crushed out the last sparks of spiritual religion. Yet in numerous quiet, circles in Judaea, and even in remote Galilee, little godly bands still nourished their souls on the prom

      ises, looking for "the consolation of Israel" and "redemption of Jerusalem" (Lk 2 25.38). Glimpses of these are vouchsafed in Zacharias and Elisabeth, in Simeon, in Anna, in Joseph and Mary (Lk 1, 2; Mt 1 ISff). It was in hearts in these circles that the stirrings of the prophetic spirit began to make themselves felt anew, preparing for the Advent (cf Lk 2 27.36).

      In the last days of Herod perhaps in the year

      748 of Rome, or 6 BC -the aged priest Zacharias,

      of the course of Abijah (1 Ch 24 10;

      2. Birth of cf Schiirer, Div II, Vol I, 21<.) fi), was the Baptist ministering in the temple at the altar (Lk 1) of incense at the hour of evening

      prayer. Scholars have reckoned, if on somewhat precarious grounds, that the ministry of the order to which Zacharias belonged fell in this year in the month of April or in early October (cf Andrews, Life of Our Lord). Now a wonderful thing happened. Zacharias and his wife Elisabeth, noted for their blameless piety, were up to this time childless. On this evening an angel, appear ing at the side of the altar of incense, announced to Zacharias that a son should be born to them, in whom should be realized the prediction of Malachi of one coming in the spirit and power of Elijah to prepare the way of the Lord (cf Mai 4 5.0). His name was to be called John. Zacharias hesitated to believe, and was stricken with dumbness till the promise should be fulfilled. It happened as the angel had foretold, and at the circumcision and naming of his son his tongue was again loosed. Zacharias, filled with the Spirit, poured forth his soul in a hymn of praise the Helta/ictus (Lk 1 5-25.57-80; cf JOHN THE BAPTIST).

      Meanwhile yet stranger things were happening in

      the little village of Nazareth, in Galilee (now 01-

      Naximh.). There resided a young

      3. The An- maiden of purest character, named nunciation Mary, betrothed to a carpenter of the and Its Re- village (cf Mt 13 55), called Joseph, suits (Lk 1: who, although in so humble a station, 26-56; Mt was of the lineage of David (cf Isa 11 1:18-25) 1). Mary, most probably, was like wise of Davidic descent (Lk 1 32;

      on the genealogies, see below). The fables relating to the parentage and youth of Mary in the Apoc ryphal Gospels may safely be discarded. To this maiden, three months before the birth of the Baptist, the same angelic visitant (Gabriel) appeared, hailing her as "highly favored" of God, and announcing to her that, through the power of the Holy Spirit, she should become the mother of the Saviour. The words Blessed art thou among women," in AV of ver 28 are omitted by RV, though found below (ver 42) in Elisabeth s salutation. They give, in any case, no support to Mariolatry, stating simply the fact that Mary was more honored than any other woman of the race in being chosen to be the mother of the Lord.

      (1) The ainaziity tnrxxdi/c. The announcement itself was of the most amazing import. Mary herself was staggered at the thought that, as a virgin, she should become a mother (ver 34). Still more sur prising were the statements made as to the Son she was to bear. Conceived of the Holy Spirit (Lk 1 35; Mt 1 18), He would be great, and would be palled "the Son of the Most High" (Lk 1 32) "the Son of God" (ver 35); then? would be given to Him the throne of His father David, and His reign would be eternal (vs 32.33; cf Isa 9 6.7); He would be "holy" from the womb (ver 35). His name was to be called Jesus (ver 31; cf Mt 1 21), denoting Him as Saviour. The holiness of Jesus is hen; put in connection with His miraculous conception, and surely rightly. In no case in the history of mankind has natural generation issued



      in a being who is sinless, not to say superhuman. The fart that Jesus, even in His human nature, was supernal urally begotten was "Son of Cod" does not exclude the higher and eternal Sonship according to the Divine nature i.ln 1 18). The incarnation of such a Divine Being as Paul and John depict, itself implies miracle in human origin. On the whole message being declared to her, Mary accepted \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\hat was told her in meek humility ( Lk 1 3X).

      (2) The visit In Elixulielh. With the announce ment to herself there was given to Mary an indica tion of what had befallen her kinswoman Elisabeth, and Mary s first act , on recovering from her astonish ment, was to go iu haste to the home of Elisabeth in the hill country of Judaea (vs39ff). Very naturally she did not rashly forestall (iod s action in speaking to Joseph of what had occurred, but waited in quietness and faith till (iod should reveal in His own way what He had done. The meeting of the two holy women was the occasion of a new- outburst of prophetic inspiration. Elisabeth, moved by the Spirit, greeted Mary in exalted lan guage as the mother of the Lord (vs 42-45) a confirmation to Mary of the message she had received; Mary, on her part, broke 1 forth in rhyth mical ut ten-nice, "My soul doth magnify the Lord, e-tc (vs 41) 5(>). Her hymn -ihe sublime Magnificat is to be compared with Hannah s (1 S 2 1-11), which furnishes the 1 model of it. Mary abode with Elisabeth about three months, then returned to her own house.

      (3) J<>.- jih s perplexity. Here anew trial awaited her. Mary s condition of me>t herhood could not long be concealeel, and when Joseph first became aware of it, the; shock to a man so just (Mt 1 10) would be terrible 1 in its severity. The disappearance of Joseph from the later gospel history suggests that he was a good deal older than his betrothed, and it is possible that, while strict, upright and conscientious, his dis position was not as strong on the side of sympathy as so delicate a case required. It is going too far to say with Lange, "He 1 encountered the modest, but unshakably firm Virgin with decided doubt; the first Ebionite" ; but so long as he had no support brvond Mary s word, his mind was in a state of agonized perplexity. His first thought was to give Mary a private "bill of divorcement to avoid scandal (ver 10). Happily, his doubts we re soon set at rest by a Divine intimation, and he hesitated no longer to take Mary to be 1 his wife (ver 24). Luke s (leispe l, which confines itself to the story of Mary, says nothing of this episode; Matthew s narrative, which bears evidence of having come from Joseph himself, supplies the lack by showing how Joseph came to have the confidence in Mary which enabled him to take 1 her to wife, and beremie sponsor for her child. The trial, doubtless, while it lasted, was not less severe for Mary than for Joseph a prelude of that sword which was to "pierce through [her] own soul" (Lk 2 35). There is no reason to believe that Joseph and Mary elid not subsequently live 1 in the usual relations of wedlex-k, and that children were not born to them (cf Mt 13 55.51), etc).

      Matthew gives no indication of where the events narrated in his first chapter took place, first men tioning Nazareth on the occasion of 4. The the return e>f the holy family from

      Birth at Egypt (2 23). In 2 The transports Bethlehem us to Bethlehem as the city of Christ s (Mt2:l; birth. It is left to Luke to give 1 an Lk 2:1-7) accemnt of the circumstances which brought Joseph and Mary to Bethle hem thus fulfilling prophecy (Mir; 5 2; Mt 2 5.(i) at this critical hour, and to record the lowly manner of Christ s birth t he>re.

      (1) The ctmxi.ix of Quirinim. The emperor

      Augustus had given orders for a general enrolment throughout the; empire (the fact of periodical enrol ments in the empire is well established by Professor W. M . Kamsay in his Was Christ Born at Bethlehem/), and this is stated to have been given effect to in Judaea when Quirinius was governor of Syria (Lk 2 1 .12). The difficulties connected with the enrolment or census here mentioned are discussed in the art. QriuiMi s. It is known that Quirinius did con duct a census in Judaea in () AD (cf Acts 5 37), but the census at Christ s birth is distinguished from this by Luke as "the first enrolment." The diffi culty was largely removed when it was ascertained, as it has been to the satisfaction of most scholars, that Quirinius was twice governor of Syria first, after Herod s death, 4-1 BC, and again in 6-11 AD. The probability is that the census was begun under Varus, the immediate predecessor of Quirinius or even earlier under Saturninus but was delayed in its application to Judaea, then under Herod s jurisdiction, and was completed by Quirinius, with whose name it is officially connected. That the enrolment was made by each one going to his own city (ver 3) is explained by the fact that the census was not made according to the Rom method, but, as befitted a dependent kingdom, in accordance with Jewish usages (cf Ramsay).

      (2) ./ a us liurii . It must be left undecided whether the journey of Mary to Bethlehem with Joseph was required for any purpose of registration, or sprang simply from her unwillingness to be separated from Joseph in so trying a situation. _ To Bethlehem, in any case, possibly by Divine monition, she came, and there, in the ancestral city of David, in circum stances the lowliest conceivable, brought forth her marvelous child. In unadorned language very different from the embellishments of apocryphal story Luke narrates how-, when _the travelers arrived, no room was found for them in the "inn"- the ordinary eastern khan or caravanserai, a square enclosure, with an open court for cattle, and a raised recess round the walls for shelter of visitors and how, when her babe was born, Mary wrapped Him in swaddling clothes, and laid Him in a manger. The wearied pair having, according to Luke, been crowded out of, and not merely within, the inn, there is every probability that the birth took place, not, as some suppose, in the courtyard of the inn, but, as the oldest tradition asserts (Justin Martyr, Dial, with Tri/pho, 7S), in a cave in the neighbor hood, used for similar purposes of lodgment and housing of cattle. High authorities look favorably on the "cave of the nativity" still shown, with its inscription, Hie de virgine Maria Jesus Chrishix itntHS cst, as marking the sacred spot. In such incredibly mean surroundings was "the only begot ten of the Father" ushered into the world He came to redeem. How true the apostle s word that He "emptied" Himself (Phil 27)! A problem lies in the very circumstances of the entrance into time of such a One, which only the thought of a voluntary humiliation for saving ends can solve.

      Born, however, though Jesus was, in a low con dition, the Father did not leave Him totally with out witness to His Sonship. There 5. The In- were rifts in the clouds through which cidents of the hidden glory streamed. The scenes the Infancy in the narratives of the Infancy exhibit (Lk 2:8-39; a strange commingling of the glorious Mt 2:1 12) and the lowly.

      (1) The visit of the shepherds. To shepherds watching their flocks by night in the fields near Bethlehem the first disclosure was made. _ The season, one would infer, could hardly have been winter, t hough it is stated that there is frequently an interval of dry weather in Judaea between the middle of December and the middle of February, when such



      a keeping of flocks would be possible (Andrews). The angel world is not far removed from us, and as angels prcannounced the birth of Christ, so, when He actually came into the world (cf He 1 6), angels of God made the night vocal with their songs. First, an angel appearing in the midst of the Divine glory the "Shekinah" announced to the sorely alarmed shepherds the birth of a "Saviour who was Christ the Lord" at Bethlehem; then a whole chorus of the heavenly host broke in with the refrain, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men in whom He is well pleased" (lit. "men of good pleasure") since, the Christmas hymn of the generations (Lk 2 1-14). The shepherds, guided as to how to recognize the babe (ver 12), went at once, and found it to be even as they had been told. Thence they hastened to spread abroad the tidings the first believers, the first worshippers, the first preachers (vs 15-20). Mary cherished the sayings in the stillness of her heart.

      (2) Tliccircnntcixion and prcxctilntinn in thetcin jilc. - Jewish law required that on the 8th day the male child should be circumcised, and on the same day He received His name (cf Lk 1 59-03). Jesus, though entirely pure, underwent the rite which de noted the putting off of fleshly sin (Col 2 11), and became bound, as a true Israelite, to render obedience to every Divine commandment. The name "Jesus" was then given Him (Lk 2 21). On the 40th day came the ceremony of presentation in the temple at Jerus, when Mary had to offer for her purifying (Lev 12; Mary s was the humbler offering of the poor, "a pair of turtle-doves, or two young pigeons [Lev 12 8; Lk 2 24]), and when the first-born son had to be redeemed with 5 shekels of the sanctuary (N u 18 15.16; about $3.00). The observance was an additional token that Christ personally sin less did not shrink from full identification with our race in the responsibilities of its sinful condition. Ere it was completed, however, the ceremony was lifted to a Diviner level, and a new attestation was given of the dignity of the child of Mary, by the action and inspired utterances of the holy Simeon and the aged prophetess Anna. To Simeon, a righteous and devout man, "looking for the con solation of Israel," it had been revealed that he should not die till he had seen the Lord s Christ, and, led by the Spirit into the temple at the very time when Jesus was being presented, lie recognized in Him the One for whom he had waited, and, taking Him in his arms, gave utterance to the beau tiful words of the Nnnc Dimittis "Now lettest thou thy servant depart, Lord," etc (Lk 2 25-32). He told also how this child was set for the falling and rising of many in Israel, and how, through Him, a, sword should pierce through Mary s own soul (vs 34.35). Entering at the same hour, the proph etess Anna now in extreme old age (over 100; a constant frequenter of the temple, ver 37) con firmed his words, and spoke of Him to all who, like herself, looked "for the redemption of Jerus."

      (3) Vifiit of the Magi. It seems to have been after the presentation in the temple that the incident took place recorded by Matthew of the visit of the Magi. The Magi, a learned class belonging originally to Chaldaea or Persia (see MAOI), had, in course of time, greatly degenerated (cf Simon Magus, Acts 8 9), but those who now came to seek Christ from the distant East were of a nobler order. They appeared in Jerus in quiring, "Where is He that is born King of the Jews?" and declaring that they had seen His star in the East, and had come to worship Him (Mt 2 2). Observers of the nightly sky, any significant appearance in the heavens would at once attract their attention. Many (Kepler, Ideler, etc; cf Ramsay, op. cit., 215 ff) are disposed to connect

      this "star" with a remarkable conjunction or series of conjunctions of planets in 7-6 BC, in which case it is possible that two years may have elapsed (cf the inquiry of Herod and his subsequent action, vs 7.16) from their observation of the sign. On the other hand, the fact of the star reappearing and seeming to stand over a house in Bethlehem (ver 9) rather points to a distinct phenomenon (cf BETHLE HEM, STAR OF). The inquiry of the Magi at once awakened Herod s alarm; accordingly, having ascer tained from the scribes that the Christ should be born at Bethlehem (Mic 5 2), he summoned the Magi, questioned them as to when exactly the star appeared, then sent them to Bethlehem to search out the young child, hypocritically pretending that he also wished to worship Him (Mt 2 7.8). Herod had faith enough to believe the Scriptures, yet was foolish enough to think that he could thwart God s purpose. Guided by the star, which anew appeared, the wise men came to Bethlehem, offered their gifts, and afterward, warned by God, returned by another road, without reporting to Herod. It is a striking picture Herod the king, and Christ the King; Christ a power even in His cradle, inspiring terror, attracting homage! The faith of these sages, unre- pelled by the lowly surroundings of the child they had discovered, worshipping, and laying at His feet their gold, frankincense and myrrh, is a splendid anticipation of the victories Christ was yet to win among t he wisest as well as the humblest of our race. Herod, finding himself, as he thought, befooled by the Magi, avenged himself by ordering a massacre of all the male children of two years old, and under, in Bethlehem and its neighborhood (.vs 10-19). This slaughter, if not recorded elsewhere (cf, however, Macrobius, quoted by Ramsay, op. cit., 219), is entirely in keeping with the cruelty of Herod s dis position. Meanwhile, Joseph and Mary had been withdrawn from the scene of danger (ver 17 con nects the mourning of the Bethlehem mothers with Rachel s weeping, Jer 31 15).

      The safety of Mary and her threatened child was

      provided for by a Divine warning to retire for a time

      to Egypt (mark the recurring expres-

      6. Flight to sion, "the young child and his mother" Egypt and the young child taking the lead, vs Return to, whither, accordingly, Nazareth they were conducted by Joseph (ver (Mt 2:13- 14). The sojourn was not a long one. 15.19-23) Herod s death brought permission to

      return, but as Archelaus, Herod s son (the worst of them), reigned in Judaea in his father s stead (not king, but "ethnarch"), Joseph was directed to withdraw to Galilee; hence it came about that he and Mary, with the babe, found themselves again in Nazareth, where Luke anew takes up the story (2 39), the thread of which had been broken by the incidents in Mt. Matthew sees in the return from Egypt a refulfilling of the ex periences of Israel (Hos 11 1), and in the settling in Nazareth a connection with the OT prophecies of Christ s lowly estate (Isa 11 1, iic<;er t "branch"; Zee 3 8; 6 12, etc).

      The objections to the credibility of the narratives

      of the Virgin Birth have already partly been adverted

      to. (See further the arts, on MARY;

      7. Questions THK VIRGIN BIRTH; and the writer s anrl OhW Volume, The Virgin Birth of Christ.)

      Q UDjec- (1) The Vir(jill Birth. The narratives in ions Mt and Lk are attested by all MSS and

      VSS genuine parts of their respective Gos pels, and as coming to us in their integrity. The narrative of Lk is generally recognized as resting on an Aram, basis, which, from its diction and the primitive character of its conceptions, belongs to the earliest age. While in Luke s narrative everything is presented from the standpoint of Mary, in Mt it is Joseph who is in the forefront, sug gesting that the virgin mother is the source of information in the one case, and Joseph himself in the other. The narratives are complementary, riot contradictory. That Mk and Jn do not contain narratives of the Virgin Birth



      cannot be wondered at. when it is remembered that Mark s (iospel begins of purpose with the Baptism of John, and that the Fourth Gospel aims at setting forth the Divine descent, not the circumstances of the earthly nativity. The Word became flesh " (.In 1 14) every thing is already implied in that. Neither can it be objected to thai I aul does not in his letters or public preaching base upon so essentially private a fact as the miraculous conception- at a time. too. when Mary probably still lived. With the exception of the narrow est sect of tin- Jewish Kbionites and some of the gnostic sects, the Virgin Birth was universally accepted in the earls church.

      (2) Th< genealogies (Mt 1 1-17; Lk 3 83-28). Diffi culty is felt with the genealogies in Mt and Lk (one de scending, the other ascending i. which, while both profess ing to t race t he descent of Jesus from I )a\\\\\\\\ id and Abraham (Lk from Adann. yet go entirely apart in the pedigree after David. See on this the art. <; KNKAI.OCIKS or Ji.srs CHUIST. A. favorite view is thai Mt exhibits the imnl. Lk the inihiriil descent of Jesus. There is plausibility in the supposition that though, in form, a genealogy of Joseph, Lk s is really the genealogy of Mary. It was not custom ary it is true, to make out pedigrees of females, but the case here was clearly exceptional, and the passing of Jo seph into the family of his father-in-law Jleh would enable the list to be made out in his name. Oelsus, in the. Jd cent, appears thus to have understood it when he derides the notion that through so lowly a woman as the carpenter s wife. Jesus should trace Jlis lineage up to the first man (Origen. Con. (>/.. ii.SU; Onsen s reply pro ceeds on t he same assumption. ( f art. on " Genealogies in Kitto, 1 1).

      II. The Years of Silencethe Twelfth Year

      With the exception of one fragment of incident that of the visit to Jerus and the

      1. The Temple in His 12th vein the Canoni- Human De- cal Gospels are silent as to the history velopment of Jesus from the return to Nazareth (Lk 2:40. till His baptism by John. This long 52) period, which the Apocryphal Gospels

      crowd with silly fables (see APOCRYPHAL GOSPKLS), the inspired records leave to be regarded as being what it was a period of quiet development of mind and body, of outward unevent fulness, of silent garnering of experience in the midst of the Nazareth surroundings. Jesus "grew, and waxed strong, filled with wisdom; and the grace of God was upon him .... advanced in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men" (Lk 2 40. .72). The incarnation was a true acceptance of humanity, with all its sinless limitations of growth and development. Not a hint is offered of that omniscience or omnipotence which theology has not infrequently imputed to Jesus even as child and boy. His schooling was probably that of the ordi nary village child (He could read, Lk 4 17 ff, and write, .In 8 G-S); He wrought at the carpenter s bench (cf Mk 6 3; Justin Martyr, following tra dition, speaks of Him as making "ploughs and yokes," DiaZ., XS). His gentleness and grace of character endeared Him to all who knew Him (Lk 2 .52). No stain of sin clouded His vision of Divine things. His after-history shows that His mind was nourished on the Scriptures; nor, as He pondered psalms and prophets, could His soul remain un- visited by presentiments, growing to convictions, that He was the One in whom their predictions were destined to be realized.

      Every year, as was the custom of the Jews,

      Joseph and Mary went, with their friends and

      neighbors, in companies, to Jerus to

      2. Jesus in the Passover. When Jesus was 12 the Temple years old, it, would seem that, for (Lk 2:41- the first time, He was permitted to 50) accompany them. It would be to

      Him a strange and thrilling experience. Everything He saw the hallowed sites, the motley crowd, the service of the temple, the very shocks His moral consciousness would receive from contact with abounding scandals would intensify His feel ing of His own unique relation to the Father. Every relationship was for the lime suspended and merged to His thought in this higher one. It was His Father s city whose streets He trod; His Father s

      house He visited for prayer; His Father s ordi nance the crowds were assembled to observe; His Father s name, too, they were dishonoring by their formalism and hypocrisy. It is this exalted mood of the boy Jesus which explains the scene that follows the only one rescued from oblivion in this interval of growth and preparation. When the time came for the busy caravan to return to Nazareth, Jesus, acting, doubtless, from highest impulse, "tarried behind" (ver 43). In the large company His absence was not at first missed, but when, at the evening halting-place, it became known that He was not with them, His mother and Joseph returned in deep distress to Jems. Three days elapsed before they found Him in the place where naturally Ihey should have looked first His Father s house. There, in one of the halls or cham bers where the rabbis were wont to teach, they discovered Him seated "in the midst," at the feet of the men of learning, hearing them discourse, asking questions, as pupils were permitted to do, and giving answers which awakened astonishment by their penetration and wisdom (vs 46.47). Those who heard Him may well have thought that before them was one of the great rabbis of the future! Mary, much surprised, asked in remonstrance, "Son, w T hy hast thou thus dealt with us?" evoking from Jesus the memorable reply, "How is it that ye sought me? knew ye not that I must be in my Father s house?" or "about my Father s business?" AV (vs 48.49). Here was the revelation of a self- consciousness that Mary might have been prepared for in Jesus, but perhaps, in the common inter course of life, was tending to lose sight of. The lesson was not unneeded. Yet, once it had been given, Jesus went back with Joseph and Mary to Nazareth, and "was subject, unto them"; and Mary did not forget the teaching of the incident (ver 51).

      ///. The Forerunner and the Baptism. Time passed, and when Jesus was nearing His 30th year,

      Judaea was agitated by the message 1. The of a stern preacher of righteousness

      Preaching who had appeared in the wilderness of John by the Jordan, proclaiming the inimi- (Mt3:l- nent approach of the kingdom of 12; Mk 1: heaven, summoning to repentance, 1-8; Lk 3: and baptizing those who confessed 1-18) their sins. Tiberius had succeeded

      Augustus on the imperial throne; Judaea, with Samaria, was now a Rom province, under the procurator Pontius Pilate; the rest of Pal was divided between the tetrarchs Herod (Galilee) and Philip (the eastern parts). The Baptist thus appeared at the time when the land had lost the last vestige of self-government, was politically divided, and was in great ecclesiastical confusion. Nurtured in the deserts (Lk 1 80), John s very appearance was a protest against the luxury and self-seeking of the age. He had been a Nazarite from his birth; he fed on the simplest products of nature locusts and wild honey; his coarse garb of camel s hair and leathern girdle was a return to the dress of Elijah (2 K 1 X), in whose spirit and power he appeared (Lk 1 17) (see JOHN THE BAPTIST).

      The coming Christ. John s preaching of the king dom was unlike that of any of the revolutionaries of his age. It was a kingdom which could be entered only through moral preparation. It availed nothing for the Jew simply that he was a son of Abraham. The Messiah was at hand. He (John) was but a voice in the wilderness sent to prepare the way for that Greater than himself. The work of the Christ would be one of judgment and of mercy. He would lay the axe at the root of the tree would winnow t lie chaff from the wheat yet would baptize with



      the Holy Spirit (Mt 3 10-12; Lk 3 15-17). Those who professed acceptance of his message, with its condition of repentance, John baptized with water at the Jordan or in its neighborhood (cf Mt 3 6; Jn 1 28; 3 23).

      John s startling words made a profound impres sion. All classes from every part of the land,

      including Pharisees and Sadducees 2. Jesus Is (Mt 3 7), came to his baptism. John Baptized was not deceived. He saw how little (Mt 3:13- change of heart underlay it all. The 17; Mk 1: Regenerator had not yet come. But 9-11; Lk one day there appeared before him 3:21.22) One whom he intuitively recognized

      as different from all the rest as, indeed, the Christ whose coming it was his to herald. John, up to this time, does not seem to have personally known Jesus (cf Jn 1 31). He must, however, have heard of Him; he had, besides, received a sign by which the Messiah should be recognized (Jn 1 33); and now, when Jesus pre sented Himself, Divinely pure in aspect, asking baptism at his hands, the conviction was instantane ously flashed on his mind, that this was He. But how should he, a sinful man, baptize this Holy One? "I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?" (Mt 3 14). The question is one which forces itself upon ourselves How should Jesus seek or receive a "baptism of re pentance"? Jesus Himself puts it on the ground of meet ness. "Suffer it now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness" (ver 15). The Head was content to enter by the same gateway as the members to His specific vocation in the service of the kingdom. In submitting to the baptism, He formally identified Himself with the expectation of the kingdom and with its ethical demands; sepa rated Himself from the evil of His nation, doubtless with confession of its sins; and devoted Himself to His life-task in bringing in the Messianic salva tion. The significance of the rite as marking His consecration to, and entrance upon, His Messianic career, is seen in what follows. As He ascended from the water, while still "praying" (Lk 3 21), the heavens were opened, the Spirit of God descended like a dove upon Him, and a voice from heaven declared: "This is my beloved Son, in whom 1 am well _ pleased" (Mt 3 10.17). It is needless to inquire whether anyone besides John (cf Jn 1 33) and Jesus (Mt 3 16; Mk 1 10) received this vision or heard these words; it was for them, not for others, the vision was primarily intended. To Christ s consecration of Himself to His calling, there was now added the spiritual equipment necessary for the doing of His work. He went forward with the seal of the Father s acknowledgment upon Him. IV. The Temptation. On the narrative of the baptism in the first three Gospels there follows at

      once the account of the temptation of 1. Tempta- Jesus in the wilderness. The psy- tion Follows chological naturalness of the incident Baptism is generally acknowledged. The bap- (Mt 4:1- tism of Jesus was a crisis in His experi- 11; Mk 1: ence. He had been plenished by the 13.14; Lk Spirit for His work; the heavens had 4:1-13) been opened to Him, and His mind

      was agitated by new thoughts and emotions; He w r as conscious of the possession of new powers. There was need for a period of retire ment, of still reflection, of coming to a complete understanding with Himself as to the meaning of the task to which He stood committed, the methods He should employ, the attitude He should take up toward popular hopes and expectations. He would wish to be alone. The Spirit of God led Him (Mt 4 1; Mk 1 12; Lk 4 1) whither His own spirit also impelled. It is with a touch of similar motive

      that Buddhist legend makes Buddha to be tempted by the evil spirit Mara after he has attained en lightenment.

      The scene of the temptation was the wilderness

      of Judaea. Jesus was there 40 days, during which,

      it is told, He neither ate nor drank

      2. Nature (cf the fasts of Moses and Elijah, of the Ex 24 18; 34 28; Dt 9 18; 1 K 19 Temptation 8). Mk adds, "He was with the wild

      beasts" (ver 13). The period was probably one of intense self-concentration. During the whole of it He endured temptations of Satan (Mk 1 13); but the special assaults came at the end (Mt 4 2 ff; Lk 4 2 IT). We assume here a real tempter and real temptations the question of diabolic agency being considered after. This, however, does not set t le the form of the temptations. The struggle was probably an inward one. It can hardly be supposed that Jesus was literally trans ported by the devil to a pinnacle of the temple, then to a high mountain, then, presumably, back again to the wilderness. The narrative must have come from Jesus Himself, and embodies an ideal or para bolic element. "The history of the temptation," Lange says, "Jesus afterwards communicated to His disciples in the form of a real narrative, clothed in symbolical language" (Comm. on Alt, 83, ET).

      The stages of the temptation were three each in its own way a trial of the spirit of obedience.

      (1) The first temptation was to distrust. Jesus, after His long fast, was an hungered. He had

      become conscious also of super-

      3. Stages natural powers. The point on which of the the temptation laid hold was His Temptation sense of hunger the most over mastering of appetites. "If thou art

      the Son of God, command that these stones become bread." The design was to excite distrustful and rebellious thoughts, and lead Jesus to use the powers entrusted to Him in an unlawful way, for private and selfish ends. The temptation was promptly met by a quotation from Scripture: "Man shall .not live by bread alone," etc (Mt 4 4; Lk 4 4; cf Dt 8 3). If Jesus was in this position, it was His Father who had brought Him there for purposes of trial. Man has a higher life than can be sustained on bread; a life, found in depending on God s word, and obeying it at whatever cost.

      (2) The second temptation (in Lk the third) was to presumption. Jesus is borne in spirit (cf Ezk 40 1.2) to a pinnacle of the temple. From this dizzy elevation He is invited to cast Himself down, relying on the Divine promise: "He shall give His angels charge over thee," etc (cf J s 91 11.12). In this way an easy demonstration of His Messiah- ship would be given to the crowds below. The temptation was to overstep those bounds of humility and dependence which were imposed on Him as Son; to play with signs and wonders in His work as Messiah. But again the tempter is foiled by the word: "Thou shalt not make trial of [try experi ments with, propose tests, put to the proof 1 the Lord thy God" (Mt 4 7; Lk 4 12; cf Dt 6 10).

      (3) The third temptation (Lk s second) was to worldly sovereignly, gained by some small concession to Satan. From some lofty elevation no place on a geographical map the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them are flashed before Christ s mind, and all are offered to Him on condition of one little act of homage to the tempter. It was the tempta tion to choose the easier path by some slight pander ing to falsehood, and Jesus definitely repelled it by the saying: "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy CJod, and him only shalt thou serve" (Mt 4 10; Lk 4 8). Jesus had chosen His path. The Father s way of the cross would be adhered to.

      Typical diameter. The stages of the tempta-



      1. The Synoptics and John

      the Baptist (Jn 1:19- 37)

      linn typify the whole round of Satanic assault on man through body, mind, and spirit (Lk 4 13; ct 1 Jn 2 Hi), and the whole round of Messianic teni])tation. Jesus was constantly being tempted (a) to spare Himself; (h) to gratify the Jewish sign- seekers; (r) to gain power by sacrifice of the right. In principle the victory was gained over all at the commencement. His way was henceforth clear.


      I. The Testimonies of the Baptist. While the

      Synoptics pass immediately from the temptation of Jesus to the ministry in Galilee after the imprisonment, of the Baptist (Mt 4 12; Mk 1 14.1"); Lk 4 14), the Fourth (iospel furnishes the account, full of interest, of the earlier ministry of Jesus in Judaea while the Baptist was still at. liberty.

      The Baptist had announced Christ s coming; had baptized Him when He appeared; it was now his privilege to testify to Him as having 2. Threefold come, and to introduce to Jesus His Witness of first disciples.

      John s work had assumed propor tions which made it impossible for the ecclesiastical authorities any longer to ignore it (cf Lk 3 15). A deputation consisting of priests and Levites was accordingly seat to John, where he was baptizing at Bethany beyond Jordan, to put to him categori es ) First cal questions about his mission. Who Testimony was he? And by what authority did -Jesus and he baptize? Was he the Christ? or Popular Elijah? or the expected prophet? (cf 6 Messianic 14; 7 4; Mt 16 14). To these ques- Expectation tions John gave distinct and straight- (vs 19-28) forward replies. He was not the Christ, not Elijah, not the prophet. His an swers grow briefer every time, "I am not the Christ" ; "I am not"; "No." Who was he then? The answer was emphatic. He was but a "voice" (cf Isa 40 8) a preparer of the way of the Lord. In their midst already stood One not necessarily in the crowd at that moment with whose greatness his was not to be compared (vs 26.27). John utter ly effaces himself before Christ.

      The day after the interview with the Jerus depu ties, John saw Jesus coming to him probably fresh from the temptation and bore a b) Second second and wonderful testimony to His Testimony Messiahship. Identifying Jesus with Christ the subject of his former testimonies, and the Sin and stating the ground of his knowl- of the edge in the sign God had given him

      World (vs (vs 30-34), he said, "Behold, the Lamb 29-34) of God, that taketh away the sin of

      the world" (ver 29). The words are rich in suggestion regarding the character of Jesus, and the nature, universality and efficacy of His work (cf 1 Jn 3 5). The "Lamb" may point specifically to the description of the vicariously Suffering Servant of Jeh in Isa 63 11.

      The third testimony was borne "again on the morrow," when John was standing with two of his disciples (one Andrew, ver 40, the r) Third other doubtless the evangelist himself). Testimony Point ing to Jesus, the Baptist repeated Christ his former words, "Behold, the Lamb and the of God." While the words are the Duty of the same, the design was different. In the Disciple first "behold" the idea is the recogni- (vs 35-37) tion of Christ; in the second there is a call to duty a hint to follow Jesus. On this hint the disciples immediately acted (ver 37). It is next to be seen how this earliest "follow ing" of Jesus grew.

      II. The First Disciples. John s narrative shows that Jesus gathered His disciples, less by a series of

      distinct calls, than by a process of 1. Spiritual spiritual accretion. Men were led to Accretion Him, then accepted by Him. This (Jn 1: process of selection left Jesus at the

      37-51) close of the second day w r ith five real

      and true followers. The history con futes the idea that it was first toward the close of His ministry that Jesus became known to His dis ciples as the Messiah. In all the Gospels it was as the Christ that the Baptist introduced Jesus; it was as the Christ that the first disciples accepted and confessed Him (vs 41.45.49).

      The first of the group were Andrew and John the unnamed disciple of ver 40. These followed

      Jesus in consequence of their Master s ) Andrew testimony. It was, however, the few and John hours converse they had with Jesus Discipleship in His own abode that actually decided as the Fruit them. To Christ s question, "What of Spiritual seek ye?" their answer was practically Converse "Thyself." "The mention of the time (vs 37-40) the 10th hour, i.e. 10 AM is one

      of the small traits that mark St. John. He is here looking back on the date of his own spirit ual birth" (Westcott).

      John and Andrew had no sooner found Christ for themselves ("We have found the Messiah," ver 41)

      than they hastened to tell others of

      b) Simon their discovery. Andrew at once Peter sought out Simon, his brother, and Discipleship brought him to Jesus; so, later, Philip a Result of sought Nathanael (ver 45). Christ s Personal unerring eye read at once the quality Testimony of the man whom Andrew introduced (vs 41.42) to Him. "Thou art Simon the son of

      John: thou shalt be called Cephas"- "Rock" or "Stone" (ver 42). Mt 16 18, therefore, is not the original bestowal of this name, but the con firmation of it. The name is the equivalent of "Peter" (Petros), and was given to Simon, not with any official connotation, but because of the strength and clearness of his convictions. His general stead fastness is not disproved by His one unhappy failure. (Was it thus the apostle acquired the name "Peter"?) The fourth disciple, Philip, was called by Jesus Himself, when about to depart for Galilee (ver 43). Friendship may have had its influence

      c) Philip on Philip (like the foregoing, he also the Result was from Bethsaida of Galilee, ver 44), of Scriptural but that which chiefly decided him was Evidence the correspondence of what he found (vs 43.44) in Jesus with the prophetic testimonies

      (ver 45).

      Philip sought Nathanael (of Cana of Galilee, 21 2) the same probably as Bartholomew the Apostle

      and told him he had found Him of <:/) Nathan- whom Moses in the law and the proph- ael Disci- ets had written (ver 45). Nathanael pleship an doubted, on the ground that the Mes- Effect of siah was not likely to have His origin Heart- in an obscure place like Nazareth (ver

      Searching 46; cf 7 52). Philip s wise answer Power was, "Come and see"; and when Na-

      (vs 45-51) thanael came, the Lord met him with a

      word which speedily rid him of his hesitations. First, Jesus attested His seeker s sin cerity ("Behold, an Israelite indeed," etc, ver 47); then, on Nathanael expressing surprise, revealed to him His knowledge of a recent secret act of medita tion or devotion ("when thou wast under the fig tree," etc, ver 48). The sign was sufficient to con vince Nathanael that he was in the presence of a superhuman, nay a Divine, Being, therefore, the Christ "Son of God .... King of Israel" (ver 49). Jesus met his faith with further self-disclosure. Na-



      thanael had believed on comparatively slight evi dence ; he \\\\\\\\vould see greater things : heavens opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man (ver 51). The allusion is to Jacob s vision (Gen 28 10-22) a Scripture which had possibly been the theme of Philip s meditation in his privacy. Jesus puts Himself in place of that mystic ladder as the medium of reopened communi cation between heaven and earth.

      The name "Son of Man" a favorite designation of Jesus for Himself appears here for the first time in the Gospels. It is disputed whether it was a 9 "cinn nf current Messianic title (see SON OF MAN), * ,, j 1)ut at 1( ast ;t had this force on the lips of Man and Jesus Himself, denoting Him as the pos- "Son of sessor of a true humanity, and as standing P j in a representative relation to mankind uni

      versally. It is probably borrowed from Dnl 7 13 and appears in tlie Book of En (see APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE). Tin; higher title, "Son of

      such as the better class of minds would seem to have attributed to the Messiah (cf Jn 5 18; 10 33 If; Mt 26 03).

      ///. The First Events. An interval of a few weeks is occupied by a visit of Jesus to Cana of Gali lee (Jn 2 1 ff ) and a brief sojourn in Capernaum (ver 12); after which Jesus returned to Jems to the; Passover as t he most appropriate place for His public; manifestation of Himself as Messiah (vs 13 ff). The notes of time in Jn suggest that the Passover (beginning of April, 27 AD) took place about three months after the baptism by John (cf 1 43; 2 1.12).

      Prior to His public manifestation, a more; private unfolding of Christ s glory was granted to the disci ples at the marriage feast of Cana of 1. The First Galilee (cf ver 11). The marriage 1 was Miracle doubtless that of some relative of the (Jn 2:1-11) family, and the presence; of Jesus at the feast, with His mother, brethren and disciples (as Joseph no more appears, it may be con cluded that he was dead), is significant as showing that His religion is not one of antagonism to natural relations. The marriage festivities lasted seven days, and toward the close the wine provided for the guests gave out. Mary interposed with an indirect suggestion that Jesus might supply the want. Christ s reply, lit. Woman, what is that to thee and to me?" (ver 4), is not intended to convey the least tinge of reproof (cf Westcott, in loc.), but inti mates to Mary that His actions were henceforth to be guided by a rule other than hers (cf Lk 2 51). This, however, as Mary saw (ver 5), did not pre clude an answer to her desire 1 . Six waterpots of stone stood near, and Je-sus ordered these 1 to be> filled with water (the quantity was large-; about 50 gal lons) ; then when the water was drawn off it was found changed into a nobler element a wine purer and better than could have been obtained from any natural vintage. The ruler of the feast, in ignorance of its origin, expressed surprise at it s qualit y (ver 10) . The miracle was symbolical a "sign" (ver 11) and may be contrasted with the first miracle of Moses- turning the water into blood (Ex 7 20). It points to the contrast between the old dispensation and the; new, and to the work of Christ as a transforming, enriching and glorifying of the natural, through Divine grace and power.

      After a brief stay at Capernaum (ver 12), Jesus went up to Jerus to keep the Passover. There it, was His design formally to manifest Himself. Other "signs" He wrought at the feast, leading many to believe on Him not, however, with a dcn-p or enduring faith (vs 23-25) but the special act by which He signalized His appearance was His public cleansing of the temple from the irreligious trafficking with which it had come to be associated.

      A like incident is related by the Synoptics at the close of Christ s ministry (Mt 21 12.13; Mk 11 15-18; Lk 19 45.46), and it is a 2. The question whether the act was actually

      First repeated, or whether the other e van-

      Passover, gelists, who do not narrate the events and Cleans- of the early ministry, simply record it ing of the out of its chronological order. In any Temple case, the act was a fitting inaugura-

      (vs 13-25) tiem of the Lord s work. A regular market, was held in the outer court of the temple. He-re the animals needed for sacrifice could be purchased, foreign money exchanged, and the doves, which, were the offerings of the poor, be obtained. It was a busy, tumultuous, noisy and unholy scene, and the "zeal" of Jesus burned within Him had doubtless ofte-n done so before as He witnessed it. Arming Himself with a scourge of cords, less as a weapon of offence, than as a symbol of authority, He descended with resistless energy upon the wrangling throng, drove out the dealers and the cattle, overthrew the table s of the money changers, and commanded the doves to be taken away. Let them not profane His Father s house (Jn 2 14-16). No one seems to have opposed. All felt that a prophet was among them, and could not resist the overpowering authority with which He spake and acted. By and by, when their courage 1 re-vived, they askeel Him for a sign" in evidence of His right to do such things. Jesus gave them no sign sue-h as they demanded, but uttered an enig matic word, and left them to reflect on it, "Destroy this temple, and in three days 1 will raise it up" (ver 19). The authenticity of the saying is sufficiently vouched for by the perverted use made of it at Christ s trial (Mt 26 61 J. It is a word based on the foresight which Christ had that the conflict now commencing was to end in His rejection and death. "The true way to destroy the 1 Temple , in the eyes e>f

      Jesus, was to slay the Messiah If it is in

      the person of the Messiah that the Temple is laid in ruins, it is in His person it shall be raised again" (Godet). The disciples, after the resurrection, saw the meaning of the word (Jn 2 22).

      As a sequel to these stirring events Jesus had a nocturnal visitor in the person of Nicodemus a Pharisee, a ruler of the Jews, a "teach- 3. The Visit er of Israel" (ver 10), apparently no of Nicode- longer young (ver 4). His coming by mus (Jn 3: night argues, besides some fear of man, 1-12) a constitutional timidity of disposition

      (cf 19 39); but the interesting thing is that he did come, showing that he hud been really impressed by Christ s words and works. One rec ognizes in him a man of candor and uprightness of spirit, yet without adequate apprehensions of Christ Himself, and of the nature of Christ s kingdom. Jesus he was prepared to acknowledge as a Divinely commissioned teacher one whose mission was ac credited by miracle (ver 2). He was interested in the kingdom, but, as a morally living man, had no doubt of his fitness to enteT into it. Jesus had but to teach and he would understand.

      (1) The new birth. Jesus in His reply laid His finger at once on the defective point in His visitor s relation to Himself and to His kingdom: "Except one be born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of Goel" (ver 3); "Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" (ver 5). Nicodemus was staggered at this demand for a spiritual new birth. There is reason to believe that proselytes were baptized on being received into the Jewish church, and their baptism was called a "new birth." Nicodemus would therefore be familiar with the expression, but could not see that it had any applicability to him. Jesus teaches him, on the other hand, that he also needs a new birth,



      and this, not through water only, but through tin- Spirit. The change was mysterious, yd plainly inanitVst in its eftVcts (vs 7.8). If Nicexlemus did not understand these "earthly things" the evidence of which lay all around him how should he under stand "heavenly things," the things pertaining to salvat ion?

      (2) "Hi innili/ tiling." These "heavenly things" Jesus now proceeds to unfold to Nicodemus: "As Moses lifted up the serpent," etc (ver 11). The "lifting up" is a prophecy of the cross (cf 12 3 J 31 >. The bra/en serpent is the symbol of sin conquered and dest roved by 1 he deat h of Christ . What follows in 3 16-21 is probably the evangelist s expansion of this them* Clod s love the source _of salvation (ver 16), C.od s purpose not the world s condemna tion, but its salvation (vs 17.18) the self-judgment of sin (vs 19 IT).

      Retiring from Jems, Jesus commenced a ministry in Judaea (ver 22). It lasted apparently about (i

      mont hs. The earlier Gospels pass over 4. Jesus if. This is accounted for by the fact and John that the. ministry in Judaea \\\\\\\\vas still (Jn3:22- preparatory. Jesus had publicly as- 36) serted His Messianic authority. A little

      space is now allowed to test the result. Meanwhile Jesus descends again to the work of pro phetic preparation. His ministry at this stage is hardly distinguishable from John s. lie summons to the baptism of repentance. His disciples, not, Himself, administer the rite (3 23; 4 2); hence (he sort of rivalry that sprang up between His baptism and that of the forerunner (3 22-26). John was bapti/ing at the time at Aenon, on the western side of the, Ionian; Jesus somewhere in the neighbor hood. Soon the greater teacher began to eclipse the less. "All men came to Him" (ver 26). John s reply showed how pure his mind was from the nar row, grudging spirit which characterized his follow ers. To him it was no grievance, but the fulfilment of his joy, that men should be flocking to Jesus. He was not the Bridegroom, but the friend of the Bride groom. They themselves had heard him testify, "I am not the Christ." It lay in the nature of things that Jesus must increase; he must decrease (vs 27-30). Explanatory words follow (vs 31-36). IV. Journey to Galilee the Woman of Samaria. Toward the close of this Judaean ministry the

      Baptist appears to have been cast into

      1. With- prison for his faithfulness in reproving drawal to Herod Antipas for taking his brother Galilee Philip s wife (cf Jn 3 24; Alt 14 3-

      5 ). It seems most natural to connect t he departure to Galilee in Jn 4 3 with that narrated in Mt 3 13 , though some think the imprisonment of the Baptist did not take place till later. The motive which Jn gives was the hostility of the Pharisees, but it was the imprisonment of tin- Baptist, which led Jesus to commence, at the time He did, an independent ministry. The direct road to Galilee lay through Samaria; hence the mem orable encounter with the woman at that place.

      Jesus, being wearied, paused to rest Himself at

      Jacob s well, near a town called Sychar, now An/car.

      It was about the sixth hour or 6

      2. The o clock in the evening. The time of Living year is determined by ver 35 to be Water "four months" before harvest, i.e.

      December (there is no reason for not tak ing this literally). It suits the evening hour that the woman of Samaria came out to draw water. (Some, on a different reckoning, take the hour to be noon.) Jesus opened the conversation by asking from the woman a draught from her pitcher. The prover bial hatred between Jews and Samaritans filled the woman with surprise that Jesus should thus address Himself to her. Still greater was her surprise when,

      as the conversation proceeded, Jesus announced Himself as the giver of a water of which, if a man drank, he should never t hirst again (vs 13.14). Only gradually did His meaning penetrate her mind, "Sir, give me this water," etc (ver 15). The request of Jesus that she would call her husband led to 1 he- discovery that Jesus knew all the secrets of her life. She was before a prophet (ver 1!)). As in the- case of Nathanael, (he heart -searching power of Christ s word convinceel her of His Divine- claim.

      The conversation next turned upon the right place

      of worship. The Samaritans had a temple of their

      own em Mount Gerixim; the Je-ws, on

      3. The the- other hand, held to the exclusive True validity of the temple at Jerus. Which Worship was right? Jesus in His reply, while

      pronouncing for (he Jews as the cus todians of God s salvation (ver 22), makes it plain that distinction of places is no longer a matter of any practical importance. A change was immi nent which would substitute a universal religion for one of special times and places (ver 20). He enunciates the great principle of the new dispensa tion that God is a Spirit , and they who worship Him must do so in spirit and in truth. Finally, when she spoke of the Messiah, Jesus made Himself ele-fi- nitely known to her as the Christ. Te> this poor Samaritan woman, with her receptive heart, JIe> unveils Himself more plainly than He: had done to priests and rulers (ver 2(5).

      The woman went home and became an evangelist

      to her people, with notable results (vs 2S.39). Jesus

      abode with them two days and con-

      4. Work firmed the impression made- by her tes- and Its (imony (vs 40-42). Meanwhile, He- Reward impressed on His disciples the neeel of

      earnest sowing and re-aping in the serv ice of the Kingdom, assuring t lie-in of unfailing re ward for both sower and reaper (vs35-3N). He Himself was their Great Example (ver 34).


      Galilee w T as divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee. It has already been remarked that upper Galilee was inhabited by a mixed pop- 1. The ulatiem hence called Galilee of the

      Scene Gentiles" (Mt 4 15). The- highroads

      of commerce ran through it. It was "the way of the sea" (AY) a scene of constant traffic. The people were rude, ignorant, and super stitious, and were densely crowded together in towns and villages. About 160 BC (here were only a fe-w Jews in the midst of a large heathen popula tion; but by the time of Christ the Jewish element had greatly increased. The busiest portion of this busy district was round the Sea of Galilee, at the N.E. corner of which stood Capernaum wealthy and cosmopolitan. In Nazareth, inde-ed, Jesus met with a disappointing reception (Lk 4 16-30; Mt 13 54-57; cf Jn 4 43-45); yet in Galilee generally He found a freer spirit and greater receptiveness than among the stricter traditionalists of Judaea.

      It is assumed here- that Jesus returned to Galileo in

      December, 27 AD, and that His ministry there lasted till

      late in 29 AD (see "Chronology" above).

      2 The On the two years scheme of the public ,_ . ministry, the Passover of Jn 6 4 has to be

      taken as the second in Christ s ministry therefore; as occurring at an interval of only

      3 or 4 months after the return. This see-ms Impossible in vi(!\\\\\\\\v of the crowding of events it involves in so short a time opening incidents, stay in Capernaum (Mt 4 13), three circuits in " all Galilee (Mt 4 23-25 1 1 ; Lk 8 1-4; Mt 9 35-3S; Mk 6 <>), lesser journeys and excursions (Sermon on Mount: Gadara); and the dislocations it necessitates, e.g. the plucking of ears of corn (about Pass over time) must be- plae-e-el after the feeding e)f the 5,000, etc. It is simpler to adhere to the- three; years scheme.

      A division of the Galilean ministry may then fitly be made into two periods one- preceding, tho other sue-



      ((((ling the Mission of the Twelve, in Mt 10 1!- One reason for this division is that, after the Mission of the Twelve the order of events is the same in the first three evangelists till the final departure from (ialilee.

      7< </-.s7, I criiul From the Beginning of the Ministry in d alilcc till the Mission of the Twelve

      I. Opening Incidents. I Yom sympathetic Sa maria (.In 4 30), Jesus had journeyed to unsym pathetic Galilee, and first to Cana,

      1. Healing where His first, miracle had been of Noble- wrought. The reports of His miracles man s Son in Judaea had come before Him (ver (Jn4: 43 54) 45), and it was mainly His reputation

      as a miracle-worker which led a noble man a courtier or officer at Herod s court to seek Him at Cana on behalf of his son, who was near to death. Jesus rebuked the sign-seeking spirit (ver 48), but, on the fervent appeal being repeated, He bade the nobleman go his way: his son lived. The man s prayer had been, "Come down"; but he had faith to receive the word of Jesus (ver 50), and on his way home received tidings of his son s recovery. The nobleman, with his whole household, was won for Jesus (ver 53j. This is noted as the second of Christ s Galilean miracles (ver 54).

      A very different reception awaited Him at Naza reth, His own country," to which He next came. We

      can scarcely take the incident recorded

      2. The in Lk 4 16-30 to be the same as that Visit to in Alt 13 54-58, though Matthew s Nazareth habit of grouping makes this not im- (Mt 4:13; possible. The Sabbath had come, and Lk 4:16-30) on His entering the synagogue, as was

      His wont, the repute He had won led to His being asked to read. The Scripture He se lected (or which came in the order of the day) was Isa 61 1 iT (the fact that Jesus was able to read from the synagogue-roll is interesting as bearing on Ilis knowledge of Heb), and from this He proceeded to amaze His hearers by declaring that this Scripture was now fulfilled in t heir ears (ver 21). The "words of grace" he uttered are not given, but it can be understood that, following the prophet s guidance, He would hold Himself forth as the predicted "Serv ant, of Jehovah," sent to bring salvation to the poor, the bound, the broken-hearted, and for this purpose endowed with the fulness of the Spirit. The idea of the passage in Isa is that of the year of jubilee, when debts were canceled, inheritances re stored, and slaves set free, and Jesus told them He had come to inaugurate that "acceptable year of the Lord." At first He was listened to with ad miration, then, as the magnitude of the claims He was makirg became apparent to His audience, a very different spirit took possession of them. Who was this that spoke thus? Was it not Joseph s son? (ver 22). They were disappointed, too, that Jesus showed no disposition to gratify them by working before them any of the miracles of which they had heard so much (ver 23). Jesus saw the gathering storm, but met it resolutely. He told His hearers He had not expected any better reception, and in reply to their reproach that He had wrought mira cles elsewhere, but had wrought none among them, quoted examples of prophets who had done the same thing (Elijah, Elisha, vs 24-28). This com pleted the exasperation of the Nazarenes, who, springing forward, dragged Him to the brow of the hill on which their city was built, and would have thrown Him down, had something in the aspect of Jesus not restrained them. With one of those looks we read of occasionally in the Gospels, He seems to have overawed His townsmen, and, passing in safety through their midst, left the place (vs 28-30). leaving Nazareth Jesus made His way to Capernaum (probably Tell Hum), which thereafter

      seems to have been His headquarters. He "dwelt"

      there (Alt 4 13;. It is called in Mt, 9 1, "his

      own city." Before teaching in Caper-

      3. Call of naiim itself, however, He appears to the Four haveopened His ministry by evangeliz- Disciples ing along the shores of the Sea of Gali- (Mt 4:17- lee (Alt 4 18; Mk 1 16; Lk 6 1), and 22; Mk 1: there, at Bethsaida (on topographical 16-22; Lk questions, see special arts.), He took 5:1-11) His first step in gathering His chosen

      disciples more closely around Him. Hitherto, though attached to His person and cause, the pairs of fisher brothers, Simon and Andrew, James and John these last the "sons of Zebedee" had not been in constant attendance upon Him. Since the return from Jerus, they had gone back to their ordinary avocations. The four were "part ners" (Lk 5 10). They had "hired servants" (Mk 1 20); therefore were moderately well olT. The time had now come when they were to leave "all," and follow Jesus entirely.

      Luke alone records the striking miracle which led to the call. Jesus had been teaching the multitude

      from a boat borrowed from Simon, and rt) The now at the (dose He bade Simon put

      Draught of out into the deep, and let down his Fishes (Lk nets. Peter told Jesus they had toiled 5:1-9) all night in vain, but he would obey

      His word. The result was an immense draught of fishes, so that the nets were breaking, and the other company had to be called upon for help. Both boats were filled and in danger of sink ing. Peter s cry in so wonderful a presence was, "Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, () Lord." The miracle gave Jesus opportunity for the word He wished to speak. It is here that Alt and Alk

      take up the story. The boats had 6) "Fishers been brought to shore when, first to of Men" Simon and Andrew, afterward to

      James and John (engaged in "mending their nets," Alt 4 21; Alk 1 19), the call was given: "Come ye after me, and I will make you fishers of men." At once all was left boats, nets, friends and they followed Him. Their experience taught them to have large expectations from Christ.

      Jesus is now found in Capernaum. An early Sabbath perhaps the first of His stated residence in

      the city was marked by notable

      4. At Ca- events.

      pernaum The Sabbath found Jesus as usual

      (Mt 4:13; in the synagogue now as teacher. Lk 4:31) The manner of His teaching is spe cially noticed: "He taught them as having authority, and not as the scribes" (Alk 1 22). The scribes gave forth nothing of their own. They but repeated the dicta of the great a) Christ s authorities of the past. It was a sur- Teaching prise to the people to find in Jesus One (Mk 1:22. whose wisdom, like waters from a clear 27; Lk 4: fountain, came fresh and sparkling 32) from His own lips. The authority also

      with which Jesus spoke commanded attention. He sought support in the opinion of no others, but gave forth His statements with firmness, decision, dignity and emphasis.

      While Jesus was teaching an extraordinary inci dent occurred. A man in the assembly, described as possessed by "an unclean spirit" 6) The (Alk 1 23; Lk 4 33) broke forth in

      Demoniac cries, addressing Jesus by name ("Jesus, in the thou Nazarene"), speaking of Him as

      Synagogue "the Holy One of God," and asking (Mk 1:23- "What have we to do with thee? Art 27; Lk 4: thou come to destroy us?" The dis- 33-37; eased consciousness of the sufferer bore

      a truer testimony to Christ s dignity, holiness and power than most of those present could



      have given, and instinctively, lint truly, construed His coming as meaning destruction to the empire of the demons. At. Christ s word, after a terrible paroxysm, from which, however, the man escaped unhurt (l.k 4 35), the demon was east out. More; than ever the people were "ama/ed" at the word which had such power (Mk 1 27).

      Di moti-potxexxion rt.s- miHti/. This is tlio place to siiy a word on this terrible form of malady demon- possession --met with so often in tho Gospels. Was it a reality? or a hallucination? Did Jesus believe in it ? It is dilliciilt to read tho Gospels, and not answer I lie last question in the afllrmative. Was Jesus, then, mistaken? This also it is hard to believe. If there is one subject, on which Jesus might be expected to have clear vision- on which we might trust His insight it was His relation to the. spiritual world with which He stood in so close rapport. Was Ife likely then to be mis taken when He spoko so earnestly, so profoundly, so fre quently, of its hidden forces of evil? There is in itself no improbability rather analogy suggests the highest probability of realms of spiritual existence outside our sensible ken. That evil should enter this spiritual world, and that human life should be deeply implicated with that evil that its forces should have a mind and will organiz ing and directing them are not. beliefs to bo dismissed with scorn. The presence; of such beliefs in tho time of Christ is commonly attributed to Hub, Pcrs or other foreign influences. It may be questioned, however, whet her the main cause was not something far more real an act ual and permitted "hour and the power of darkness" (Lk 22 r > <) in the kingdom of evil, discovering itself in manifestations in the bodies and souls of men, that could be traced only to a supernatural cause (see DEMONIAC POSSESSION). (The present writer discusses the subject in an art. in tho Xmiitau School Times for June 4, 11)10. It would be presumptuous even to say that tho instance in the (lospels have 110 modern parallels. See a striking paper in Good Words, edited by Dr. Norman MacLeod, for 1S(>7, on "The English Demoniac.") It should bo noted that nil diseases are not, as is sometimes affirmed, traced to demonic influence. The distinction between other diseases and demonic possession is clearly main tained (of Mt 4 24; 10 l; 11 /i, etc). Insanity, epilepsy, blindness, dumbness, etc, were frequent accompaniments of possession, but they are not identified with it.

      Jesus, on leaving the synagogue, entered the

      house of Peter. In Mk it is called "the house of

      Simon and Andrew" (1 29). Peter

      c) Peter s was married (of 1 Cor 9 5), and ap- Wife s parent ly his mother-in-law and brother Mother lived with him in Capernaum. It was (Mt 8:14. an anxious time in the household, for 16; Mk 1: the mother-in-law lay "sick of a fever" 29-31; Lk "a great fever," as Luke the physi- 4:38.39) cian calls it. Taking her by the hand,

      Jesus rebuked the fever, which in stantaneously left her. The miracle, indeed, was a double one, for not only was the fever stayed, but strength was at once restored. "She rose up and ministered unto them" (Lk 4 39).

      The day s labors were not yet done; were, in deed, scarce begun. The news of what had taken

      place quickly spread, and soon the

      d) The extraordinary spectacle was presented Eventful of the whole city gathered at the door Evening of the dwelling, bringing their sick of (Mt 8:16; every kind to be healed. Demoniacs Mk 1:32- were there, crying and being rebuked, 34; Lk 4: but multitudes of others as well. The 40.41) Lord s compassion was unbounded.

      He rejected none. He labored nn- weariodly t ill every one was healed. His syrnpat hy was individual: "He laid his hands on every one of them" (Lk 4 40).

      //. From First Galilean Circuit till Choice of the Apostles. The chronological order in this sec tion is to bo sought in Mk and Lk; 1. The First Mt groups for didactic purposes. Circuit. (Mk The morning after that eventful 1:35-45; Sabbath evening in Capernaum, Jesus Lk 4:42- took steps for a systematic visitation 44; cf Mt of the towns and villages of Galilee. 4:23-25) The task He set before Himself was

      prepared for by early, prolonged, soli tary prayer (Mk 1 35; many instances show that

      Christ s life was steeped in prayer). His disciples followed Him, and reported that the multitudes sought Him. Jesus intimated to them His intention of passing to the next towns, and forthwith com menced a tour of preaching and heal- o) Its Scope ing "throughout all Calilee." Even if the expression "all Calilee" is used with some latitude, it indicates a work of very extensive compass. It was a work likewise methodically con ducted (of Mk 6 6: "went round about the vil lages," lit. "in a circle"). Galilee at this time was extraordinarily populous (cf Jos, BJ , III, iii, 2), and the time occupied by the circuit must have been considerable. Mt s condensed picture (4 23-25) shows that Christ s activity during this period was incredibly great. He stirred the province to its depths. His preaching and miracles drew enor mous crowds after Him. This tide of popularity afterward turned, but much of the seed sown may have produced fruit at a later day.

      The one incident recorded which seems to have belonged to this tour was a sufficiently typical one. While Jesus was in a certain city b) Cure of a man "full of leprosy" (Lk 6 12) the Leper came and threw himself down before (Mt 8:2-4; Him, seeking to be healed. The man Mk 1:40- did not even ask Jesus to heal him, 45; Lk 5: but expressed his faith, "If thou wilt, 12-16) thou canst make me clean." The

      man s apparent want of importunity was the very essence of his importunity. Jesus, moved by his earnestness, touched him, and the man was made whole on the spot. The leper was enjoined to keep silence Jesus did not wish to pass for a mere miracle-worker and bade the man show himself to the priests and offer the appointed sacri fices (note Christ s respect for the legal institu tions). The leper failed to keep Christ s charge, and published his cure abroad, no doubt much to his own spiritual detriment, and also to the hin drance of Christ s work (Mk 1 45).

      His circuit ended, Jesus returned to Capernaum (Mk 2 1; lit. "after days"). Here again His fame at once drew multitudes to see 2. Caper- and hear Him. Among them were naum now persons of more unfriendly spirit.

      Incidents Pharisees and doctors, learning of the new rabbi, had come out of "every village of Galilee and Judaea and Jerusalem" (Lk 5 17), to hear and judge of Him for themselves. The chief incidents of this visit are the two now to be noted.

      In a chamber crowded till there was no standing room, even round the door, Jesus wrought the cure upon the paralytic man. The scene a) Cure of was a dramatic one. From Christ s the Para- words "son," lit. "child" (Mk 2 5), lytic (Mt 9: we infer that the paralytic was young, 2-8 ; Mk but his disablement seems to have been 2:1-12; Lk complete. It was no easy matter, 5: 17-26) with the doorways blocked, to get the man brought to Jesus, but his four bearers (ver 3) were not easily daunted. They climbed the flat roof, and, removing part of the covering above where Jesus was, let down the man into the midst. Jesus, pleased with the inventive ness and perseverance of their faith, responded to their wish. But, first, that the spiritual and tem poral might be set in their right relations, and the attitude of His hearers be tested, He spoke the higher words: "Son, thy sins are forgiven" (ver 5). At once the temper of the scribes was revealed. Here w r as manifest evasion. Anyone could say, "Thy sins are forgiven." Worse, it was blas phemy, for "who can forgive sins but one, even God?" (ver 7). Unconsciously they were conceding to Christ the Divine dignity He claimed. Jesus per-



      ceives at once the thoughts of the cavilers, and proceeds to expose their malice. Accepting their own test, He proves His right to say, "Thy sins are forgiven," by now saying to the palsied man, "Take up thy bed and walk" (vs 9.11). At once the man arose, took his bed, and went forth whole. The multitude were "amazed" and "glorified God" (ver 12).

      The call of Matthew apparently took place shortly after the cure of the paralytic man. The

      feast was possibly later (cf the con- 6) Call and nection with the appeal of Jairus, Feast of Mt 9 18), but the call and the feast Matthew are best taken together, as they are (Mt 9:9- in all the three narratives. 13; Mk2: (1) The ail!. Matthew is called 13-17; Lk "Levi" by Luke, and "Levi, the son of 6:27-32) Alphaeus" by Mark. By occupation

      he was a "publican" (Lk 6 27), collector of custom-dues in Capernaum, an impor tant cent er of traffic. There is no reason to suppose that Matthew was not a man of thorough upright ness, though naturally the class to which he belonged was held in great odium by the Jews. Passing the place of toll on His way to or from the lake-side, Jesus called Matthew to follow Him. The publican must by this time have seen and heard much of Jesus, and could not but keenly feel His grace in calling one \\\\\\\\vhoin men despised. Without an instant s delay, he left all, and followed Jesus. From publican, Matthew became apostle, then evangelist.

      (2) The fcufif. Then, or after, in the joy of his heart, Matthew made a feast for Jesus. To this feast he invited many of his own class "publicans and sinners" (Mt 9 10). Scribes and Pharisees were loud in their remonstrances to the disciples at what seemed to them an outrage on all propriety. Narrow hearts cannot understand the breadth of grace. Christ s reply was conclusive: "They that are whole have no need of a physician, but they that are sick," etc (Mk 2 17, etc)".

      (3) Fasting and joy. Another line of objection was encountered from disciples of the Baptist. They, like the Pharisees, "fasted oft" (Mt 9 14), and they took exception to the unconstrained way in which Jesus and His disciples entered into social life. Jesus defends His disciples by adopting a metaphor of John s own (Jn 3 29), and speaking of Himself as the heavenly bridegroom (Mk 2 19). Joy was natural while the bridegroom was with them; then, with a sad forecast of the end, He alludes to days of mourning when the bridegroom should be taken away (ver 20). A deeper answer follows. The spirit of His gospel is a free, spon taneous, joyful spirit, and cannot be confined within the old forms. To attempt to confine His religion within the outworn forms of Judaism would be like putting a patch of undressed cloth on an old garment, or pouring new wine into old wine skins. The garment would be rent; the wine skins would burst (vs 21.22 ||). The new spirit must make forms of its own.

      At this point is probably to be introduced the visit to Jerus to attend "a feast," or, according to

      another reading, "the feast" of the 3. The Un- Jews, recorded in Jn 6. The feast named may, if the article is admitted, have

      Jerusalem been the Passover (April), though in Feast that case one would expect it to be

      (Jn 5) named; it may have been Purim

      (March), only this is not a feast Jesus might be thought eager to attend; it may even have been Pentecost (June). In this last case it would succeed the Sabbath controversies to be mentioned later. Fortunately, the determination of the actual feast has little bearing on the teaching of the chapter.

      Bethesda ("house of mercy") was the name given

      to a pool, fed by an intermittent spring, possessing

      healing properties, which was situated

      a) The by the sheep-gate (not "market," AY), Healing at i.e. near the temple, on the E. Porches Bethesda were erected to accommodate the (vs 1-16) invalids who desired to make trial of

      the waters (the mention of the angel, ver 4, with part of ver 3, is a later gloss, and is justly omitted in RV). On one of these porches lay an impotent man. His infirmity was of long standing 38 years. Hope deferred was making his heart sick, for he had no friend, when the waters were troubled, to put him into the pool. Others invariably got down before him. Jesus took pity on this man. He asked him if he would be made whole; then by a word of power healed him. The cure was instantaneous (vs 8.9). It was the Sab bath day, and as the man, at Christ s command, took up his bed to go, he was challenged as doing that which was unlawful. The healed man, how ever, rightly perceived that He who was able to work so great a cure had authority to say what should and should not be done on the Sabbath. Meeting the man after in the temple, Jesus bade him "sin no more" a hint, perhaps, that his previous infirmity was a result of sinful conduct (ver 14).

      Jesus Himself was now challenged by the authori ties for breaking the Sabbath. Their strait, arti ficial rules would not permit even of

      b) Son and acts of mercy on the Sabbath. This Father (vs led, on the part of Jesus, to a momen- 17-29) tons assertion of His Divine dignity.

      He first justified Himself by the example of His Father, who works continually in the upholding and government of the universe (ver 17) the Sabbath is a rest /row earthly labors, for Divine, heavenly labor (Westcott) then, when this increased the offence by its suggestion of "equality" with the Father, so that His life was threatened (ver IS), He spoke yet more explicitly of His unique relationship to the Father, and of the Divine prerogatives it conferred upon Him. The Jews were right: if Jesus were not a Divine Person, the claims He made would be blasphemous. Not only was He admitted to intimacy with the Divine counsel (vs 20.21; cf Mt 11 27), but to Him, He averred, was committed the Divine power of giving life (vs 21.26), of judgment (vs 22.27), of resurrection spiritual resurrection now (vs 24.25), resurrection at the last day (vs 28.29). It was the Father s will that the Son should be honored even as Himself (ver 23).

      These stupendous claims are not made without

      adequate attestation. Jesus cites a threefold

      witness: (1) the witness of the Bap-

      c) The tist, whose testimony they had been Threefold willing for a time to receive (vs 33.35) ; Witness (2) the witness of the Father, who by (vs 30-47) Christ s works supported His witness

      to Himself (vs 36-38); (3) the witness of the Scriptures, for these, if read with spiritual discernment, would have led to Him (vs 39.45-47). Moses, whom they trusted, would condemn them. Their rejection of Jesus was due, not to want of light, but to the state of the heart: "I know you, that ye have not the love of God in yourselves" (ver 42) ; "How can ye believe," etc (ver 44).

      Shortly after His return to Galilee, if the order of events has been rightly apprehended, Jesus

      became involved in new disputes with 4. Sabbath the Pharisees about Sabbath-keeping. Contro- Possibly we hear in these the echoes versies of the charges brought against Him at

      the feast in Judaea. Christ s conduct, and the principles involved in His replies, throw valuable light on the Sabbath institution.



      The first, dispute was occasioned by the action of the disciples in plucking ears of grain and rubbing

      them in their hands as they passed a) Plucking through the grainfields on a Sabbath of the Ears (the note of time "second-first," in of Grain Lk 6 1 AV, is omitted in RV. In (Mt 12:1- any case the ripened grain points to 8; Mk 2: a "time shortly after the Passover). 23-28; Lk The law permitted this liberty (Dt 6:1-5) 23 25), but Pharisaic rigor construed

      it into an offence to do the act on the Sabbath (for specimens of the minute, trivial and vexatious rules by which the Pharisees converted the Sabbath into a day of wretched constraint, see Farrar s Life of Christ, Edersheim s Jesus the Mes siah, and similar works). Jesus, in defending His disciples, first quotes OT precedents (David and the sliowbread, an act done apparently on the Sabbath, 1 S 21 G; the priests service on the Sabbath "One greater than the temple" was there, Mt 12 G), in illustration of the truth that necessity overrides positive enactment; next, falls back on the broad principle of the design of the Sabbath as made for man for his highest physical, mental, moral and spiritual well-being: The sabbath was made for man," etc (Mk 2 27). The claims of mercy are paramount. The end is not to be sacrificed to the means. The Son of Man, therefore, asserts lordship over the Sabbath (ver 28 ).

      The second collision took place on "another sabbath" (Lk 6 6) in the synagogue. There was

      present a man with a withered hand. 6) The Man The Pharisees themselves, on this with the occasion, eager to entrap Jesus, seem Withered to have provoked the conflict by a Hand (Mt question, "Is it lawful to heal on the 12:10-14; sabbath day?" (Mt 12 10). Jesus met Mk 3:1-6; them by an appeal to their own prac- Lk 6:6-11) tice in permitting the rescue of a

      sheep that had fallen into a pit on the Sabbath day (vs 1 1.12), then, bidding the man stand forth, retorted the question on themselves, "Is it lawful on the sabbath day to do good, or to do harm? to save a life, or to kill?" (Mk 3 4) an allusion to their murderous intents. On no reply being made, looking on them with holy indignation, Jesus ordered the man to stretch forth his hand, and it was at once perfectly restored. The effect was only to inflame to "madness" (Lk 611) the minds of His adversaries, and Pharisees and Herodians (the court-party of Herod) took counsel to destroy Him (Mk 3 6 ||).

      Jesus, leaving this scene of unprofitable conflict, quietly withdrew with His disciples to the shore,

      and there continued His work of teach- c) With- ing and healing. People from all the drawal to neighboring districts nocked to His the Sea ministry. He taught them from a (Mt 12:15- little boat (Mk 3 9), and healed their 21; Mk 3: sick. Mt sees in this a fulfilment of 7-9) the oracle which is to be found in Isa

      42 1-4.

      The work of Jesus was growing on His hands, and friends and enemies were rapidly taking sides. The

      time accordingly had come for selcct- 5. The ing and attaching to His person a defi-

      Choosing nite number of followers not simply of the disciples who might be prepared to

      Twelve carry on His work after His departure.

      (Mt 10: This He did in the choice of twelve 1-4 ; Mk 3 : apostles. The choice was made in 13-19 ; Lk early morning, on the Mount of Beati- 6 : 12-16 ; tudes, after a night spent wholly in Acts 1:13) prayer (Lk 6 12).

      "Apostle" means "one sent." On the special function of the apostle it is sufficient to

      say here that those thus set apart were chosen for the special end of being Christ s witnesses and

      accredited ambassadors to the world, ) The able from personal knowledge to bear

      Apostolic testimony to what Christ had been, Function said and done to the facts of His life,

      death and resurrection (cf Acts 1 22. 23; 2 22-32; 3 15; 10 39; 1 Cor 16 3-15, etc); but, further, as instructed by Him, and endowed with His Spirit (cf Lk 24 49; Jn 14 16.17.26, etc), of being the depositaries of His truth, sharers of His authority (cf Mt 10 1; Mk 3 15), messengers of His gospel (cf 2 Cor 6 18-21), and His instruments in laying broad and strong the foundations of His church (cfEph 2 20; 3 5). So responsible a calling was never, before or after, given to mortal men.

      Four lists of the apostles are given in Mt, Mk, Lk, and Acts (1 13, omitting Judas). The names

      are given alike in all, except that

      b] The "Judas, the son [or brother] of James" Lists (Lk 6 1G; Acts 1 13) is called by Mt

      "Lebbaeus," and by Mk "Thaddaeus." The latter names are cognate in meaning, and all denote the same person. "Bartholomew (son of Tolmai) is probably the Nathanael of Jn 1 47 (cf 21 2). The epithet "Cananaean" (Mt 10 4; Mk 3 18) marks "Simon" as then or previously a mem ber of the party of the Zealots (Lk 6 15). In all the lists Peter, through his gifts of leadership, stands first; Judas Iscariot, the betrayer, stands last. There is a tendency to arrangement in pairs : Peter and Andrew; James and John; Philip and Bartholo mew; Thomas and Matthew; lastly, James, the son of Alphaeus, Judas, son or brother of James, Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot. The list contains two pairs of brothers (three, if "brother" be read with Judas), and at least one pair of friends (Philip and Nathanael).

      All the apostles were men from the humbler ranks, yet not illiterate, and mostly comfortably circum stanced. All were Galileans, except

      c) The Men the betrayer, whose name "Iscariot"

      i.e. "man of Kerioth," marks him as a Judaean. Of some of the apostles we know a good deal; of others very little; yet we are warranted in speaking of them all, Judas excepted, as men of honest minds, and sincere piety. The band held within it a number of men of strongly contrasted types of character. Allusion need only be made to the impetuous Peter, the contemplative John, the matter-of-fact Philip, the cautious Thomas, the zealous Simon, the conservative Matthew, the ad ministrative Judas. The last-named Iscariot is the dark problem of the apostolate. We have express testimony that Jesus knew him from the beginning (Jn 6 64). Yet He chose him. Thechar- acter of Judas, when Jesus received him, was doubt less undeveloped. He could not himself suspect the dark possibilities that slept in it. His association with the apostles, in itself considered, w r as for his good. His peculiar gift was, for the time, of service. In choosing him, Jesus must be viewed as acting for, and under the direction of, the Father (Jn 6 19; 17 12). See special arts, on the several apostles.

      ///. From the Sermon on the Mount till the Par ables of the Kingdom a Second Circuit. The

      choice of the apostles inaugurates a 1. The new period of Christ s activity. _Itsfirst

      Sermon on most precious fruit was the delivery to the Mount the apostles and the multitudes who

      thronged Him as He came down from the mountain (Lk 6 17) of that great manifesto of His kingdom popularly known as the Sermon on the Mount. The hill is identified by Stanley (Sinai and Pal, 368) and others with that known as "the Horns of Hattin," where "the level place" at the top, from which Christ would come down from one



      of (ho higher horns, exactly suits the conditions of the narrative. The .sick being healed, Jesus seated Himself a little higher up, His disciples near Him, and addressed the assembly (cf Alt 7 28.29). The season of the year i.s shown by the mention of the "lilies" to be the summer.

      Its scope. His words were weighty. His aim was at the outset to set forth in terms that were un mistakable the principles, aims and dispositions of His kingdom; to expound its laws; to exhibit its righteousness, both positively, and in contrast with Pharisaic formalism and hypocrisy. Only the lead ing ideas can be indicated here (see BEATITUDES; SERMON ON MOUNT; ETHICS OP JESUS). Matthew, as is his w y ont, groups material part of which is found in other connections in Lk, but it is well to study the whole in the well-ordered form in which it ap pears in the First Gospel.

      In marked contrast with the lawgiying of Sinai,

      Christ s first words are those of blessing. Passing

      at once to the dispositions of the heart,

      a) The He shows on what inner conditions the Blessings blessings of the kingdom depend. His (Mt 6 : 1- beat itudes (poverty of spirit, mourning, 6; Lk 6: meekness, hunger and thirst after 20-26) righteousness, etc) reverse all the

      world s standards of judgment on such matters. In the possession of these graces consists true godliness of character; through them the heirs of the kingdom become the salt of the earth, the light of the world. The obligation rests on them to let their light shine (cf Mk 4 21-23; Lk 8 16; 11 33). Jesus defines His relation to the old law not a Destroyer, but a Fulfiller and proceeds to exhibit

      the nature of the true righteousness

      b) True in contrast to Pharisaic literality and Righteous- formalism. Through adherence to the ness the latter they killed the spirit of the law. Old and the With an absolute authority But I New Law say unto you" Jesus leads every- (Mt 5:17- thing back from the outward letter to 48; Lk 6: the state of the heart. Illustrations 27-36) are taken from murder, adultery,

      swearing, retaliation, hatred of ene mies, and a spiritual expansion is given to every precept. The sinful thought or desire holds in it the essence of transgression. The world s stand ards are again reversed in the demands for non- resistance to injuries, love of enemies and requital of good for evil.

      Pursuing the contrast between the true right eousness and that of the scribes and Pharisees,

      Jesus next draws attention to motive

      c) Religion in religion. The Pharisees erred not and Hy- simply in having regard only to the pocrisy letter of the Law, but in acting in True and morals and religion from a false motive. False Mo- He had furnished the antidote to their tive (Mt 6: literalism; He now assails their osten- 1-18; cf Lk tation and hypocrisy. Illustrations 11: 1-8) are taken from almsgiving, prayer and

      fasting, and in connection with prayer the Lord s Prayer is given as a model (Lk intro duces this in another context, 11 1-4).

      The true motive in religious acts is to please God; the same motive should guide us in the choice of

      what is to be our supreme good.

      d) The True Earthly treasure is not to be put above Good and heavenly. The kingdom of God and Cure for His righteousness are to be first in our Care (Mt 6: desires. The eye is to be single. The 19-34; cf true cure for worldly anxiety is then Lk 11: found in trust of the heavenly Father. 34-36; 12: His children are more to God than 22-34) fowls and flowers, for whom His care

      in Nature is so conspicuously manifest. Seeking first the kingdom they have a pledge no

      higher conceivable that all else they need will be granted along with it (this section on trust, again, Lk places differently, 12 22-34).

      Jesus finally proceeds to speak of the relation of the disciple to the cril of the world. That evil has

      been considered in its fiostile attitude e) Relation to the disciple (Mt 5 38 ff); the ques- to the t ion is now as to the disciple s free rela-

      World s tions toward it. Jesus inculcates the Evil the duties of the disciple s bearing himself Conclusion wisely toward evil with charity, with (Mt 7:1- caution, with prayer, in the spirit of 29; Lk 6: ever doing as one would be done by 37-49; cf and of being on his guard against it. 11:9-13) The temptation is great to follow the

      worldly crowd, to be misled by false teachers, to put profession for practice. Against these perils the disciple is energetically warned. True religion will ever be known by its fruits. The discourse closes with the powerful similitude of the wise and foolish builders. Again, as on an earlier occasion, Christ s auditors were astonished at His teaching, and at the authority with which He spoke (Mt 7 2S.29).

      A series of remarkable incidents are next to be noticed.

      (1) The healing of the centurion s servant ap parently took place on the same day as the delivery

      of the Sermon on the Mount (Lk 7 2. Inter- 1.2). It had been a day of manifold vening and exhausting labors for Jesus. A

      Incidents walk of perhaps 7 miles brought Him

      back to Capernaum, the crowds ac companying. Yet no sooner, on His return, does He hear a new appeal for help than His love replies,

      "I will come and heal him." The a) Healing suppliant was a Rom centurion one of the Cen- who had endeared himself to the Jews turion s (Lk 7 5) and the request was for the Servant healing of a favorite servant, paralyzed (Mt 8:1.6- and tortured with pain. First, adepu- 13; Lk 7: tation sought Christ s good offices, 1-10) then, when Jesus was on the way, a

      second message came, awakening even Christ s astonishment by the magnitude of its faith. The centurion felt he was not worthy that Jesus should come under his roof, but let Jesus speak the word only, and his servant would be healed. "I have not found so great faith," Jesus said, "no, not in Israel." The word was spoken, and, on the return of the messengers, the servant was found healed.

      The exciting events of this day gathered so great a crowd round the house where Jesus was as left

      Him no leisure even to eat, and His 6) The friends, made anxious for His health,

      Widow of sought to restrain Him (Mk 3 20.21). Nain s Son It was probably to escape from this Raised (Lk local excitement that Jesus, "soon 7: 11-17) afterwards," is found at the little town

      of Nain, a few miles S.E. of Nazareth. A great multitude still followed Him. Here, as He entered the city, occurred the most wonderful of the works He had yet wrought. A young man the only son of a widowed mother was being carried out for burial. Jesus, in compassion, stopped the mournful procession, and, in the calm certainty of His word being obeyed, bade the young man arise. On the instant life returned, and Jesus gave the son back to his mother. The amazement of the people was tenfold intensified. They felt that the old days had come back: that God had visited His people.

      It was apparently during the journey or circuit which embraced this visit to Nain, and as the result of the fame it brought to Jesus (Lk 7 17.18; note the allusion to the dead being raised in Christ s reply to John), that the embassy was sent from the

      Jesus Christ



      Baptist in prison to ask of Jesus whether He was indeed He who should come, or would they look

      for another. It was a strange question c) Embassy on the lips of the forerunner, but is of John s probably to be interpreted as the ex- Disciples pression of perplexity rather than ot Christ and act ual doubt . There seems no quest ion His Gen- but that John s mind had been thrown eration (Mt into serious difficulty by the reports 11:2-30; which had reached him of the work Lk 7 : 18-35) of Jesus. Things were not turning out

      as he expected. It was the peaceful, merciful character of Christ s work which stumbled John. The gloom of his prison wrought with his disappointment, and led him to send this message for the satisfaction of himself anil his disciples.

      (1) Christ s answer to John. If doubt there was, Jesus treated it tenderly. lie did not answer di rectly, but bade the two disciples who had been sent go back and tell John the things they had seen and heard the, blind receiving their sight, the lame walking, the deaf cured, the dead raised, the Gospel preached. Little doubt the Messiah had come when works like these the very works predicted by the prophets (Isa 35 o.(>) were being done. Blessed were those who did not find occasion of stumbling in Him. Jesus, however, (lid more. By his em bassy John had put himself in a somewhat false po sition before the multitude. But Jesus would not have His faithful follower misjudged. His was no fickle spirit. Jesus nobly vindicated him as a prophet and more than a prophet ; yea, a man than whom a greater had not lived. Yet, even as the new dispensation was higher than the old, one "but little" in the kingdom of heaven one sharing Christ s humble, loving, self-denying disposition was greater even than John (Mt 11 11).

      (2) A perverse people Christ s grace. The im plied contrast between Himself and John led Jesus further to denounce the perverse spirit of His own generation. The Pharisees and lawyers (Lk 7 30) had rejected John; they were as little pleased with Him. Their behavior was like children objecting to one game because it was merry, and to another because it was sad. The flood of outward popu larity did not deceive Jesus. The cities in which His greatest works were wrought Chorazin, Beth- saida, Capernaum remained impenitent at heart. The heavier would be their judgment; worse even than that on Tyre and Sidon, or on Sodom _itself. Over against their unbelief Jesus reasserts His dig nity and declares His grace (Mt 11 25-30). All authority was His; He alone knew and could reveal the Father (no claims in Jn are higher). Let the heavy laden come to Him, and He would give them rest (parts of these passages appear in another con nection in Lk 10 12-21).

      Yet another beautiful incident connected with this journey is preserved by Lk the anointing of

      Jesus in Simon s house by a woman d) The who was a sinner. In Nam or some

      First other city visited by Him, Jesus was

      Anointing invited to dine with a Pharisee named the Woman Simon. His reception was a cold one Who Was a (vs 44-46). During the meal, a Sinner (Lk woman of the city, an outcast from 7:36-50) respectable society -one, however, as

      the story implies, whose heart Jesus had reached, and who, filled with sorrow, love, shame, penitence, had turned from her life of sin, entered the chamber. There, bathing Christ s feet with her tears, wiping them with her tresses, and imprinting on them fervent kisses, she anointed them with a precious ointment she had brought with her. Simon was scandalized. Jesus could not be a right-thinking man, much less a prophet, or He would have rebuked this misbehavior from such

      a person. Jesus met the thought of Simon s heart by speaking to him the parable of the Two Debtors (vs 41.42). Of two men who had been freely for given, one 500, the other 50 shillings, which would love his creditor most? Simon gave the obvious answer, and the contrast between his own reception of Jesus and the woman s passionate love was immediately pointed out. Her greater love was due to the greater forgiveness; though, had Simon only seen it, he perhaps needed for giveness even more than she. Her faith saved her and she was dismissed in peace. But again the question arose, Who is this that even forgiveth sins?" Luke introduces here (Lk 8 1-4) a second Galilean circuit of Jesus, after the return from which a new series of exciting incidents took place at Ca-

      3. Second Galilean Circuit Events at Capernaum (Lk 8:1-4. 19 -21; Mt 12:22-50; Mk 3:22- 35; cfLk 11:14-36)


      The circuit was an extensive one

      "went about through cities and villages [lit. "according to city and village"], preaching." During this journey Jesus was attended by the Twelve, and by devoted women (Mary Magdalene, Joanna, wife of Herod s

      a) Galilee steward, Susanna, and others), who Revisited ministered to Him of their substance (Lk 8:1-4) (vs 2.3). At the close of this circuit

      Jesus returned to Capernaum. Jesus, no doubt, wrought numerous miracles on demoniacs (cf Lk 8 1.2; out of Mary Magdalene He is said to have cast 7 demons per-

      b) Cure of haps a form of speech to indicate the Demoniac severity of the possession) . The demo- Discourse niac now brought to Jesus was blind on Bias- and dumb. Jesus cured him, with the phemy double result that the people were

      rilled with amazement: "Can this be the son of David?" (Mt 12 23), while the Phari sees blasphemed, alleging that Jesus cast out demons by the help of Beelzebub (Gr Beelzeboul), the prince of the demons (see s.v.). A quite similar incident is narrated in Mt 9 32-34; and Lk gives the discourse that follows in a later con nection (11 14 ff). The accusation may well have been repeated more than once. Jesus, in reply, points out, first, the absurdity of supposing Satan to be engaged in warring against his own kingdom (Mt 18 25 ff |i ; here was plainly a stronger than Satan) ; then utters the momentous word about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. All other blasphemies even that against the Son of Man (Mt 12 32) may be forgiven, for they may proceed from ignorance and misconception; but deliberate, perverse rejection of the light, and attributing to Satan what was manifestly of God, was a sin which, w r hen matured and the Pharisees came perilously near committing it admitted of no forgiveness, either in this world or the next, for the very capacity for truth in the soul was by such _sin destroyed. Mk has the strong phrase, "is guilty of an eternal sin" (3 29). Pertinent words follow as to the root of good and evil in character (Mt 12 33-37). See BLASPHEMY.

      The sign of Jonah. Out of this discourse arose the usual Jewish demand for a "sign" (Mt 12 38; cf Lk 11 29-32), which Jesus met by declaring that no sign would be given but the sign of the prophet Jonah an allusion to His future resurrec tion. He reiterates His warning to the people of His generation for their rejection of greater light than had been enjoyed by the Ninevites and the Queen of Sheba.

      Two incidents, not dissimilar in character, interrupted this discourse one the cry of a w r oman in the audience (if the time be the same, Lk 11 27. 28), "Blessed is the womb that bare thee," etc,



      to which Jesus replied, "Yea rather, blessed arc they that hear the word of God, and keep it"; the other, a message that His mother and brethren c) Christ s (doubtless anxious for His safety) de- Mother and sired to speak with Him. To this, Brethren stretching out His hand toward His disciples, Jesus answered, "Behold, my mother and my brethren" (Mk 3 34), etc. Kinship in the spiritual kingdom consists infidelity to the will of God, not in ties of earthly relationship. On the same day on which the preceding dis courses were delivered, Jesus, seeing the multitudes, passed to the shore, and entering a 4. Teaching boat, inaugurate* 1 a new method in in Parables His public leaching. This was the (Mt 13:1- speaking in parables. Similitude, 62; Mk 4: metaphor, always entered into the 1-34; Lk teaching of Jesus (cf Alt 7 24-27), 8:4-16; 13: and parable has once been met with 18-21) (Lk 7 4 1.42); now parable is sys

      tematically employed as a means of imparting and illustrating important truths, while yet veiling them from those whose minds were hostile and unreceptive (Mk 4 10-12; Lk 8 9.10). The parable thus at once reveals anil conceals. The motive of this partially veiled teaching was the growing hostility of the Pharisees. In its nature the parable (from a verb signifying to place side by side") is a representation in some form of earthly analogy of truths relating to Divine and eternal things (see PARABLE). The parables of the king dom brought together in Mt 13 form an invaluable series, though not all were spoken in public (cf Mt 13 3G-52), and some may belong to a later occasion (cf Lk 13 1S-21). Mk adds the parable of the Seed Growing Secretly (4 20-29). Of three of the parables (the Sower, the Tares, the Dragnet), Jesus Himself gives the interpretation.

      Parables of the kinydoin. In series the parables at once mirror the origin, mixed character and development of the kingdom in its present imper fect earthly condition, and tin; perfection which awaits it after the crisis at the end. In the parable of the Sower is represented the origin of the kingdom in the good seed of the word, and the varied soils on which that seed falls; in the Seed Growing Secretly, the law of orderly growth in the kingdom; in the parable of the Tares, the character of the subjects of the kingdom; in those of the Mustard Seed and Leaven, the progress of the kingdom external growth, internal transformative effect; in those of the Treasure and Pearl t he finding and worth of the kingdom; in that of the Dragnet the consummation of the kingdom. Jesus compares His disciples, if they understand these things, to householders bringing out of their treasure "things new and old" (Mt 13 52).

      IV. From the Crossing to Gadara to the Mission of the Twelve a Third Circuit. It was on the evening of the day on which He spoke 1. Crossing the parables though the chronology of the Lake of the incident seems unknown to Lk Stilling (8 22) that Jesus bade His disciples of the (TOSS over to the other side of the

      Storm (Mt lake. At this juncture He was accosted 8:18-27; by an aspirant for discipleship. Mat- Mk 4:35- thew gives two cases of aspirants; 41; Lk 8: Luke (but in a different connection, 22-25; cf 9 57-02), three. Luke s connection 9:67-62) (departure from Galilee) is perhaps preferable for the second and third; but the three may be considered together.

      The three aspirants may be distinguished as, (a) The forward disciple : he who in an atmosphere of enthusiasm offered himself under impulse, without counting the cost. The zeal of this would-be follower Jesus checks with the pathetic words, "The

      foxes have holes," etc (Mt 8 20; Lk 9 58. (b) The procrastinating disciple. The first candidate needed repression; the second needs im- o) Aspirants pulsion. He would follow Jesus, but for Dis- first let him bury his father. There had cipleship come a crisis, however, when the Lord s claim was paramount: "Leave the dead to bury their own dead" (Mt 8 22). There are at times higher claims than mere natural rela tionships, to which, in themselves, Jesus was the last to_be indifferent, (c) The waccriny disciple. The third disciple is again one who offers himself, but his heart was too evidently still with the things at home. Jesus, again, lays His finger on the weak spot, "No man, having put his hand to the plow, and looking back," etc (Lk 9 02j. As mentioned, the latter two cases tally better with a final depar ture from Galilee than with a temporary crossing of the lake.

      The inland lake was exposed to violent and sudden tempests. One of these broke on the dis ciples boat as they sailed across. b) The Everyone s life seemed in jeopardy.

      Storm Jesus, meanwhile, in calmest repose,

      Calmed was asleep on a cushion in the stern

      (Mk 4 3NJ. The disciples woke Him almost rudely: "Teacher, carest tliou not that we perish?" Jesus at once arose, and, reproving their want of faith, rebuked wind and waves ("Peace, be still"). Immediately there was a great calm. It was a new revelation to the disciples of the majesty of their Master. "Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?"

      The lake being crossed, Jesus and His disciples came into the country of the Cadarenes (Mt), or Gerasenes (Mk, Lk) Gadara being 2. The the capital of the district (on the to-

      Gadarene pography, cf Stanley, Sinai and Pal, (Gerasene) 380-81). From the lake shore rises a Demoniac mountain in which are ancient tombs. (Mt 8:28- Here Jesus was met by a demoniac 34; Mk 5: (Mt mentions two demoniacs: M. 1 20; Lk 8: Henry s quaint comment is, "If there 26-39) were two, there was one." Possibly

      one was the fiercer of the two, the other figuring only as his companion). The man, as de scribed, was a raving maniac of the worst type (Mk 5 3-5), dwelling in the tombs, wearing no clothes (Lk 8 27), of supernatural strength, wounding himself, shrieking, etc. Really possessed by "an unclean spirit," his consciousness was as if he were indwelt by a "legion" of demons, and from that consciousness he addressed Jesus as the Son of God come for their tormenting. In what follows it is difficult to distinguish what belongs to the broken, incoherent consciousness of the man, and the spirit or spirits who spake through him. In the question, "What is thy name?" (Mk 6 9) Jesus evidently seeks to arouse the victim s shat tered soul to some sense of its own individuality. On Jesus commanding the unclean spirit to leave the man, the request was made that the demons might be permitted to enter a herd of swine feeding near. The reason of Christ s permission, with its result in the destruction of the herd ("rushed down the steep into the sea") need not be too closely scrutinized. It may have had an aspect of judg ment on the (possibly) Jewish holders of the swine; or it may have had reference to the victim of the possession, as enabling him to realize his deliver ance. Whatever the difficulties of the narrative, none of the rationalistic explanations afford any sensible relief from t hem. The object of t he miracle may be to exclude rationalistic explanations, by giving a manifest attestation of the reality of the demon influence. When the people of the city came they found the man fully restored "clothed



      and in his right mind." Vet, with fatal short sightedness, I hey besought Jesus to depart from their borders. The man was sent home to declare. to his friends the great things the Lord had done to him.

      Repelled by the ( ierasenes, Jesus received a

      warm welcome on His return to Capernaum on

      the western shore (Mk 5 21). It was

      3. Jairus probably at this point that Matthew- Daughter gave the feast formerly referred to. Raised It was in connection with this feast, Woman Matthew himself informs us (9 IS), with Issue that Jairus, one of the rulers of the of Blood (Mt synagogue, made his appeal for help. 9:18-26; His little daughter, about 12 years Mk5:21- old (Lk 8 42), was at the point of 43; Lk 8: death; indeed, while Jesus was coming, 40-56) she died. The ruler s faith, though

      real, was not equal to the centurion s, who believed that Jesus could heal without being present. Jesus came, and having expelled the pro fessional mourners, in sacred privacy,

      a) Jairus only the fat her and mother, with Peter, Appeal and James and John being permitted to Its Result enter the death-chamber, raised the

      girl to life. It is the second miracle on record of the raising from the dead.

      On the way to the ruler s house occurred another

      wonder a miracle within a miracle. A poor

      woman, whose case was a specially

      b) The distressing one, alike as regards the Afflicted nature of her malady, the length of Woman its continuance, and the fruitlessness of Cured her application to the physicians, crept

      up to Jesus, confident that if she could but touch the border of His garment, she would be healed. The woman was ignorant; her faith was blended with superstition; but Jesus, reading the heart, gave her the benefit she desired. It was His will, however, that, for her own good, the woman thus cured should not obtain the blessing by stealth. He therefore brought her to open con fession, and cheered her by His commendatory word. At this point begins apparently a new evangelistic tour (Mt 9 35; Mk 6 6), extending methodically

      to "all the cities and villages." To it

      4. Incidents belong in the narratives the healing of of Third two blind men (cf the case of Barti- Circuit (Mt maeus, recorded later); the cure of a 9:27-38; demoniac who was dumb a similar 13:63-58; case to that in Mt 12 22; and a second Mk 6:1-6) rejection at Nazareth (Mt, Mk). The

      incident is similar to that in Lk 4 16-30, and shows, if the events are different, that the people s hearts were unchanged. Of this cir cuit Mt gives an affecting summary (9 35-38), em phasizing the Lord s compassion, and His yearning for more laborers to reap the abundant harvest. _

      Partly with a view to the needs of the rapidly growing work and the training of the apostles, and

      partly as a witness to Israel (Mt 10

      5. The 6.23), Jesus deemed it expedient to Twelve Sent send the Twelve on an independent Forth Dis- mission. The discourse in Mt attached course of to this event seems, as frequently, Jesus (Mt to be a compilation. Parts of it are 10; Mk 6: given by Luke in connection with the 7-13; Lk 9: mission of the Seventy (Lk 10 Iff; 1-6; cf Lk the directions were doubtless similar 10 : 2-24 ; in both cases) ; parts on other occasions 12:2-12, (Lk 12 2-12; 21 12-17, etc; cf Mk etc) 13 9-13).

      The Twelve were sent out two by two. Their work was to be a copy of the Master s to preach the gospel and to heal the sick. To this end they were endowed with authority over unclean spirits, and over all manner of sickness. They were

      to go forth free from all encumbrances no money, no scrip, no changes of raiment, no staff (save that

      in their hand, Mk 6 8), sandals only a) The on their feet, etc. They were to rely

      Commission for support on those to whom they

      preached. They were for the present to confine their ministry to Israel. The saying in Mt, 10 23, "Ye shall not have gone through the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come," ap parently has reference to the judgment on the nation, not to the final coming (cf 16 28).

      The mission of the Twelve was the first step of Christianity as an aggressive force in society. Jesus

      speaks of it, accordingly, in the light 6) Counsels of the whole future that was to come and out of it. He warns His apostles

      Warnings faithfully of the dangers that awaited

      them; exhorts them to prudence and circumspection ("wise as serpents," etc); holds out to them Divine promises for consolation; di rects them when persecuted in one place to flee to another; points out to them from His own case that such persecutions were only to be expected. He assures them of a coming day of revelation; bids them at once fear and trust God ; impresses on them the duty of courage in confession; inculcates in them supreme love to Himself. That love would be tested in the dearest relations. In itself peace, the gospel would be the innocent occasion of strife, enmity and division among men. Those who re ceive Christ s disciples will not fail of their reward. When Christ had ended His discourse He pro ceeded with His own evangelistic work, leaving the disciples to inaugurate theirs (Mt 11 1).

      Second Period After the Mission of the Twelve till the Departure from Galilee

      I. From the Death of the Baptist till the Discourse on Bread of Life. Shortly before the events now to be narrated, John the Baptist had 1. The been foully murdered in his prison

      Murder of by Herod Antipas at the instigation the Baptist of Herodias, whose unlawful marriage and Herod s with Herod John had unsparingly Alarms (Mt condemned. Jos gives as the place of 14:1-12; the Baptist s imprisonment the for- Mk 6: 14- tress of Machaerus, near the Dead Sea 29; Lk 9: (Ant, XVIII, v, 2); or John may have 7-9; cf 3: been removed to Galilee. Herod 18-20) would ere this have killed John, but

      was restrained by fear of the people (Mt 14 5). The hate of Herodias, however, did not slumber. Her relentless will contrasts with the vacillation of Herod, as Lady Macbeth in Shake speare contrasts with Macbeth. A birthday feast gave her the opening she sought for. Her daughter Salome, pleasing Herod by her dancing, obtained from him a promise on oath to give her whatever she asked. Prompted by Herodias, she boldly de manded John the Baptist s head. The weak king was shocked, but, for his oath s sake, granted her what she craved. The story tells how the Baptist s disciples reverently buried the remains of their mas ter, and went and told Jesus. Herod s conscience did not let him rest. When rumors reached him of a wonderful teacher and miracle-worker in Galilee, he leaped at once to the conclusion that it was John risen from the dead. Herod cannot have heard much of Jesus before. An evil conscience makes men cowards.

      Another Passover drew near (Jn 6 4), but Jesus did not on this occasion go up to the feast.

      Returning from their mission, the apostles re ported to Jesus what they had said and done (Lk 9 10) ; Jesus had also heard of the Baptist s fate, and of Herod s fears, and now proposed to His disciples a retirement to a desert place across the



      lake, near Bethsaida (on the topography, cf Stanley, op. cit., 375, 381). As it proved, however, the mul titudes had observed their departure,

      2. The and, running round the shore, were at Feeding of the place before them (Mk 6 33). the Five The purpose of rest was frustrated, Thousand but Jesus did not complain. He pitied (Mt 14:13- the shepherdless state of the people, 21; Mk 6: and went out to teach and heal them. 30-44 ; Lk The day wore on, and the disciples sug- 9:10-17; gested that the fasting multitude should Jn 6: 1-14) disperse, and seek victuals in the nearest

      towns and villages. This Jesus, who had already proved Philip by asking how the people should be fed (Jn 6 5), would not permit. With the scanty provision at command 5 loaves and 2 fishes He fed the whole multitude. By His bless ing the food was multiplied till all were satisfied, and 12 baskets of fragments, carefully collected, re mained over. It was a stupendous act of creative power, no rationalizing of which can reduce it to natural dimensions.

      The enthusiasm created by this miracle was in tense (Jn 6 14). Mt and Mk relate (Lk here falls for

      a time out of the Synopsis) that Jesus

      3. Walking hurriedly constrained His disciples to on the Sea enter into their boat and recross the (Mt 14:22- lake this though a storm was gath- 33; Mk 6: ering while He Himself remained in 45-52 ; Jn the mountain alone in prayer. Jn gives 6:15-21) the key to this action in the statement

      that the people were about to take Him by force and make Him a king (ver 15). Three hours after midnight found the disciples still in the midst of the lake, "distressed in rowing" (Mk 6 48), deeply anxious because Jesus was not , as on a former occasion, with them. At last, at the darkest hour of their extremity, Jesus was seen approaching in a way unlooked-for walking on the water. Every new experience of Jesus was a surprise to the disci ples. They were at first terrified, thinking they saw a spirit, but straightway the well-known voice was heard, "Be of good cheer: it is I; be not afraid." In the rebound of his feelings the impulsive Peter asked Jesus to permit him to come to Him on the water (Mt). Jesus said "Come," and for the first moment or two Peter did walk on the water; then, as he realized his unwonted situation, his faith failed, and he began to sink. Jesus, with gentle chiding, caught him, and assisted him back into the boat. Once again the sea was calmed, and the disciples found themselves safely at land. To their adoring minds the miracle of the loaves was eclipsed by this new marvel (Mk 6 52).

      On the return to Gennesaret the sick from all quarters were brought to Jesus the commence ment apparently of a new, more general

      4. Gennes- ministry of healing (Mk 6 56). Mean- aret Dis- while here we depend on Jn the course on people on the other side of the lake, the Bread when they found that Jesus was gone, of Life (Mt took boats hastily, and came over to 14:34-36; Capernaum. They found Jesus ap- Mk6:53- patently in the synagogue (ver 59). In 66; Jn 6: reply to their query, "Rabbi, when 22-71) earnest thou hither?" Jesus first rebuked

      the motive which led them to follow Him not because they had seen in His miracles "signs" of higher blessings, but because they had eaten of the loaves and were filled (ver 26) then spoke to them His great discourse on the bread from heaven. "Work," He said, "for the food which abideth unto eternal life, which the Son of man shall give unto you" (ver 27). When asked to authenti cate His claims by a sign from heaven like the manna, He replied that the manna also (given not by Moses but by God) was but typical bread, and surprised

      them by declaring that He Himself was the true bread of life from heaven (vs 35.51). The bread was Christ s flesh, given for the life of the world; His flesh and blood must be eaten and drunk (a spiritual appropriation through faith, ver 63), if men were to have eternal life. Jesus of set purpose had put His doctrine in a strong, testing manner. The time had come when His hearers must make their choice between a spiritual acceptance of Him and a break with Him altogether. What He had said strongly offended them, both on account of the claims implied (ver 42), and on account of the doc trine taught, which, they were plainly told, they could not receive because of their carnality of heart (vs 43.44.61-64). Many, therefore, went back and walked no more with Him (vs 60.61.66); but their defection only evoked from the chosen Twelve a yet more confident confession of their faith. "Would ye also go away?"

      Peter s first confession. Peter, as usual, spoke for the rest: "Lord, to whom shall we go? .... We have believed and know that thou art the Holy One of God" (ver 69). Here, and not first at Caesarea Philippi (Mt 16 16), is Peter s brave confession of his Master s Messiahship. Twelve thus confessed Him, but even of this select circle Jesus was com pelled to say, "One of you [Judas] is a devil" (Jn 6 70.71).

      //. From Disputes with the Pharisees till the Transfiguration. The discourse in Capernaum seems to mark a turning-point in the Lord s minis try in Galilee. Soon after we find Him ceasing from public teaching, and devoting Himself to the in struction of His apostles (Mt 15 21; Mk 7 24, etc).

      Meanwhile, that Christ s work in Galilee was at tracting the attention of the central authorities, is shown by the fact that scribes and 1. Jesus Pharisees came up from Jems to watch and Tradi- Him. They speedily found ground of tion Out- complaint against Him in His uncon- ward and ventional ways and His total disregard Inward of the traditions of the elders. They

      Purity (Mt specially blamed Him for allowing His 15:1-20; disciples to eat bread with "common," Mk7:l-23) i.e. unwashen hands. Here was a point on which the Pharisees laid great stress (Mk 7 3.4). Ceremonial ablutions (washing "diligently," Gr "with the fist"; "baptizings" of person and things) formed a large part of their re ligion. These washings were part of the "oral tra dition" said to have been delivered to Moses, and transmitted by a succession of elders. Jesus set all this ceremonialism aside. It was part of the "hypocrisy" of the Pharisees (Mk 7 6). When questioned regarding it, He drew a sharp distinc tion between God s commandment in the Scriptures and man s tradition, and accused the Pharisees (in stancing "Corban" fq.v.], in support, vs 10-12) of making "void" the former through the latter. This led to the wider question of wherein real defilement consisted. Christ s rational position here is that it did not consist in anything outward, as in meats, but consisted in what came from within the man : as Jesus explained afterward, in the outcome of his heart or moral life: "Out of the heart of men evil thoughts proceed," etc (vs 20-23). Christ s saying was in effect the abrogation of the old ceremonial distinctions, as Mk notes: "making all meats clean" (ver 19). The Pharisees, naturally, were deeply offended at His sayings, but Jesus was unmoved. Every plant not of the Father s planting must be rooted up (ver 13).

      From this point Jesus appears, in order to escape notice, to have made journeys privately from place to place. His first retreat was to the borders, or neighborhood, of Tyre and Sidon. From Mk 731 it is to be inferred that He entered the heathen ter-



      ritory. He could not, however, be hid (Mk 7 24).

      It was not long ere, in the house into which He

      had entered, there reached Him the

      2. Retire- cry of human distress. A woman came ment to to" Him, a (ireek (or (lentile, (ireek- Tyre and speaking), but Syrophoenieian by race. Sidon -the Her "little daughter" was grievously Syrophoeni- afllicted with an evil spirit. Flinging cian Woman herself at. His feet, and addressing (Mt 15:21- Him as "Son of David," she besought 28; Mk 7: His mercy for her child. At first. 24-30) .Jesus seemed yet only strnicd- to

      repel her, speaking of Himself as sent only to the lost sheep of Israel, and of the un meet ness of giving the children s loaf to the dogs (the (!r softens the expression, "the little dogs"). With a. beautiful urgency which won for her the boon she sought , the woman seized on the word as an argu ment in her favor. "Even the dogs under the table eat of the children s crumbs." The child at Jesus word was restored.

      Christ s second retreat was to Decapolis the

      district of the ten cities -E. of the Jordan. Here

      also lie was soon discovered, and

      3. At Decap- followed by the multitude. Sufferers

      olis New were brought to Him, whom He

      Miracles cured (Alt 15 30). Later, He fed the (Mt 15:29- crowds.

      39; Mk 7: The miracle of the deaf man is at- 31-37; 8: tested only by Mk. The patient was 1-10) doubly afflicted, being deaf, and having

      an impediment in his speech. The cure presents several peculiarities its privacy (ver 83); the actions of Jesus in putt ing his fingers into his ears,

      etc (a mode of speech by signs to the a) The Deaf deaf man); His "sign," accompanied Man (Mk with prayer, doubtless occasioned by 7:32-37) something in the man s look; the word

      Ephphalhd (ver 34) "Be opened." The charge to those present not to blazon the deed abroad was disregarded. Jesus desired no cheap popularity.

      The next miracle closely resembles the feeding of the Five Thousand at Bethsaida, but the place and

      numbers are different; 4,000 instead^ of 6) Feeding 5,000; 7 loaves and a few fishes, in- of Four stead of 5 loaves and 2 fishes; 7 baskets

      Thousand of fragments instead of 12 (Mark s term (Mt 15:32- denotes a larger basket). _ There is no 39; Mk 8: reason for doubting the distinction of 1-9) the incidents (cf Alt 16 9.10; Mk 8


      Returning to the plain of Gennesaret (Magdala, Mt 15 39 AV; parts of Dalmanutha, Mk 8 10),

      Jesus soon found Himself assailed by

      4. Leaven His old adversaries. Pharisees and of the Phari- Sadducees were now united. They sees, etc came "trying" Jesus, and asking from Cure of Him a "sign from heaven" some Blind Man signal Divine manifestation. "Sigh- (Mtl6:l- ing deeply" (Mk) at their caviling 12; Mk 8: spirit, Jesus repeated His word about 11-26) the sign of Jonah. The times in

      which they lived were full of signs, if they, so proficient in weather signs, could only see them. To be rid of such questioners, Jesus anew took boat to Bethsaida. On the way He warned His disciples against the leaven of the spirit they had just encountered. The disciples misunder stood, thinking that Jesus referred to their for- getfulness in not taking bread (Mark states in his graphic way that they had only one loaf). The leaven Christ referred to, in fact, represented three spirits: (1) the Pharisaic leaven formalism and hypocrisy; (2) the Sadducean leaven rationalistic skepticism; (3) the Herodian leaven (Mk 8 15) political expediency and temporizing. Arrived at

      Bethsaida, a miracle was wrought on a blind man resembling in some of its features the cure of the deaf man at Decapolis. In both cases Jesus took the patients apart; in both physical means were used the spittle ("spit on his eyes," Mk 8 23); in both there was strict injunction not to noise the cure abroad. Another peculiarity was the gradual- iit-xx of the cure. It is probable that the man had not been blind from his birth, else he could hardly have recognized men or trees at the first opening. It, needed that Jesus should lay His hands on Him before he saw all things clearly.

      The next retirement of Jesus with His disciples was to the neighborhood of Caesarea Philippi, near

      the source of the Jordan. This was 5. At Caesa- the northernmost point of His journey- rea Philippi ings. Here, "on the geographical - The Great frontier between Judaism and heathen- Confession ism" (Liddon), Our Lord put the First An- momentous question which called forth nouncement Peter s historical confession, of Passion (1) The voices of the age and the exter- (Mt 16:13-r// truth . The question put to the 28; Mk 8: Twelve in this remote region was: "Who 27-30; Lk do men say that the Son of man is?" 9:18-27) "Son of man," as already said, was

      the familiar name given by Jesus to Himself, to which a Messianic significance might or might not be attached, according to the prepos sessions of His hearers. First the changeful voices of the age were recited to Jesus: "Some say John the Baptist ; some, Elijah," etc. Next, in answer to the further question: "But who say ye that I am ?" there rang out from Peter, in the name of all, the unchanging truth about Jesus: "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living Clod." In clearness, boldness, decision, Peter s faith had attained _ a height not reached before. The confession embodies two truths: (1) the Divinity, (2) the Messiahship, of the Son of man. Jesus did honor to the con fession of His apostle. Not flesh and blood, but the Father, had revealed the truth to him. Here at length was "rock" on which He could build a church. Reverting to Peter s original name, Simon Bar-Jonah, Jesus declared, with a play on the name "Peter" (pelros, "rock," "piece of rock") He had before given him (Jn 1 42), that on this "rock" (petra), He would build His church, and the gates of Hades (hostile evil powers) would not prevail against it (Mt 16 18). The papacy _has reared an unwarrantable structure of pretensions on this passage in supposing the "rock" to be Peter personally and his successors in the see of Rome (none such existed; Peter was not bishop of Rome). It is not Peter the individual, but Peter the confessing apostle Peter as representative of all that Christ names "rock"; that which consti tuted him a foundation was the truth he had con fessed (cf Eph 2 20). This is the first NT men tion of a "church" (ckklcsia) . The Christian church, therefore, is founded (1) on the truth of Christ s Divine Sonship; (2) on the truth of His Messiah- ship, or of His being the anointed prophet, priest and king of the new age. A society of believers confessing these truths is a church; no society which denies these truths deserves the name. To this confessing community Jesus, still addressing Peter as representing the apostolate (cf Mt 18 18), gives authority to bind and loose to admit and to exclude. Jesus, it is noted, bade His disciples tell no man of these things (Mt 16 20; Mk 8 30; Lk 9 21).

      (2) The cross and the disciple. The confession of Peter prepared the way for an advance in Christ s teaching. From that time, Matthew notes, Jesus began to speak plainly of His approaching suffer ings and death (16 21). There are in all three



      solemn announcements of the Passion (Mt 16 21-23; 1722.23; 2017-19 ||). Jesus foresaw, and clearly foretold, what would befall Him at Jerus. He would be killed by the authorities, but on the third day would rise again. On the first announcement, following His confession, Peter took it upon him to expostulate with Jesus: "Be it far from thee, Lord," etc (Mt 16 22), an action which brought upon him the stern rebuke of Jesus: "Get thee behind me, Satan," etc (ver 23). The Rock-man, in his fall to the maxims of a worldly expediency, is now identified with Satan, the tempter. This principle, that duty is only to be done when personal risk is not entailed, Jesus not only repudiates for Himself, but bids His disciples repudiate it also. The disciple, Jesus says, must be prepared to deny himself, and take up his cross. The cross is the symbol of anything distressing or painful to bear. There is a saving of life which is a losing of it, and what shall a man be profited if he gain the whole world, and forfeit his (true, higher) life? As, however, Jesus had spoken, not only of dying, but of rising again, so now He encourages His disciples by announcing His future coining in glory to render to every man according to His deeds. That final coming might be distant (cf Mt 24 30); but (so it seems most natural to interpret the saying 16 28 ) there were those living who would see the nearer pledge of that, in Christ s coming in the triumphs and successes of His kingdom (cf Mk 91; Lk 9 27; Mt 26 04).

      About eight days after the announcement of His passion by Jesus, took place the glorious event of the transfiguration. Jesus had spoken 6. The of His future glory, and here -was a

      Transfigura- pledge of it. In strange, contrast tion the with the seem 1 of glory on the summit Epileptic of the mountain was the painful sight Boy (Mt which met Jesus and His three com- 17:1-20; panions when they descended again to Mk 9:2-29; to the plain.

      Lk 9:28-43) Tradition connects the scene of the transfiguration witli Mount Tabor, but it more probably took place on one of the spurs of Mount Hernum. Jesus had ascended the moun tain with Peter, James and John, for a) The prayer. It was while He was praying

      Glory of the the wonderful change happened. For Only once the veiled glory of the only

      Begotten begotten from the Father (Jn 1 14) was permitted to burst forth, suffusing His person and garments, and changing them into a dazzling brightness. His face did shine as the sun; His raiment became white as light ("as snow," A V, Mk). Heavenly visitants, recognized from 1 heir converse as Moses and Elijah, appeared with Him arid spoke of His decease (Lk). A voice from an enveloping cloud attested: "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." Little wonder the disciples were afraid, or that Peter in his con fusion should stammer out: "It is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, I will make here three taber nacles [booths]." This, however, was not per mitted. Earth is not heaven. Glimpses of heavenly glory are given, not to wean from duty on earth, but to prepare for the trials connected therewith.

      The spectacle that met the eyes of Jesus and the chosen three as they descended was distressing in the extreme. A man had brought 6) Faith s his epileptic boy a sore sufferer and Entreaty dumb to the disciples to see if they and Its could cast out the evil spirit that pos-

      Answer sessed him, but they were not able. Their failure, as Jesus showed, was a failure of faith; none the less did their discomfiture afford a handle to the gainsayers, who were not slow to take advantage of it (Mk 9 14). The man s ap

      peal was now to Jesus, "If thou canst do anything," etc (vor 22). The reply of Jesus shifted the "canst" to the right quarter, "If thou canst [believe]" (ver 23). Such little faith as the man had revived under Christ s word: "I believe; help thou mine unbelief." The multitude pressing around, there was no call for further delay. With one energetic word Jesus expelled the unclean spirit (ver 25). The first effect of Christ s approach had been to induce a violent paroxysm (ver 20) ; now the spirit terribly convulsed the frame it was compelled to relinquish. Jesus, taking the boy s hand, raised him up, and he was found well. The lesson drawn to the disciples was the omnipotence of faith (Mt 17 19.20) and power of prayer (Mk 9 28.29).

      ///. From Private Journey through Galilee till Return from the Feast of Tabernacles. Soon after the last-mentioned events Jesus passed 1. Galilee privately through Galilee (Mk 9 30), and Caper- returning later to Capernaum. naum During the Galilean journey Jesus

      made to His disciples His 2d announce ment of His approaching sufferings and death, accompanied as before by the assurance of His re surrection. The disciples still could a) Second not take in the meaning of His words, Announce- though what He said made them "ex- ment of ceeding sorry" (Mt 17 23). Passion :Mt The return to Capernaum was 17:22.23; marked by an incident which raised Mk 9:30- the question of Christ s relation to 33; Lk 9: temple institutions. The collectors of 44.45) tribute for the temple inquired of Peter:

      "Doth not your teacher pay the half- shekel?" ;Gr diilrac/nna, or double drachm, worth about 32 cents or Is. 4</.). The origin of this tax was in the half-shekel of atonement-money //) The ofEx 30 11-16, which, though a special Temple Tax contribution, was made the basis of (Mt 17:24- later assessment (2 Ch 24 4-10; in 27) Nehemiah s time the amount was one-

      third of a shekel, Neh 10 32), and its object was the upkeep of the temple worship (Schiirer). The usual time of payment was March, but Jesus had probably been absent and the inquiry was not made for some months later. Peter, hasty as usual, probably reasoning from Christ s ordinary respect for temple ordinances, answered at once that He did pay the tax. It had not occurred to him that Jesus might have something to say on it, if formally challenged. Occasion therefore was taken by Jesus gently to reprove Peter. Peter had but recently acknowledged Jesus to be the Son of God. Do kings of the earth take tribute of their own sons? The half-shekel was suitable to the subject- relation, but not to the relation of a son. Never theless, lest occasion of stumbling be given, Jesus could well waive this right, as, in His humbled con dition, He had waived so many more. Peter was ordered to cast his hook into the sea, and Jesus foretold that the fish he would bring up would have in its mouth the necessary coin (Gr slater, about 04 cents or 2s. 8J.). The tax was paid, yet in such a way as to show that the payment of it was an act of condescension of the king s Son.

      On the way to Capernaum a dis- c) Dis- pute had arisen among the disciples as

      course on to who should be greatest in the Messi- Greatness anic kingdom about to be set up. The and For- fact of such disputing showed how giveness largely even their minds were yet dom- (Mt 18:1- inated by worldly, sensuous ideas of 35; Mk 9: the kingdom. Now, in the house (Mk 33-50; Lk 9 33), Jesus takes occasion to check 9:46-50) their spirit of ambitious rivalry, and to inculcate much-needed lessons on greatness and kindred matters.



      (1) dreatnexx in humility. First, by the example of a little child, .Jesus teaches that humility is the root-disposition of His kingdom. It alone admits to the kingdom, and conducts to honor in it. He is greatest who humbles himself most (Mt 18 4), and is the servant of all (Mk 9 35). He warns against slighting the "little ones," or causing them to stumble, and uses language of terrible severity against those guilty of this sin.

      (2) Toliraiict-. The mention of receiving little ones in Christ s name 1 led John to remark that he had seen one casting out demons in Christ s name, and had forbidden him, because he was not of their company. "Forbid him not," Jesus said, "for there is no man who shall do a mighty work in my name, and be able quickly to speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is for us" (Mk 9 39.40).

      (3) The erring brother. The subject of offences leads to the question of sins committed by one Chris tian brother against another. Here Christ incul cates kindness and forbearance; only if private rep resentations and the good offices of brethren fail, is the matter to be brought before the church; if the brother repents he is to be unstintedly forgiven ("seventy times seven," Mt 18 22). _ If the church is compelled to interpose, its decisions are valid (under condition, however, of prayer and Christ s presence, vs 18-20).

      (4) Parable of the Unmerciful Servant. To en force the lesson of forgiveness Jesus speaks the para ble of the Unmerciful Servant (Mt 18 23-35). Himself forgiven much, this servant refuses to for give his fellow a much smaller debt. His lord visits him with severest punishment. Only as we for give others can we look for forgiveness.

      The Gospel of Jn leaves a blank of many months between chs 6 and 7, covered only by the state ment, "After these things, Jesus walked 2. The in Galilee" (71). In this year of His

      Feast of ministry Jesus had gone neither to the Tabernacles feast of the Passover nor to Pentecost. Dis- The Feast of Tabernacles was now at

      courses, etc hand (October). To this Jesus went up, (Jn 7 10: and Jn preserves for us a full record of 21) His appearance, discourses and doings


      The brethren of Jesus, still unpersuaded of His claims (ver 5), had urged Jesus to go up with them to the feast. "Go up," in their sense, a) The included a public manifestation of

      Private Himself as the Messiah. Jesus replied

      Journey that His time for this had not yet come. Divided Afterward He went up quietly, and in Opinions the midst of the feast appeared in the (Jn7:l-10) temple as a teacher. The comments made about Jesus at the feast before His arrival vividly reflect the divided state of opinion regarding Him. "He is a good man," thought some. "Not so," said others, "but He leadeth the multi tude astray." His teaching evoked yet keener divi sion. While some said, "Thou hast a demon" (ver 20), others argued, "When the Christ shall come, will he do more signs?" etc (ver 31). Some de clared, "This is of a truth the prophet," or "This is the Christ"; others objected that the Christ was to come out of Bethlehem, not Galilee (vs 40-42) . Yet no one dared to take the step of mo lesting Him.

      Christ s wisdom and use of the Scriptures excited surprise. Jesus met this surprise by stating that His knowledge was from the Father, and with ref erence to the division of opinion about Him laid down the principle that knowledge of the truth was the result of the obedient will: "If any man willeth to do his will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it is of God" (ver 17). It was objected that they knew who Jesus was, and whence He came. In

      a sense, Jesus replied, this was true; in a deeper sense, it was not. He came from the Father, whom they knew not (vs 28.29). The b) The Test last and great day of the feast the of Truth eighth (Nu 29 35) brought with it Christ s a new self-attestation. Jesus stood Self- and cried, "If any man thirst, let him

      Witness; come unto me and drink, fie that a Foiled believeth on me .... from within him Purpose shall flow rivers of living water" (vs (vs 14-52) 37.38). The words are understood to have reference to the ceremony of pouring out a libation of water at this feast the libation, in turn, commemorating the gift of water at the striking of the rock. The evangelist inter prets the saying of the Spirit which believers should receive. Meanwhile, the chief priests and Pharisees had sent officers to apprehend Jesus (ver 32), but they returned without Him. "Why did ye not bring him?" The reply was confounding, "Never man so spake" (vs 45.46). The retort was the poor one, "Are ye also led astray?" In vain did Nico- demus, who was present, try to put in a moderating word (vs 50.51). It was clear to what issue hate like this was tending.

      The discourses at the feast are at this point in terrupted by the episode of the woman taken in adul tery (8 1-11), which, by general con- f) The sent, does not belong to the original

      Woman text of the Gospel. It is probably, Taken in however, an authentic incident, and Adultery illustrates, on the one hand, the eager- Continued ness of the official classes to find an ac- Self-Wit- cusation against Jesus, and, on the ness (ch 8) other, the Saviour s dignity and wisdom in foiling such attempts, His spirit of mercy and the action of conscience in the accusers. In His continued teaching, Jesus put forth even higher claims than in the foregoing discourse. As He had applied to Himself the water from the rock, so now He applied to Himself the symbolic meaning of the two great candelabra, which were lighted in the temple court during the feast and bore refer ence to the pillar of cloud and fire. "I am the light of the world," said Jesus (ver 12). Only a Divine being could put forth such a claim as that. The Jews objected that they had only His witness to Himself. Jesus replied that no other could bear adequate witness of Him, for He alone knew whence Fie came and whither He went (ver 14). But the Father also had borne witness of Him (ver 18) . This discourse, delivered in the "treasury" of the temple (ver 20), was soon followed by another, no man yet daring to touch Him. This time Jesus warns the Jews of the fate their unbelief would email upon them: "Ye shall die in your sins" (ver 24). Ad dressing Himself next specially to the Jews who believed in Him, He urged them to continuance in His word as the condition of true freedom. Re sentment was again aroused at the suggestion that the Jews, Abraham s seed, were not free. Jesus made clear that the real bondage was that of sin; only the Son could make spiritually free (vs 34-36). Descent from Abraham meant nothing, if the spirit was of the devil (vs 39-41). A new conflict was pro voked by the saying, "If a man keep my word, he shall never see death" (ver 51). Did Jesus make Himself greater than Abraham? The controversy that ensued resulted in the sublime utterance, "Be fore Abraham was born, I am" (ver 58). The Jews would have stoned Him, but Jesus eluded them, and departed.

      The Feast of Tabernacles was past, but Jesus was still in Jerus. Passing by on a Sabbath (ver 14), He saw a blind man, a beggar (ver 8), well known to have been blind from his birth. The narrative of the cure and examination of this blind man is



      Jesus Christ

      adduced by Paley as bearing in its inimitable cir cumstantiality every mark of personal knowledge on the part of the historian. The man, d) The cured in strange but symbolic fashion

      Cure of the by the anointing of his eyes with clay Blind Man (thereby apparently sealing them more (ch 9) firmly), then washing in the Pool of

      Siloam, became an object of immediate interest, and every effort was made by the Pharisees to shake his testimony as to the miracle that had been wrought. The man, however, held to his story, and his parents could only corroborate the fact that their son had been born blind, and now saw. The Pharisees themselves were divided, some reasoning that Jesus could not be of God because He had broken the Sabbath the old charge; others, Nicodeinus-like, standing on the fact that a man who was a sinner could not do such signs (vs 15.16). The healed man applied the logic of common-sense: "If this man were not from God, he could do nothing" (ver 33). The Pharisees, impotent to deny the wonder, could only cast him out of the synagogue. Jesus found him, and brought him to full confession of faith in Himself (vs 35-38).

      Yet another address of Jesus is on record arising out of this incident. In continuation of His reply to the question of the Pharisees (9 40), o) The "Are we also blind?" Jesus spoke to

      Good them His discourse on the Good Shep-

      Shepherd herd. Flocks in eastern countries are (10:1-21) gathered at night into an inclosure sur rounded by a wall or palisade. This is the "fold," which is under the care of a "porter," who opens the closely barred door to the shepherds in the morning. As contrasted with the legitimate shepherds, the false shepherds "enter not by the door," but climb over some other way. The al lusion is to priests, scribes, Pharisees and gener ally to all, in any age, who claim an authority within the church unsanctioned by God (Godet). Jesus now gathers up the truth in its relation to Himself as the Supreme Shepherd. From His fundamental relation to the church, He is not only the Shepherd, but the Door (vs 7-14). To those who enter by Him there is given security, liberty, provision (ver 9). In his capacity as Shepherd Christ is preemi nently all that a faithful shepherd ought to be. The highest proof of His love is that, as the Good Shep herd, He lays down His life for the sheep (vs 11.15. 17). This laying down of His life is not an accident , but is His free, voluntary act (vs 17. IS). Again there was division among the Jews because of these remarkable sayings (vs 19-21).

      Chronological note. Though John does not mention the fact, there is Jittle doubt that, after this visit to JITUS, .Jesus returned to Galilee, and at no long interval from His return, took His final departure southward. The chronology of this closing period in Galilee is some what uncertain. Some would place the visit to the Feast of Tabernacles before the withdrawal to Caesarea Philippi, or even earlier (cf Andrews, Life of Our Lord, etc) ; but the order adopted above appears preferable.


      An interval of two months elapses between vs 21 and 22 in Jn 10 from the Feast of Tabernacles (Oc tober) till the Feast of the Dedication Departure (December). This period witnessed from the final withdrawal of Jesus from Gali-

      Galilee lee. Probably while yet in Galilee He

      sent forth the seventy disciples to pre pare His way in the cities to which He should come (Lk 10 1). Repulsed on the borders of Samaria (Lk 9 51-53), He passed over into Peraea ("beyond Jor dan"), where he exercised a considerable ministry. The record of this period, till the entry into Jerus, belongs in great part to Luke, who seems to have had a rich special source relating to it (9 51 19 27).

      The discourses in Lk embrace many passages and sections found in other connections in Mt, and it is difficult, often, to determine their proper chrono logical place, if, as doubtless sometimes happened, portions were not repeated.

      /. From Leaving Galilee till the Feast of the Dedi cation. Conscious that He went to suffer and die, Jesus steadfastly set His face to go to

      1. Rejected Jerus. His route was first by Samaria by Samaria an opportunity of grace to that peo- (Lk 9: pie but here, at a border village, the 61-55) messengers He sent before Him, prob ably also He Himself on His arrival,

      were repulsed, because of His obvious intention to go to Jerus (ver 53). James and John wished to imitate Elijah in calling down fire from heaven on the rejecters, but Jesus rebuked them for their thought (RV omits the reference to Elijah, and subsequent clauses, vs 55.56).

      In the present connection Luke inserts the inci dents of the three aspirants formerly considered (9 57-62; cf p. 1645). It was sug-

      2. Mission gested that the second and third cases of the may belong to this period.

      Seventy (Lk A new and significant step was now 10:1-20) taken by Jesus in the sending out of 70 disciples, who should go before Him, two by two, to announce His coming in the cities and villages He was about to visit. The number sent indicates how large a following Jesus had now acquired. (Some see a symbolical meaning in the number 70, but it is difficult to show what it is.) The directions given to the messengers are similar to those formerly given to the Twelve (9 1-5; cf Mt 10); a passage also found in Mt in a different connection (11 21-24) is incorporated in this dis course, or had originally its place in it (vs 13-15). In this mission Jesus no longer made any secret of His Messianic character. The messengers were to proclaim that the kingdom of God was come nigh to them in connection with His impending visit (ver 9). The mission implies that a definite route was marked out by Jesus for Himself (cf 13 22), but this \\\\\\\\vould_be subject to modification according to the reception of His emissaries (vs 10.11.16). The cir cuit need not have occupied a long time with so many engaged in it. The results show that it aroused strong interest. Later the disciples re turned elated with their success, emphasizing their victory over the demons (ver 17). Jesus bade them rejoice rather that their names were written in heaven (ver 20). Again a passage is inserted (vs 21.22) found earlier in Mt (11 25-27; cf also vs 23.24, with Mt 13 16.17).

      Jesus had now passed "beyond the Jordan," i.e. into Peraea, and vast crowds waited on His teach ing (cf Mt 19 1 f; Mk 10 1; Lk 12 1).

      3. The At one place a lawyer put what he Lawyer s meant to be a testing question, "What Question shall I do to inherit eternal life?" Jesus Parable of referred him to the great command- Good Sa- ments of love to God and one s neigh- maritan (Lk bor, eliciting the further query, "And 10:25-37) who is my neighbor?" In reply Jesus

      spoke to him the immortal parable of the Good Samaritan, and asked who proved neigh bor to him who fell among the robbers. The lawyer could give but one answer, "He that showed mercy on him." "Go," said Jesus, "and do thou like wise."

      The incident of Martha and Mary, which Luke inserts here (vs 38-42), comes in better later, when Jesus was nearer Bethany.

      At this place Luke brings together a variety of discourses, warnings and exhortations, great parts of which have already been noticed in earlier contexts. It does not follow that Lk has not,



      in many cast s, preserved the original connection. This is probably the case; with the Lord s Prayer

      (11 1-4), and with portions of what 4 Dis- Mt includes in the Sermon on the

      courses, Mount (e.g. 11 9-13.33-36; 12 22 3 I ; Parables, cf 13 21-27 with Mt 7 13. 11. and and in other discourses (e.g. 11 42-52

      Miracles =Mt 23 23-3(1; 12 2 12 = Mt 10 2(1 (Lkchsll 33; 12 42-48 = Mt 24 45-51; 13 18- -14) 21, parables of Mustard Seed and

      Leaveu = Mt 13 31.32, etc).

      Of matter original to Lk in these chs may be noted such passages as that on the Friend at Midnight

      (11 5-S), the incident of the man who n) Original wished Jesus to bid his brother divide to Luke his inheritance with him, to whom

      Jesus spoke the parable of the Rich Fool (12 13 -21 ), the parable of the Barren Fig Tree, called forth by the disposition to regard certain Gali leans whom Pilate had slain in a tumult at the temple, and eighteen on whom the tower of Siloain had fallen, as sinners above others (13 1-9: "Nay," said Jesus, "but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish"), and most of the teaching in ch 14, referred to below. In 11 37.38, we have the mention of a Pharisee inviting Jesus to dine, and of his astonishment at the Lord s neglect of the customary ablutions before eating. Ver 53 gives a glimpse of the fury to which the scribes and Pharisees were aroused by the severity of Christ s denunciations. They "began to press upon him vehemently .... laying wait for him, to catch something out of his mouth." In 13 31 ff it is told how the Pharisees sought to frighten Jesus from the district by telling Him that Herod would fain kill Him. Jesus bade them tell that _"fox" that His work would go on uninterruptedly in the brief space that remained ("day" used enigmatically) till He was "perfected" (ver 32). The woe on Jerus (vs 34.35) is given by Mt in the discourse in ch 23.

      Of the miracles in this section, the casting out of the demon that was dumb (11 14 ff) is evidently

      the same incident as that already noted

      b) The in Mt 12 22 ff. Two other miracles Infirm are connected with the old accusation Woman of Sabbath breaking. One was the the Drop- healing in a synagogue on the Sabbath sied Man day of a woman bowed down for 18

      years with "a spirit of infirmity" (13 10-17) ; the other was the cure on the Sabbath of a man afflicted with dropsy at a feast in the house of a ruler of the Pharisees to which Jesus had been in vited (14 1-6). The motive of the Pharisee s invi tation, as in most such cases, was hostile (ver 1). In both instances Jesus met the objection in the same way, by appealing to their own acts of hu manity to their animals on the Sabbath (13 15.16; 14 5).

      This feast at the Pharisee s house had an inter esting sequel in the discourse it led Jesus to utter against vainglory in feasting, and on

      c) Parable the spirit of love which would prompt of the Great to the table being spread for the help- Supper less and destitute rather than for the

      selfish enjoyment of the select few, closing, in answer to a pious ejaculation of one of the guests, with the parable of the Great Supper (14 7-24). The parable, with its climax in the invita tion to bring in the poor, and maimed, and blind, and those from the highways and hedges, was a commentary on the counsels He had just been giv ing, but it had its deeper lesson in picturing the rejection by the Jews of the invitation to the feast God had made for them in His kingdom, and the call that would be given to the Gentiles to take their place.

      The injunctions to the multitudes as to the sac rifice and cross-bearing involved in discipleship are pointed by the examples of a man (I) Counting building a tower, and a king going to the Cost war, who count the cost before enter ing on their enterprises (vs 25-35). At or about this thru perhaps before the inci dents in Lk 14 Jesus paid the visit to Jerus at the Feast of the Dedication described in

      5. Martha Jn 10 22-39. This seems the fitting and Mary place for the introduction of the epi sode of Martha and Mary which Luke

      narrates a little earlier (10 38-42). The "village" into which Jesus entered was no doubt Bethany (Jn 11 1). The picture given by Luke of the con trasted dispositions of the two sisters Martha active and "serving" (cf Jn 12 2), Mary retiring and contemplative entirely corresponds with that in Jn. Martha busied herself with preparations for the meal; Mary sat at Jesus feet, and heard His word. To Martha s complaint, as if her sister were idling, Jesus gave the memorable answer, "One thing is needful: for Mary hath chosen the good part," etc (Lk 10 42).

      The Feast of the Dedication, held in December,

      was in commemoration of the cleansing of the temple

      and restoration of its worship after its

      6. Feast of profanation by Antiochus Epiphanes the Dedica- (164 BC). Great excitement was oc- tion (Jn 10: casioned by the appearance of Jesus at, 22-39) this feast, and some asked, "How long

      dost thou hold us in suspense? If thou art the Christ, tell us plainly." Jesus said He had told them, and His works attested His claim, but they were not of His true nock, and would not believe. To His own sheep He gave eternal life. The Jews anew wished to stone Him for claiming to be God. Jesus replied that even the law called the judges of Israel "gods" (Ps 82 6, "I said, Ye are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High"): how could it then be blasphemy for Him whom the Father had sanctified and sent into the world to say of Himself, "I am the Son of God"? The Jews sought to take Him, but He passed from their midst. //. From the Abode at Bethabara till the Raising of Lazarus. After leaving Jerus Jesus went beyond Jordan again to the place where John at first bap tized (Jn 10 40; cfl 28, called in AV "Bethabara," in RV "Bethany," distinct from the Bethany of ch 11) . There He "abode," implying a prolonged stay, and many resorted to Him. This spot, sacred to Jesus by His own baptism, may be regarded now as His headquarters from wdiich excursions would be made to places in the neighborhood. Several of the incidents recorded by Luke are probably con nected with this sojourn.

      The stronger the opposition of scribes and Pharisees to Jesus became, the more by natural

      affinity did the classes regarded as out- 1. Parables cast feel drawn to Him. He did not of Lost repel them, as the Pharisees did, but

      Sheep, ate and drank with them. Publicans

      Lost Piece and sinners gathered to His teaching, of Silver, and He associated with them. The Prodigal murmuring was great: "This man re- Son (Lk 15) ceiveth sinners, and eateth with them."

      The defence of Jesus was in parables, and the Pharisees reproach may be thanked for three of the most beautiful parables Jesus ever spoke the Lost Sheep (cf Mt 18 12-14), the Lost Piece of Silver, and the Prodigal Son (ch 15). Why does the shepherd rejoice more over the one lost sheep brought back than over the ninety-nine that have not gone astray? Why does the woman rejoice more over the recovery of her lost drachma than over all the coins safe in her keeping? W T hy does the father rejoice more over the prodigal son come back



      in rags and penitence from the fur country than over the obedient but austere brother that had never left the home? The stories were gateways into the inmost heart of God. There is joy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth more than over ninety- nine just persons that need no repentance (ver 7).

      Two other parables, interspersed by discourses

      (in part again met with in other connections, cf 16

      13 with Mt 6 24; ver 10 with Mt 11

      2. Parables 12; ver IS with Alt 5 32; 19 9, etc), of the were spoken at this time that of the Unjust Unjust Steward (16 1-9) and that of Steward, the Rich Man and Lazarus (vs 19-31). the Rich The dishonest steward, about to be dis- Man and missed, utilized his opportunities, still Lazarus dishonestly, to make friends of his (Lk 16) master s creditors; let the "children

      of light" better his example, by right eously using mammon to make friends for them selves, who shall receive them into everlasting habi tations. The rich man, pampered in luxury, let the afflicted Lazarus starve at his gate. At death in Hades the positions are reversed: the rich man is in torment, stripped of all he had enjoyed; the poor man is at rest in Abraham s bosom, compensated for all he suffered. It is character, not outward estate, that determines destiny. The unmerciful are doomed. Even a messenger from the unseen world will not save men, if they hear not Moses and the prophets (ver 31).

      In this connection Lk (17 1-10) places exhorta tions to the disciples on occasions of stumbling, for giveness, the power of faith, renunciation of merit ("We are unprofitable servants"), some of which are found elsewhere (cf Mt 18, etc).

      While Jesus was in the trans-Jordanic Betha-

      bara, or Bethany, or in its neighborhood, a message

      came to Him from the house of Martha

      3. The and Mary in the Judaean Bethany (on Summons the Mount of Olives, about 2 miles E. to Bethany from Jerus), that His friend Lazarus Raising ("he whom thou lovest") was sick. of Lazarus The conduct of Jesus seemed strange, (Jn 11) for He abode still two days where Me

      was (Jn 11 6). As the sequel showed, this was only for the end of a yet more wonderful manifestation of His power and love, to the glory of God (ver 4). Meanwhile Lazarus died, and was buried. When Jesus announced His intention of going into Judaea, the disciples sought hard to dis suade Him (ver 8); but Jesus was not moved by the fears they suggested. He reached Bethany (a distance of between 20 and 30 miles) on the fourth day after the burial of Lazarus (ver 17), and was met on the outskirts by Martha, and afterward by Mary, both plunged in deepest sorrow. Both breathed the same plaint: "Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died" (vs 21.32). To Martha Jesus gave the pledge, "Thy brother shall rise again," strengthening the faith she already had expressed in Him (ver 22) by announcing Himself as "the resurrection, and the life" (vs 25.26); at Mary s words He was deeply moved, and asked to be taken to the tomb. Here, it is recorded, "Jesus wept" (ver 35), the only other instance of His weep ing in the Gospels being as He looked on lost Jerus (Lk 19 41). The proof of love was manifest, but some, as usual, suggested blame that this miracle- worker had not prevented His friend s death (ver 37). Arrived at the rock-tomb, Jesus, still groan ing in Himself, caused the stone at its mouth to be removed, and, after prayer, spoke with a loud voice, "Lazarus, come forth" (ver 43). The spirit re turned, and the man who had been dead came forth bound with his grave-clothes. He was released and restored to his sisters.

      Even this mighty deed did not alter the mind of the

      Pharisees, who held a council, and decided, on the ad vice of Caiaphas (ver 50), that for the safety of the nation it was "expedient" that this man should die.

      The circumstantiality of this beautiful narrative speaks irresistibly for its historical truth, and the objections raised by critical writers center really in their aversion to the miraculous as such.

      ///. From the Retirement to Ephraim till the

      Arrival at Bethany. The hostility of the ruling

      classes w T as now so pronounced that, in

      1. Retreat the few weeks that remained till Jesus to Ephraim should go up to the Passover, He deemed (Jn 11:54- it advisable to abide in privacy at 67) a city called Ephraim (situation un certain). That He was in secrecy dur ing this period is implied in the statement (ver 57) that if anyone knew where He was, he was to inform

      the chief priests and Pharisees. The

      2. The retirement would be for Jesus a period Journey of preparation for the ordeal before Resumed Him, as the wilderness had been for

      the commencement of His ministry. On His leaving this retreat to resume His advance to Jerus the narratives again become rich in incident and teaching.

      It is not easy to define the route which brought

      Jesus again to the border line between Samaria and

      Galilee (Lk 17 11), but, in traversing

      3. Cure of this region, He was met by ten lepers, the Lepers who besought Him for a cure. Jesus (Lk 17: bade them go and show themselves to 11-19) the priests, and on the way they were

      cleansed. Only one of the ten, and

      he a Samaritan, returned to give thanks and glorify

      God. Gratitude appeared in the unlikely quarter.

      At some point in this journey the Pharisees sought

      to entrap Jesus on the question of divorce. Was it

      lawful for a man to put away his wife

      4. Pharisaic for every cause? (Mt 19 3). Jesus Question- in reply admitted the permission to ings divorce given by Moses (Mk 10 3-5),

      but declared that this was for the hard ness of their hearts, and went back to the original institution of marriage in which the two so joined

      were declared to be "one flesh." Only

      a) Divorce one cause is admissible as a ground of (Mt 19:3- separation and remarriage (Mt 19 9; 12; Mk 10: cf 5 31.32; Mk has not even the ex- 1-12) ception, which is probably, however,

      implied). Comments follow to the dis ciples in Mt on the subject of continence (vs 10-12). See DIVORCE.

      Another question asked by the Pharisees of Jesus was as to when the kingdom of God should come.

      The expectation excited by His own

      b) Coming ministry and claims was that it was of the near; when should it appear? Re- Kingdom buking their worldly ideas, Jesus (Lk 17: warned them that the kingdom did 20-37) not come "with observation" was

      not a "Lo, there! Lo, here!"; it was "within" them, or "in their midst," though they did not perceive it. In the last decisive coming of the Son of Man there would be no dubiety as to His presence (vs 24.25). He adds exhortations as to the suddenness of His coming, and the separations that would ensue (vs 26-37), which Mt gives as part of the great discourse on the Last Things in ch 24. In close connection with the foregoing, as fur nishing the ground for the certainty that this day of

      the Son of Man would come, Jesus

      c) Parable spoke the parable of the Unjust Judge. of the Un- This judge, though heedless of the just Judge claims of right, yet yielded to the (Lk 18:1-8) widow s importunity, and granted her

      justice against her adversary. How much more surely will the righteous, long-suffering

      Jesus Christ



      God avenge His own elect, who cry unto Him day and night (vs 7.S)! Yet men, in that supremo hour, will almost have lost faith in His coming

      A series of sayings and incidents at this time throw light- upon the spirit of the kingdom.

      The spirit of self-righteousness is 6. The rebuked and humble penitence as the

      Spirit of the condition of acceptance is enforced in Kingdom the parable of the Pharisee and Pub lican. The Pharisee posing in his self- complacency at his fastings and tithes, and thanking God for his superiority to others, is set in vivid con trast to the abased publican, standing

      a) Parable afar off, and able only to say, "God, be of Pharisee thou merciful to me a sinner" (ver 13). and Publi- Yet it was he who went down to his can (Lkl8: house "justified" (ver 14).

      9_14) A similar lesson is inculcated in the

      beautiful incident of the blessing of

      the babes. The disciples rebuked the mothers for

      bringing their little ones, but Jesus, "moved with

      indignation" (Mk), received and blessed

      b) Blessing the babes, declaring that to such (to of the them and those of like spirit ) belonged Babes (Mt the kingdom of heaven. "Suffer the 19:13 15; little children, and forbid them not, to Mk 10:13- come unto me," etc.

      16; Lk 18: A third illustration this time of the 15-17; peril of covet ousness is afforded by

      the incident of the rich young ruler. This amiable, blameless, and evidently sincere young man ("Jesus looking upon him loved him,"

      Mk 10 21) knelt, and addressing r) The Rich Jesus as "Good Teacher," asked what Young he must do to inherit eternal life. Jesus

      Ruler (Mt first declined the term "good," in the 19: 16-30; easy, conventional sense in which it Mk 10: was applied, then referred the ruler to 17-31; Lk the commandments as the standard 18:18-30) of doing. All these, however, the

      young man averred he had observed from his you! h up. He did not know himself. Jesus saw the secret hold his riches had upon his soul, and revealed it by the searching word, "If thou wouldest be perfect, go, sell that which thou hast," etc (Mt 19 21 ; cf Mk, "One thing thou lackest," etc). This was enough. The young man could not yield up his "great possessions," and went away sorrowing. Jesus bases on his refusal earnest warnings against the love of riches, and points out, in answer to a question of Peter, that loss for His sake in this life is met with overwhelmingly great compensations in the life to come.

      Not unconnected with the foregoing teachings is the third solemn announcement to the disciples, so

      hard to be persuaded that the kingdom

      6. Third was not immediately to be set up in Announce- glory, of His approaching sufferings ment of the and death, followed by resurrection. Passion The disciples had been "amazed" and (Mt 20:17- "afraid" (Mk) at something strange 19; Mk 10: in the aspect and walk of Jesus as they 32-34; Lk were on the way, going to Jerus (cf 18:31-33) Lk 9 51). His words gave the ex planation. With them should be taken

      what is said in a succeeding incident of His baptism of suffering (Mk 10 38.39; cf Lk 12 50).

      The spirit of the kingdom and sacrifice for the

      kingdom have already been associated with the idea

      of reward, but the principles underlying

      7. The this reward are now made the subject, Rewards of of special teaching.

      the King- First by the parable of the Laborers

      dom in the Vineyard the lesson is inculcated

      that reward in the kingdom is not ac cording to any legal rule, but is governed by a Di

      vine equity, in accordance with which the last may

      often be equal to, or take precedence of, the first.

      The laborers were hired at different

      a) Parable hours, yet all at the end received the of the same wage. The murmuring at the Laborers generosity of the householder of those in the Vine- who had worked longest betrayed a de- yard (Mt fectiveness of spirit which may explain 20:1-17) why they were not, more highly re warded. In strictness, the kingdom is

      a gift of grace, in the sum total of its blessings one and the same to all.

      Still there are distinctions of honor in God s king dom, but these are not arbitrarily made. This is the lesson of the reply of Jesus to the

      b) The plea of the mother of the sons of Zebe- Sons of dee, James and John, with, apparently, Zebedee the concurrence of the apostles them- (Mt 20:20- selves, that they might sit one on the 28 ; Mk 10 : right hand and the other on the left 35-45) hand in His kingdom. It was a bold

      and ambitious request, and naturally moved the indignation of the other apostles. Still it had its ground in a certain nobility of spirit. For when Jesus asked if they were able to drink of His cup and be baptized with His baptism, they an swered, "We are able." Jesus told them they should share that lot of suffering, but to sit on His right hand and on His left were not favors that could be arbitrarily bestowed, but would be given to those for whom it had been prepared of His Father the preparation having regard to character and fitness, of which the Father alone was judge. Jesus went on to rebuke the spirit which led one to seek promi nence over another, and laid down the essential law, "Whosoever would become great among you shall be your minister," enforcing it by His own never-to-be-forgotten example, "Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to min ister, and to give his life a ransom for many" (Mt 20 28; Mk 10 45).

      Accompanied by a great throng, possibly of pil grims to the feast, Jesus drew near to the influential city of Jericho, in the Jordan valley, 8. Jesus at about 17 miles distant from Jerus. Jericho Here two notable incidents marked

      His progress.

      As they approached the city (Lk) (Mt and Mk place the incident as they "went out") a blind beg gar, Bartimaeus, hearing that "Jesus

      a) The the Nazarene" (Mk) passed by, loudly Cure of called on Him as the "Son of David" Bartimaeus to have mercy on him. The multitude (Mt20:29- would have restrained the man, but 34; Mk 10: their rebukes only made him the more 46-52; Lk urgent in his cries. Jesus stopped in 18:35-43) His way, called the blind man to Him,

      then, when he came, renewing his appeal, healed him. The cry of the beggar shows that the Davidic descent, if not the Messiahship, of Jesus was now known. Mt varies from the other evangelists in speaking of "two blind men," while Mt and Mk, as noted, make the cure take place on leaving, not on entering the city. Not improbably there are two healings, one on entering Jericho, the other on going from the city, and Matthew, after his fashion, groups them together (Luke s language is really indefinite; lit. "as they were near to Jericho"). The entrance of Jesus into Jericho was signalized by a yet more striking incident. The chief collect or of revenue in the city was Zacchaeus,

      b) Zacchae- rich, but held in opprobrium ("a .sin us the Pub- ner") because of his occupation. Being lican (Lk little of stature, Zacchaeus had climbed 19:1-10) into the branches of a sycomore tree

      to see Jesus as He passed. To his amazement, and that of the crowd, Jesus stopped


      on His way, and called Zacchaeus by name to hasten to come down, for that day He must abide at his house. Zacchaeua joyfully received Him, and, moved to a complete change in his views of duty, declared his purpose of giving half his goods to the poor, and of restoring fourfold anything he might have taken by false accusation. It was a revolution in the man s soul, wrought by love. "Today," Jesus testified, "is

      salvation come to this house For the Son of

      man came to seek and to save that which was lost."

      The expectations of the multitude that the king dom of God should immediately appear led Jesus to speak the parable of the Pounds, fore- c) Parable warning them that the consummation of the they looked for might be longer de-

      Pounds layed than they thought, and impress- (Lk 19: ing on them the need of loyalty,

      11-27) faithfulness and diligence, if that day,

      when it came, was not to prove dis astrous to them. The nobleman went into a far country" to receive a kingdom, and his ten servants were to trade with as many pounds (each = 100 drachmas) in his absence. On his return the faith ful servants were rewarded in proportion to their diligence; the faithless one lost what he had; the rebellious citizens were destroyed. Thus Jesus fore shadowed the doom that would overtake those who were plotting against Him, and checked hopes that disregarded the moral conditions of honor in His kingdom.

      Arrival at Bethany. From Jericho Jesus moved on to Bethany, the abode of Lazarus and his sisters. To His halt here before His public entrance into Jerus the next events belong.


      We reach now the closing week and last solemn events of the earthly life of Jesus. The importance

      attached to this part of their narra- Importance tives is seen by the space the evangel- of the Last ists devote to it. Of the Gospels of Events Mt and Mk fully one-third is devoted

      to the events of the Passion Week and their sequel in the resurrection; Luke has several chs; John gives half his Gospel to the same period. It is obvious that in the minds of the evangelists the crucifixion of Jesus is the pivot of their whole narrative the denouement to which everything tends from the first.

      /. The Events Preceding the Last Supper. The arrival in Bethany is placed by John "six days before the Pass over" (12 1). Assuming that the public 1 The entry into Jerus took place on the Sun-

      t,V , day, and that the 14th of Nisan fell on the

      Chronology following Thursday, this would lead to the arrival being placed on the Friday or Saturday preceding, according to the mode of reckoning. It is in the highest degree unlikely that Jesus would jour ney from Jericho on the Jewish Sabbath; hence He may be supposed to have arrived on the Friday evening. The supper at which the anointing by Mary took place would be on the Saturday (Sabbath) evening. Alt and Mk con nect it with events two days before the Passover (Mt 26 2; Mk 14 1), but parenthetically, in a way which leaves the other order open.

      .This beautiful deed occurred at a supper given in honor of Jesus at the house of one Simon, a leper (Mt and Mk) probably cured by 2. The Jesus at which Martha, Mary and

      Anointing Lazarus were guests. Martha aided at Bethany in serving (Jn 12 2). In the course (Mt 26:6- of the meal, or at its close, Mary 13; Mk 14; brought a costly box of nard (valued by 3-9; Jn Judas at "300 shillings," about $50, or 12:1-9) 10; cf ARVm on Jn 6 7), and with the perfume anointed the head (Mt, Mk) and feet (Jn) of Jesus, wiping His feet with her hair (Mt and Mk, though not mentioning the "feet," speak of the "body" of Jesus). Indignation, insti

      gated by Judas (Jn), was at once awakened at what was deemed wanton waste. How much better had the money been given to the poor! Jesus vindi cated Mary in her loving act a prophetic anoint ing for His burial and declared that wherever His gospel went, it would be spoken of for a memorial of her. It is the hearts from which such acts come that are the true friends of the poor. The chief priests were only the further exasperated at what was happening, and at the interest shown in Lazarus, and plotted to put Lazarus also to death (Jn 12 10). On the day following Palm Sunday Jesus made His public entry as Messiah into Jerus. All the evangelists narrate this event.

      3. The The Mount of Olives had to be crossed Entry into from Bethany, and Jesus sent two Jerusalem disciples to an adjacent village prob- (Mt 21:1- ably Bethphage (this seems to have 11; Mk 11: been also the name of a district) 1-11; Lk where an ass and its colt would be found 19:29-44; tied. These they were to bring to Jn 12: Him, Jesus assuring them of the per- 12-19) mission of the owners. Garments

      were thrown over the colt, and Jesus seated Himself on it. In this humble fashion (as Mt and Jn note, in fulfilment of prophecy, Zee 9 9), He proceeded to Jerus, from which a multitude, bearing palm branches, had already come out to meet Him (Jn). Throngs accompanied Him, going before and after; these, spreading their garments, and strewing branches in the way, hailed Him with hosannas as the Son of David, the King of Israel, who came in the name of the Lord. Very different were the feelings in the breasts of the Pharisees. "Behold," they said, "how ye prevail nothing; lo, the world is gone after him" (Jn 12 19). They bade Jesus rebuke His disciples, but Jesus replied that if they were silent, the very stones would cry out (Lk 19 40).

      Jen us weeping over Jerusalem return to Bethany. One incident in this progress to Jerus is related only by Lk (19 41-44). As at a bend in the road Jerus became suddenly visible, Jesus paused and wept over the city, so blind to its day of visitation, and so near to its awful doom. Not His own suffer ings, but the thought of Jerusalem s guilt and woes, filled Him with anguish. On reaching the city, Mark s testimony is explicit that He did no more than enter the temple, and look round on all things (11 11). Then eventide having come, He returned to Bethany with the Twelve.

      The morning of Monday found Jesus and His

      disciples again on their way to the city. Possibly

      the early hours had been spent by

      4. Cursing Jesus in solitary prayer, and, as they of the Fig went, it is recorded that "he hungered." Tree A fig tree from which, from its foliage, Second fruit might have been expected, stood Cleansing invitingly by the wayside, but when of Temple Jesus approached it, it was found to 21:12-22; have nothing but leaves a striking Mk 11: 12- symbol of the outwardly religious, but 26; Lk 19: spiritually barren Jewish community. 45-48) And in this sense Jesus used it in pro nouncing on it the word of doom, "No

      man eat fruit from thee henceforward for ever" (Mk). Next morning (Tuesday), as the disciples passed, the tree was found withered from the roots. Mt combines the events of the cursing and the withering, placing both on the second day, but Mk more accurately distinguishes them. Jesus used the surprise of the disciples as the occasion of a lesson on the omnipotence of faith, with added counsels on prayer.

      Were there two deansings ? Pursuing His journey on the first morning, Jesus reached the temple, and there, as His first act, is stated by Mt and Mk to



      have cleansed the temple of the traders. It is a difficult question whether this is a second cleansing, or the same act as that recorded by John at the beginning of the ministry (.In 2 13-22; see above), and here narrated out of its chronological order. The acts are at least quite similar in character and significance. In favor of a second cleansing is the anger of the priests anil scribes (Mk 11 IS; Lk 19 47), and their demand next day for His authority. No other incidents are recorded of this visit to the temple, except (lie healing of certain blind and lame, and the praises of the children, "Hosanna to the son of David" an echo of the previous day s proceed ings (Mt 21 H-16). In the evening He went back to Bethany.

      Far different is it with the third day of these visits of Jesus to the templethe Tuesday of the Passion

      Week. This is crowded with parables, 6. The discourses, incidents, so numerous,

      Eventful impressive, tragical, as to oppress the Tuesday mind in seeking to grasp how one short

      day could embrace them all. It was the last day of t he appearance of Jesus in the temple (Jn 12 36), and marks His final break with the authorities of the nation, on whom His words of denunciation (Mt 23) fell with overwhelming force. The thread of the day s proceedings may thus be briefly traced.

      On His first appearance in the temple on the Tues day morning, Jesus was met by a demand from the

      chief priests, scribes and elders (rep- a) The resent at ives of the Sanhedrin), for the

      Demand for authority by which He acted as He Authority did. Jesus met them by a counter- Parables question, "The baptism of John, was (Mt 21: it from heaven, or from men?" The 23 22:14; dilemma was obvious. If John was Mk 11:27 Divinely accredited, why did they not 12:12; accept, his testimony to Jesus? Yet Lk 20: 1-18) they feared to say his mission was of

      men, for John was universally esteemed a prophet. They could therefore only lamely reply : "We cannot tell" (AV). Matters had now come to an issue, and Jesus, reverting to the method of parable, set forth plainly their sin and its results to themselves and others.

      The Two tions the Wicked Husbandmen the Marriage of the King s 8<t. The parables spoken on this occasion were : that of the Two Sons, one who said "I go not," but afterward repented and went, the other who said, "1 go, sir," but went not- pointing the moral that the publicans and harlots went into the kingdom of God before the self-right eous leaders who rejected the preaching of John (Mt 21 28-32); that of the Wicked Husbandmen, who slew the servants, and finally the son, sent to them, and were at length themselves destroyed, the vineyard being given to others a prophecy of the transferring of the kingdom to the Gentiles (Mt, Mk, Lk); and that of the Marriage of the King s Son (Mt 22 2-14), akin to that of the Great Supper in Lk 14 16-24 in its gathering in of the outcasts to take the place of those who had been bidden, but distinguished from it by the feature of the wedding garment, the lack of which meant being thrust into the outer darkness. The Pharisees easily perceived that these parables were spoken of them (Mt 21 45; Mk 12 12; Lk 20 19), and were correspond ingly enraged, yet dared not touch Jesus for fear of the people.

      The attempt was next made on the part of the Pharisees, Herodians and Sadducees now joined in a common cause to ensnare Jesus by captious and compromising questions. _ These_ attempts He met with a wisdom and dignity which foiled His adversaries, while He showed a ready apprecia tion of a candid spirit, when it presented itself,

      and turned the point against His opponents by putting a question on the Davidic sonship of the Messiah.

      b) Ensnar- (1) Tribute to Caesar the Rcsurrec- ing Ques- lion the (treat Commandment. First tions, etc the Pharisees wit h t he 1 lerodians sought (Mt 22:1- to entrap Him by raising the question 46; Mk 12: of the lawfulness of tribute! to Caesar. 13-37; Lk By causing them to produce a denarius 20:19-44) bearing Caesar s image and superscrip tion, Jesus obtained from them a recog nition of their acceptance of Caesar s authority, and bade them render Caesar s things to Caesar, and God s to God. The Sadducees next tried Him with the puzzle of the wife who had seven husbands, leading up to denial of the resurrection; but Jesus met them by showing that marriage relations have no place in the resurrection life, and by pointing to the implication of a future life in God s word to Moses, "I am the God of Abraham," etc. God "is not the God of the dead, but of the living," a fact which carried with it all the weight of resurrection, as needed for the completion of the personal life. The candid scribe, who came last with His question as to which commandment was first of all, had a different reception. Jesus met Him kindly, sat isfied him with His answer, and pronounced him "not far from the kingdom of God" (Mk 12 34).

      (2) Dat id s tion and Lord. The adversaries were silenced, but Jesus now put to them His own ques tion. If David in Ps 110 could say "Jeh saith unto my lord, Sit thou on my right hand," etc, how was this reconcilable with the Christ being David s son? The question was based on the acceptance of the oracle as spoken by David, or one of his house, of the Messiah, and was intended to suggest the higher nature of Christ as one with God in a Divine sover eignty. David s son was also David s Lord.

      At this point, in audience of the multitudes and

      of His disciples in the temple, Jesus delivered that

      tremendous indictment of the scribes

      c) The and Pharisees, with denunciations of Great De- woes upon them for their hypocrisy nunciation and iniquity of conduct, recorded most (Mt 23; fully in Mt 23. A more tremendous Mk 12:38- denunciation of a class was never 40; Lk 20: uttered. While conceding to the 45-47; cf scribes and Pharisees any authority Lk 11: they lawfully possessed (vs 2.3), Jesus 39-62) specially dwelt on their divorce of

      practice from precept. They said and did not (ver 3). He denounced their perver sion of the right, their tyranny, their ostentation, their keeping back others from the kingdom, their zeal in securing proselytes, only to make them, when gained, worse than themselves, their immoral cas uistry, their scruples about trifles, while neglecting essentials, their exaltation of the outward at the expense of the inward, their building the tombs of the prophets, while harboring the spirit of those that killed the prophets. He declared them to be foul and corrupt to the last degree: sons of Gehenna (vs 15.33). So awful a condition meant ripeness for doom. On them, through that law of retribution which binds generation with generation in guilt and penalty, would come all the righteous blood shed since the days of Abel (the allusion to "Zachariah son of Barachiah," ver 35, is unmistakably to 2 Ch 24 21 this being the last book in the Heb Canon but "Barachiah" seems a confusion with Zee 1 1, perhaps through a copyist s gloss or error). At the close indignation melts into tenderness in the affecting plaint over Jerus "O Jerusalem, Jerusa lem, .... how often would I have gathered thy children together," etc (vs 37-39) words found in Lk in an earlier context (13 34.35), but assuredly also appropriate here. For other parts of the dis-



      course found earlier, of Lk 11 39-52. All seems to have been gathered up afresh in this final accusa tion. It can be imagined that the anger of the Pharisees was fierce at such words, yet they did not venture openly to touch Him.

      Before finally leaving the temple, Jesus seems to

      have passed from the outer court into the women s

      court, and there to have sat down near

      d) The the receptacles provided for the gifts Widow s of the worshippers. Many who were Offering wealthy cast of their gold and silver into (Mk 12:41- the treasury, but the eye of Jesus singled 44; Lk 21: out one poor widow who, creeping up, 1-4) cast in two mites (Gr Icpld, the smallest

      of coins), which made up but a farth ing. It was little, but it was her all, and Jesus immortalized her poor offering by declaring that, out of her want, she had given more than the wealth iest there. Gifts were measured in His sight by the willingness that prompted them, and by the sac rifice they entailed.

      It is perhaps to this crowded day, though some place it earlier in the week (on Sunday or Monday),

      that the incident should be referred of

      e) The the request of certain Greeks to see Visit of the Jesus, as related in Jn 12 20 ff. Who Greeks (Jn these Greeks were, or whence they 12:20-36) came, is unknown, but they were evi dently proselytes to the Jewish faith,

      and men of a sincere spirit . Their request was made through Philip of Bethsaida, and Philip and An drew conveyed it to Jesus. It is not said whether their wish was granted, but we can hardly doubt that it was. Jesus evidently saw in the incident a prelude of that glory that should accrue to Himself through all men being drawn to Him (vs 23.32). But He saw as clearly that this "glorifying" could only be through His death (vs 24.33), and He uni versalized it into a law of His Kingdom that, as a grain of wheat must fall into the earth and die if it is to be multiplied, so only through sacrifice can any life be made truly fruitful (vs 24.25). The thought of death, however, always brought trouble to the soul of Jesus (ver 27), and a voice from the Father was given to comfort Him. The; multitude thought it thundered, and failed to apprehend the meaning of the voice, or His own words about being "lifted up" (vs 29.34).

      Jesus had now bidden farewell to the temple. As He was going out, His disciples or one of them

      (Mk) called His attention to the /) Dis- magnificence of the buildings of the

      course on temple, eliciting from Him the startling Last Things reply that not one stone should be left (Mt 24 ; Mk upon another that should not be thrown 13; Lk 21: down. Later in the evening, when 6-36) seated on the Mount of Olives on their

      return journey, in view of the temple, Andrew, James and John (Mk) asked Him privately when these things should be, and what would be the signs of their fulfilment. In Mt the question is put more precisely, "When shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming [parousia], and of the end of the world?" (or "consummation of the age"). It is in answer to these complex ques tions that Jesus spoke His great discourse on the destruction of Jerus and His final coming, some of the strands in which it is difficult now to disentangle. In the extended report in Mt 24 certain passages appear which are given elsewhere by Luke (cf Lk 17 20-37). It may tend to clearness if a distinction be observed between the nearer event of the de struction of Jerus also in its way a coming of the Son of Man and the more remote event of the final parousia. The former, to which vs 15-28 more specially belong, seems referred to by the "these things" in ver 34, which, it is declared, shall be ful

      filled in that generation. Of the final parousia, on the other hand, it is declared in ver 36 that "of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven, neither the Son, but the Father only" (cf Mk 13 32). The difficulty occasioned by the "immediately" of ver 29 is relieved by recalling the absence of perspective and grouping of future events in all apocalyptic prophecy the consum mation ever rising as the background of the imme diate experience which is its prelude. The dis course then divides itself into a general part (vs 4-14), delineating the character of the entire period till the consummation (false Christs and prophets, wars, tribulations, apostasies, preaching of the gos pel to all nations, etc); a special part relating to the impending destruction of the city, with appropriate warnings (vs 15-28); and a closing part (vs 32-51) relating mainly to the final parousia, but not without reference to preceding events in the extension of Christ s kingdom, and ingathering of His elect (vs 30.31). Warning is given of the suddenness of the coming of the Son of Man, and the need of being prepared for it (vs 37-51). The whole is a massive prophecy, resting on Christ s consciousness that His death would be, not the defeat of His mission, but the opening up of the way to His final glorifi cation and triumph.

      To this great discourse on the solemnities of the end, Jesus, still addressing His disciples, added three memorable parables of instruction and <-/) Parables warning (Mt 26) the first, that of of Ten the Ten Virgins, picturing, under the

      Virgins, figure of virgins who went to meet the Talents bridegroom with insufficient provision and Last of oil for their lamps, the danger of Judgment being taken unawares in waiting for (Mt 26) the Son of Man; the second, that of the Talents, akin to the parable in Lk of the Pounds (19 11-27), emphasizing the need of diligence in the Lord s absence; the third, that of the Sheep and Goats, or Last Judgment, showing how the last division will be made according as dis- cipleship is evinced by loving deeds done to those in need on earth such deeds being owned by Christ the King as done to Himself. Love is thus declared to be the ultimate law in Christ s kingdom (cf 1 Cor 13; ; the loveless spirit is reprobated. "These shall go away into eternal punishment: but the righteous into eternal life" (ver 46).

      Lk 21 37.38 might suggest that Jesus taught in the temple every day till the Thursday of the Pass over; if, however, the denunciation

      6. A Day took place, as nearly all agree, on Tues- of Retire- day, an exception must be made of the ment (cf Wednesday, which Jesus probably Jn 12 : 36) spent in ret irement in Bethany in prep aration of spirit for His last great con flict (others arrange differently, and put some of the preceding events in this day). The summary in Jn 12 36-43 connects the blindness of mind of the Pharisees with Isaiah s vision (6 10), and with the prophecy of the rejected Servant (53 1).

      The plot for the destruction of Jesus was mean while maturing. Two days before the Passover (Tuesday evening), Jesus forewarned

      7. An At- the disciples of His approaching be- mosphere of tray al and crucifixion (Mt 26 2); and Plotting probably at that very hour a secret Judas and meeting of the chief priests and elders the Priests was being held in the court of the house (Mt26:l-5. of the high priest, Caiaphas (Mt), to 14-16 ; Mk consult as to the means of putting Him 14:1.2.10. to death. Their resolve was that it 11; Lk 22: should not be done on the feast day, 1-6) lest there should be a tumult; but the

      appearance of Judas, who since the anointing had seemingly meditated this step, speed-



      ily changed

      pieces of silver (shekels of the sanctuary, less than $20 or .IM; the price of a slave, Ex 21 32; cf /<< 11 12), the recreant disciple, perhaps persuading himself that he was really forcing Jesus to an exer cise of His Messianic power, agreed to betray his Lord. The covenant of infamy was made, and the traitor now only waited his opportunity to carry out his project .

      //. From the Last Sapper till the Cross. A question of admitted difficulty arises in the comparison of the Synop tics and .Jn as to the dates of the Last Supper 1 TV.C. and of the crucifixion. The Synoptics seem

      * L clearly to place the Last Supper on the

      Chronology evening of the I4th of Nisan (in Jewish reckoning, the beginning of the loth), and to identify it with I In- ordinary paschal meal (Mt 26 17- !.)) The crucifixion then took place on the 15th. .In, on the contrary, seems to place the supper on the day before the Passover (13 1). and the crucifixion on the 14th, when the Passover had not yet been eaten (18 2H; 19 14). Many, on this ground, allirm an irreconcilable dis crepancy between .In and the Synoptics, some (e.g. Meyer, Farrar, less decisively Sanday) preferring Jn; others (Strauss, Baur, Schmiedel, etc) using the fact to discredit Jn. By those who accept both accounts, various modes of reconciliation arc! proposed. A favor ite opinion (early church writers; many moderns, as Ciodet, Westcott, Farrar) is that Jesus, ill view of His death, nntiri i><it> / the Passover, and ate His parting meal with His disciples on the evening of the 13th; others (e.g. Tholuck, Luthardt, Kdersheim, Andrews, O. Smith), adhering to the Synoptics, take the view, here shared, that the apparent discrepancy is accounted for by a somewhat freer usage of terms in Jn. Details of the discussion must be sought in the works on the sub ject. The case for the anticipatory view is well given in Westcott, Intro to the Slu<lt/ of the (ioxpcls, 339 if; and in Farrar, Life of Christ, Kxcur. X; a good statement of that for the Synoptics may be seen in Andrews, Life of Our Lord; cf Tholuck, Co mm. on Jn, Oil 13 1; Lut- hardt, Co mm. on Jn, on 13 1; 18 2S; D. Smith, Days of //IN /-V< x/i. Apj). II. The language of the Synop- tists ("the first day of unleavened bread, when they sacrificed the passover," Mk 14 12) leaves no doubt that they intended to identify the Last Supper with the regular Passover, and it is hardly conceivable that they could be mistaken on so vital a point of the apostolic tradition. This also was the view of the churches of Asia Minor, where John himself latterly resided. On the other hand, the phrase to "eat the passover" in Jn 18 28 may very well, in John s usage, refer to participation in the special sacrifices which formed a chief feature of the proceedings on the loth. The allusion in Jn 13 1 need mean no more than that, the Passover now impend ing, Jesus, loving His disciples to the end, gave them a special token of that love during the meal that ensued. Tin; "preparation of the passover" in Jn 19 14.31 most naturally refers to the preparation for the Sabbath of the Passover week, alluded to also by the Synoptics (Mt 27 02; Mk 15 42; Lk 23 54). The objections based on rabbinical regulations about the Sabbath are con vincingly met by Tholuck (see also Andrews). We assume, therefore, that Our Lord ate the Passover with His disciples at the usual time the evening of the 14th of Nisan (i.e. the beginning of the 15th).

      In the scene in the upper chamber, at the observ ance of the Last Supper, we enter the holy of holies

      of this part of the Lord s history. It 2. The Last is difficult, in combining the narratives, Supper (Mt to be sure of the order of all the par- 26: 17-35; ticulars, but the main events are clear. Mk 14:12- They may be exhibited as follows: 31; Lk 22- On the first day of unleavened 7-38; Jn bread" Thursday, 14th of Nisan 13; cf 1 Jesus bade two of His disciples (Lk Cor 11: names Peter and John) make the need- 23-26) ful preparations for the observance of

      the Passover. This included the sacri ficing of the lamb at the temple, and the securing of a guest-chamber. Jesus bade the disciples follow

      a man whom they would meet bearing a) The a pitcher, and at the house where he

      Preparation stopped they would find one willing

      to receive them. The master of the house, doubtless a disciple, at once gave them "a large upper room furnished and ready" (Mk); there they made ready.

      Evening being eome, Jesus and the Twelve assem bled, and took their places for the meal. We gather

      from .In 13 23 that John reclined next to Jesus (on the right), and the sequel shows that Judas and Peter were near on the other side. It h) Dispute was probably this arrangement that about gave rise to the. unseemly strife for pre-

      Precedence cedence among the disciples narrated -Washing in Lk 22 24-30. The spirit thus dis- of the Dis- played Jesus rebuked, as He had more ciples Feet than once had occasion to do (cf Mk 9

      Depart- 33-37) ; then (for here may be inserted

      ure of the beautiful incident in Jn 13 1 fT),

      Judas rising from the table, He gave them an

      amazing illustration of His own precept,

      "He that is chief [let him become] as he that doth

      serve I am in the midst of you as he that

      serveth" (Lk 22 20.27), in divesting Himself of His garments, girding Himself with a towel, and per forming the act of a servant in washing His disciples feet. Peter s exclamation must have expressed the feelings of all: Lord, dost thoti wash my feet?" The act of the Divine Master was a wonderful lesson in humility, but Jesus used it also as a parable of something higher. "If I wash thee not [i.e. if thou art, not cleansed by the receiving of my word and spirit, which this washing symbolizes], thou hast no part with me"; then on Peter s further impulsive protest, "Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head," the word : "He that is bathed rieedeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit" (i.e. sanctification of the inner man is once for all, but there is need for cleansing from the sins of the daily walk)._ Resuming His place at the table, He bade them imitate the example He had just given them.

      Is it I . An ominous word had accompanied the reply to Peter, "Ye are not all clean" (Jn 13 10.11). As the supper proceeded, the meaning of this was made plain. Judas, who had already sold his Master, was at the table with the rest. _ He had permitted Jesus to wash his feet, and remained un moved by that surpassing act of condescending love. Jesus was "troubled in spirit," and now openly declared, "One of you shall betray me" (the Gr word means lit. "deliver up": cf Lk 22 4.6, and HVrn throughout). It was an astounding announcement to the disciples, and from one and another came the trembling question, "Lord, is it I?" Jesus answered that it was one of those dipping his hand with Him in the dish (Mk), and spoke of the woe that would overtake the betrayer ("Good were it for that man if he had not been born"). John, at a sign from Peter, asked more definitely, "Who is it?" (Jn). Jesus said, but to John only, it was he to whom He would give a sop, and the sop was given to Judas. The traitor even yet sought to mask his treachery by the words, "Is it I, Rabbi?" and Jesus replied, though still not aloud, "Thou hast said" (Mt); then, as Satanic passion stirred the breast of Judas, He added, "What thou doest, do quickly" (Jn). Judas at once rose and went out into the night (13 30). The disciples, not compre hending his abrupt departure, thought some errand had been given him for the feast or for the poor. Jesus was relieved by his departure and spoke of the glory coming to Himself and to His Father, and of love as the mark of true discipleship (13 31-35).

      The forms of the observance of the Passover by the Jews are given elsewhere (see PASSOVER). Luke alone of the NT writers speaks of 2 r) The cups (22 17.20); in Jewish practice 4

      Lord s cups were used. The "Western" text

      Supper D omits Lk s 2d cup, from which some

      (cf Sanday, HDB) infer duplication, but this is not necessary. Lk s 1st cup (ver 17) may be that with which the paschal supper opened; the 2d cup that mentioned by all the writers was probably the 3d Jewish cup, known as "the cup



      of blessing" (cf 1 Cor 10 10). Sonic, however, as Meyer, make it the 4th cup. It is implied in Mt, Mk, Jn, that by this time Judas had gone. Left thus with His own, the essent ials of the paschal meal being complete, Jesus proceeded, by taking and distributing bread and wine, associating them with His body and blood, soon to be offered in death upon the cross, to institute that sacred rite in which, through all ages since (though its simplicity has often been sadly obscured) His love and sacrifice have been commemorated by His church. There are variations of phrase in the different accounts, but in_the essentials of the sacramental institution there is entire agreement. Taking bread, after thanks to (!od, Jesus broke it, and gave it to the disciples with the words, "This is my body"; the cup, in like manner, after thanksgiving, He gave them with the words, "This is my blood of the cov enant [in Lk and Paul, "the new covenant in my blood"] which is poured out for many" (Alt adds, unto remission of sins"). Lk and Paul add what is implied in the others: "This do in remembrance of me" (Lk 22 19; 1 Cor 11 21). Nothing could more plainly designate the bread and wine as holy symbols of the Lord s body and blood, offered in death for man s redemption, and sealing in His blood a new covenant with (Jod; nor, so long as the rite- is observed in its Divine simplicity, as Jesus insti tuted it, will it be possible to expunge from His death the character of a redeeming sacrifice. In touching words Jesus intimated that He would no more drink of the fruit of the vine till He drank it new with them in their Father s Kingdom (on the doctrinal aspects, see EUCHARIST; SACRAMENT; LORD S SUPPER).

      The Supper was over, and parting was imminent, but Jesus did not leave the holy chamber till He had

      poured out His inmost heart in those d) The Last tender, consolatory, profoundly spirit- Discourses ual addresses which the beloved disciple Inter- has preserved for us in the 14th, 15th cessory and 16th chs of his Gospel, followed

      Prayer by the wonderful closing intercessory

      prayer of ch 17. He was leaving theni, but their hearts were not to be disquieted, for they would see Him again (14 IS; 16 16 ff), and if, ere long, He would part with them again in visible form, it was only outwardly He would be separated from them, for He would send them the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, who would take His place, to guide them into all truth, and bring all things to their remem brance that He had said to them (14 1(5.17; 15 2(5; 16 7-14). If He went away, it was to prepare a place for them, and He would come again to receive them to Himself in His Father s house (14 1-3); let them meanwhile show their love to Him by keep ing His commandments (14 15.23.24). In the Spirit He Himself and the Father would dwell in the souls that loved Him (14 21-23). Tin; intimacy of their union with Him would be like that of branches in the vine; only by abiding in Him could they bring forth fruit (15 Iff). They would have tribulations (15 IS ff; 16 1.2), but as His dying bequest He left them His own peace (14 27) ; that would sustain their hearts in all trial (16 33). With many such promises did He comfort them in view of the terrible ordeal through which they were soon to pass; then, addressing His Father, He prayed for their holy keeping, and their final ad mission to His glory (17 9-18.24).

      _ These solemn discourses finished, Jesus and His disciples sang a hymn (the "Hallel") and departed to go to the Mount of Olives. Comparing the evangelists, one would infer that the conversation in which Jesus foretold the denial of Peter at least commenced before they left the chamber (Lk 22 31 ff; Jn connects it, probably through relation of

      subject, with the exposure of Judas, 13 36-38); but it seems to have continued on the way (Mt, Mk). Jesus had spoken of their being c) The "offended" in Him that night. In

      Departure his exaltation of spirit, Peter declared and Warn- that though all should be offended in ing Him, he would never be offended.

      Jesus, who had already warned Peter that Satan sought to have him, that he might sift him as wheat (Lk 22 31; but "I made supplica tion for thee," etc), now told him that before the cock should crow, he would thrice deny Him. Peter stoutly maintained that he would die rather than be guilty of so base an act so little did he or the others (Mt 26 35; Mk 14 31) know themselves! The enigmatic words in Lk 22 36 about taking scrip and sword point metaphorically to the need, in the times that were coming upon them, of every lawful means of provision and self-defence; the succeeding words show that "sword" is not intended to be taken literally (ver 38).

      Descending to the valley, Jesus and His disciples, crossing the brook Kidron ("of the cedars"), en tered the "garden" (Jn) known as 3. Geth- Cethsemane ("oil-press"), at the foot semane of the Mount of Olives. Here took the Betrayal place the agony, which is the proper and Arrest commencement of the Passion, the (Mt 26:36- betrayal by Judas and the arrest of 56; Mk 14: Jesus.

      32-52; Lk During the evening the thoughts of 22:39-53; Jesus had been occupied mainly with Jn 18: 1-12) His disciples; now that the hour had come when the things predicted con cerning Him should have fulfilment (Lk 22 37: "your hour, and the power of darkness," ver 53), it was inevitable that mind and spirit <i) Agony should concentrate on the awful bodily in the and mental sufferings that lay before

      Garden Him. It was not the thought of physi cal suffering alone from that also the pure and sensitive humanity of Jesus shrank with natural horror but death to Him, the Holy One and Prince of Life, had an indescribably hateful character as a hostile power in humanity, due to the judgment of Cod on sin, and now descending upon Him through the workings of the vilest of human passions in the religious heads of His nation. What anguish to such an One, filled with love and the desire to save, to feel Himself rejected, betrayed, deserted, doomed to a malefactor s cross alone, yet not alone, for the Father was with Him! (Jn 16 32). The burden on His spirit when He reached Gethsemane was already, as the language; used shows, all but unendurable "amazed," "sore troubled," "My soul is exceeding sorrowful even unto death" (Mk). There, bidding the other dis ciples wait, He took with Him Peter, and James, and John, and withdrew into the recesses of the garden. Leaving these also a lit lie behind, lie sank on the ground in solitary "agony" (Lk), and "with strong crying and tears" (He 5 7), poured out His soul in earnest supplication to His Father. "Let this cup pass away from me" it could not be, but thus the revulsion of His nature was expressed "howbeit not what I will, but what thou wilt." The passage in Lk (22 44), "His sweat became as it were great drops of blood," etc, though omitted in certain MSS, doubtless preserves a genuine trait. Returning to the three, He found them overpowered with sleep : even the support of their wakeful sym pathy was denied Him! "Watch and pray," He gently admonished them, "that ye enter not into temptation." A second and third time the same thing happened wrestling with God on His part, sleep on theirs, till, with Divine strengthening (Lk 22 41), victory was attained, and calm restored.



      "Sleep on now," He said to His disciples (the crisis is past; your help can avail no more): "Arise, let us be going" (the future has to he faced; the be trayer is at hand. See the, remarkable sermon of F. W. Robertson, II, sermon 22).

      The crisis had indeed arrived. Through the dark ness even as Jesus spoke, was seen flushing the light

      of torches and lanterns, revealing a b) Betrayal mingled company of armed men by Judas Rom soldiers, temple officers (.In), Jesus others sent by the chief priests,

      Arrested scribes and elders, to apprehend Jesus.

      Their guide was Judas. It had been found impracticable to lay hands on Jesus in public-, but Judas knew this retreat (.In 18 2), and had arranged, by an act of dastardly treachery, to en able them to effect the capture in privacy. The sign was to be a kiss. Wit h an affectation of friend ship, only possible to one into whose heart the devil had truly entered (Lk 22 3; Jn 13 27), Judas advanced, and hailing Jesus as "Master," effusively kissed Him (Mt 26 49; Mk 14 45m). Jesus had asked, "Betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss?" (Lk); now He said, "Friend, do that for which thou art come" (Mt). The soldiers essayed to take Jesus, but on their first approach, driven back as by a supernatural power, they fell to the ground (Jn). A proof thus given of the voluntariness of His sur render (cf Mt 26 53: "Thinkest thou that I cannot beseech my Father," etc), Jesus, remarking only on the iniquity of secret violence when every day they had opportunity to take Him in the temple, submitted to be seized and bound. At this point Peter, with characteristic impetuosity, remember ing, perhaps, his pledge to die, if need be, with Jesus, drew a sword, and cut off the right ear of the high priest s servant, Malchus (Jn gives the names). If he thought his deed justified by what Jesus had earlier said about "swords" (Lk 22 36.38), he was speedily undeceived by Jesus rebuke (Mt 26 52; Jn 18 11), and by His healing of the ear (Lk; the last miracle of Jesus before His death). How little this flicker of impulsive boldness meant is shown by the general panic that immediately followed. "All the disciples," it is related, "left him, and fled" (Mt, Mk). Mk tells of a young man who had come upon the scene with only a linen cloth cast about his naked body, and who fled, leaving the cloth behind (14 51.52). Not improbably the young man was Mark himself.

      It would be about midnight when Jesus was ar rested, and He was at once hurried to the house of

      Caiaphas, the high priest, where in 4. Trial expectation of the capture, a company before the of chief priests, scribes and elders Sanhedrin members of the Sanhedrin were al- (Mt 26:57- ready assembled. Here the first stage 76; 27:1- in the trial of Jesus took place. 10 Mk 14:

      .. _ The legal and constitutional questions 53-7^; 10 : connected with the trial of Jesus arc con- 1; Lk 22: sideredin the art. on JESUS CHRIST, ARREST K4. 71 . j n AND TRIAL OF; see also Dr. Taylor Innes, iQ.iolo7- The Trial f Je . sus Christ; on the powers io .i&-&l , of the Sanhedrin, see SANHEDRIN, and cf cf Acts Schiirer, Jewish People, etc, II, 1, pp. 163 ff.

      1 18 19) There seems little doubt that, while certain 1 judicial forms were observed, the trial was illegal in nearly every particular. The arrest itself was arbitrary, as not founded on any formal accusation (the Sanhedrin, however, seems to have ar rogated to itself powers of this kind; cf Acts 4 Iff); but the night session, lack of definite charge, search for testimony, interrogation of accused, haste in condem nation, were unquestionably in flagrant violation of the established rules of Jewish judicial procedure in such cases. It is to be remembered that the death of Jesus had already been decided on by the heads of the Sanhedrin, so that the trial was wholly a means to a foregone conclusion. On the historical side;, certain difficulties arise. Jn seems to make the first interrogation of Jesus take place before Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas (on Annas, see below; though deposed 15 years before, he retained, in reality,

      all the dignity and influence of the high-priesthood; cf Lk 3 2; Acts 4 <>); after which He is sent to Caiaphas (Jn 18 13. 14. 19-24). The narrative is simplified if either (1) vs 19-2:5 are regarded as a preliminary interrogatory by Annas till matters were prepared for the arraignment before Caiaphas; or (2) ver 24 is taken as retrospective (in the sense of "had sent," as in AV), and the interrogation is included in the trial by Caiaphas (cf ver 19: " the, high priest"). Annas and Caiaphas may be presumed from the account of Peter s denials to have occupied the same official residence; else Annas was present on this night to be in readiness for the trial. The frequently occurring term "chief priests" denotes the high priests, with those who had formerly held this rank, and members of their families (cf Schurer, op. cit., 20:} IF). They formed, with the scribes, the most important element in the Sanhedrin.

      First Jesus was led before Annas, then by him, after a brief interview, was transferred, still bound,

      to Caiaphas. Annas had been de- a) Before posed, as above noticed, much earlier Annas and (15 AD), but still retained the name Caiaphas and through his sons and relations, as the Unjust long as he lived, exercised much of the Judgment authority of high priest. Like all

      those holding this high office, he and Caiaphas were Sadducees. Annas if he is the questioner in Jn 18 19-23 asked Jesus concern ing His disciples and His teaching. Such interroga tion was unlawful, the duty of the accuser, in Jewish law, being to produce witnesses; properly, there fore, Jesus referred him to His public teaching in the temple, and bade him ask those who heard Him there. An officer standing by struck Jesus with his hand for so speaking: an indignity which Jesus endured with meek remonstrance (vs 22.23).

      (1) An illegal session. Meanwhile a company of the Sanhedrin had assembled (23 sufficed for a quorum), and Jesus was brought before this tri bunal, which was presided over by Caiaphas. A hurried search had been made for witnesses (this, like the night session, was illegal), but even the suborned testimony thus obtained ("false witnesses") was found useless for the purpose of establishing, constructively or directly, a charge of blasphemy against Jesus. At length two witnesses were pro duced who gave a garbled version of the early saying of Jesus (Jn 2 19) about destroying the temple and rebuilding it in three days. To speak against the temple might be construed as speaking against God (cf Mt 23 16.21; Acts 6 13.14), but here too the witnesses broke down through lack of agree ment. At all costs, however, must Jesus be con demned: the unprecedented course therefore was taken of seeking a conviction from the mouth of the accused Himself. Rising from his seat, the high priest adjured Jesus by the living God to tell them whether He was the Christ, the Son of God (in Mk, "Son of the Blessed"). In using this title, Caiaphas had evidently in view, as in Jn 6 18; 10 33, a claim to equality with God. The supreme moment had come, and Jesus did not falter in His reply: "Thou hast said." Then, identifying Himself with the Son of Man in Daniel s vision (7 13.14), He sol emnly added, "Henceforth [from His resurrection on] ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven." It was enough. Without even the pretense of in quiry into the truth or falsehood of the claim, the high priest rent his garments, exclaiming, "He hath spoken blasphemy," and by assent of all Jesus was adjudged worthy of death. Abuse and insult fol lowed. The minions of the Sanhedrin were per mitted to spit on the condemned One, smite Him, blindfold arid mock Him, saying, "Prophesy unto us, thou Christ : who is he that struck thee?" Then, with further blows, He was led away (Mt 26 68).

      (2) A morning confirmation. To give color of judicial sanction to these tumultuous and wholly irregular night proceedings, a more formal meeting of the Sanhedrin was convened as soon as day



      hud dawned (Mt 27 1; Mk 15 1 ; Lk 22 0(5-71). Probably the irregularities were held to be excused by the urgency of the occasion and the solemnities of the feast. Jesus was again brought forward; new questions were put which He declined to an swer. Possibly a new avowal of His Messiahship was made (more probably Luke includes in this scene, the only one he records, some of the particulars of the earlier proceedings). The judgment of the past night was confirmed.

      While this greatest moral tragedy of the trial and

      condemnation of Jesus was in process, a lesser, but

      still awful, tragedy in the history of a

      b) The soul was being enacted in the court Threefold of the same building (from this the Denial chamber in which the Sanhedrin sat

      was visible), in the threefold denial of his Master by the apostle Peter. Peter, who had followed "afar off" (Lk), had gained access to the court through an unnamed disciple, whom it is easy to identify with John (Jn 18 15). As he stood warming himself at a fire which had been kindled, the maid who had admit ted them (Jn), gazing atten tively at Peter, said boldly, "Thou also wast with Jesus the Galilean" (Mt 26 69). Unnerved, and affrighted by his surroundings, Peter took the readi est mode of escape in denial. "1 know him not." His heart must have sunk within him as he framed the words, and the crowing of a cock at the moment (Mk perhaps an hour after midnight), reminding him of his Master s warning, completed his dis comfiture. Guiltily he withdrew to the porch, only a little after to be accosted by another (the maid had spoken to her neighbors, Mk), with the same charge. More afraid than ever, he declared again, "I know not this man," and, seeing he was not be lieved, strengthened the denial with an oath. Yet a third time, an hour later, a bystander (or several, Mk), this time founding on his Galilean speech, pronounced, "Of a truth thou art one of them." Peter, to clear himself, cursed and swore, anew dis claiming knowledge of his Lord. To this depth had the boastful apostle fallen as low, it might seem, as Judas! But there was a difference. As Peter spoke the cock again crew the cockcrow which gives its form to three of the narratives (Mk alone mentions the double cockcrowing). At the same instant, either from within, or as He was being led forth, Jesus turned and looked on His erring disciple. That look so full of pity, sorrow, re proach could never be forgotten! Its effect was instantaneous: "Peter went out, and wept bit terly." Peter s heartfelt repentance has its counterfoil in the remorse of Judas, which, bitter as it also was, cannot receive the nobler name. First,

      c) Remorse Judas sought to return the 30 shekels and Suicide paid him as the price of blood ("I be- of Judas trayed innocent blood"); then, when

      callously rebuffed by the priests and elders, he flung down the accursed money in the sanctuary, and went and hanged himself. Mt and Acts seem to follow slightly divergent traditions as to his end and the purchase of the potter s field. The underlying facts probably are that the priests applied the money, which they could not put into the treasury (Mt), to the purchase of the field, where, either before or after the purchase, Judas destroyed himself (Acts: falling and bursting asun der), assigning it as a place to bury strangers in. Its connection with Judas is attested by its name, "Akeldama," ;<the field of blood."

      The Jews might condemn, but they had no power to execute sentence of death (Jn 18 31). This power had been taken from them by the Romans, and was now vested in the Rom governor. The procurator of Judaea was Pontius Pilate, a man hated by the Jews for his ruthless tyranny (see PILATE),

      yet, as the Gospels show him, not without a sense of right, but vacillating and weak-willed in face

      of mob clamor, and risk to his own in- 5. Trial terests. His residence in Jerus ("Prae- before torium," KRV "palace") was probably

      Pilate (Mt Herod s former palace (thus Schiirer, 27:2.11- G. A. Smith, etc), on the tesselated 31; Mk 15: pavement (Jn 19 13) in the semicir- 1-20; Lk cular front of which was placed the 23:1-25; tribunal (bhna) from which judgments Jn 18:28- were delivered. It was to this place 40; 19: Jesus was now brought. The events 1-16) took place when it was "early" (Jn 18

      28), probably between 6 and 7 AM (cf 19 14, Rom computation).

      Jesus was taken within the Praetorium, but His accusers were too scrupulous about defilement at

      the Passover festival (Jn 18 28) to a) Attitude enter the building. Pilate therefore of the came out to hear their accusation.

      Accusers They would fain have had him endorse

      their condemnation without further inquiry, but this he would not do. They would not have it that it was a simple question of their law, yet had to justify their demand for a death sentence (ver 31). They based, therefore, on the alleged revolutionary character of Christ s teaching, His forbidding to pay tribute to Caesar (a false charge), His claim to be a king (Lk 23 2.5), to all which charges Jesus answered not a word (Mk 15 3.5). At a later stage, after Pilate, who knew very well that no mere sedition against the Rom power had called forth all this passion (witness the choice of Barabbas), had repeatedly declared that he found no crime in Jesus (Mk 15 14; Lk 23 4.14.22; Jn 18 38; 19 4.6), the real spring of their action was laid bare: "We have a law, and by that law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God" (Jn 19 7). When it was seen how this declaration made Pilate only the more unwilling to yield to their rage, return was made to the politi cal motive, now in the form of personal threat: "If thou release this man, thou art not Caesar s friend" (ver 12). This was Pilate s weak point, and the Jews knew it. The clamor grew ever louder, "Cru cify him, crucify him." Hate of Jesus and national degradation could go no farther than in the cry, "We have no king but Caesar" (ver 15).

      Pilate was from the first impressed with the inno cence of Jesus, and was sincerely anxious, as his

      actions showed, to save Him from the 6) The terrible and ignominious death His

      Attitude of implacable enemies were bent on in- Pilate flicting upon Him. His crime was

      that, as Rom judge, he finally, against his own convictions, through fear of a charge of dis loyalty to Caesar, yielded up to torture and death One whom he had pronounced guiltless, to gratify the brutal passions of a mob. By Pilate s own ad missions, Christ s death was, not a punishment for any crime, but a judicial murder. First, through private examination, Pilate satisfied himself that the kingship Jesus claimed ("Thou sayest") carried with it no danger to the throne of Caesar. Jesus was a king indeed, but His kingdom was not of this world; was not, like earthly kingdoms, supported by violence; was founded on the truth, and gathered its subjects from those that received the truth (Jn 18 36.37)._ The indifference to the name of truth which the jaded mind of Pilate confessed ("What is truth?") could not hide from him the nobility of soul of the Holy One who stood before him. He declared publicly, "I find no fault in this man," and thereafter sought means of saving Him, at least of shifting the responsibility of His condemnation from himself to others.

      (1) Jesus sent to Herod. Hearing in the clamor



      round the judgment scat that Jesus was a Galilean, and remembering that Herod Antipas, \\\\\\\\vlio had jurisdiction in that region, \\\\\\\\vas in the city, Pilate s first expedient was to send .Jesus to Herod, to he examined l>y him (Lk 23 (ill). This act of cour tesy had the effect of making Herod and Pilate, who had been at enmity, again friends (ver 12); otherwise it failed of its object- Herod was pleased enough to see One he had so often heard about - even thought in his flippancy that a miracle might- be done by Him but when .lesus, in presence ot "that fox" (Lk 13 32), refused to open His mouth in answer to (lie accusations heaped upon Him, Herod, with his soldiers, turned the matter into jest, by clothing Jesus in gorgeous apparel, and sending Him back as a mock-king 1 ( (> Pilate. ^

      (2) "Xi>t tlii* man, ltt Barabbas." Pilate s next thought was to release Jesus in pursuance of a Jew ish custom of setting free a prisoner at the feast, and to this end, having again protested that no fault had been found in Him, offered the people the choice between Jesus and a notorious robber and murderer called Barabbas, then in prison. Just then, as he sat on the judgment seat, a message from his wife regarding a dream she had ("Have thou nothing to do with that, righteous man," Mt 27 19) must strongly have influenced his superstitious mind. Pilate could hardly have conceived that the multi tude would prefer a murderer to One so good and pure; but, instigated by the priests, they perpe trated even this infamy, shouting for the release of Barabbas and the crucifixion of Jesus.

      (3) "Km: Howo." -Pilate s weakness now began to reveal itself. He proposed to "chastise" (scourge) Jesus why "chastise," if lie was innocent? then release; Him. But this compromise, as was to be anticipated, only whetted the eagerness for blood, and the cries grew ever louder, "Crucify him." Pilate, however, as if yielding to the storm, did deliver Jesus to be scourged (scourging a fearful infliction preceded crucifixion), the cruelty being aggravated by the maltreatment of the soldiers, who, outstripping former mockeries, put on His head a crown of thorns, arrayed Him in a purple robe, and rained blows upon His bleeding face and form. It seems to have been a design of Pilate to awake pity, for once again he brought Jesus forth, and in this affecting guise, with new attestation of His in nocence, presented Him to the people in the words, "Behold, the man!" (Jn 19 5). How hideous the mockery, at once to declare of such an one, "I iind no crime in him," and to exhibit Him to the crowd thus shamefully abused! No pity dwelt in these hearts, however, and the shouts became still an grier, "Crucify him."

      (4) A la at appeal Pilate yields. The words of the leaders, "He made himself the Son of Ciod," spoken as a reason for putting Jesus to death (Jn 19 7), struck a new fear into the heart of Pilate. It led him again to enter the Praetorium, and inquire of this strange prisoner, unlike any he had ever seen, "Whence art thou?" Jesus was silent. "Knowest thou not," asked Pilate, "that I have power to re lease thee, and have power to crucify thee?" Jesus answered only that he, Pilate, had no power over Him at all save what was given him of Ciod; the greater therefore was the crime of those who had subjected Him to this abuse of Divinely given power. Again Pilate went out and sought to release Him, but was met by the fierce cries that foreboded com plaint to Caesar (Jn 19 12). A tumult seemed imminent, and Pilate succumbed. Here probably (though possibly after the choice of Barabbas) is to be placed the washing of his hands by Pilate a vain disclaiming of his responsibility recorded in Mt 27 21, and the awful answer of the people, "His blood be on us, and on our children" (ver 25).

      Pilate now ascends the judgment seat, and, fully conscious of the iniquity of his procedure, pronounces the formal sentence which dooms Jesus to the cross. The trial over, Jesus is led again into the Praeto rium, where the cruel mockery of the soldiers is resumed in intensified form. The Holy One, thorn- crowned, clad in purple, a reed thrust into His hand, is placed at the mercy of the whole band, who bow the knee in ridicule before Him ("Hail, King of the Jews"), spit upon Him in contempt, smite Him on the head with the reed (Mt, Mk). Then, stripped of the robe, His own garments are put on Him, in preparation for the end.

      In all this hideous scene of cruelty, injustice, and undeserved suffering, the conspicuous feature in the bearing of Jesus is the absolute c) The calmness, dignity and meekness with

      Attitude which lie endures the heaviest wrongs of Jesus and insults put upon Him. The pic ture in Isa 53 7.8 is startling in its fidelity: "When he was afflicted he opened not his mouth; as a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and as a sheep that before its shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth. By oppression and judg ment he was taken away," etc. There is no return of the perturbation of Gethsemane. As if the strength won there had raised Him into a peace that nothing could shake, He passed through the frightful physical exhaustion, mental strain, agony of scourging, suffering from wounds and blows, of that terrible night and morning, with unbroken fortitude and unembittered spirit. Not a word of complaint passes His lips; He makes no reply to accusations; when reviled, He reviles not again; He takes all with submission, as part of the cup the Father has given Him to drink. It is a spectacle to move the stoniest heart. Well to remember that it is the world s sin, in which all share, that mingled the bitter draught!

      ///. The Crucifixion and Burial. Crucifixion was the form of punishment reserved by the Romans for slaves, foreigners and the vilest 1. The criminals, and could not be inflicted

      Crucifixion on a Rom citizen. With its prolonged (Mt 27:31- and excruciating torture, it was the 56; Mk 15: most agonizing and ignominious death 20-41; Lk which the cruelty of a cruel age could 23:26-49; devise. Jewish law knew nothing of Jn 19: it (the hanging on a tree of Dt 21 22.

      16-37) 23, was after death; cf Gal 3 13), yet

      to it t he Jewish leaders hounded Pilate on to doom their Messiah. The cross was no doubt of the usual Rom shape (see CROSS). The site of Golgotha, "the place of a skull" (in Lk "Calvary," the Latinized form), is quite uncertain. It may have been a slight mound resembling a skull (thus Meyer, Luthardt, Godet, etc), but this is not known. _ It is only plain that it was outside the wall, in the im mediate vicinity of the city (see note below- on sepulcher). The time of the crucifixion was about 9 AM (Mk 15 25). The day (Friday) was the "preparation" for the Sabbath of the Passover week (Mt, Mk, Lk; cf Jn 19 14.31).

      It was part of the torment of the victim of this horrible sentence that he had to bear his own cross (according to some only the patibu- a) On the lum, or transverse beam) to the place Way of execution. As Jesus, staggering,

      possibly fainting, under this burden, passed out of the gate, a stranger coming from the country, Simon, a man of Cyrene, was laid hold of, and compelled to carry the cross (such an one would not be punctilious about rabbinical rules of travel, especially as it was not the regular Sabbath). Jesus, however, was not wholly unpitied. In the crowd following Him were some women of Jerus, who be wailed and lamented Him. The Lord, turning,



      bade these weep, not for Him, but for themselves and for their children. "If they do these things in the green tree, what shall be done in the dry?" (Lk 23 27-31).

      Golgotha being reached, the crucifixion at once took place under the care of a centurion and a quaternion of soldiers. With ruthless ft) Between blows, hands and feet were nailed to the Thieves the wood, then the cross was reared the (the perpendicular part may, as some

      Superscrip- think, have first been placed in posi tion the tion). As if to emphasize, from Pilate s Seamless point of view, the irony of the pro- Robe ceedings, two robbers were crucified with Jesus, on right and left, an unde signed fulfilment of prophecy (Isa 53 12). It was doubtless when being raised upon the cross that Jesus uttered the touching prayer His 1st word on the cross (its genuineness need not be questioned, though some ancient MSS omit) "Father, for give them; for they know not what they do" (Lk). Above His head, according to custom, was placed a tablet with His accusation, written in three lan guages, Heb, Gr and Lat. The chief priests took offence at the form, "This is the King of the Jews," and wished the words changed to, "He said, I am King," etc, but Pilate curtly dismissed their com plaint: "What I have written I have written" (Jn). Whether Jesus still wore the crown of thorns is doubtful. The garments of the Crucified were di vided among the soldiers, but for His inner garment, woven without seam, they cast lots (cf Ps 22 IS). A draught of wine mingled with an opiate (gall or myrrh), intended to dull the senses, was offered, but refused.

      The triumph of Christ s enemies now seemed com plete, and their glee was correspondingly unre strained. Their victim s helplessness c) The was to them a disproof of His claims.

      Mocking Railing, and wagging their heads, they the Peni- taunted Him, "If thou art the Son of tent Thief God, come down from the cross"; "He Jesus saved others; himself he cannot save." and His At first the robbers who were crucified Mother with Him (possibly only one) joined in

      this reproach, but ere long there was a change. The breast of one of the malefactors opened to the impression of the holiness and meek ness of Jesus, and faith took the place of scorn. He rebuked his neighbor for reviling One who had "done nothing amiss"; then, addressing Jesus, he prayed: "Jesus, remember me when thou comest in thy kingdom." The reply of Jesus His 2d word on the cross surpassed what even the penitent in these strange circumstances could have anticipated, "To day shalt thou be with me in Paradise" (Lk) . A not less touching incident followed perhaps pre ceded this rescue of a soul in its last extremity. Standing rtear the cross was a group of holy women, one of them the mother of Jesus Himself ( Jn 19 25 : Alary the mother of Jesus, Mary s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas some identify the two latter Mary Magdalene). Mary, whose anguish of spirit may be imagined, was supported by the disciple John. Beholding them His 3d word from the cross Jesus tenderly commended His mother to the care of John; to Mary, "Woman, behold, thy son"; to John, "Behold, thy mother." From that time Mary dwelt with John.

      Three hours passed, and at noon mocking was hushed in presence of a startling natural change. The sun s light failed (Lk), and a deep darkness, lasting for 3 hours, settled over the land. The dark ness was preternatural in its time and occasion, whatever natural agencies may have been con cerned in it. The earthquake a little later (Mt) would be due to the same causes. It was as if

      Nature veiled itself, and shuddered at the enormity

      of the crime which was being perpetrated. But the

      outer gloom was only the symbol of a yet

      d) The more awful darkness that, toward the Great close of this period, overspread the soul Darkness of Jesus Himself. Who shall fathom the the Cry of depths of agony that lay in that awful Desertion cry the 4th from the cross that burst

      loudly from the lips of Jesus, "Eli, Eli , lamd sabachtkani" "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me" (or, "Why didst thou for sake me?") words borrowed from Ps 22 1! It was before remarked that death was not a natural event to Jesus, but ever had in it to His mind its signifi cance as a judgment of God on sin. Here it was not simply death that He experienced in its most cruel form, but death bereft of the sensible comforts of the Father s presence. What explanation of that mystery can be found which does not take into account with Isa 53 (cf Jn 1 29) His character as Sin-Bearer, even as the unbroken trust with which in His loneliness He clings to God ("MyGod") may be felt to have in it the element of atonement ? On this, however, the present is not the place to dwell. The end was now very near. The victim of crucifixion sometimes lingered on in his agony for days; but the unexampled strain of

      e) Last body and mind which Jesus had under- Words and gone since the preceding day brought Death of an earlier termination to His suffer- Jesus ings. Light was returning, and with

      it peace; and in the consciousness that all things were now finished (Jn 19 2S), Jesus spoke again the oth word "I thirst" (Jn). A sponge filled with vinegar was raised on a reed to His lips, while some who had heard His earlier words ("Eli, Eli," etc), and thought He called for Elijah, said, "Let us see whether Elijah cometh to save him" (Mt). With a last effort, Jesus cried aloud 6th and memorable word "It is finished," then, in a final utterance the 7th commended His spirit to God: "Father into thy hands I commend my spirit" (Lk). Following on this word, bowing His head, He surrendered Himself to death. It will be seen that of the 7 words spoken from the cross, 3 are preserved by Lk alone (1st, 2d, 7th), 3 by Jn alone (3d, 5th, 6th), while the 4th cry ("Eli, Eli," etc) occurs only in the first 2 evangelists (Mt and Mk, however, speak of Jesus "crying with a loud voice" at the close).

      Jesus had died; the malefactors still lived. It was now 3 o clock in the afternoon, and it was de sired that the bodies should not remain /) The upon the cross on the approaching

      Spear- Sabbath. Permission was therefore

      Thrust obtained from Pilate for the soldiers Earthquake to break the legs of the crucified (cruri- and Rend- frayium), and so hasten death. When ing of the it was discovered that Jesus was Veil already dead, a soldier, possibly to

      make sun 1 , pierced His side with a spear, and John, who was present, notices as a spe cial fact that "there came out blood and water" (19 34). Whether this means, as Stroud and others have contended, that Jesus literally died of rupture of the heart, or what other physiological explana tion may be given of the phenomenon, to which the apostle elsewhere attaches a symbolical significance (1 Jn 5 6), need not be here discussed (see BLOOD AND WATEK). This, however, was not the only startling and symbolically significant fact attend ing the death of Jesus. A great darkness had pre luded the death; now, at the hour of His expiry, the veil of the temple (i.e. of the inner shrine) was rent from top to bottom surely a sign that the way into the holiest of all was now opened for mankind



      (He 9 8. 12) and a great earthquake shook the city and rent the rocks. Mt connects with this the statement that from the tombs thus opened "many bodies of the saints .... were raised; and coming; forth out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many" (27 52.53). There is nothing in itself improbable, though none of the other evangelists mention it, in such an early demonstration being given of what the Lord s death and resurrection meant for be lievers. In other ways the power of the cross was revealed. A dying robber had been won to penitence; now the centurion who commanded the soldiers was brought to the avowal, "Truly this was the Son of God" (Mt, Mk; in Lk, "a righteous man"). The mood of the crowd, too, was changed since the morning; they "returned, smiting their breasts" (Lk 23 48). "Afar off," speechless with sorrow, stood the women who had followed Jesus from Galilee, with other friends and disciples. The evangelists name Mary Magda lene, Mary, the mother of James and Joses, Salome (Mk), and Joanna, the wife of Chuza, Herod s steward (Lk).

      Jesus had conquered hearts on His cross; now His death reveals friends from the wealthier classes,

      hitherto kept back by fear (Jn 19 2. The 38.39), who charge themselves with

      Burial (Mt His honorable burial. One was Joseph 27:57-66; of Arimathaea, a just man, "looking cf 28: 11- for the kingdom of God," of whom the 15; Mk 15: interesting fact is recorded that, 42-47; Lk though a member of the Sanhedrin, 23:50-56; "he had not consented to their coun- Jn 19: sel and deed" (Lk); the other was

      38^42) Nicodemus, he who came to Jesus by

      night (Jn 3 1.2; 19 39), mentioned again only in Jn 7 50-52, where, also as a member of the Sanhedrin, he puts in a word for Jesus.

      Joseph of Arimathaea takes the lead. "Having dared," as Mk says (15 43, Gr), he begged the body

      of Jesus from Pilate, and having ob- <i) The tained it, bought linen cloth wherein

      New Tomb to wrap it, and reverently buried it

      in a new rock-tomb of his own (Mt, Mk), "where never man had yet lain" (Lk). Jn furnishes the further particulars that the tomb was in a "garden," near where Jesus was crucified (19 41.42). He tells also of the munificence of Nico demus, who brought as much as 100 pounds (about 75 Ibs. avoir.) of spices "a mixture of myrrh and aloes" (ver 39), with which to enwrap the body of Jesus. This is not to be thought of as an "anoint ing": rather, the spices formed a powder strewn between the folds of the linen bandages (cf Lut- hardt, Com in. on Jn 19 40). The body, thus pre pared, was then placed in the tomb, and a great stone rolled to the entrance. The burial was of necessity a very hurried one, which the holy women who witnessed it Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses are specially mentioned (Mt, Mk) purposed to supplement by an anointing w r hen the Sabbath was past (cf Lk 23 56).

      Though Jesus was dead, the chief priests and Pharisees were far from easy in their minds about

      Him. Mysterious words of His had b) The been quoted about His building of the

      Guard of temple in three days; possibly Judas Soldiers had told something about His sayings (Mt) regarding His death and rising again

      on the 3d day; in any case, His body was in the hands of His disciples, and they might remove it, and create the persuasion that He had risen. With this plea they went to Pilate, and asked from him a watch of soldiers to guard the tomb. To make assurance doubly sure, they sealed the tomb with the official seal. The result of their efforts

      was only, under Providence, to provide new evi dence of the reality of the resurrection !

      The uncertainty attaching to the site of Golgotha attaches also to the site of Joseph s rock-tomb. Opinion is about equally divided in favor of, and against, the traditional site, where the Church of the Holy Sepulchre now stands. A principal ground of uncertainty is whether that site originally lay within or without the second wall of the city (cf Stanley, Sinai and Pal, 457 ff ; G. A. Smith, Jerus, II, 576; a good conspectus of the different opinions, with the authorities, is given in Andrews, Part VII).


      The resurrection of Jesus, with its completion in the ascension, setting the seal of the Father s accept ance on His finished work on earth, The Resur- and marking the decisive change from rection a His state of humiliation to that of Funda- exaltation, may be called in a true

      mental Fact sense the corner stone of Christianity (cf 1 Cor 15 14.17). It was on the preaching of Christ crucified and risen that the Christian church was founded (e.g. Acts 2 32-36; 1 Cor 15 3.4). Professor Harnack would dis tinguish between "the Easter faith" (that Jesus lives with God) and "the Easter message," but the church never had any Easter faith apart from the Easter message. The subversion of the fact of the resurrection is therefore a first task to which unbe lief addresses itself. The modern spirit rules it out a priori as miraculous. The historical fact is de nied, and innumerable theories (imposture, theories of swoon, of hallucination, mythical theories, spirit ualistic theories, etc) are invented to explain the belief. None of these theories can stand calm examination (see the writer s work, The Resurrec tion of Jesus ). The objections are but small dust of the balance compared with the strength of the evidence for the fact. From the standpoint of faith, the resurrection of Jesus is the most credible of events. If Jesus was indeed such an One as the gospel history declares Him to be, it was impossible that death should hold Him (Acts 2 24). The resurrection, in turn, confirms His claim to be the Son of God (Rom 1 4).

      With the narratives of the resurrection are here included, as inseparably connected, those of the appearances of Jesus in Jerus and 1. The Galilee. The accounts will show that,

      Resurrec- while the body of Jesus was a true body, tion (Mt identical with that which suffered on 28; Mk 16; the cross (it could be seen, touched, Lk 24; Jn handled), it exhibited attributes which 20, 21; 1 showed that Jesus had entered, even Cor 15:3-8) bodily, on a new phase of existence, in which some at least of the ordinary limitations of body were transcended. Its condi tion in the interval between the resurrection and the ascension was an intermediate one no longer simply natural, yet not fully entered into the state of glorification. "I am not yet ascended .... 1 ascend" (Jn 20 17); in these two parts of the one saying the mystery of the resurrection body is comprised.

      The main facts in the resurrection narratives stand out clearly. "According to all the Gospels," the arch-skeptic Strauss concedes, a) The "Jesus, after having been buried on the

      Easter Friday evening, and lain during the

      Morning Sabbath in the grave, came out of it the Open restored to life at daybreak on Sun- Tomb day" (New Life of Jesus, I, 397, ET). Discrepancies are alleged in detail as to the time, number, and names of the women, num ber of angels, etc; but most of these vanish on careful examination. The Synoptics group their material, while Jn gives a more detailed account of particular events.



      (1) The angel and the keepers. No eye beheld the actual resurrection, which took place in the early morning, while it was still dark. Alt records that there was "a great earthquake," and tells of the descent of an angel of the Lord, who rolled away the stone, and sat upon it. Before his dazzling aspect the keepers became as dead men, and after ward fled. The chief priests bribed them to conceal the facts, and say the body had been stolen (Mt 28 2-4.11-1")).

      (2) Visit of the women. The first intimation of the resurrection to the disciples was the discovery of the empty tomb by the women who had come at early dawn (Mt 28 1; Mk 16 2; Lk 24 1; Jn 20 1) with spices, prepared to anoint the body of Jesus (Mk 16 1; cf Lk 23 56). Apparently ig norant of the guard, the women were concerned on their way as to who should roll away the stone from the door of the tomb (Mk 16 3), and were much surprised to find the stone, rolled away, and the tomb open. There is no need for supposing that the women mentioned all came together. It is much more probable that they came in different groups or companies perhaps Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, or these with Salome, first (Mt, Mk; cf the "we" of Jn 20 2); then Joanna and other members of the Galilean band (Lk). (On the appearance of Jesus to Mary, see below.)

      (3) The angelic message. As the women stood, perplexed and affrighted, at the tomb, they received a vision of angels (Mt and Mk speak only of one angel; Lk and Jn mention two; all allude to the dazzling brightness), who announced to them that Jesus had risen ("He is not here; for he is risen; . . . . come, see the place where the Lord lay"), ami bade them tell His disciples that He went before them to Galilee, where they should see Him (Mt, Mk; Lk, who does not record the Galilean appear ances, omits this part, and recalls the words spoken by Jesus in Galilee, concerning His death and re surrection; cf Mt 16 21). The women departed with trembling and astonishment" (Mk). yet "with great joy" (Mt). Here the original Mk breaks off (ver 8), the remaining vs being an ap pendix. But it is granted that Mk must originally have contained an account of the report to the dis ciples, and of an appearance of Jesus in Galilee.

      The narrative in Jn enlarges in important respects those of the Synoptics. From it we learn that Mary

      Magdalene (no companion is named, b) Visit of but one at least is implied in the we" Peter and of ver 2), concluding from the empty John tomb that the body of Jesus had been

      Appearance removed, at once ran to carry the news to Mary to Peter and John ("They have taken (Jn; cf Mk away the Lord out of the tomb, and 16:9.10; we know not where they have laid Lk 24: him"). These apostles lost no time

      12.24) in hastening to the spot. John, who

      arrived first, stooping down, saw the linen cloths lying, while Peter, entering, beheld also the napkin for the head rolled up in a place by itself. After John likewise had entered ("He saw, and be lieved"), they returned to their home. Meanwhile Mary had come back disconsolate to the tomb, where, looking in, she, like the other women, had a vision of two angels. It was then that Jesus ad dressed her, "Why weepest thou?" At first she thought it was the gardener, but on Jesus tenderly naming her, "Mary," she recognized who it was, and, with the exclamation, "Rabboni" ("Teacher"), would have clasped Him, but He forbade: "Touch me not," etc (ver 17, m "Take not hold on me"), i.e. "Do not wait, but hasten to tell my disciples that I am risen, and ascend to my Father" (the ascension-life had already begun, altering earlier relations).

      Report to the disciples incredulity. The appear ance of Jesus to the other women (Mt 28 9.10) is referred to below. It is probable that, on the way back, Mary Magdalene rejoined her sisters, and that the errand to the disciples or such of them as could be found was undertaken together. Their report was received with incredulity (Lk 24 11; cf Mk 16 11). The visit of Peter referred to in Lk 24 12 is doubtless that recorded more precisely in Jn.

      Ten appearances of Jesus altogether after His resurrection are recorded, or are referred to; of

      these five were on the day of resurrec- c) Other tion. They are the following: Easter-Day (1) The first is the appearance to Appear- Mary Magdalene above described. ances (2) The second is an appearance to

      (Emmaus, the women as they returned from the Jerusalem) tomb, recorded in Mt 28 9.10. Jesus

      met them, saying, "All hail," and as they took hold of His feet and worshipped Him, He renewed the commission they had received for the disciples. Some regard this as only a general ization of the appearance to Mary Magdalene, but it seems distinct.

      (3) An appearance to Peter, attested by both Lk (24 34) and Paul (1 Cor 15 5). This must have been early in the day, probably soon after Peter s visit to the tomb. No particulars are given of this interview, so marked an act of grace of the risen Lord to His repentant apostle. The news of it occasioned much excitement among the disciples (Lk 24 34).

      (4) The fourth was an appearance to two disci ples on their way from Jerus to Emmaus a village about two hours distant (Lk 24 12-35; Mk 16 12.13). They were conversing on the sad events of the last few days, and on the strange tidings of the women s vision of angels, when Jesus overtook them, and entered into conversation with them. At first they did not recognize Him a token, as in Mary s case, of change in His appearance though their hearts burned within them as He opened to them the Scriptures about Christ s sufferings and glory. As the day was closing, Jesus abode with them to the evening meal; then, as He blessed and brake the bread, "Their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight" (Lk 24 30.31). They hastily rose, and returned to the company of disciples at Jerus. According to Mk 16 13, their testimony, like that of the women, was not at first believed.

      (5) The fifth appearance was that to "the eleven," with others, in the evening an appearance recorded by Luke (24 36 ff), and John (20 19-23), and al luded to by Paul (1 Cor 15 5). The disciples from Emmaus had just come in, and found the company thrilling with excitement at the news that the Lord had appeared to Simon (Lk). The doors were closed for fear of the Jews, when suddenly Jesus appeared in their midst with the salutation, "Peace be unto you" (Lk, Jn; doubt is unnecessarily cast on Lk 24 36.40, by their absence from some West ern texts). The disciples were affrighted; they thought they had seen a spirit (Lk); "disbelieved for joy" (Lk 24 41). To remove their fears, Jesus showed them His hands and His feet (in Jn, His side), and ate before them (Lk). He then breathed on them, saying, "Receive ye the Holy Spirit," and renewed the commission formerly given to remit and retain sins (Jn; cf Mt 18 17.18). The breath ing was anticipative of the later affusion of the Spirit at Pentecost (cf Jn 7 39; Acts 2); the authority delegated depends for its validity on the possession of that Spirit, and its exercise according to the mind of Christ (cf e.g. 1 Cor 5 3). The incident strikingly illustrates at once the reality of



      Christ s risen body, and the changed conditions under which that liody now existed.

      Fight days after this first appearance i.e. the next Sunday evening a second appearance of Jesus to the apostles took place in the same (I) The chamber and under like conditions

      Second ("the doors being shut"). The pecul-

      Appearance iar feature of this second meeting was to the the removal of the doubt of Thomas

      Eleven - who, it is related, had not been present the Doubt on the former occasion. Thomas, of Thomas devoted (cf Jn 11 16), but of naturally questioning temperament (14 5), re fused to believe on the mere report of others that the Lord had risen, and demanded indubitable sensible evidence for himself. Jesus, at the second appearance, after salutation as before, graciously gave the doubting apostle the evidence lie asked: "Reach hither thy finger, and see my hands," etc (Jn 20 27). though, as the event proved, the sign was not needed. The faith and love of the erst while doubter leaped forth at once in adoring con fession: "My Lord and my God." Jt was well; but Jesus reminded him that, the 1 highest faith is not that which waits on the evidence of sense ("Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed," ver 29J.

      The scene now shifts for the time to CJalilec. Jesus had appointed to meet with His disciples in (ialilee (Alt 26 32; Mk 16 7; cf c) The Mk 14 2S). Prior, however, to this

      Galilean meeting that recorded in Alt 28 16- Appear- 20, probably to be identified with the ances appearance "to above five hundred

      brethren at once," mentioned by Paul (1 Cor 15 6,1 there is another appearance of Jesus to seven disciples at the Lake of (ialilee, of which the story is preserved in Jn 21 l-2. 5.

      (1) At (lie <S m of Tiberius the draught of fishes Peter ft restoration. The chapter which narrates this appearance of Jesus at the Lake of (ialilee ("Sea of Tiberias") is a supplement to the Gospel, but is so evidently Johannine in character that it may safely be accepted as from the pen of the beloved djsciple (thus Lightfoot, Meyer, Godet, Alford, etc). The appearance itself is described as the third to the disciples (ver 14), i.e. the third to the apostles collectively, and in Jn s record seven disciples are stated to have been present, of whom five arc named Peter, Thomas, Nathanael (probably to be identified with Bartholomew), and the sons of Zebedec, James and John. The disciples had spent the night in fishing without, result. In the morning Jesus yet unrecognized appeared on the beach, and bade them cast down their net on the right side of the boat. The draught of fishes which they took revealed to John the presence of the Master. "It is the Lord," he said to Peter, who at once flung himself into the lake to go to Jesus. On landing, the disciples found a fire of coals, with fish placed on it, and bread; and Jesus Himself, after more fish had been brought, distributed the food, and, it seems implied, Himself shared in the meal. Still a certain awe another indication of a mvsterious change in Christ s appearance rest rained" the dis ciples from asking openly, "Who art thou?" (ver 12). It was not long, however ("when they had broken their fast"), before Jesus sufficiently dis closed Himself in the touching episode of the res toration of Peter (the three-fold question, "Lovest thou me?" answering to the three-fold denial, met by Peter s heartfelt, "Yea, Lord; thou knowest that. I love thce," with the words of reinstatement, "Feed my lambs," "Feed my sheep"). In another way, Jesus foretold that Peter would have the oppor tunity of taking back his denial in the death by which he should glorify God (vs 18.19; tradition

      says he was crucified head-downward). Curious inquiries were set, aside, and attention recalled to duty, "Follow thou me" (ver 22j.

      (2) On. the. mountain the (Ireat Commission bajilisnt. Though only the eleven apostles are named in Matthew s account (28 16), the fact of an appointment for a definite time and place ("the mountain"), and the terms in which the mes sage was given to the "disciples," suggests a collect ive gathering such as is implied in Paul s "above five hundred brethren at once" (1 Cor 16 6). The company being assembled, Jesus appeared; still, at first, with that element of mystery in His appear ance, which led some to doubt (ver 17). Such doubt would speedily vanish when the Lord, announcing Himself as clothed with all authority in heaven and earth, gave to the apostles the supreme commission to "make disciples of all the nations" (vs 18-20; cf Mk 16 If), "Go ye into all the world," etc). Discipleship was to be shown by baptism "into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (one name, yet threefold), and was to be followed by instruction in Christ s commands. Be hind the commission, world-wide in its scope, and binding on every age, stands the word of never- failing encouragement, "Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." Doubts of the genuineness of these august utterances go as a rule with doubt of the resurrection itself.

      It will be noticed that the Lord s Supper and Baptism are the only sacraments instituted by Jesus in His church.

      Paul records, as subsequent to the above, an ap pearance; of Jesus to James, known as "the Lord s brother" (1 Cor 15 7; cf Gal 1 19). /) Appear- No particulars are given of this appear ance to ance, which may have occurred either James in Galilee or Jerus. James, so far as known, was not a believer in Jesus before the crucifixion (cf Jn 7 3); after the ascen sion he and the other brethren of Jesus are found in the company of the disciples (Acts 1 14), and he became afterward a chief "pillar" of the church at Jerus (Gal 1 19; 2 9). This appearance may have marked the turning-point.

      The final appearance of Jesus to the apostles (1 Cor 15 7) is that which Luke in the closing verses of his Gospel (44-53), and in fir) The Acts 1 3-12, brings into direct rela-

      Last tion with the ascension. In the Gos-

      Meeting pel Luke proceeds without a break from the first appearance of Jesus to "the eleven" to His last words about "the promise of my Father"; but Acts 1 shows that a period of 40 days really elapsed during which Jesus repeatedly "appeared" to those whom lie had chosen. This last meeting of Jesus with His apostles was mainly occupied with the Lord s exposition of the pro phetic Scriptures (Lk 24 44-46), with renewed commands to preach repentance and remission of sins in His name, "beginning from Jerus" (vs 47. 48; cf Acts 1 8), and with the injunction to tarry in Jerus till the Spirit should be given (ver 49; cf Acts 1 4.5). Then He led them forth to Olivet, "over against Bethany," and, while blessing them, "was carried up into heaven" (vs50.51; cf Acts 1 10.12). Jesus had declared, "I ascend unto my Father" (Jn 20 17), and Luke in Acts 1 narrates the cir cumstances of that departure. Jesus 2. The might simply have "vanished" from

      Ascension the sight of His disciples, as on pre- (Lk 24:50- vious occasions, but it was His will to 53; Acts 1: leave them in a way which would vis- 6 14; cf Mk ibly mark the final close of His asso- 16:19) ciation with them. They are found,

      as in the Gospel, "assembled" with Him at Jerus, where His final instructions are given.



      Then the scene insensibly changes to Olivet, where the ascension is located (Acts 112). The disciples inquire regarding the restoration of the kingdom to Israel (even yet their minds are held in these tem poral conceptions), but Jesus tells them that it is not for them to know times and seasons, which the Father had set within His own authority (ver 7). Far more important was it for them to know that within the next days they should receive power from the Holy Spirit to be witnesses for Him to the utter most part of the earth (ver 8). Even as He spake, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight (ver 9). Then, as the apostles stood gazing upward, two heavenly messengers appeared, who comforted them with the assurance that in like manner as they had seen Jesus ascend into heaven, so also would He come again. For that return the church still prays and waits (cf Rev 22 20). See, further, ASCENSION.

      Retracing their steps to Jerus, the apostles joined the larger company of disciples in the "upper room" where their meetings seem to have been habitually held, and there, with one accord, to the number of about 120 (Acts 1 15), they all continued sted- fastly in prayer till the promise of the Father" (Lk 24 49; Acts 1 4) was, at Pentecost, bestowed upon them.


      The earthly life of Jesus is finished. With His res urrection and ascension a new age begins. Yet the work of Christ continues. As Luke

      1. After the expressively phrases it, in Acts 1 1.2, Ascension the Gospels are but the records of "all

      that Jesus bc//(in both to do and to teach, until the day in which he was received up." It is beyond the scope of this art. to trace the suc ceeding developments of Christ s activity through His church and by His Spirit; in order, however, to bring the subject to a proper close, it is necessary to glance, even if briefly, at the light thrown back by the Spirit s teachings, after the ascension, on the significance of the earthly life itself, and at the en largement of the apostles conceptions about Christ, consequent on this, as seen in the Epistles and the Apocalypse.

      It was the promise of Jesus that, after His de parture, the Spirit would be given to His disciples,

      to teach them all things, and bring to

      2. Revela- their remembrance all that He had tion through said to them (Jn 14 26). It was not the Spirit a new revelation they were to receive,

      but illumination and guidance of their minds into the meaning of what they had received already (Jn 16 13-15). This promise of the Spirit was fulfilled at Pentecost (Acts 2). Only a few personal manifestations of Jesus (Acts 7 55.5(5; 22 17. IS; 23 11) are recorded after that event the two chief being the appearance to Paul on the way to Damascus (1 Cor 15 8; cf Acts 9 3 ff, etc), and the appearance in vision to John in Patmos (Rev 1 10 ff). The rest was internal revelation (cf Gal 1 12.16; Eph 1 17; 3 3-5). The immense advance in enlargement and clearness of view aided, no doubt, by Christ s parting instructions (Lk 24 44- 4S; Acts 1 2) is already apparent in Peter s discourses at Pentecost ; but it is not to be supposed that much room was not left for after-growth in knowledge, and deepened insight into the connec tion of truths. Peter, e.g., had to be instructed as to the admission of the Gentiles (Acts 10 11); the apostles had much gradually to learn as to the relations of the law (cf Acts 15; 21 20 ff; Gal 2, etc); Paul received revelations vastly widen ing the doctrinal horizon; both John and Paul show progressive apprehension in the truth about Christ.

      It is therefore a question of much interest how the

      apostolic conceptions thus gained stand related to

      the picture of Jesus we have been

      3. Gospels studying in the Gospels. Itisthecon- and Epistles tention of the so-called "historical"

      (anti-supernaturalistic) school of the day that the two pictures do not correspond. The transcendental Christ of Paul and John has little in common, it is affirmed, with the Man of Nazareth of the Synoptic Gospels. Theories of the "origins of Christianity" are concocted proceeding on this assumption (cf Pfieiderer, Weizsacker, Bousset, Wernle, etc). Such speculations ignore the first conditions of the problem in not accepting the self- testimony of Jesus as to who He was, and the ends of His mission into the world. When Jesus is taken at His own valuation, and the great fact of His resurrection is admitted, the alleged contradictions between the "Jesws of history" and the "Christ of faith" largely disappear.

      It is forgotten how great a change in the center of

      gravity in the conception of Christ s person and

      work was necessarily involved in the

      4. Fact of facts of Christ s death, resurrection and Christ s exaltation to the right hand of power. Lordship The life is not ignored far from it.

      Its influence breathes in every page, e.g. of Paul s epistles. But the weakness, the limi tations, the self-suppression what Paul in Phil 2 7 calls the "emptying" of that earthly life have now been left behind; the rejected and crucified One has now been vindicated, exalted, has entered into His glory. This is the burden of Peter s first ad dress at Pentecost: "God hath made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom ye crucified" (Acts 2 36). Could anything look quite the same after 1 hat ? The change is seen in the growing substitu tion of the name "Christ" for "Jesus" (see at be ginning of art.), and in the habitual speaking of Jesus as "Lord."

      With belief in the lordship of Jesus went neces sarily an enlarged conception of the significance of

      His person. The elements were all

      5. Signifi- there in what the disciples had seen cance of and known of Jesus while on earth Christ s (Jn 1 14; 1 Jn 1 1-3), but His ex- Person altation not only threw back light upon

      His claims while on earth confirmed, interpreted, completed them but likewise showed the ultimate ground of these claims in the full Di vine dignity of His person, lie who was raised to the throne of Divine dominion; who was worshipped with honors due to God only; who was joined, with Father and with Holy Spirit as, coordinately, the source of grace and blessing, must in the fullest sense be Divine. There is not such a thing as honorary Godhead. In this is already contained in substance everything taught about Jesus in the epistles: His preexistence (the Lord s own words had suggested this, Jn 8 58; 17 5, etc), His share in Divine attri butes (eternity, etc), in Divine works (creation, etc, 1 Cor 8 6; Col 1 16.17; He 1 2; Rev 1 8; 3 14, etc), in Divine worship (Phil 2 9-11; Rev 5 11.12, etc), in Divine names and titles (He 1 8, etc). It is an extension of the same conception when Jesus is represented as the end of creation the "Head" in whom all things are finally to be summed up (Eph 1 10; cf He 2 6-9). These high views of the per son of Christ in the Epistles are everywhere assumed to be the possession of the readers.

      Jesus had furnished His disciples with the means of understanding His death as a necessity of His Messianic vocation, endured for the salvation of the world; but it was the resurrection and exalta tion which shed light on the utmost meaning of this also. Jesus died, but it was for sins. He was a propitiation for the sin of the world (Rom 3 25;

      Jesus Christ, Arrest, Trial



      1 ,Tn 2 J; 4 10). He was made sin for us (2 Cor 6 21). The strain of Isa 53 runs through tin- NT teaching on this theme (cf 1 l < t 6. Signifi- 1 lit; 2 22-25, etc). Jesus own word cance of the "ransom" is reproduced by Paul (1 Tim Cross and 26). The song of the redeemed is, Resurrec- "Thou didst purchase unto God with tion thy blood men of every tribe," etc

      (Rev 5 .)). Is it wonderful, in view of this, that in the apostolic writings not in Paul only, but in Pet, in .In, in He, and Rev, equally I he cross should assume the decisive im portance it does? Paul only works out more fully in relation to the law and the sinner s justification a truth shared by all. He himself declares it to be the common doctrine of the churches (1 Cor 15 3.4).

      The newer tendency is to read an apocalyptic character into nearly all the teaching of Jesus (cf Schweitzer, Quest of the Historical 1. Hope of Jesus). This is an exaggeration, but the Advent that Jesus taught. His disciples to look for His coming again, and connected with that coming the perfection of His kingdom, is plain to every reader of the Gospels. It will not be denied that the apostolic church retained this fea ture of the teaching of Jesus. In accordance with the promise in Acts 111, it looked for the glorious reappearing of its Lord. The Epistles are full of this hope. Even Jn gives it prominence (1 Jn 2 28; 3 2). In looking for the parousia as something immediately at hand, the early believers went even beyond what had been revealed, and Paul had to rebuke harmful tendencies in this direction (2 Thess 2). The In > f>e, might be cherished that the coming would not long be delayed, but in face of the express declarations of Jesus that no one, not the angels, not even the- Son, knew of that, day and hour (Alt 24 H6; Mk 13 32), and that, the Father had set these things in His own authority (Acts 1 7; cf also such intimations as in Mt 13 30; 24 14; 25 11); 28 P.); Lk 19 11, etc), none could affirm this with certainty. Time has proved proved it even in the apostolic age (2 Pet 3 3.4) that the Ad vent was not so near as many thought. In part, perhaps, the church itself may be to blame for the delay. Still to faith the- Advent remains the great fixed event of the future, the event which overshadows all others in that sense is ever neai the polestar of the church s confidence that righteousness shall triumph, the dead shall be raised, sin shall be judged and the kingdom of God shall come.

      LiTEi<ATrKE.--The lit. on the life and teaching of Jesus is so voluminous, and represents such diverse! standpoints, that it, would be unprofitable to furnish an extended catalogue of it. It may be seen prefixed to any of the larger books. On the skeptical and ration alistic side the best, account of the lit. will be found in Schweitzer s book, From Kcimnrus to Wrede (KT, Quest of the instorieal. Jesus). Of modern believing works may be specially named those of Lange, Weiss, Ellicott, Kders- heim, Farrar, 1). Smith. Dr. Sanday s book. The Life of Christ in Recent Research, surveys a large part of the field, and is preparatory to an extended Life, from Dr. Sanday s own pen. Jlis art. in IIDB has justly attracted much at ten I ion. Schiirer s /lint of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ (KT, 5 vols; a new German cd has been published) is the best authority on the external conditions. The works on XT Bit), theology ( Keuss, Weiss, Schmid, Stevens, etc) deal with the teaching of Jesus; see also Wendt. The Teaching of Jesus (KT). Works and arts, on the Chronology, on Harmony of the Gospels, on geog raphy and topography (cf esp. Stanley, G. A. Smith) are legion. A good, comprehensive book on these topics is Andrews. Life /if Our Lord (rev. ed). The present writer has published works on The Virt/in Hirth of Christ and The Resurrection of Jesus. On the relations of gospel and epistle, sec .1. Denney, Jesus ami the (Itisfiel. See also the various arts, in this Ktic, on GOSPELS; THE PKHSON OF C HIUST; Ivrnics OK Jivsrs; Vine, IN BIKTH; .1 ESCS ( n HIST, AHHKST AND TKIAI, OK; R KKKCTION ; ASCENSION; PHAKISEEW; SADDUCEES; HEROD; JERUSALEM, etc.



      1. Jewish and Roman Law

      2. Difficulties of the Subject

      3. Illustrations of Difficulties I. THE AHHEST

      1. Preparatory Steps

      2. The Arrest in the Garden . 5. Taken to the City


      1. The Jewish Law

      2. The Mishna

      3. Criminal Trials

      4. The Trial of Jesus

      5. The Preliminary Examination (i. The Night Trial

      7. False Witnesses

      s. A Browbeating Judge

      9. The Morning Session

      10. Powers of the Sanhedrin

      11. Condemnation for Blasphemy

      12. Summary


      1. Taken before Pilate

      2. Roman Law and Procedure

      3. Full Trial Not Desired

      4. Final Accusation

      5. Examination, Defence and Acquittal (5. Fresh Accusations

      7. Reference to Herod

      S. Jesus or Bar abbas

      9. Behold the Man 1

      10. Pilate Succumbs to Threats

      11. Pilate Washes His Hands

      12. The Sentence

      13. Review

      This subject is of special interest, not only on account of its inherent importance, but more par ticularly on account of its immediately preceding, and leading directly up to what is the greatest tragedy in human history, the crucifixion of Our Lord. It has also the added interest of being the only proceeding on record in which the two great legal systems of antiquity, the Jewish and the Roman, which have most largely influenced modern legislation and jurisprudence, each played a most important part.

      The coexistence of these two systems in Judaea, and their joint action in bringing about the tremendous results in question, were made possible by the 1 Jewish generous policy pursued by Rome in allow ing conquered na^ns to retain their an- and Koman C j un t laws, institutions and usages, in so



      ad m

      far as they were compatible with Rom sovereignty and supremacy. Not only so.

      ait in a large degree, they permitted these laws to be dministered by the officials of the subject peoples. This

      were by no means rare.

      Of the matters considered in this article, the arrest of Jesus and the proceedings before Annas, Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin took place professedly under Jewish law; the proceedings before Pilate and the reference to Herod, under Rom law.

      It is very difficult to construct from the materials in the four Gospels a satisfactory continuous record

      of the arrest, and of what, may be 2. Diffi- called the twofold trial of Jesus. The culties of Gospels were written from different the Subject viewpoints, and for different purposes,

      each of the writers selecting such par ticulars as seemed to him to be of special importance for the particular object he had in view. Their reports are all very brief, and the proper chrono logical order of the various events recorded in different Gospels must, in many cases, be largely a matter of conjecture. The difficulty is increased by the great irregularities and the tumultuous character of the proceedings; by our imperfect knowledge of the topography of Jerus at this time (29 AD) ; also by the fact that the reports are given mainly in popular and not in technical language; and when the latter form is used, the technical terms have had to be tr d into Gr, either from the Heb or from the Lat.



      Jesus Christ, Arrest, Trial

      For instance, opinions arc divided as to where Pilate resided when in Jerus, whether in the magnificent palace built by Herod the Great, or in the castle 3. Illustra- f Antonia; as to where was the palace tions of occupied by Herod Antipas during the Pass-

      TV*R 1 over; whether Annas and Caiaphas occu- Uirnculties pied different portions of the same palace, or whether they lived in adjoining or different residences ; whether the preliminary examination of Jesus, recorded by John, was before Annas or Caiaphas, and as to other similar matters. It is very satisfactory, however, to know that, although it is sometimes difficult to decide exactly as to the best way of harmonizing the different accounts, yet there is nothing irreconcilable or contradictory in them, and that there is no material point in the history of the very important proceedings falling within the scope of this article which is seriously affected by any of these debatable matters.

      For a clear historical statement of the events of the concluding day in the life of Our Lord before His cruci fixion, see the article on JESUS CHRIST. The present article will endeavor to consider the matters relating to His arrest and trial from a legal and constitutional point of view.

      /. The Arrest. During (he hist year of the min istry of Jesus, the hostility of the Jews to Him had greatly increased, and some six months before they finally succeeded in accomplishing their purpose, they had definitely resolved to make away with Him. At the Feast of Tabernacles they sent officers (the temple-guards) to take Him while He was teaching in the temple (Jn 7 32) ; but these, after listening to His words, returned without having made the attempt, giving as a reason that "never man so spake" (ver 46).

      After His raising of Lazarus, their determination to kill Him was greatly intensified. A special meet ing of the council was held to consider the matter. There Caiaphas, the high priest, strongly advocated such a step on national grounds, and on the ground of expediency, quoting in support of his advice, in a cold-blooded and cynical manner, the Jewish adage that it was expedient that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. Their plans to this end were frustrated, for the time being, by Jesus withdrawing Himself to the border of the wilderness, where He remained with His disciples (Jn 11 47-54).

      On His return to Bethany and Jerus, six days before the Passover, they were deterred from carry ing out their design on account of His manifest popularity with the people, as evidenced by His triumphal entry into Jerus on the first day of the Passover week (Palm Sunday), and by the crowds who thronged around Him, and listened to His teachings in the temple, and who enjoyed the dis comfiture of the Pharisees, Sadducees and Hero- dians, as they successively sought to entangle Him in His talk.

      Two days before the Passover, at a council meet ing held in the palace of Caiaphas, they planned to accomplish their purpose by subtlety, but "not during the feasl , lest a tumult arise among the people" (Alt 26 3-5; Mk 14 1.2). While they were in this state of perplexity, to their great relief Judas came to them and agreed to betray his Mast erf or money (Mt 26 14-16; Mk 14 10.11).

      This time they determined not to rely solely upon their own temple-guards or officers to execute their warrant or order of arrest, fearing that 1. Prepara- these officials, being Jews, might again tory Steps be fascinated by the strange influence which Jesus exercised over His country men, or that His followers might offer resistance. They therefore applied to Pilate, the Rom proc urator (governor), for the assistance of a band of Rom soldiers. He granted them a cohort (Gr speirn, 400 to 600 men) from the legion then quar tered in the castle; of Antonia, which adjoined and overlooked the temple-area. The final arrange ments as to these would probably be completed while Judas was at the supper room. It has been

      suggested that the whole cohort would not go, but only a selection from them. However, it is said that Judas "received the band [cohort] of soldiers" (Jn 18 3), and that they were under the command of a chief captain (Gichiliarch, Lat tribune, ver 12). If there had not been more than 100 soldiers, they would not have been under the command of a captain, but the chief officer would have been a centurion. The amazing popularity of Jesus, as shown by His triumphal entry into the city, may have led the authorities to make such ample provi sion against any possible attempt at rescue.

      The Garden of Gethsemane, in which Judas knew that Jesus would be found that night, was well known to him (Jn 18 2); and he also knew the time he would be likely to find his Master there. Thither at the proper hour he led the band of sol diers, the temple officers and others, and also some of the chief priests and elders themselves; the whole being described as "a great multitude with swords and staves" (Mt 26 47). Although the Easter full moon would be shining brightly, they also carried "lanterns and torches" (Jn 18 3), in order to make certain that Jesus should not escape or fail to be recognized in the deep shade of the olive trees in the garden.

      On their arrival at the garden, Jesus came forward

      to meet them, and the traitor Judas gave them the

      appointed signal by kissing Him. As

      2. The the order or warrant was a Jewish one, Arrest in the temple officers would probably be the Garden in front, the soldiers supporting them

      as reserves. On Jesus announcing to the leaders that He was the one they sought , what the chief priests had feared actually oc curred. There was something in the words or bearing of Jesus which awed the temple officers; they were panic-stricken, went backward, and fell to the ground. On their rallying, the impetuous Peter drew his sword, and cut off the ear of one of them, Malchus, the servant of the high priest (Jn 18 6-10).

      On this evidence of resistance the Rom captain and soldiers came forward, and with the assistance of the Jewish officers bound Jesus. Under the Jewish law this was not lawful before condemnation, save in exceptional cases where resistance was either offered or apprehended.

      Even in this trying hour the concern of Jesus was more for others than for Himself, as witness His miracle in healing the ear of Malchus, and His request that His disciples might be allowed their liberty (Jn 18 8). Notwithstanding His efforts, His followers were panic-stricken, probably on account of the vigorous action of the officers and soldiers after the assault by Peter, "and they all left him and fled" (Mk 14 50).

      It is worthy of note that Jesus had no word of blame or censure for the Rorn officers or soldiers who w r cre only doing their sworn duty in supporting the civil authorities; but His pungent words of reproach for not having attempted His arrest while; He was teaching openly in the temple were reserved for "the chief priests, and captains of the temple, and elders" (Lk 22 52), who had shown their in ordinate ze>al and hostility by taking the unusual, and for those who we re; to sit as judges on the case, the improper ami illegal course of accom panying the officers, and themselves taking part in the arrest.

      The whole body departed w r ith their prisone-r for

      the city. From the; first three; Gospels one might

      infe-r that they went directly to the pal-

      3. Taken to ae:e of Caiaphas, the; high priest, the City In the Fourth Gospel, however, we

      are told that they took him first to Annas (Jn 18 13).

      Jesus Christ, Arrest, Trial



      Why they did so we are not informed, (he only state- ment made being that lie was the father-in-law of Caia phas (ver i:<>. He had been (lie high priest from 7 AD to I ) A I), when he was deposed by Valerius Gratus, the Horn procurator. He was still the most influential member of (he Satihedrin. and. being of an aggressive disposition, it may be that it was lie who had given in structions as to t lie arrest . and that they thought it their duty to report tir.-t to him.

      Annas, however, sent Jesus bound to Cuiaplms (ver 21). Having delivered over their prisoner, (lie Rom soldiers would proceed to their quarters in the castle, the temple officials retaining Jesus in their charge.

      Meanwhile, the members of the Sanhedrin were assembling at the palace of the high priest, and the preliminary steps toward the first, or Jewish trial were being taken.

      //. The Jewish Trial. It is t lie just boast of 1 hose countries whose jurisprudence had its origin in the common law of England, that their 1. The Jew- system of criminal law is founded upon ish Law the humane maxims that everyone is presumed to be innocent until he is proved 1o be guilty, and that no one is bound to criminate himself. But the Jewish law went even farther in the safeguards which it placed around an accused person. In the Pent it is provided that one witness shall not be sufficient to convict any man of even a minor offence. "One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall a matter be established" (Dt 19 15).

      Those principles of the Mosaic law were elaborated

      and extended in the system which grew up after the

      return from Babylon, it was begun by

      2 The lnt men ^ t 1 ^ reat Synagogue, and wa s -1.. , afterward completed by the Sanhedrin JVllsnna which succeeded them. Tp to the time of

      Our Lord, and for the first two centuries of the Christian era, their rules remained largely in an oral or unwritten form, until they were compiled or codi fied in the Mish by Rabbi .ludah and his associates and successors in t he early part of the :5d cent. It is generally conceded by both Jewish and Christian writer s that the main provisions, therein found for the protection of accused persons, had been long incorporated in the oral law and were recognized as a part of it in the time, of Annas and Caiaphas.

      The provisions relating to criminal trials, and esp, to those in which the offence was punishable by death,

      were very stringent and were all framed

      3 Crim L! in tno interest of the accused. Among T le Uu in were thr following: The trial must

      be begun by day. and if not completed before night it must be adjourned and resumed by day; the quorum of judges in capital cases was i>:i, that being the quorum of the (irand Council; a verdict, of acquittal, which required only a majority of one, might be rendered on the same day as the trial was completed; any other verdict could only be rendered on a subsequent day and required a majority of at least two; no prisoner could be convicted on his own evidence; it was the duty of a judge to see that the interests of the accused were fully protected.

      The modern practice of an information or complaint and a preliminary investigation before a magistrate was wholly unknown to the Jewish law and foreign to its genius. The examination of the witnesses in open court was in reality the beginning of a Jewish trial, and the crime for which the accused was tried, and the sole charge he had to meet, was that which was disclosed by the evi dence of the witnesses.

      Let us see how far the foregoing principles and rules were followed and observed in the proceedings

      before the high priest in the present. 4. The instance. The first step taken in the

      Trial of trial was the private examination of

      Jesus Jesus by the high priest, which is

      recorded only in Jn 18 19-23. Opin ions differ as to whether this examination was con ducted by Annas at his residence before he sent. Jesus to Caiaphas (ver 24), or by the latter after Jesus had been delivered up to him.

      Caiaphas was actually the high priest at the time, and had been for some years. Annas had been deposed from

      the office about 14 years previously by the Rom procu rator; but he was still accorded the title (Acts 4 15). Many of the Jews did not concede the right of the proc urator to depose him, and looked upon him as still the rightful high priest. He is also said to have been at this time tin vice-president of the Sanhedrin. The arguments as to which of them is called the high priest by John in this passage are based largely upon two differ ent renderings of Jn 18 24. In AV the verse reads " Now Annas had sent him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest," a reading based upon the T K which implies that Jesus had been sent to Caiaphas before, t he exami nation. On the other hand, RV, following the Or text adopted by Nestle and others, reads, "Annas therefore sent him bound unto ( aiaphas the high priest," implying that Annas sent, him to ( aiaphas on account of what had taken place in the examination.

      However, it is not material which of these two leading members of the Sanhedrin conducted the examination. The same may also be said as to the controversy regarding the residence of Annas at the time, whether it was in some part of the official palace of the high priest or elsewhere;. The im portant matters are the fact, the time, and the manner of the examination by one or other of these leading members of the council, not the precise place where, or the particular person by whom, it was conducted.

      The high priest (whether Annas or Caiaphas) proceeded to interrogate Jesus concerning His dis ciples and His doctrine (Jn 18 19). 6. The Pre- Such a proceeding formed no part of a liminary regular Jewish trial, and was, more- Examina- over, not taken in good faith; but tion with a view to entrapping Jesus into

      admissions that might be used against Him at the approaching trial before the council. It appears to have been in the nature of a private examination, conducted probably while the mem bers of the council were assembling. The dignified and appropriate answer of Jesus pointedly brought before the judge the irregularity he was committing, and was a reminder that His trial should begin with the examination of the witnesses: "I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing. Why askest thou me? Ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said" (vs 20.21 AV). The reply to this was a blow from one of the officers, an outrageous proceeding which appears to have passed unrebuked by the judge, and it was left to Jesus Himself to make the appro priate protest.

      The next proceeding was the trial before the council in the palace of Caiaphas, attended at least by the quorum of 23. This was an 6. The illegal meeting, since a capital trial,

      Night Trial as we have seen, could not either be begun or proceeded with at night. Some of the chief priests and elders, as previously stated, had been guilty of the highly improper act for judges, of taking part in and directing the arrest of Jesus. Now, "the chief priests and the whole council" spent the time intervening be tween the arrest and the commencement of the trial in something even worse: they "sought false witness against Jesus, that they might put him to death" (Mt 26 59). This, no doubt, only means that they then collected their false witnesses and instructed them as to the testimony they should give. For weeks, ever since the raising of Laza rus, they had been preparing for such a trial, as we read: "So from that day forth they took counsel that they might put him to death" (Jn 11 53).

      Caiaphas, as high priest and president of the San hedrin, presided at the meeting of the council. The oath administered to witnesses in a Jewish court was an extremely solemn invocation, and it makes



      Jesus Christ, Arrest, Trial

      one shudder to think of the high priest pronouncing these words to perjured witnesses, known by him to have been procured by the judges before him in the manner stated.

      But even this did not avail. Although "many

      bare false witness against him," yet on account of

      their having been imperfectly tutored

      7. False by their instructors, or for other cause, Witnesses "their witness agreed not together"

      (Mk 14 56), and even these prejudiced and partial judges could not find the concurring testimony of two witnesses required by their law (Dt 19 15).

      The nearest approach to the necessary concur rence came at last from two witnesses, who gave a distorted report of a figurative and enigmatic state ment made by Jesus in the temple during His early- ministry: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up" (Jn 2 19). The explanation is given: "He spake of the temple of his body" (ver 21). The testimony of the two witnesses is reported with but slight variations in the two first Gospels as follows: "This man said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days" (Mt 26 61); and "We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another made without hands" (Mk 14 58). Whether these slightly different statements represent the discrepancies in their tes timony, or on account of some other variations or contradictions, the judges reluctantly decided that "not even so did their witness agree together" (ver 59).

      Caiaphas, having exhausted his list of witnesses,

      and seeing the prosecution on which he had set his

      heart in danger of breaking down for

      8. A Brow- the lack of legal evidence, adopted a beating blustering tone, and said to Jesus, Judge "Answerest thou nothing? what is it

      which these witness against tliee? But Jesus held his peace" (Mt 26 62.63), relying on the fact that the prosecution had utterly failed on account of the lack of agreement of two witnesses on any of the charges. As a final and desperate resort, Caiaphas had recourse to a bold strategic move to draw from Jesus an admission or confession on which he might base a condemnation, similar to the attempt which failed at the preliminary exami nation; but this time fortifying his appeal by a solemn adjuration in the name of the Deity. He said to Jesus: "I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou art the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Henceforth ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven" (vs 63.64). Caiaphas, although knowing that under the law Jesus could not be convicted on His own answers or admissions, thereupon in a tragic manner "rent his garments, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy: what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard the blasphemy : what think ye? They answered and said, He is worthy of death" (vs 65.66).

      The night session then broke up to meet again after daybreak in order to ratify the decision just come to, and to give a semblance of le gality to the trial and verdict. The closing scene was one of disorder, in which they spat in their prisoner s face and buffeted him (vs 67.68; Lk 22 63-65).

      The following morning, "as soon as it was day," the council reassembled in the same place, and Jesus was led into their presence (Lk 22 66). There were probably a number of the council present who had not attended the night session. For the benefit of these, and perhaps to give an appearance

      of legality to the proceeding, the high priest began

      the trial anew, but not with the examination of

      witnesses which had proved .such a

      9. The failure at the night session. He pro- Morning ceeded at once to ask substantially the Session same questions as had finally brought

      out from Jesus the night before the answer which he had declared to be blasphemy, and upon which the council had "condemned him to be worthy of death" (Mk 14 64). The meeting is mentioned in all the Gospels, the details of the ex amination are related by Luke alone. When asked whether He was the Christ, He replied, "If I tell you, ye will not believe: and if I ask you, ye will not answer. But from henceforth shall the Son of man be seated at the right hand of the power of God" (Lk 22 67-69). This answer not being suf ficient to found a verdict of blasphemy upon, they all cried out, "Art thou then the Son of God?" To this He gave an affirmative answer, "Ye say that I am. And they said, What further need have we of witness? for we ourselves have heard from his own mouth" (vs 70.71).

      It will be observed that neither at the night nor at the morning session was there any sentence pro nounced upon Jesus by the high priest.

      10. Powers There was on each occasion only what of the San- would be equivalent to a verdict of hedrin guilty found by a jury under our

      modern criminal practice, but no sentence passed upon the prisoner by the presiding judge. When Judaea lost the last vestige of its independence and became a Rom province (6 AD), the Sanhedrin ceased to have the right to inflict capital punishment or to administer the law of life and death. This jurisdiction was thenceforth transferred to the Rom procurator. The San hedrin submitted very reluctantly to this cur tailment of its powers. A few years later it exercised it illegally and in a very riotous manner in the case of Stephen (Acts 7 58). Annas, how ever, of all men, had good reason not to violate this law, as his having done so during the absence of the procurator was the cause of his being de posed from the office of high priest by Valerius G rat us (15 AD).

      The proceedings may have been taken before the high priest in the hope that Pilate might be induced to accept the verdict of the Sanhedrin as conclusive that Jesus had been guilty of an offence punishable by death under the Jewish law.

      Now what was the precise crime or crimes for

      which Jesus was tried at these two sittings of the

      council? The first impression would

      11. Con- probably be that there was no connec- demnation tion between the charge of destroying for Bias- the temple and building another in phemy three days, and His claiming to be the

      Son of God. And yet they were closely allied in the Jewish mind. The Jewish nation being a pure theocracy, the overthrow of the temple, the abode of the Divine Sovereign, would mean the overthrow of Divine institutions, and be an act of treason against the Deity. The profession of ability to build another temple in three days would be construed as a claim to the possession of supernatural power and, consequently, blasphemy. As to the other claim which He Himself made and confessed to the council, namely, that He was the Christ, the Son of God, none of them would have any hesitation in concurring in the verdict of the high priest that it was rank blasphemy, when made by one whom they regarded simply as a Galilean peasant.

      To sum up: The Jewish trial of Our Lord was absolutely illegal, the court which condemned Him being without jurisdiction to try a capital offence,

      Jesus Christ, Arrest, Trial



      which blasphemy was under the Jewish law. Even if there had been jurisdiction, it would have been irregular, as the judges had rendered 12. Sum- themselves incompetent, to try the mary case, having been guilty of the viola

      tion of the spirit of the law that re quired judges to be unprejudiced and impartial, and carefully to guard the interests of the accused. Even the letter of the law had been violated in a number of important respects. Among these may be mentioned: (1) some of the judges taking part in and directing the arrest; (2) the examination before the trial and the attempt to obtain admis sions; (. >) endeavors of the judges to procure the testimony of false witnesses; (-\\\\\\\\) commencing and continuing the trial at night; (5) examining and adjuring the accused in order to extort admissions from Him; (5) rendering a verdict of guilty at Un close of the night session, without allowing a day to intervene ; (7) holding the morning session on a feast day, and rendering a verdict at its close; and (S) rendering both verdicts without any legal evidence.

      ///. The Roman Trial. Early on the morning of Friday of the Passover week, as we have al ready seen, "the chief priests with the elders and scribes, and the whole council" held a consulta tion (Alk), in the palace of the high priest; and after the examination of Jesus and their verdict, that He was guilty of blasphemy, they took coun sel against Him "to put him to death" (Alt), this being, in their judgment, the proper punishment for the offence of which they had pronounced Him guilty.

      For the reasons already mentioned, they came

      to the conclusion that it would be necessary to

      invoke the aid of the Rom power in

      1. Taken carrying out this sentence. They before thereupon bound Jesus, and led Him Pilate away and delivered Him up to Pilate,

      who at this time probably occupied, while in Jerus, the magnificent palace built by Herod the ( Jreat . Jesus was taken into the judgment hall of the palace or Praetor him; His accusers, unwill ing to defile themselves by entering into a heathen house and thereby rendering themselves unfit to eat the Passover, remained outside upon the marble pavement.

      The proceedings thus begun wore conducted under a

      system entirely different from that which we have thus

      far been considering, both in its nature

      2. Roman aiu l ls administration. The Jewish law Tflwand vva s a P art of tne religion, and in its

      growth and development was adrninis- rTocedure tered in important cases by a large body

      of trained men, who were obliged to follow strictly a well-deflned procedure. The Kom law, on the other hand, had its origin and growth under the stern and manly virtues and the love of justice which char acterized republican Home, and it still jealously guarded tliti rights and privileges of Kom citizens, even in a con quered province. Striking illustrations of this truth are found in the, life of St. Paul (see Acts 16 35-39; 22 24-21); 25 10-12). The lives and fortunes of the natives in an imperial province like Judaea may be said to have been almost completely at the mercy of the Rom procu rator or governor, who was responsible to his imperial mas ter alone, and not even to the Kom senate. Pilate there fore was well within the mark when, at a later stage of the trial, heing irritated at Jesus remaining silent when questioned by him, he petulantly exclaimed: "Speakest thou not unto me V knowest thou not that I have power lo release thee, and have power to crucify thee?" (Jn 19 10). While, however, the procurator was not com pelled in such cases to adhere strictly to the prescribed procedure, and had a wide discretion, he was not allowed to violate or depart from the established principles of the law.

      On this occasion, Pilate, respecting the scruples of the chief priests about entering the palace, went outside at their request, apparently leaving Jesus in the Praetorium. He asked them the usual for

      mal question, put at, the opening of a Rom trial:

      "What accusation bring ye against this man?

      They answered and said unto him, If

      3. Full he were not an evil-doer, we should not, Trial Not have delivered him up unto thee" Desired (Jn 18 2<)f AV). Pilate could see at

      once that, this was a mere attempt to evade the direct question he had asked, and was not. such an accusation as disclosed any offence known to the Rom law. Affecting to treat it with disdain, and as something known only to their own law, he said, "Take him yourselves, and judge him according to your law. The Jews said unto him, It, is not lawful for us to put any man to death" (ver 31).

      Perceiving that Pilate would not gratify their desire to have Jesus condemned on the verdict

      which they had rendered, or for an

      4. Final offence against their own law only, Accusation "they began to accuse him, saying,

      We found this man perverting our nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, and saying that he himself is Christ a king" (Lk 23 2). This was an accusation containing three charges, much like a modern indictment containing three counts. Pilate appears to have been satisfied that there was nothing in the first two of these charges; but the third was too serious to be ignored, esp. as it was a direct charge of majestas or treason, the greatest crime known to the Rom law, and as to which the reigning emperor, Tiberius, and his then favorite, Sejanus, were particularly sen sitive and jealous. The charges in this case were merely oral, but it would appear to have been in the discretion of the procurator to receive them in this form in the case of one who was not a Rom citizen.

      The accusers having been heard, Pilate returned to the Praetorium to examine Jesus regarding the last and serious accusation. The Four 6. Exami- Gospels give in the same words the nation, De- question put to him by Pilate, "Art fence and thou the King of the Jews?" The Acquittal first three record only the final affirma tive answer, "Thou sayest," which if it stood alone might have been taken as a plea of guilty; but John gives the intervening discussion which explains the matter fully. _ He tells us that Jesus did not answer the question directly, but asked Pilate, "Sayest thou this of thyself, or did others tell it thee concerning me?" (Jn 18 34) (apparently not having been outside when the charges were made). On being told that it came from the chief priests, He went on to explain that His kingdom was not of this world, but was a spirit ual kingdom. Being again asked if He was a king, He replied in effect, that He was a king in that sense, and that His subjects were those who were of the truth and heard His voice (vs 35-37). Pilate, being satisfied with His explanation, "went out again unto the Jews," and apparently having taken Jesus with him, he mounted his judgment seat or movable tribunal, which had been placed upon the tesselated pavement, and pronounced his verdict, "I find in him no fault at all" (ver 38 AV, RV "I find no crime in him").

      According to the Rom law, this verdict of ac quittal should have ended the trial and at once secured the discharge of Jesus; but 6. Fresh instead it brought a volley of fresh Accusations accusations to which Jesus made no reply. Pilate hesitated, and hearing a charge that Jesus had begun His treasonable teaching in Galilee, the thought occurred to him that he might escape from his dilemma by sending Jesus for trial to Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of



      Jesus Christ, Arrest, Trial

      Galilee, who was then in Jerus for the feast, which he accordingly did (Lk 23 7).

      Herod had long been desirous to see Jesus

      "hoped to see some miracle done by him," and

      "questioned him in many words; but

      7. Refer- he answered him nothing." The ence to chief priests and scribes, who had Herod followed him from the. Praetorium to

      the Maceabean palace, which Herod was then occupying, "stood, vehemently accus ing" Jesus (vs 8-10). "That fox," however, as Jesus had called him (Lk 13 32), was too astute to intermeddle in a trial for treason, which was a dan gerous proceeding, and possibly he was aware that Pilate had already acquitted Him; in which case a retrial by him would be illegal. He and his soldiers, probably irritated at the refusal of Jesus to give him any answer, mocked Him, and array ing Him in a gorgeous robe, no doubt in ridicule of His claim to be a king, sent Him back to Pilate. This reference to Herod in reality formed no effective part of the trial of Jesus, as Herod declined the jurisdiction, although Pilate sought to make use of it in his subsequent discussion with the chief priests. The only result was that Herod was nattered by the courtesy of Pilate, the enmity between them ceased, and they were made friends (Lk 23 11.12.15).

      On their return, Pilate resumed his place on the judgment seat outside. What followed, however,

      properly formed no part, of the legal

      8. Jesus or trial, as it was a mere travesty upon Barabbas law as well as upon justice. Pilate

      resolved to make another attempt to secure the consent of the Jews to the release of Jesus. To this end he summoned not only the chief priests and the rulers, but "the people" as well (Lk 23 13), and after mentioning the failure to prove any of the charges made against Jesus, he reminded them of the custom of releasing at the feast a prisoner selected by them, and offering as a compromise to chastise or scourge Jesus before releasing Him. At this point Pilate s anxiety to release Jesus was still further increased by the mes sage he received from his wife concerning her dis turbing dream about Jesus and warning him to "have .... nothing to do with that righteous man" (Mt 27 19). Meanwhile, the chief priests and elders were busily engaged in canvassing the multitude to ask for the release of Barabbas, the notable robber, and destroy Jesus (ver 20). When Pilate urged them to release Jesus, they cried out all together, "Away with this man, and release unto us Barabbas"; and upon a further appeal on behalf of Jesus they cried, "Crucify, crucify him." A third attempt on his part met with no better result (Lk 23 18-23).

      The Fourth Gospel alone records a final attempt on the part of Pilate to save Jesus. He scourged

      Him, it has been suggested, with a

      9. Behold view to satisfying their desire for His the Man! punishment, and afterward appealing

      to their pity. He allowed his soldiers to repeat what they had seen done at Herod s palace, and place a crown of thorns upon His head, array Him in a purple robe, and render mock hom age to Him as king of the Jews. Pilate went out to the Jews with Jesus thus arrayed and bleeding. Again declaring that he found no fault in Him, he presented Him, saying, "Behold, the man!" This was met by the former cry, "Crucify him, crucify him." Pilate replied, "Take him yourselves .... for I find no crime in him." The Jews referred him to their law by which He deserved death because He made Himself the Son of God. This alarmed Pilate s superstitious fears, who by this time appears to have wholly lost control of himself. He took

      Jesus into the palace and said to Him, "Whence art thou? But Jesus gave him no answer." Irritated at His silence, Pilate reminded Him of his absolute power over Him. The mysterious answer of Jesus as to the source of power still further alarmed him, and he made new efforts to secure His discharge (Jn 19 !-<).

      The Jews were well aware that Pilate was arbi trary and cruel, but they had also found that he was very sensitive as to anything that

      10. Pilate might injuriously affect his official Succumbs position or his standing with his mas- to Threats ter, the emperor. As a last resort

      they shouted to him, "If thou release this man, thou art not Caesar s friend: every one that maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar" (ver 12). The prospect of a charge of his aiding and abetting such a crime as treason, in addi tion to the other charges that a guilty conscience told him might be brought against him, proved too much for the vacillating procurator. He brought Jesus out, and sat down again upon the judgment seat placed upon the pavement. He made one more appeal, "Shall I crucify your King?" The chief priests gave the hypocritical answer, "We have no king but Caesar" (ver 15). Pilate finally suc cumbed to their threats and clamor; but took his revenge by placing upon the cross the superscript ion that was so galling to them, "Tin-; KINC; OF THE JEWS."

      Then occurred the closing scene of the tragedy, recorded only in the First Gospel, when Pilate

      washed his hands before the multitude

      11. Pilate (a Jewish custom), saying to them, Washes His "I am innocent of the blood of this Hands righteous man; see ye to it." The

      reply was that dreadful imprecation, "His blood be on us, and on our children" (Alt 27 24,2r,).

      Pilate resumes his place upon the judgment seat,

      the fatal sentence at last falls from his lips, and

      Jesus is delivered up to be crucified.

      12. The Now r , how far were these proceed- Sentence ings in accordance with the Rom law

      under which they purported to have been taken and conducted? In the first place, Pilate, as procurator, was the proper officer to try

      the charges brought against Jesus.

      13. Review In the next place he acted quite properly in declining to entertain THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA

      Jesus Christ, Arrest, Trial

      Galilee, who was then in Jerus for the feast, which he accordingly did (Lk 23 7).

      Herod had long been desirous to see Jesus

      "hoped to see some miracle done by him," and

      "questioned him in many words; but

      7. Refer- he answered him nothing." The ence to chief priests and scribes, who had Herod followed him from the. Praetorium to

      the Maceabean palace, which Herod was then occupying, "stood, vehemently accus ing" Jesus (vs 8-10). "That fox," however, as Jesus had called him (Lk 13 32), was too astute to intermeddle in a trial for treason, which was a dan gerous proceeding, and possibly he was aware that Pilate had already acquitted Him; in which case a retrial by him would be illegal. He and his soldiers, probably irritated at the refusal of Jesus to give him any answer, mocked Him, and array ing Him in a gorgeous robe, no doubt in ridicule of His claim to be a king, sent Him back to Pilate. This reference to Herod in reality formed no effective part of the trial of Jesus, as Herod declined the jurisdiction, although Pilate sought to make use of it in his subsequent discussion with the chief priests. The only result was that Herod was nattered by the courtesy of Pilate, the enmity between them ceased, and they were made friends (Lk 23 11.12.15).

      On their return, Pilate resumed his place on the judgment seat outside. What followed, however,

      properly formed no part, of the legal

      8. Jesus or trial, as it was a mere travesty upon Barabbas law as well as upon justice. Pilate

      resolved to make another attempt to secure the consent of the Jews to the release of Jesus. To this end he summoned not only the chief priests and the rulers, but "the people" as well (Lk 23 13), and after mentioning the failure to prove any of the charges made against Jesus, he reminded them of the custom of releasing at the feast a prisoner selected by them, and offering as a compromise to chastise or scourge Jesus before releasing Him. At this point Pilate s anxiety to release Jesus was still further increased by the mes sage he received from his wife concerning her dis turbing dream about Jesus and warning him to "have .... nothing to do with that righteous man" (Mt 27 19). Meanwhile, the chief priests and elders were busily engaged in canvassing the multitude to ask for the release of Barabbas, the notable robber, and destroy Jesus (ver 20). When Pilate urged them to release Jesus, they cried out all together, "Away with this man, and release unto us Barabbas"; and upon a further appeal on behalf of Jesus they cried, "Crucify, crucify him." A third attempt on his part met with no better result (Lk 23 18-23).

      The Fourth Gospel alone records a final attempt on the part of Pilate to save Jesus. He scourged

      Him, it has been suggested, with a

      9. Behold view to satisfying their desire for His the Man! punishment, and afterward appealing

      to their pity. He allowed his soldiers to repeat what they had seen done at Herod s palace, and place a crown of thorns upon His head, array Him in a purple robe, and render mock hom age to Him as king of the Jews. Pilate went out to the Jews with Jesus thus arrayed and bleeding. Again declaring that he found no fault in Him, he presented Him, saying, "Behold, the man!" This was met by the former cry, "Crucify him, crucify him." Pilate replied, "Take him yourselves .... for I find no crime in him." The Jews referred him to their law by which He deserved death because He made Himself the Son of God. This alarmed Pilate s superstitious fears, who by this time appears to have wholly lost control of himself. He took

      Jesus into the palace and said to Him, "Whence art thou? But Jesus gave him no answer." Irritated at His silence, Pilate reminded Him of his absolute power over Him. The mysterious answer of Jesus as to the source of power still further alarmed him, and he made new efforts to secure His discharge (Jn 19 !-<).

      The Jews were well aware that Pilate was arbi trary and cruel, but they had also found that he was very sensitive as to anything that

      10. Pilate might injuriously affect his official Succumbs position or his standing with his mas- to Threats ter, the emperor. As a last resort

      they shouted to him, "If thou release this man, thou art not Caesar s friend: every one that maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar" (ver 12). The prospect of a charge of his aiding and abetting such a crime as treason, in addi tion to the other charges that a guilty conscience told him might be brought against him, proved too much for the vacillating procurator. He brought Jesus out, and sat down again upon the judgment seat placed upon the pavement. He made one more appeal, "Shall I crucify your King?" The chief priests gave the hypocritical answer, "We have no king but Caesar" (ver 15). Pilate finally suc cumbed to their threats and clamor; but took his revenge by placing upon the cross the superscript ion that was so galling to them, "Tin-; KINC; OF THE JEWS."

      Then occurred the closing scene of the tragedy, recorded only in the First Gospel, when Pilate

      washed his hands before the multitude

      11. Pilate (a Jewish custom), saying to them, Washes His "I am innocent of the blood of this Hands righteous man; see ye to it." The

      reply was that dreadful imprecation, "His blood be on us, and on our children" (Alt 27 24,2r,).

      Pilate resumes his place upon the judgment seat,

      the fatal sentence at last falls from his lips, and

      Jesus is delivered up to be crucified.

      12. The Now r , how far were these proceed- Sentence ings in accordance with the Rom law

      under which they purported to have been taken and conducted? In the first place, Pilate, as procurator, was the proper officer to try

      the charges brought against Jesus.

      13. Review In the next place he acted quite prop

      erly in declining to entertain a charge which disclosed no offence known to the Rom law, or to pass a sentence based on the verdict of the Sanhedrin for an alleged violation of the Jewish law. He appears to have acted in accordance with the law, and indeed in a judicial and praiseworthy manner in the trial and disposition of the threefold indictment for treason (unless it be a fact that Jesus was not present when these accusations were brought against Him outside the Praetorium, which would be merely an irregularity, as they were made known to him later inside). Pilate s initial mistake, which led to all the others, was in not discharging Jesus at once, when he had pronounced the verdict of acquittal.

      All the subsequent proceedings were contrary to both the letter and the spirit of the law. Al though Pilate took his place upon the judgment seat, his acts, properly speaking, were not those of a judge, and had no legal force or value; but were rather the futile attempts of a weak and vacillating politician to appease an angry mob thirsting for the blood of an innocent countryman. The carrying out of a sentence imposed in such circumstances, and under such conditions, may not inaptly be described as a judicial murder.




      2. He Re mains True to Paul


      OF JKSTS.

      JESUS JUSTUS, je /us jus tus ( Irjo-ovs 6 \\t^6- fievos lovo-rog, /<~,w//.s ho l<-t/i >iticiios loiistos, "Jesus

      that is called Justus," C ol 411): 1. A Jew One of three friends of Paul the by Birth others being Aristarchus and Mark

      whom he associates with himself in sending salutations from Home to the church at Colossae. Jesus Justus is not mentioned elsewhere in the NT, and there is nothing more known about him than is given in this passage in C ol, vi/. that he was by birth a Jew "of the circumcision" that he had been converted to C hrist, and that he was one of the inner circle of intimate friends and associates of the apostle during his first Rom cap tivity.

      The words also contain the information that at a stage in Paul s imprisonment, \\\\hen the welcome extended to him by the Christians in Koine on his arrival there had lost its first warmth, and when in consequence, probably, of their fear of persecution, most of them had proved untrue and were holding aloof from him. J. J. and his two friends remained faith ful. It would be pressing this passage unduly to make it mean that out of the large number hundreds, or perhaps even one or t wo thousands -who composed the membership of the church in Koine at this time, and who within the next few years proved their loyalty to C hrist by their stedfastness unto death in the Xe- ronic persecution, all fell away from their affectionate allegiance to Paul at this dillicult time. The words cannot be made to signify more than that it was the Jewish section of the church in Koine which acted in this unworthy manner only temporarily, it is to be hoped. Hut among these Jewish Christians, to such dimensions had this defection grown that Aristarchus. Mark and J. J. alone were the apostle s fellow-workers unto the kingdom of (iod. These three alone, at that particular time from among the Jewish Christians were helping him in the work of the gospel in Koine. That this de fection refers to the Jewish section of the church and not to the converts from among the Cent lies, is evident from many considerations. It seems to be proved, for example by ver 14 of the same chapter (i.e. Col 4 14). as well as by Philem ver 24. in both of which passages Paul names Demas and Luke as his fellow-laborers; and Luke was not a Jew by birth. But in the general failure of the Christians in Rome in their conduct toward Paul, it is with much, affection and pat hos t hat he writes concerning Aristarchus, Mark, and J. J., "These only are my fellow- workers unto the kingdom of (iod, men that have been a comfort unto me."

      JoiIN RlJTHEBFURD JETHER, je ther pH? , ijdficr, "abundance"):

      (1) Ex 4 IS RVm, AVm. See JETHRO.

      (2) Gideon s eldest, son (Jgs 8 20), who was called upon by his father to slay Zebah and Zal- munnah, but feared, because he was yet a youth." The narrative there (8 -Iff) should l>e connected with that of 6 34, where Gideon is followed by his clan, and not with that of ch 7, where he lias MOO picked men. The captives would be taken to ()r- pah, Gideon s home, and slain there.

      (3) Father of Amasa (1 K 2 f).32); he was an Ishmaelite according to 1 Ch 2 17 = "Ithra, the Israelite" of 2 S 17 25, when; "the Ishmaelite" should be read for "the Israelite."

      (1) A Jerahmeelite (1 Ch 2 32 bis). (5) A Judahite (1 Ch 4 17). (0) A man of Asher (1 Ch 7 3S) = "Ithran" of ver 37. DAVID FRANCIS ROBERTS

      JETHETH, jf- theth (rr," 1 , i/ lhtth, meaning un known): A chief (or clauj of Edom (Gen 36 10 1 Ch 1 ">1j, but probably a mistake for "Jether" = "Ithran" (Gen 36 2l>).

      JETHLAH, jeth la (nblT , yithlah). See ITHLAH.

      JETHRO, jeth ro, je thro CTirP , yithro, "excel lence," Ex 3 1; 4 1S6; 18 1-12 [in 4 ISa, probably a textual error, n .P? , ycthcr, "lether," AVm, RVm];

      IAN always Io06p, lothi ir): The priest of Midian and father-in-law (fwttien) of Moses.

      It is not easy to determine the relation of J. to

      Keuel and llobab. If we identify .J. with Keuel as in

      Kx 2 is; 31 (and in Ant. Ill, iii; V,

      4ic T?o :5) wo nl| ist connect "Moses father-in-

      law" in \\u 10 2!) immediately with

      lation to "Keuer- (AV "Kaguel",). and make llobab

      Reuel and f ll( brother-in-law of Moses. Uut while

      it is possible that ln iiln ii may be used in

      the wider sense of a wife s relative, it is

      nowhere tr 1 "brother-in-law" except in

      Jgs 1 Iti; 4 11 ("father-in-law," AV, RVm). If we

      insert, as Kwald suggests (///, II. 2.">), "Jethro son of"

      before " Keuel" in Kx 2 IS (cf LXX ver 10, where the

      name "Jethro" is given), we would then identify J. with

      llobab, the son of Keuel, in N u 10 - .I, taking "Moses

      father-in-law" to refer back to Hobab. Against this

      identification, however, it, is stated that J. went away

      into his own country without any effort on the part o f

      Moses to detain him (Kx 18 -7), whereas Hobab, though

      al first he refused to remain with the Israelites, seems to

      have yielded to the pleadings of Moses to become their

      guide to Canaan (Xu 10 2(>-32; Jgs 1 1(5, where Kittel

      reads "Hobab the Kenite"; 4 11). It may be noted

      that while the father-in-law of Moses is spoken of as a

      " Midianite" in Kx. he is called a " Kenite" in Jgs 1 10;

      4 11. from this lOwald infers that the Midianites were

      at that time intimately blended with the Amalekites,

      to which tribe the Kenites belonged (///, II, 44).

      When Moses fled from Egypt he found refuge in

      Midian, where he received a hearty welcome into

      the household of J. on account of the

      2. His courtesy and kindness he had shown Hearty to the priest s 7 daughters in helping Reception them to water their flock. This of Moses friendship resulted in J. giving Moses

      his daughter, Zipporah, to wife (Ex 2 15-21). After Moses had been for about 40 years in the service of his father-in-law, the angel of the Lord appeared to him in the burning bush as he was keeping the flock at Iforeb, commanding him to return to Egypt and deliver his enslaved brethren out of the hands of Pharaoh (3 Iff). With J. s consent Moses left Midian to carry out the 1 Divine commission (4 IS).

      When tidings reached Midian of "all that God

      had done for Moses, and for Israel" in delivering

      them from Egyp bondage, J., with a

      3. His natural pride in the achievements of Visit to his relative, set out on a visit to Moses, Moses in taking Zipporah and her two sons with the Wilder- him (Ex 18 1-12). On learning of ness his father-in-law s arrival at the

      "mount of God," Moses went out to meet him, and after a cordial exchange of courtesies they retired to Moses tent, when 1 a pleasant inter view took place between them. We are told of tin 1 interest J. felt in all the particulars of the great de liverance, how he "rejoiced for all the goodness which Jeh had done to Israel," and how the con viction was wrought within him that Jeh was "greater than all gods; yea, in the thing wherein they dealt proudly against them" (ver 11). In this condition so expressed then 1 is evidently a reference to the element by which the Egyptians thought in their high-handed pursuit they would be able to bring back Israel into bondage, but by which they were themselves overthrown.

      It is worth noting that in the religious service in which J. and Moses afterward engaged, when J., as priest, offered a burnt, offering, and Aaron with all the elders of Israel partook of the sacrificial feast, prominence was given to J. over Aaron, and thus a priesthood was recognized beyond the limits of Israel.

      This visit of J. to Moses had important conse quences for the future government of Israel (Ex 18 13-27). The priest of Midian

      4. His Wise became concerned about his son-in- Counsel law when he saw him occupied from

      morning to night in deciding the dis putes that had arisen among the people. The labor



      this entailed, J. said, was far too heavy a burden for one man to bear. Moses himself would soon be worn out, and the people, too, would become weary and dissatisfied, owing to the inability of one judge to overtake 1 all the cases that were brought before him. J., therefore 1 , urged Moses to make use of the talents of others and adopt a plan of gradation of judges who would dispose of all eases of minor importance, leaving only the most difficult for him to settle by a direct appeal to the will of God. Moses, recognizing the wisdom of his father- in-law s advice, readily acted upon his suggestion and appointed "able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens." Thereafter, J. returned to his own country. The story of J. reveals him as a man of singular attractiveness and strength, in whom a kind, con

      siderate disposition, a deeply religious 5. His spirit, and a wise judgment all met

      Character in happy combination. And this an- and In- cient priest of Midian made Israel and

      fluence all nations his debtors when lie taught

      the distinction between the legislative and the judicial function, and the importance of securing that all law be the expression of the Divine will, and that its application be entrusted only to men of ability, piety, integrity and truth (Ex 18 21). JAMES CKICHTON

      JETUR, je tur ("W? , iflur, meaning uncertain): A "son" of Ishmael (Gen 25 15 1 Ch 1 31); against this clan the two and a half tribes warred (1 Ch 5 ISf); they are the Ituraeans of NT times.

      See ITUKAEA.

      JEUEL, jC-u el, ju el (5151^, ifiTcl, meaning un known) :

      (1) A man of Judah (I Cli 9 (i); the name is not found in the of Xeh 11 24.

      (2) A Levite, AV "Jeiel" (2 Ch 29 13).

      (3) A companion of Ezra, AV "Jeiel" (Ezr 8 13).

      (4) The name occurs also as Ivthlbh in 1 Ch 9 35; 2 Ch 26 11. See JKIEL, (2), (G).

      JEUSH, je ush OW , y ush, probably "lie pro tects," "he comes to help"; see Ill X, 109; K"thlbh isTlTIP, // Zs/i, in Gen 36 5.14; 1 Ch 7 10):

      (1) A "son" of Esau (Gen 36 5. 14. IS; 1 Ch 1 3">). "The name is thought by some to be identical with that of an Arabian lion-god Yaijid . . . . , meaning helper, whose antiquity is vouched for by inscriptions of Thamud" (Skinner, Gen, 432).

      (2) A Benjamite (1 Ch 7 10), but probably a Zebulunite. See Curtis, Ch, 145 ff.

      (3) A descendant of King Saul, AV "Jehush" (1 Ch 8 39).

      (4) A Gershonite Levite (1 Ch 23 10.11).