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 "L"



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 "L"

    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 "L"


    Letter "L"

    LAADAH, la a-da
      A descendant of Judah (1 Chron 4:21).

    LAADAN, la a-dan.
      See LADAN.

    LABAN, LAA ban:
      The person named Laban, possibly connected with moaning "to be white," from which in Heb the adj. meaning "white" has just this form is first introduced to the reader of Gen in the story of the wooing of Rebekah (ch 24). He belonged to that branch of the family of Torah that was derived from Abraham's brother Nahor and his niece Milcah.

      The genealogy of this branch is traced in (Jen 22 20-24; but, true to its purpose and the place it occupies in the book, this genealogy brings the family down to Rebekah, and there (stops without mentioning Laban.

      Accordingly, when Rebekah is introduced in the narrative of ch 24, she is referred to (vs 15.24) in a way that recalls to the reader the genealogy already given; but when her brother Laban is introduced (vor 29), he is related to his sister by the express announcement, "And Rebekah had a brother, and his name was Laban."

      In this ch he lakes prominent part in the reception of Abraham s servant, and in the determination of his sister s future. That brothers had an effective voice in the marriage of their sisters is evident, not, only from extra-Bib, sources, but from the Bible itself; see e.g. Cant 8 8.

      In Gen 24, however, Laban is perhaps more prominent than even such custom can explain (of vs 31.50.5")), and we are led to see in him already the same forcefulnoss and egotism that are abundantly shown in the stories from his later life.

      The man s eager hospitality (vor 31), coming immediately after his mental inventory of the gifts bestowed by the visitor upon his sister (ver 30), has usually, and justly, been regarded as a proof of the same greed that is his most conspicuous characteristic in the subsequent chapters.

      The story of that later period in Laban s life is BO interwoven with the career of Jacob that little need here be added to what is said of Laban in JACOB, III, 2 (q.v.). By the time of Jacob s arrival he is already a very old man, for over 90 years had elapsed since Robokah s departure.

      Yet even at the end of Jacob s 20 years residence with him ho is represented as still energetic and active (31 19.23), not only ready for an emergency like the pursuit after Jacob, but personally superintending the management of his huge flocks.

      His home is in Haran, "the city of Nahor," that is, the locality where Nahor and his family remained at the time when the rest of Terah s descendants emigrated to Canaan (11 31; 12 5).

      Since Haran, and the region about it where his flocks fed, be longed to the district called Aram (see PADDAX- ARAM; MESOPOTAMIA), Laban is often called "the Aramaean" (EV "the Syrian," from LXX 6 Stfpos, hoSuros};see 25 20; 28 5; 31 20.24.

      It is uncertain how far racial affinity may be read into this term, because the origin and mutual relationships of the various groups or strata of the Sem family are not yet clear. For Laban himself it suffices that lie was a Semite, living within the region early occupied by those who spoke the Sem dialect that we call Aramaic.

      This dialect is represented in the narrative of Gen as already differentiated from the dialect of Canaan that was Jacob s mother-tongue; for "the heap of witness," erected by uncle and nephew before they part (31 47), is called by the one Jegar-saha-dufha and by the other Galeed phrases which are equivalent in meaning, the former

      the latter Heb. (Ungnad, Hebraische Gram- matik, 1912, 6, puts the date of the differentiation of Aram, from "Amurntish" at "about 1500 BC"; Skinner, "Genesis," ICC, argues that ver 47 is a gloss, following Wellhausen, Dillmann, et al.)

      The character of Laban is interesting to observe. On the one hand it shows a family likeness to the portraits of all his rolat ions in the patriarchal group, preeminently, however, to his sister Rebekah, his daughter Rachel, and his nephew Jacob.

      The nearer related to Laban such figures are, the more conspicuously, as is fitting, do they exhibit Laban s mingled cunning, resourcefulness", greed and self- complacency. And, on the other hand, Laban s character is sui generis; the picture we get of him is too personal and complex to be denominated merely a "type."

      It is impossible to resolve this man Laban into a mythological personage he is altogether human or into a tribal representative (e.g. of "Syria" over against "Israel" = Jacob) with any degree of satisfaction to the world of scholar ship. Whether a character of reliable family tra dition, or of popular story-telling, Laban is "a" char acter"; and his intimate connection with the chief personage in Israel s national recollections makes it highly probable that he is no more and no less his torical than Jacob himself (cf JACOB, VI).

      J. OSCAR Bo YD

    LABANA, lab a-na
      (Aa^avd, Laband, 1 Esd 5 29) : Called Lebanah in Ezr 2 45.

    LABOR, la ber
      Dirndl; KOTTOS, kfipos): The word (noun and vb.) denoting hard work or "toil" (thus in RV of Dt 26 7; Josh 7 3; Rev 2 2) represents several Heb and Gr words, chiefly those above. Occasionally, as in Hub 3 17 (/uu ase//), it stands for "fruit of labor." Some times, in conjunction with "travail," it refers to childbirth ((Jen 35 10.17, yaladh; cf 1 Thess 2 9; 2 Thess 3 8). Examples of the word in the ordi nary sense are: of y e (jhl"\\ Gen 31 42; Job 39 11. 16; Ps 128 2; of Carnal, common in Eccl 1 3.8; 2 10.11.18, etc; of kopos, 1 Cor 15 58 ("your labor is not vain," etc); 1 Thess 1 3 ("work of faith and labor of love"; cf He 6 10); 1 Tim 5 17 ("labor in the word and in teaching"). See WORK; SLAVERY. JAMES ORR

    LACCUNUS, lak ti-nus
      One of the sons of Addi who returned with Ezra and had married a foreign wife (1 Esd 9 31). The name does not, as might have been expected, occur in Ezr 10 30. See note on the passage (in Lange s C</ttim.) as to the reconciliation of the lists in 1 Esd and Ezr.

    LACE, laas
      ( put In I, variously rendered in Gen 38 IS. 25; Ex 39 3; Nu 15 38; 19 15; Jgs 16 9; Ezk 40 3): In modern Eng. the noun "lace" usually denotes a delicate ornamental fabric, but in the word in the sense of "that which binds" is still in perfectly good use, esp. in such combinations as "shoelace," etc.

      It is this latter significance that is found in Ex 28 28 ("They shall bind .... with a lace of blue"); 28 37; "39 21. 31, and ki Sir 6 30 AY, K\\wo>a, klosma (RV "rib and").

    LACEDAEMONIANS, las-C-dO-mo ni-anz
      (2ira.pTi.dTai,, Spartidtai; once only AaKeSaijiovioi, Lakedaimdnioi, 2 Mace 5 9): The inhabitants of Sparta or Laocdaemon with whom the Jews claimed some kinship and formed alliances (1 Mace 12



      1S20; 14 20.23; 15 23; 2 -Mace 59). The alliance mentioned in 1 Mace 12 5-23 is based, among other grounds, on thai of a common descent of Jews and Lacedaemonians from Abraham, for which the only probable presumption suggested by Ewald is the similarity of names, "Pclasgi" and Peleg son of Eber (den 10 25; 11 1(5). This has been reasonably objected to, and perhaps the most, that can be said on this point is that the belief in some relationship between the Jews and the Lacedaemonians seems to have prevailed when 1 Mace was written. The alliance itself is said to have been formed (1 Mace 12 20) between Areus, king of the Lacedaemonians and Onias the high priest; but it is not easy to make out a consistent chronology for the transaction. For the renewal of the alliance (e, 144 BC) by Jonathan (1 Mace 12 5-1S) and again by Simon (1 Mace 14 16-23), something can be said, as the Greeks had finally been deprived of independence in 146 BC, and Sparta was only obliged to lend assistance to Home and may be supposed to have been doing so in help ing the Jews against Syria. It is possible, too, that as against Syrian Hellenism the Jews were anxious to show that they had the assistance of distinguished ( .reeks, though the actual power of Sparta was much reduced from that of former times. The facts, at least of the alliance and the correspondence, seem to be sufficiently attested, though it is not easy to reconcile all the particulars. Jos (Ant, XII, iv, 10; XIII, v, S; XIV, xii, 2.3) gives the correspondence at greater length than the wiiter of the Maccabees.

      J. HrrcMsoN

      LACHISH, la kish (15^5, lakhlsh; LXX Aax^s, La clt i* [Josh 15 3 ( J], Maxes, M aches): A town in the foothills of the Shephelah on the 1. Location border of the Phili plain, belonging to Judah, and, from the mention of Eglon in connection with it, evidently in the southwestern portion of Judah s territory. Onom locates it 7 miles from Eleutheropolis (Beit Jibrln) toward Daroma, but as the latter place is uncertain, the indicat ion does not help in fixing the site of L. The city seems to have been abandoned about 400 BC, and this circumstance has rendered the identifica tion of the site difficult. It was formerly fixed at [/////// Lnkin, from the similarity of the name and because it was in the region that the Bib. references to L. seem to indicate, but the mound called Tell el- Hesy is now generally accepted as the site. This was first suggested by Cornier in 1877 (PEF8, 1878, 20), and the excavations carried on at the Tell by the Pal Exploration Fund in 1890-93 con firmed his identification. Tell el-IJesy is situated on a wady, or valley, of the same name (Wady el- Hesy), which runs from a point about 6 miles W. of Hebron to the sea between Gaza and Askelon. It is a mound on the very edge of the wady, rising some 120 ft. above it and composed of debris to the depth of about GO ft., in which the excavations revealed the remains of distinct cities which had been built, one upon the ruins of another. The earliest of these was evidently Amorite, and could not have been later than 1700 BC, and was perhaps two or three centuries earlier (Bliss, Mound of Many Cities). The identification rests upon the fact that the site corresponds with the Bib. and other historical notices of L., and csp. upon the dis covery of a cuneiform tablet in the ruins of the same character as the Am Tab, and containing the name of Zimridi, who is known from these tablets to have been at one time Egyp governor of L. The tablets, which date from the latter part of the 15th or early part of the 14th cent. BC, give us the earliest in formation in regard to L., and it was then an Egyp dependency, but it seems to have revolted and joined wit h ot hen 1 towns in an attack upon Jerus, which was

      also an Egyp dependency. It was perhaps com ix-lied to do so by the Khabiri who were then raiding this region. The place was, like Ga/a, an impor tant one for Egypt , being on the, front ier and on the route to Jerus, and the importance is seen in the fact that it was taken and destroyed and rebuilt so many times.

      We first hear of it in the history of Israel when Joshua invaded the land. It was then an Amorite

      city, and its king, Japhia, joined the 2. History confederacy formed by Adonizedek,

      king of Jerus, to resist Joshua. They were defeated in the remarkable battle at Gibeon, and the five confederate kings were captured and put to death at Makkedah (Josh lOpaxxim; 12 11). L. was included in the lot of Judah (15 39), and it was rebuilt, or fortified, by Rehoboam (2 Ch 11 5.9). It was besieged by Sennacherib in the reign of Hezekiah and probably taken (2 K 18 13) when he invaded Judah and besieged Jerus, but the other references to the siege leave it doubtful

      Sennacherib on His Throne before Lachish. (Kouyunjik.)

      Layanl s M.nimncms u Miu-v, h.

      (2 K 18 14.17; 19 8; 2 Ch 32 9; Isa 36 2; 37

      8). The Assyr monuments, however, render it cer tain that the place; was captured. The sculptures on the walls of Sennacherib s palace picture the storming of L. and the king on his throne receiving the submission of the captives (Ball, Liyht from the East, 190-91). _This was in 701 BC, and to this period we may assign the enigmatical reference to L. in Mic 1 13, "Bind the chariot to the swift steed, O inhabitant of Lachish: she was the begin ning of sin to the daughter of Zion." The cause of the invasion of Sennacherib was a general revolt in Phoenicia, Pal, and Philistia, Hezekiah joining in it and all asking Egypt for aid (Rawlinson, Five Great Monarchies of the Ancient Eastern World, ch ix). Isaiah had warned Judah not to trust in Egypt (Isa 20 5.6; 30 1-5; 31 1), and as L. was the place where communication was held with Egypt, being a frontier fortress, perhaps even having an Egyp garrison, it would be associated with the "sin" of the Egyp alliance (HGIIL, 234).

      The city was evidently rebuilt after its destruc tion by Sennacherib, for we find Nebuchadnezzar fighting against it during his siege of Jerus (Jer 34 7). It was doubtless destroyed by him, but we are informed by Nehemiah (11 30) that some of the returned Jews settled there after the captivity. It is very likely that they did not reoccupy the site of the ruined city, but settled as peasants in the territory, and this may account for the transference of the name to Umm Lakis, 3 or 4 miles from Tell



      Lachish Laish

      el-Hcsy, where some ruins exist, but not of :i kind to suggest, Lachish (Bliss, op. cit). No remains of any importance were found on the Tell indicating its occupation as a fortress or city later than that destroyed by the king of Babylon, but it was occu pied in some form during the crusades, Unim Labis being held for a time by the Hospitallers, and King Richard is said to have made it a base of operations in his war with Saladin (H(.iHL). The Tell itself, if occupied, was probably only the site of his camp, and it has apparently remained since that time without inhabitants, being used for agricultural purposes only. See further, PALESTINE (RECENT EXPLORATION), III, 1. H. POUTER

      LACK (forms of "ICH , fuller, "to lack," "pS , ayin, "nought"): This word in its various forms has the usual meaning of want," "need," "deficiency." There is but little change in the use of the word in the different VSS. Sometimes one of the common synonyms is exchanged for the word itself, e.g. in the OT, 1 S 21 15 RV has "lack" ("Do I lack madmen?") where AV lias "need of"; Prov 5 23, "for lack," instead of "without"; 6 32, "void of" for "lacketh"; 10 21, "lack" for "want"; 31 11, "lack" for "need"; Isa 69 15, "lacking" for "fail- eth." In the XT "lack" is the tr of va-reptu, hns- tereo, lit. "to be behind," and ^oe^s, eW<r.s , "in want." In Lk 8 6, RV reads "had no" instead of "lacked" in AV. In 2 Cor 11 9, RV gives "my want" for "which was lacking to me" in AV; in Col 1 24 "that which is lacking" for "that which is behind"; Jas 2 15 "lack" for "destitute." It will readily be seen that sometimes the slight variation helps to explain the meaning.


      LACUNUS, la-ku nus. See LACCUNXJS.

      LAD: In the OT this word occurs as the tr of nu*<ir, "young person," "child," "servant," RV properly substituting "servant" in 2 K 4 19; Jgs 16 20 is another passage where cither sense of the original word may be intended. The word occurs in the NT in Jn 6 9 as the tr of ira.i8dpi.ov, puiild- rion; in Acts 20 12, TTCUJ, pais (AV "young man").

      LADAN, la dan CpT^ , Indian; AV Laadan) :

      (1) A descendant of Ephraim, and an ancestor of Joshua (1 Ch 7 26).

      (2) A Levite of the family of Gershon (1 Ch 23 7.8.9; 26 21), also called LIBNI (q.v.).

      LADANUM, lad a-num (E5 , lot): Gen 37 25 RVm; elsewhere, AIvHuu (q.v.).

      LADDER, lad er. See SIEGE, 4, (c).

      LADDER OF TYRE ( H KXljia^ [d-n-6 -Hp K\\tfiaKos| T-upo\\), He kliniax [a/>6 tfs klimakos] Tiirou): Not mentioned in the OT or the NT, but in Apoc (1 Mace 11 59), where it is said that Antiochus VI, after having confirmed Jonathan in the high-priesthood, appointed his brother Simon captain over the terri tory included between the Ladder of Tyre and the borders of Egypt. The Ladder has been located at different points on the coast between Tyre and Acre, such as the Ras d-^Abyailh ("Promontorium Album" of the ancient geographers), about 7 miles S. of Tyre, and Ras cn-Nakurah, about 6 miles farther S., and Ras el-Musheirifeh, a little farther on. These are capes jutting westward into the sea from the ridge which runs parallel to the general line of the coast. These capes project more than a mile into the sea, and present a very bold and pre cipitous front from 200 to 300 ft. in height. The ascent on either side of the promontory is very

      steep, and at Ras ci- Abyadh steps were cut in the white rock, which led to the identification of this point with the Ladder, but a reference to Jos (BJ , II, x, 2) leads to a different conclusion. He locates it 100 stadia N. of Acre, which corresponds fairly well with the southern limit of the whole promon tory, which is about 12 miles N. of Acre, but not at all with Ras el-*Abyadh. The altitude of d- Musheirifeh is greater than that of d- Abymlh and may have; had steps cut in it similar to the latter. It is more probable that the L. was here, or at cu- \\akurali, but the term applied to the whole prom ontory, which offered a serious obstacle to the passage of armies, or even caravans, since the ap proach is precipitous on either side, and at Ras el-*Abyadh the road skirts the edge of a sheer preci pice, where a misstep would hurl one into the sea some 200 ft. below. The application of the term to the whole promontory seems to be indicated by Jos, since lie speaks of it as one of the mountains which encompass the plain of Ptolemais (Acre) and the highest of all. This would not be true of any one of the three capes mentioned, but would be if the hills behind, which form their base, were in cluded. That it was designated as the Ladder of Tyre rather than of Acre was probably due to the fact that, the promontory is nearer the former city (see Thomson, LB, II, ed 1S82; XWP, name-lists, s.v.). H. PORTEH

      LADE, lad, LADING, lad ing: "To lade" in the sense of "to load" is retained by RV in nearly all passages where the word occurs in AV (but cf AV and RV reading of Ps 68 19; Isa 46 1), "They laded us with such things" (Acts 28 10 AV). The tiriTiOy/ju, ( i>Hit/t(~nu, "to put on," is rendered by RV, "They put on board such tilings." Lk 11 40 RV reads "ye load" instead of AV "ye lade."

      Lading ((popriov, phortion) is found in Acts 27 10 in its usual meaning, "the lading of a ship."

      LADY, la di: This word should be taken in the sense of "mistress" in Isa 47 5.7 (Heb g e bhereth) (so ARV). In Jgs 5 29; Est 1 IS it is the tr of another Heb word (sarah), best rendered "princess" (so RV in list, but not in Jgs). In 2 Jn vs 1.5 it is the tr of Kvpla, kuria, which sonic; interpreters regard as a proper name. See CYRIA; JOHN, EI ISTLES OF; ELECT LADY.

      LAEL, la el (s , la el, "belonging to God"): Father of Eliasaph, the prince of the father s house of the Gershonites (Nu 3 24).

      LAHAD, la/had ("~D , Idhadh) : A descendant of Judah (1 Ch 4 2). "

      LAHAI-ROI, la-hl roi, la-hl-ro I, la hi-roi pnb

      " SO , Itihdij ro l). See BEER-LAHAI-ROI.

      LAHMAM, la/mam (Dttn, lahmani): A town in the Judaean Shephelah (Josh 16 40, RVm "Lah- mas"), possibly the modern cl-Lahin, 2 miles S. of Beit jibrin.

      LAHMAS, la/mas. See LAHMAM.

      LAHMI, la ml P^? , lahml) : According to 1 Ch 20 5, the brother of Goliath of Oath. See EL-


      LAISH, la ish (TIT? , layish) :

      (1) A city in the upper Jordan valley, apparently colonized by the Sidonians, which was captured by the Danites and called DAN (q.v.) (Jgs 18 7, etc;

      Laishah Lamech



      Isa 10 30 AV). In Josh 19 -17 live name appears as "Leshem."

      (2) A Benjamite, father of Palti or Paltiel, 1o whom Michal, David s wife, was given by Saul (1 S 25 44; 2 S 3 15).

      LAISHAH, la-I sha, la ish-a (nC 1 ; ? , l,,yl,ril<, AV Laish): A place named in Isa 10 30 with Gallim and Anathoth. It should apparently be sought on the N. of Jerus. Some would identify Callim with Hdl Jala, near Bethlehem. Conder suggests AswrZ- yi k on the eastern slope, to the N.X.E. of the Mount of Olives.

      LAKE, lak (Xtp-vTi, llinnt^: The word in used (Lk 5 1.2; 8 22.23.33) of the Lake of Gennesaret or Sea of Galileo, and (Rev 19 20; 20 10.14.15; 21 8) of the "lake of fire and brimstone." Lakes are not abundant in Syria and Pal. The Dead Sea, which might be called a lake, is in most places in EV called the Salt Sea. It is called by the Arabs Bahr Ltd, Sea of Lot. It is a question whether the Waters of Merom (Josh 11 5.7) can be identified with the Hiilcli, a marshy lake in the course of the Upper Jordan, N.of the Seaof Galilee. E. of Damascus on the edge of the desert there are saltish lakes in which the water of the rivers of Damascus (see 2 K 6 12) is gathered and evapo rates. In the Lebanon \\V. of Bti -albck is the small Lake Yannnunch, which is fed by copious springs, but whose water disappears in the latter part of the summer, being drained off by subterranean channels. The Lake of JJunis on the Orontes is artificial, though ancient. On the lower Orontes is the Lake of Antioch. ALFRED ELY DAY

      LAKE OF FIRE (\\i\\ivr] TO irvpds, limne toti puros): Found in Rev 19 20; 20 10.14(&ts).15. Rev 21 8 has "the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone." The brimstone in connection with "the lake of fire" occurs also in Rev 19 20 and 20 10, the latter being a backward reference to the former passage. In Rev 20 14 the words, "This is the second death, even the lake of lire," are either a gloss originally intended to elucidate ver lot hrough a reference to 20 6, or, if part of the text, formed originally the close of ver 15, whence they became displaced on account of the identity of the words once immediately preceding them in ver 15 with the words now preceding them in ver 14. The "lake of fire" can be called "the second death" only with reference to the lost among men (ver 15), not with reference to death and Hades (ver 14). In all the above references "the lake of fire" appears as a place of punishment, of perpetual torment, not of annihilation (20 10). The beast (19 20); the pseudo-prophet (19 20; 20 10); the devil (20 10); the wicked of varying description (20 15; 21 8), are cast into it. "When the same is affirmed of death and Hades (20 14), it is doubtful whether this is meant as a mere figure for the cessation of these two evils personified, or has a more realistic background in the existence of two demon-powers so named (cf Isa 25 8; 1 Cor 15 26.54 ff; 2 Esd 7 31). The Scriptural source for the conception of "the lake of fire" lies in Gen 19 24, where already the fire and the brimstone occur together, while the locality of the catastrophe described is the neigh borhood of the Dead Sea. The association of the Dead Sea with this fearful judgment of God, to gether with the desolate appearance of the place, rendered it a striking figure for the scene of escha- tological retribution. The two other OT passages which have "fire and brimstone" (Ps 11 6; Ezk 38 22) are dependent on the Gen passage, with which they have the figure of "raining" in common. In Rev 21 8, "their part" seems to allude to Ps

      11 (I, "the portion of their cup." In En 67 4 ff the Dead Sea appears as the place of punishment for evil spirits. Of late it has been proposed to derive "the lake of fire" from "the stream of fire" which destroys the enemies of Ahura in the Zoroastrian eschatology; so Bousset, Die Offenbarung Johannis, !!)()(), 433/434. But the figures of a stream and a lake are different; cf 2 Esd 13 0-11, where a stream of fire proceeds from the mouth of the Mes siah for the destruction of His enemies. Besides, the Pers fire is, in part, afire of purification, and not of destruction only (Bousset, 442), and even in the apocalyptic Hook of En, the fires of purification and of punishment are not confounded (cf En 67 4 with 90 20). The OT fully explains the entire conception. GKKKHARDTS Vos

      LAKE OF GENNESARET, ge-nes a-rct, See GALILEE, SEA OF.

      LAKKUM, lak um (Dip?, Info-run; AVLakum): An unidentified town on the border of Naphtali, named with Adarni, Nekeb and Jabneel, apparently nearer the Jordan (Josh 19 33).


      LAMB, lam: (1) The most used word is kebhes, "a young ram"; cf Arab, (j^-y > kebsh, "ram"; often of sacrifices; (fern.) !"TIZJ 2 2 , kuhhxdli, or ntoaS, kiUixnh, "ewe lamb" (2 S 12 3j; by transposition 2 1C 2 , kcscbh, and fern. rQTL 2 , kishdh (Gen 30 40; Lev 3 7; 5 6). (2) 12, kar, "lamb" (Dt 32 14; 1 S 15 9; 2 K 3 4). (3) nto , s,-li, "one" of the flock (Gen 22 7; Lev 5 7). (4) 12 .

      a -

      fo n, "sheep," "goats," "flock"; cf Arab. ijL^> . dan, "sheep" (Ex 12 21); and ) ]3 , ben, gon (Ps 114 4). (5) nVj, talch, "young lamb"; cf

      Arab. J^, tali, "young lamb"; and D^E,

      Pla lm (ls 7 9; Isa 40 11; 65 25). (6) imm rin (Ezr 6 0.17; 7 17). (7) apvas, drnas, ace. pi. (Lk 10 3); dim. dpviov, arnion (Jn 21 15; Rev 5 6, etc). (S) d^vos, amnos (Jn 1 29.36; Acts 8 32; 1 Pet 1 19). See SHEEP.


      LAMB OF GOD (6 d^vos TOV 9eov, ho ainnds tmi thcoii): This is a title specially bestowed upon Our Lord by John the Baptist (Jn 1 29-36), "Be hold, the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world!" In XII P an apocryphal book, prob ably of the 2d cent. we have the term used for the Messiah, "Honor Judah and Levi, for from them shall arise for you the Lamb of God, saving all na tions by grace." But the term does not seem to have been of any general use until it received its distinctly Christian significance. It has been gen erally understood as referring to the prophetic lan guage of Jer 11 19, and Isa 53 7.

      It is far more probable, however, that the true source of the expression is to be found in the impor

      tant place which the "lamb" occupies 1. Sacrifi- in the sacrifices, esp. of the PC. In cial Sense these there was the lamb of the daily of the Term morning and evening sacrifice. How

      familiar this would be to the Baptist, being a member of a priestly family! On the Sab bath the number of the offerings was doubled, and at some of the great festivals a still larger number were laid upon the altar (see Ex 29 38; Nu 28 3.9.13). The lamb of the Passover would also occupy a large place in the mind of a devout Israel-



      Laishah Lamech

      ite, and, as the Passover was not far off, it is quite possible that John may have referred to this as well as to other suggested ideas connected with the lamb. The sacrificial significance of the term seems to be far more probable than the mere comparison of the character of Our Lord with meekness and gentle ness, as suggested by the words of the prophets, although these contain much more than the mere reference to character (see below). That this became the clearly defined conception of apostolic teaching is clear from passages in Paul and Peter (I Cor 57; 1 Pet 1 18 fj. In the Book of Rev the reference to the Lamb occurs 27 t. The word here used differs from that in Jn. The aninos of the Gospel has become the ornlon of the Apocalypse, a diminutive form suggestive of affection. This is the word used by Our Lord in His rebuke and for giveness of Peter (Jn 21 15), and is peculiarly touched therefore with an added meaning of pa thetic tenderness. Westcott, in his Comm. on Jn 1 29, refers to the conjecture that there may have been flocks of lambs passing by on their way to Jerus to be used at the feast. This is possible, but fanciful. As applied to Christ, the term certainly suggests the meekness and gentleness of Our Lord s nature and work, but could not have been used by John without containing some reference to the place which the lamb bore in the Judaic ritualism.

      The significance of the Baptist s words has been

      variously understood. Origcn, Cyril, Chrysostom,

      among the ancients, Lucke, DeWette,

      2. As Meyer, Ewald, Alford, among the Variously moderns, refer it to Isa 53 7; Grotius, Understood Bengel, Hengstenberg, to the paschal

      lamb; Baumgarten-Crusius, etc, to the sin offering; Lange strongly urges the influence of the passage in Isa 53, and refers to John s de scription of his own mission under the influence of the second part of Isa, in which he is supported by Schaff. The importance of the Isa-thought is found in Mt 8 17; Acts 8 32; 1 Pet 2 22-25. It is to be observed that the LXX in Isa 53 7 translates the Heb word for sheep (sc/0, by the Gr

      word for lamb. In ver 10, the

      3. As Set prophet s "suffering one" is said to Forth by have made his soul an offering for Isaiah sin," and in ver 4 he hath borne our

      griefs," where bearing involves the conception of sin offering, and as possessing justi fying power, the idea of taking away." John indeed uses not the LXX word (j>tpeiv (phercin), but alpfiv (ni rein), and some have maintained that this simply means "put away," or "support," or "endure." But this surely loses the suggestion of the associated term "lamb," which John could not have employed without some reference to its sacri ficial and therefore expiatory force. What Lange calls a "gerrn perception" of atonement must cer tainly have been in the Baptist s mind, csp. when we recall the Isa-passages, even though there may not have been any complete dogmatic conception of the full relation of the death of Christ to the sal vation of a world. Even the idea of the bearing of the curse of sin may not be excluded, for it was impossible for an Israelite like John, and esp. with his surroundings, to have forgotten the significance of the paschal lamb, both in its memorial of the judgment of Egypt, as well as of the deliverance of Israel. Notwithst anding every effort to take out of this striking phrase its deeper meanings, which involve most probably the combination of all the sources above described, it must _ ever remain one of the richest mines of evangelical thought. It occupies, in the doctrine of atonement, a position analogous to that brief word of the Lord, "God is a Spirit" (Jn 4 24), in relation to the doctrine of God. The Lamb is defined as "of God," that is, of Di

      vine providing. See Isa 53; Rev 50; 13 8. Its emphatic and appointed office is indicated by the definite article, and whether we refer the conception to a specific sacrifice or to the general place of a lamb in the sacrificial institution, they all, as being ap pointed by and specially set apart for God, suggest the close relation of Our Lord to the Divine Being, and particularly to His expiatory sacrifice.

      LL. D. BEVAX LAME, lam (HOE , pisc a h, HD2 , ndkheh; xA6s,

      (1) The condition of being unable or imperfectly able to walk, which unfitted any descendant of Aaron so afflicted for service in the priesthood (Lev 21 18), and rendered an animal unsuitable for sac rifice (Dt 15 21). The offering of animals so blem ished was one of the sins with which Malachi charges the negligent Jews of his time (Mai 1 8-13).

      (2) Those who suffered from lameness, such as Mephibosheth, whose limbs were injured by a fall in childhood (2 S 4 4; 93). In the prophetic description of the completeness of the victory of the returning Israelites, it is predicted that the lame shall be made whole and shall leap like a hart (Jer 31 8; Isa 35 0). The unfitness of the lame for warfare gives point to the promise that the lame shall take the prey (Isa 33 23). Job in his graphic description of his helpfulness to the weak before his calamity says, "And feet was I to the lame" (Job 29 15). The inequality of the legs of the lame is used in Prov 26 7 as a similitude of the inaptness with which a fool uses a parable.

      In the enigmatical and probably corrupt passage describing David s capture of Jerus, the lame and blind aro mentioned twice. In 2 S 5 6 it was a taunt on the part of the Jebusites that even a garrison of cripples would suffice to keep out tho Israelites. Tho allusion in ver 8 may be read, "Whosoever smiteth the Jebusites let him .... slay both tho lame and blind, which hato David s soul," as it is in LXX. Tho Vulg says, "David had offered a reward on that day to the man who should smite the Jebusito and reach the water pipes of the houses, and remove the blind and lame who hated David s soul." It is possible, however, that Buddc s emendation is more correct and that it is a throat against tho indiscriminate slaughter of the Jebusites: "Whoso slayeth a Jebusito shall bring his neck into peril; the lame and blind aro not hated of David s soul." Tho proverbial saying quoted in ver 8 cannot be correct as rendered in AV, for we read in Mt 21 14 that the lame came to Our Lord in the temple and were healed.

      The healing of the lame by Our Lord is recorded in Mt 11 5; 15 30.31; 21 14; Lk 7 22; 14 13. For the apostolic miracles of healing the lame, see CRIPPLE. In He 12 13 the Christians are coun seled to courage under chastisement, lest their despair should cause that which is lame to be "turned out of the way." ALEX. MACALISTEH

      LAMECH, la mek OfCS , lemekh; Adjwxi Ldmcch, "a strong youth" [?]):

      (1) The name is first mentioned in Gen 4 18-24. Here L., the son of Methushael, is named as the last of the descendants of Cain. He was the father of Jabel, Jubal, Tubal-cain, and Naamah. As the husband of two wives, viz. Adah and Zillah, he furnishes the first recorded instance of polygamy. It is very instructive to note that this "father of polygamy" at once becomes the first blustering tyrant and a braggadocio; we are fully permitted to draw this conclusion from his so-called "sword- lay" (Gen 4 23 f). He does not put his trust in God, but in the weapons and implements invented by his sons, or rather these instruments, enhancing the physical and material powers of man, are his God. He glories in them and misconstrues the Divine kindness which insured to Cain freedom from the revenge of his fellow-men.

      (2) Another L. is mentioned in Gen 5 25.28 (cf 1 Ch 1 3; Lk 3 36), the son of Methuselah

      Lamedh Lamp



      and the father of Noah. His words (Gen 5 29) show the great difference between this descendant of Seth and the descendant of Cain. While the one is stimulated to a song of defiance by the worldly inventions of his sons, the other, in pro phetical mood, expresses his sure 1 belief in the corning of better times, and calmly and prayerfully awaits the period of comfort and rest which lie expected to be ushered in by his son Noah. WILLIAM BAUU

      LAMEDH, lii mcth (b): The 12th letter of the Ileb alphabet; transliterated in this Encyclopaedia

      as /. It came also to be used for the number 30. For name, etc, see ALPHAHKT.

      LAMENT, la-men t . See Music.

      LAMENTATION, lam-en-ta shun. Sec; BURIAL, III, 2; IV, 4, 5, 6.

      LAMENTATIONS, lam-en-ta shunz, BOOK OF The Lamentations of Jeremiah: This is a col lective name which tradition has given

      1. Name to 5 elegies found in the Heb Canon

      that lament the fate of destroyed Jerus. The rabbis call this little book Ekhah (Jlp^ , "how"), according to the word of lament with which it begins, or klnulh (IHl-^p). On the basis of the latter term the LXX calls it Bprivoi, thrtnoi, or Lat Thrctti, or "Lamentations."

      The little book consists of 5 lamentations, each one forming the contents of a chapter. The first

      4 are marked by the acrostic use of the

      2. Form alphabet. In addition, the klnah

      ("elegy") meter is found in these hymns, in which a longer line (3 or 4 accents) is followed by a shorter (2 or 3 accents). In chs 1 and 2 the acrostic letters begin three such double lines; in ch 4, however, two double lines. In ch 3 a letter controls three pairs, but is repeated at the beginning of each line. In ch 5 the alphabet is wanting; but in this case too the number of pairs of lines agrees with the number of letters in the Heb alphabet, i.e. 22. In chs 2, 3 and 4, the letter *ayin follows pe, as is the case in Ps 34. Ch 1, however, follows the usual order.

      These 5 hymns all refer to the great national catastrophe that overtook the Jews and in par ticular the capital city, Jerus, through

      3. Contents the Chaldaeans, 587-586 BC. The

      sufferings and the anxieties of the city, the destruction of the sanctuary, the cruelty and taunts of the enemies of Israel, esp. the Edomites, the disgrace that befell the king and his nobles, priests and prophets, and that, too, not without their own guilt, the devastation and ruin of the country all this is described, and appeal is made to the mercy of God. A careful sequence of thought cannot be expected in the lyrical feeling and in the alphabetical form. Repetitions are found in large numbers, but each one of these hymns emphasizes some special feature of the calamity. Ch 3 is unique, as in it one person describes his own peculiar sufferings in connection with the general calamity, and then too in the name of the others begins a psalm of repentance. This person did not suffer so severely because he was an exceptional sinner, but because of the unrighteousness of his people. These hymns were not written during the siege, but later, at a time when the people still vividly remem bered the sufferings and the anxieties of that time and w r hen the impression made on them by the fall of Jerus was still as powerful as ever.

      Who is the author of these hymns? Jewish tra dition is unanimous in saying that it was Jeremiah. The hymns themselves are found anonymously in

      the Heb text, while the LXX has in one an additional statement, the He?) style of which would lead us to

      conclude that it was found in the origi- 4. Author nal from which the version was made.

      This statement reads: "And it came to pass, after Israel had been taken away captive and Jerus had been laid waste, that Jeremiah sat weeping, and uttered this lamentation over Jerus and said." The Tg also states that Jeremiah was the author. The rabbis and the church Fathers have no doubts on the subject. Jerome (cf on Zee 12 11) thinks that 2 Ch 35 25 refers to these hymns. The same is said by Jos (Ant, X, v, 1). If this were the case, then the writer of Ch would have regarded Lam as having been written because of the death of Josiah. But this misunderstanding is not to be ascribed to him. It was easily possible that he was acquainted with lamentations of such a nature, but which afterward were lost. At all events, Jeremiah was by nature adapted to the composition of such elegies, as is proved by his book of prophecies.

      Only in modern times has the authorship of these hymns by Jeremiah been seriously called into ques tion; and it is now denied by most critics. For this they give formal and material reasons. The language of these lamentations shows many simi larities to the discourses of Jeremiah, but at the same time also many differences. The claim that the alphabetical scheme is not worthy of Jeremiah is a prejudice caused by the taste of our times. Heb poets had evidently been making use of such methods for a long time, as it helps materially in memorizing. At the time of the first acute suffer ing on account of the destruction of Jerus, in fact, he would probably not have made use of it. But we have in this book a collection of lamentations written some time after this great catastrophe. The claim has also been made that the views of Jeremiah and those of the composer or the com posers of these poems differ materially. It is said that Jeremiah emphasizes much more strongly the guilt of the people as the cause of the calamity than is done in these hymns, which lament the fate of the people and find the cause of it in the sins of the fathers (5 7), something that Jeremiah is said not to accept (Jer 31 29 f). However, the guilt of the people and the resultant wrath of God are often brought out in these hymns; and Jeremiah does not deny (31 29 f) that there is anything like inherited guilt. He declares rather that in the blessed future things would be different in this respect. Then, too, we are not to forget that if Jeremiah is the author of these patriotic hymns, he does not speak in them as the prophet and the appointed accuser of his people, but that he is at last permitted to speak as he humanly feels, although there is no lack of prophetical reminiscences (cf Lam 4 21 f). In these hymns he speaks out of the heart that loves his Jerus and his people, and he utters the priestly prayer of intercession, which he was not allowed to do when announcing the judgment over Israel. The fact that he also evinces great reverence for the unfortunate king and his Divinely given hereditary dignity (4 20), although as a prophet he had been compelled to pronounce judgment over him, would not be unthinkable in Jeremiah, who had shown warm sympathies also for Jehoiachim (22 24.28). A radical difference of sentiment between the two authors is not to be found. On the other hand, a serious difficulty arises if w r e claim that Jeremiah was not the author of Lam in the denunciations of Lam over the prophets of Jerus (2 14; 4 13). How could the great prophet of the Destruction be so ignored if he himself were not the author of these sentiments? If he was himself the author, we can easily understand this omission. In his book



      Lamedh Lamp

      of prophecies he has spoken exactly the same way about the prophets. To this must be added, that Lam 3 forces us to regard Jeremiah as the author, because of the personal sufferings that are here described. Compare esp. 3 14.37 f. 53 ff. 61.63. What other person was during the period of this catastrophe the cynosure of all eyes as was the prophet, esp., too, because he was guiltless? The claim that here, not an individual, but the personi fied nation is introduced as speaking, is altogether improbable, and in some passages absolutely im possible (vs 14.48).

      This little book must accordingly be closely con nected with the person of Jeremiah. If he himself is the author, he must have composed it in his old age, when he had time and opportunity to live over again all the sufferings of his people and of himself. It is, however, more probable, esp. because of the language of the poems, that his disciples put this book in the present shape of uniform sentential utterances, basing this on the manner of lamenta tions common to Jeremiah. In this way the origin of ch 3 can be understood, which cannot arti ficially be shaped as his sayings, as in this case the personal feature would be more distinctly expressed. It was probably compiled from a number of his utterances.

      In the Heb Canon this book is found in the third division, called k - tliiiblilin, or Sacred Writings, t get her with the Pss. However, the LXX adds t 1 is book to Jer, or rather, to the Book of Bar, found i : xt after Jer. The Hebrews count it among the 5 i e (/hilloth, or Rolls, which were read on promi nent anniversary days. The day for the Lamenta tion was the 9th of Ab, the day of the burning of the temple. In the Roman Catholic church it is read on the last three clays of Holy Week.

      LITFR \\TTJRE. Comms. of Thonius, Ewald, Niigols- barh, Gerlach, Koil, Clioyne, Oettli, Lohr, Budde; art. by Robertson Smith on "Lamentations" in EB.


      LAMP, LAMPSTAND, lamp stand ("PJ, i;, "P3 rnr, ncr, TE 1 ? , lappldh, Phoen ~& Cb , lampadh, whence \\a(Aira,s, lam pas; X.VXVQS, luchtios, is also used) : Ner or nlr is properly light" or "a light-giving thing," hence "lamp," and is so rendered in RV, but often "candle" in AV. Its use in connection with the tabernacle and the temple (Ex 25 37 ff; 2 Ch 4 20 f), where oil was employed for light (Ex 35 14;

      Lamps: Figs. 1, 2.

      Lev 24 2), shows that this is its proper meaning. Lappldh is properly "a torch" and is thus rendered generally in RV, but "lamp" in Isa 62 1 where it is used as a simile. AV renders it "lamp usually, but "torch" in Nah 2 3f; Zee 12 6. In Job 12 5 RV renders it "for misfortune," regarding it as composed of the noun "PS , pUh, and the preposi tion b , I. Lampas in Gr corresponds to it, but luchnos is also rendered in RV "lamp," while AV gives "candle," as in Mt 5 15 and corresponding passages in the other Gospels.

      Lamps were in use in very remote times, though we have few allusions to them in the early history

      of Egypt. There are indications that 1. Forms they were used there. Niches for and History lamps are found in the tombs of Tell

      el-Amarna (Arch. Survey of Egypt, Am Tab, Part IV, 14) . Lampstands are also represented (ib, Part III, 7). Torches were of course used before lamps, and are mentioned in Gen (15 17 RV), but clay lamps were used in Canaan by the Amorites before the Israelites took possession. The excava-


      Lamps: Figs. 3, 4, G, 14.

      tions in Pal have furnished thousands of specimens, and have enabled us to trace the development from about 2000 BC onward. The exploration carried out at Lachish (Tdl Hesy) and Gezer (Tell Jezer} by the Pal Exploration Fund has given ample material for the purpose, and the numerous examples from tombs all over Pal and Syria have supplied a great variety of forms.

      "Lamp" is used in the sense of a guide in Ps 119

      105; Prov 6 23, and for the spirit, which is called

      the lamp of Jeh in man (Prov 20 27),

      2. Figura- and it of course often signifies the light

      tive Use itself. It is used also for the son who

      is to succeed and represent his father

      (1 K 15 4), and it perhaps is employed in this

      sense in the phrase, "The lamp of the wicked shall

      be put out" (Job 21 17; Prov 13 9; and perhaps

      Job 18 6).

      The early Can. or Amorite lamp was a shallow, saucer-like bowl with rounded bottom and vertical rim, slightly pointed or pinched on one side where the lighted end of the wick was placed (Fig. 1). This form continued into Jew ish times, but was gradu ally changed until the spout was formed by drawing the rim of the sides together, forming a narrow open channel, the remainder of the rim being rolled outward and flat tened (Fig. 2), the bottom being also flattened. This was the early Heb pattern and persisted for centu ries. The open bowl was gradually closed in, first at the spout, where the rim of one side was lapped over the other, and finally the whole surface was closed with only an orifice in the center for receiving the oil, and at the same time the spout was lengthened. This transforma tion is seen in Fig. 3, a lamp of the Seleucid period, or from 300 BC. These lamps have usually a cir cular foot and sometimes a string-hole on one side. The next development was a circular bowl with a somewhat shorter spout, sometimes being only a bulge in the rim, so that the orifice for the wick falls in the rim, the orifice for filling being quite small

      Lamp: Fig. 5.

      Lamp Language of NT



      at (lie bottom of a saucer-like depression in the center of the bowl. There is sometimes a loop handle affixed on the side opposite to the spout. Sometimes the handle is horizontal, but, commonly vertical (Fig. 4). This form is called Roman, and the bowl is often ornamented with mythological human or animal figures (Fig. f>). Other forms arc 1


      .), 10, 11.

      Lamp: Fig. 12.

      elongated, having numerous wick holes (Fig. 0). The mythological and animal forms were rejected by the Jews as contrary to their traditions, and they made lamps with various other designs on the bowl, such as vine leaves, cups, scrolls, etc. (Figs. 7-11). One very marked Jewish design is the seven- branched candlestick (Ex 26 32) of the temple (Fig. 12). The lamps of flu; parable of the Ten Virgins were probably similar to these (Alt 25 1 f f). The latest form of the clay lamp was what is called Byzantine, the bowl of which has a large orifice in the center and tapers gradually to the spout (Fig. 13); they are ornamented commonly with a palm branch between the cen tral orifice and the wick- hole, or with a cross. Sometimes there is an in scription on the margin (Fig. 13). The words on this read "fws Kv[piov] <f>evi

      TTCLfflV KO.X77? PIlOS ku[rWU\\

      />//< ni {Hixix Av//<y The light

      of the Lord shines to all

      (beautifully?]." Others

      read, "The Lord is my

      light"; "beautiful light,"

      etc. These inscriptions

      determine the period as

      being Christian. In Rom times, and earlier also,

      bronze was much used for the finer lamps, often

      with covers for the orifice and sometimes wit h chain

      and ring for hanging (Fig. 14). Very elaborate

      designs in this material occur.

      These terra-cotta lamps are found in the tombs and burial places throughout Pal and Syria, and they were evidently de posited there in connec tion with the funeral rites. Very few are found in Can. tombs, but they be come numerous in later times and esp. in the early Christian centuries. The symbolism in their use for funeral purposes is indi cated by the inscriptions abo ve m e n t i o n c d (see PEFS, 1904, 326 ff; Ex plorations in Pal, by Bliss. Macalister and Wunsch, 4to, published by the Pal Exploration Fund). These lamps were used by the

      peasants of the country Lamp: Fig. U.

      down to recent t hnes, when petroleum has superseded olive oil for lighting. The writer has seen lamps of the Jewish and Horn

      period with surface blackened with recent usage. Olive oil was commonly used, but terebinth oil also (Thomson, LJi, 111, 472). H. PORTER

      LAMPSACUS, lamp sa-kus. See SA.MPSA.MES.

      LANCE, lans, LANCER, lan ser, LANCET, lan - set. See ARMOR, III, 4, (3); 1 K 18 28 11 V "lances."

      LAND ([1] -pX, We; [2] H^-S, (Wiamafi; [3] " , Mlrl/H li, "a piece of land"; [4] -yfj, yf, "earth"; [")] d-ypos, fiymx, field"; [(}] \\<apa., chora, "region"; [7] x w P"> v > c/torion, dim. of churn; [X] r]p6s, xcros, "dry land"; [9] HITS , ezrdh, "native," AV "born in the land," "born among you," RV "home-born" [Lev 19 34; 24 10; Nu 15 30]; "like a green tree in its native soil" _[Ps 37 3o]): Ercq occurs hun dreds of times and is used in much the same way as ddhdtnah, which also occurs often: e.g. "land of Egypt," trcf iniqrnijim (Gen 13 10), and adhmath misrayim (Gen 47 20). The other words occur less oft en, and are used in the senses indicated above. See COUNTRY; EARTH. ALFRED ELY DAY

      LAND-CROCODILE (RV), land-crok 6-dil 0TJ3, ko"h; LNN xajxaiXewv, chamailedn, Lev 11 30; AV Chameleon): Ku /l h is found only here, meaning an animal, the fifth in the list of unclean "creeping things." Elsewhere is it tr d "strength" or "power," and it has been thought that here is meant the desert monitor, Varanus griseus, a gigantic lizard, which is common in Egypt and Pal, and which attains the length of 4 ft. "Chameleon," which AV has here, is used by RV for iinshcmdh (AV "mole"), the eighth in the list of unclean "creeping things" (cf nasham, "to breathe"; tr d "swan" in ver 18 m). While it is by no means certain what animal is meant, there could be no objection to "monitor" or "desert monitor." "Land-crocodile" is objec tionable because it is not a recognized name of any animal. See CHAMELEON; LIZARD.



      LANDMARK, land mark (blljl, (fbhul, lit. "boundary"): The boundary may have been marked, as at present, simply by a furrow or stone. The iniquity of removing a landmark is frequently insisted on (Dt 19 14; 27 17; Prov 22 2X; 23 10; Job 24 2 [g e bhuluh]), its removal being equiva lent to theft,

      LANE, Ian (PVJJITI, rhume): An alley or bypath of a city. Occurs once in Lk 14 21, "Go out quick ly into the streets and lanes of the city"; elsewhere 1r d "street," e.g. Mt 6 2; Acts 9 11; Ecclus 9 7; Tob 13 18.

      LANGUAGE, lan gwfij, OF THE NEW TESTA MENT (Greek). See ARAMAIC LANGUAGE, also:


      1. The Old Point of View

      2. The Revolution

      3. The Proof of the New Position

      (1) The Papyri

      (2) The Ostraka

      (3) The Inscriptions

      (4) Modern Greek

      (5) Historical and Comparative Grammar

      4. Characteristics of the Vernacular koine II. LITERARY ELEMENT* IN THE NT




      /. The Vernacular "koine" the Language of

      the NT. The ghost of the old Purist controversy is now laid to rest for good and all. The story




      of that episode has interest chiefly for the historian of language anil of the vagaries of the human in tellect. See Winer-Thayer, Grammar

      1. The Old of the Idiom of the NT, 1SG9, 12-19, Point of and Schmiedel s Winer, 2, for a sketch View of this once furious strife. In the 17th

      cent, various scholars tried to prove that the Gr of t he NT was on a par with the literary Attic of the classic period. But the Hebraists won the victory over them and sought to show that it was Hebraic; Gr, a special variety, if not dialect, a Bib. Cir. The 4th ed of Cremer s Biblico-T/ieo- logical Lexicon of NT Gr (tr d by W. Urwick, 1892) quotes, with approval, Rothe s remark (Dogmatik, 1863,238):

      "Wo may appropriately speak of a language of the Holy Ghost. For in the Bible it is evident that the Holy Spirit has been at work, moulding for itself a distinct ively religious mode of expression out of the language of t he country which it has chosen as its sphere, and transforming the linguistic elements which it found ready to hand, and even conceptions already existing, into a shape and form appropriate to itself and all its own." Creiner acids: ""We have a very clear and striking proof of this in NT Gr."

      This was only twenty years ago and fairly repre sented the opinion of that day. Hatch in 1889 (/ , * //s in Bib. Gr, 34) held that with most of the NT words the key lay in the LXX. But Winer (Winer-Thayer, 20) had long ago seen _ that the vernacular koine was the special foundation of the diction of the NT," though he still admitted "a Jowish-Cr, which native Greeks did not entirely understand" (p. 27). He did not see the practical identity of NT Gr with the vernacular koine ( common" Greek), nor did Schmiedel in the 8. Auflage of Winer (I. Theil; II. Theil, erstes Heft, 1894-97). In the second ed of his Grammar of NT Gr (ET by Thackeray, 1905, 2), Blass sees the (lawn of the new day, though his book was iirst written before it came. Viteau (Etude xur le (/rec <lu Noun an. Testament, I, Le verbe, 1893, II, Le sujet, JL896) occupies wholly the old position of a Judaic Gr. An extreme instance of that view is seen in Guille- inard s Hebraism* in the Gr Testament (1879).

      A turn toward the truth comes with H. A. A.

      Kennedy s Sources of the NT Gr (1895). Hi- finds

      the explanation of the vocabulary

      2. The of both the LXX and the NT to be Revolution the vernacular which he traces back

      to Aristophanes. It is a good exercise to read Westcott s discussion of the "Language of the XT" iii/Aft,HI (1888), and then turn to Moulton, "Language of the NT," in the 1-vol 1-lDB. \\Vest- cott says: "The chief peculiarities of the syntax of the NT lie in the reproduction of Heb forms." Moulton remarks: "There is no reason to believe that any NT writer who ever lived in Pal learned Gr only as a foreign language when he went abroad." Still better is it to read Moulton, "New Testament Greek in the Light of Modern Discovery" in Cam bridge. Biblical Essays (1909, 461-505); Deiss- mann, Lit/tit from the Ancient East (1911); or Angus, "The koine, the Language of the NT," Princeton Review, January, 1910, 42-92. The revolution has come to stay. It is now clear that the Gr of the NT is not a jargon nor a patois. In all essential respects it is just the vernacular koine of the 1st cent. AD, the lingua franca of the Gr- Rom empire, the legacy of Alexander the Great s conquest of the East. This world-speech was_ at bottom the late Attic vernacular with dialectical and provincial influences. It was not a decaying tongue, but a virile speech admirably adapted to the service of the many peoples of the time. The able article in vol III of IIDB on the "Language of the NT" by Dr. J. H. Thayer appeared in 1900, and illustrates how quickly an encyclopaedia article

      may become out of date. There is a wealth of knowledge here displayed, as one would expect, but Thayer still speaks of "this species of Greek," "this peculiar idiom," "Jewish Greek," though he sees that its basis is "the common or spoken Greek." The last topic discussed by him is "Problems." He little thought that the biggest "problem" so near solution was the character of the language itself. It was Adolph Deissmann, then of Heidel berg, now of Berlin, who opened the new era in the knowledge of the language of the NT. His Hibel- studien (zumeist aus den Papyri und Inschriflen znr Geschichte der Sprache, dcs Schrifttums und der Religion des hellenistischen Judentums und des Urchristentums) appeared in 1895. In this epoch- making volume he proved conclusively from the papyri and the inscriptions that many of the seem ing Hebraisms in the LXX and the NT were com mon idioms in the vernacular koine. He boldly claimed that the bulk of the Hebraisms were falsely so termed, except in the case of translating Gr from the Heb or Aram, or in "perfect" Hebraisms, gen uine Gr usage made more common by reason of similarity to the Sem idiom. In 1897 he produced Ncue Bibelstudicn, sprachgeschichtliche Beilrdge zumeist ans den Papyri und Inschriften zur Er- klarung des Neuen Testaments.

      In 1901 (2d ed in 1903) these two volumes were trd as one by A. Grieve under the title liihlr Xtittlii x. Deissmami s other volumes have confirmed his thesis. The most important are Nao Liuht on the NT (1907), The Philology of the Gr Bible (190S), Lie/it com Oxtrn (1908), Light from the Ancient East (tr by Strachan, 1910), St. Paul in the Lit/ht of Social and I{rli</i.<>ux ///.s- tory (1912). In Light from the. Ancient Eaxt, Deissmann illustrates the NT language with much detail from the papyri, ostraka and inscriptions, ile is now at work on a new lexicon of the NT which will make use of the fresh knowledge from these sources.

      The otherwise helpful work of E. Preuschen, Vollstdndiges griechisch-deutsches Handworterbuch zu i/en Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der uhrigen urchristlichen Literal ur (1908-10), fails to utilize the papyri and inscriptions while drawing on the LXX and the NT Apoc and other early Christian literature. But this has been done by Ebeling in his Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch znm NT, 1913. The next stop was made by A. Thumb, the great philologian, in his Griecliische Sprache im Zeilalter des Ilellcnismus; Beitrdgc znr Geschichte und Bcurteilung der "koine," 1901, in which the real character of the koine was for the first time properly set forth.

      Winer and Blass had both lamented the need of a grammar of the koine, and that demand still exists, but Thumb went a long way toward supplying it in this volume. It is to be hoped that he will yet prepare a grammar of the koine. Thumb s interests cover the whole range of comparative philology, but ho has added in this field "Die Forschungen iiber dio helle- nistische Sprache in den Jahren 1896-1901," Archiv fur Papyrusforschung, II, 390 f; " Prinzipienfragen dor Koine-Forschung," AVi/c Jnhrh. fur ,/s kl. Alt., 190(3; "Die sprachgeschichtliche Stellungdes biblischen Griech- isch," Theoloijische Rundschau, V, 85-99.

      The other most important name to add is that of J. Hope Moulton, who has the credit of being the first to apply the new knowledge directly to the NT Gr. His Grammar of NT Gr, 1, Prolegomena (1906, 2d ed, 1906, 3d ed, 1908, Ger. tr in 1911, Einlei- tung in die Sprache des NT) is a brilliant piece of work and relates the Gr of the NT in careful detail to the vernacular koine, and shows that in all im portant points it is the common Gr of the time and not a Hebraic Gr. Moulton probably pressed his point too far in certain respects in his zeal against Hebraisms, but the essential position of Deissmann and Moulton is undoubtedly sound.

      Moulton had previously published the bulk of this material as "Grammatical Notes from the Papyri The Expositor, 1901, 271-S2; 1903, 104-21, 423-39;



      The (7iY; Review, 1001, 31 -;57, -1:54-41; 1004, 10t>- 1L>, 151-55; (. Imriictcristics of NT Ur," ! !,< Ex positor, 10O4.

      In 1!)() ( .) appeared his essay, Greek- in the, Light of Modern Discovery (see above). Since 1908, The Expositor has had ;i series of ])apers by J. H. Moul- lon and George Milligan called "Lexical Notes from the Papyri/ which are very useful on the lexical side of the language. Thus the study is fairly launched on its new career. In 1900, A. T. Robertson produced a Syllabus on the NT (ir Syn- tax from the standpoint of comparative philology, which was rewritten in 1908, with the added view point of the papyri researches, as A Short (1 nun- mar of tin- <;> A" T CM ed, 190!), 3d ed, 1912; trans- lations in Italian in 1910, Or. and Fr. in 1911, Dutch in 1912). In October, 1909, S. Angus pub lished a good article in the Jlarrard Theological Renew on "Modern Methods in NT Philology," followed in January, 1910, by another in the Pri/iee- ton Review on "Thekoine, the Language of the NT." The new knowledge appears also in Jakob Wacker- nagel, "Die griechische Sprache" (pp. 291-318, 2d ed, of Die gricchixche unit lalt inixchc Liliralur lu/d Sprache, 1907). L. Radermacher has set forth very ably "die sprachlichen Vorgiinge in ihrem Zusain- menhang," in his Ncutestameulliche Grammatik: Das Griechiseh des Ncuen Testaments im Zusammerihang mil der Yolks* prachc. It is in reality the background of the NT Gr and is a splendid preparation for the study of the Gr NT. A full discussion of the new knowledge in grammatical detail has been prepared by A. T. Robertson under the title A Grammar of the. Gr NT in the Light of Historical Research (in press). Moulton and Schmiedel arc planning also to complete their works.

      The proof of the new position is drawn from several sources:

      (1) The papyri. These rolls have lain in the museums of the world many years and attracted little attention. For lists of the chief 3. The collections of the papyri see Moulton,

      Proof of Prolegomena, 259-02; Milligan, Se- the New lections from the Gr Papyri, xi, xii; Position Mayser, Grammatik der griechischcn Papyri aus der Ptolcmacrzeit; Laut- und Wortlehre, vii-x; Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, 20-41; Robertson, Grammar of the Gr NT, Bibliography. New volumes of papyri as a result of recent explorations in Egypt are pub lished each year. See PAPYRUS, and in the other encyclopaedias s.v. Most of the papyri discovered belong to the period of the koine (the first three centuries BC and AD in round numbers), and with great wealth of illustration they show the life of the common people of the time, whether in Egypt or Herculaneum (the two chief regions represented). There are various degrees of culture shown, as can be seen in any of the large volumes of Grenfcll and Hunt, or in the handbooks of Lietzmann, Griechisdie Papyri (190.")), and of Milligan, Greek Papyri (1910). They come from the scrap-heaps of the long ago, and are mainly receipts, contracts, letters of busi ness or love, military documents, etc. They show all grades of culture, from the illiterate with phonetic spelling to the man of the schools. But we have here the language of life, not of the books. In a most startling way one notes the similarities of vocabulary, forms, and syntax between the lan guage of the papyri of the 1st cent. AD and that of the NT books. As early as 1778, F. W. Sturz made use of the Chart a Borgiana, "the first papyrus ever brought to Europe" (Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, 39), and in 1841 Thiersch like wise saw the value of the papyri for the philology of the LXX. But the matter was not pressed. Lightfoot threw out a hint about the value of letters

      of the people, which was not followed till Deissmann saw the point; cf Moulton, Prol., 242. It is not, necessary here to illustrate the matter at length. Deissmann takes up in detail the "Biblical" words in Thayer s Lexicon, and has no difficulty in finding most of them in the papyri (or inscriptions). Thus 7r\\i7po0op<?a>, pleniphoreo, is shown to be common in the papyri. See Deissmann, Bible Studies and Light from the Ancient East, for extensive lists. The papyri show also the same meanings for many words once thought peculiar to the Bible or the NT. An instance is seen in the official sense of irpefffiv- Tfpos, presbtiteros, in the papyri, 6 7rpeo-/3i)repos rijs K6fj.r]s, ho presbuteros Its homes (Pap. Lugd. A 35 f), "without doubt an official designation" (Deissmann, Bible Studies, 155). tSo d5eX06s, (ulelphos, for members of the community, ava.ffrpo<pr), anastropht, for manner of life, avTi\\rjfj.-^is, anlilei/i- pxis, "help," \\eLTovpjia, leitourgia, "public service," irdpoiKos, pdroikos, "sojourner," etc (Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, 107). R. Helbing (Grammatik der Septuaginta, 190S) and H. St. John Thackeray (A Gram mar of the OT in, Gr according to the LXX, 1909) have applied the new knowledge to the language of the LXX, and it has been dis cussed with much ability in the first volumes. The use of the papyri for grammatical purposes is made easier by the excellent volume of E. Mayser, Grammatik der griechischen Papyri aus der Plole- n/iie/;~( it; Laut- und Wortlehre (1900), though his "Syntax," is still a desideratum. Useful also is G. Cronert, Mcmoria Graeca Hcrculanensis (1903).

      (2) The ostraka. The literature on this subject is still small in bulk. In 1899 ITrieh Wilcken pub lished Griechische Ostraka aus Aegypten und Nubien, and in 1902 \\V. E. Crum produced his book of Chris tian ostraka called Coptic Ostraca from the Collec tions of the Egypt Exploration Fund, the Cairo Museum, and Others. This was followed in 1905 by H. R. Hall s Coptic and Gr Texts of the Christian Period from Ostraka, Stelae, etc. These broken pieces of pottery were used by the lowest classes as writing material. It was very widely used because; it was so very cheap. Wilcken has done more than anyone else to collect and decipher the ostraka. Deissmann (Light from the Ancient Euxt, 40) notes that Clean thes the Stoic "wrote on ostraka or on leather" because too poor to buy papyrus. So he quotes the apology of a Christian for using potsherd for a letter: "Excuse me that I cannot find papyrus as I am in the country" (Crum, Coptic Ostraca, 55). The use of d7r<?xw, apecho, on an ostrakon for a receipt in full, illustrates well the frequent use of this word in the NT (Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, 111).

      (3) The inscriptions. Here caution must be used since many of the inscriptions give, not the vernacular, but the literary language. The official (legal and military) decrees often appear in very formal style. But a number do preserve the ver nacular idiom and often have the advantage of being dated. These inscriptions arc chiefly on stone, but some are on metal and there are a few wax tablets. The material is vast and is constantly growing. See list of the chief collections in Deiss- mann s Light from the Ancient East, 10-20. Boeckh is the great name here. As early as 1779 Walch (Obscrvationes in Matt, ex graecis inscriptionibus) made use of Gr inscriptions for NT exegesis, and R. A. Lipsius says that his father (K. H. A. Lipsius, author of Grammatische Untersuchungen uber die biblische Gracitat) "contemplated a large grammar of the Gr Bible in which he would have availed himself of the discoveries in modern epigraphy" (Deissmann, Light, etc, 15). Schmiedel has made good use of the inscriptions so far in his revision of Winer; H. A. A. Kennedy (Sources of NT Gr, 1895),



      H. Anz (Subsidia ad Cogn., etc, 1894), R. Hclbing (Grammatik der Septuaginta, 1908), J. Psichari (Essai sur le Grec de la Sepiante, 1908), H. St. John Thackeray (A Grammar of the OT in Gr according to the LXX, 1909), and R. Meister (Prol. zu einer Grammalik der Septuaginta, 1907) turned to good account the inscriptions for the linguistic problems of the LXX, as indeed Hatch (Essays in Bib. Gr, 1889) had already done. W. Dittenbergcr added some valuable "Grammatica et ortho- graphica" to his Orientis Gracci Inscriptiones Se- lidae (2 vols, 1903, 1905). See also E. L. Hicks and G. F. Hill, Gr Historical Inscriptions (1901), and Hicks s paper "On Some Political Terms Em ployed in the NT," Classical Renew, 1887, 4 ff , 42 ff. W. M. Ramsay s Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia (2 vols, 1895, 1897) and his other works show keen insight in the use of the inscriptions. Deissmann s Bible Studies (1895, 1901) applied the knowledge of the inscriptions to the LXX and to the NT. In his Light from the Ancient East (1910) copious use is made of the inscriptions for NT study. Moulton (Prol., 1906, 258 f, for lists) is alive to the value of the inscriptions for NT grammar, as indeed was Blass (Grammatik dcs neutestamentlichen Griechisch, 1890) before him.

      Cf, further, G. Thieme, Die Inschriften von Mag nesia am M dander und das Neue Testament (1906); T. Ntigeli, Der Wortschatz des A pastels Paulus (1905), and J. Koufflac, Recherches sur les cararteres du Grec dans le NT d apres les I user, de Priene (1911). Special treatises or phases of the grammar of the inscrip tions appear in Meisterhans-Schwyzer, Grammatik der attischen Inschriften (1900); Nachmanson, Laute und For men der magnetischen Inschriften ( 189G) ; Schweizer, Grammatik der per gamenischen Inschriften (1 s98).

      Moulton and Milligan have drawn freely also on the inscriptions for their "Lexical Studies" running in The Expositor (1908-). The value of the in scriptions for the Gr of the NT is shown at every turn. For instance, irpurbroKos, prototokos, is _ no longer a "Biblical" word. It appears in a metrical inscription (undated) of Trachonitis on a tomb of a pagan "high priest" and "friend of the gods" (Deissmann, Light, etc, 88); cf Kaibcl, Epigram- mata Gracca, etc, no. 460. Even dydrrr], agape, occurs on a pagan inscription of Pisidia (Papers of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 2, 57). See, further, W. H. P. Hatch s "Some Illustrations of NT Usage from Gr Inscrip tions of Asia Minor," Journal of Bib. Lit., 1908, 134-46.

      (4) Modern Greek. As early as 1834 Heilmeier saw that the modern Gr vernacular went back to the koine (Moulton, Prol., 29), but it is only in recent years that it was clearly seen that the modern Gr of the schools arid usually in the newspapers is artificial, and not the real vernacular of today. Mullach s work (Grammatik der griechischen Vul- garsprache, 1856) was deficient in this respect. But Jannaris Historical Gr Grammar (1897) Carries the history of the vernacular Gr along with the literary style. Hatzidakis, Einleitung in die neu- gricchische Grammatik, 1892, clears the air very much and connects the modern Gr with the NT. But it is to Thumb that we are indebted for the best knowledge of the vernacular (TJ SwoTticfi, he dcmotike} as opposed to the literary language (? KaOapehwra, he kuthareuousa) of today. Mitsotakis (Praktische Grammatik, 1891) had treated both together, though Wied (Die Kunst, die neugriechische Volk- sprache) gave only the vernacular. But Wied is only elementary. Thumb alone has given an ade quate treatment of the modern Gr vernacular, showing its unity and historical contact with the vernacular koine (Handbuch der neugriechischen Volkssprachc, 1895; Thumb-Angus, Handbook of Modern Greek Vernacular, 1912). Thus one can

      ee the living stream of the NT speech as it has come on down through the ages. It is impossible to overestimate the importance of modern Gr vernacular in the knowledge of NT Gr. The dis appearance of the optative, the vanishing of the infinitive before iva, hina, and itacism are but in stances of many others which are luminous in the light of the modern Gr vernacular. See Psichari, Essaisdegrammaire historique neo-grecque (1886-89). (5) Historical and comparative grammar. From this source the koine gets a new dignity. It will take one too far afield to sketch here the linguistic revolution wrought since the publication of, and partly caused by, Bopp s Verglcichende Gram matik (1857), following Sir Win. Jones s discovery of Sanskrit. The great work of Brugmann and Delbrilck (Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen, I-V, 1892-1909) marks the climax of the present development, though many workers have won distinction in this field. The point to accent here is that by means of comparative philology the Gr language is seen in its proper relations with other languages of the Indo-Gcrmanic family, and the right interpretation of case, preposition, mode, tense, voice, etc, is made possible. The old traditional empiricism is relegated to the scrap-heap, and a new grammatical science consonant with the facts has taken its place. See Delbriick, Intro to the Study of Language (1882), Giles, Short Manual of Comparative Philology (1901), for a resume of the facts. Wright, Comparative Grammar of the Gr Language (1912), applies the new learning to the Gr tongue. The progress in classical scholarship is well shown by Sandys in his History of Classical Scholarship (I-III, 1906- 8) and by Gudeman, Geschichte der klass. Phil- ologie, 2. Aufl, 1909. Innumerable monographs have enriched the lit. of this subject. It is now feasible to see the Gr language as a whole, and grasp its historical unity. Seen in this light the koine is not a dying tongue or a corrupt dialect. It is a normal and natural evolution of the Gr dialects into a world-speech when Alexander s conquests made it possible. The vernacular koine which has developed into the modern Gr vernacular was itself the direct descendant of the Attic vernacular which had its roots in the vernacular of the earlier dialects. The dialectical developments are closely sketched by Thumb, Handbuch der griechischen Dialekte (1909), and by Buck, Intro to the Study of Gr Dialects (1910), not to mention the older works of Iloffmann, Meister, etc. Jannaris has undertaken in his His torical Gr Grammar (1897) to sketch and interpret the facts of the Gr tongue throughout its long career, both in its literary and vernacular aspects. He has succeeded remarkably well on the whole, though not quite seeing the truth about the modern Gr vernacular. Schanz is seeking to lay the founda tion for still better work by his Beitrdge zur his- torischen Syntax der griechischen Sprache (1882-). But the NT student must be open to all the new light from this region, and it is very great. See, further, Dieterich, Untcrsuchungen zur Geschichte der griech. Sprache von der hellcn. Zeit (1898).

      As already indicated, the Gr of the NT is in the main just the vernacular koine of the 1st cent. AD, though Gr as used by men of ability 4. Charac- and varying degrees of culture. The teristics of most striking difference between the the Ver- vernacular koine and the literary nacular Attic is seen in the vocabulary. The

      "koine" writers in the literary koine show more likeness to the classic Attic, but even they reveal the changes due to the intervening centuries. There was, of course, no violent break. The changes came gradually and naturally. It is mainly at this point that Deissmann has done such



      brilliant work in his Hihl< Studies and other hooks. He has taken the lists of "Biblical" and "ecclesias tical" words, as given by Cremer and Thayer, and lias shown from the papyri, ostraka, inscriptions, or koine writers that they arc not peculiar to the Bible, but belong to the current speech of the time. The proof is so overwhelming and extensive that it cannot be given here. Some words have not yet been found in the non-Bib, koine, but they may be any day. Some few words, of course, belong to the very nature of Christianity (xpiffTia.v6s, cfiristianos, for instance), but a7r6<rroAos, ap6stolo8, /3a.TTTi(T/jL6s, baptisinfis, irdpoLKos, pdroikos, a-wa.- yuyri, sunagdge, and hundreds of others can no longer be listed as "Biblical." New meanings come to old words also. Cf SaifjAviov, daimonion. It is interesting to note that the NT shows many of the words found in Aristophanes, who caught up the vernacular of his day. The koine uses more words from the lower strata of society. Aris totle likewise has many words common in the koine, since he stands at the parting of the ways between the old dialects and the new koine of Alex ander s conquests. The koine develops a fondness for compound and even double compound (ses quipedalian) words; cf, for instance, dvfKStriyijTos, anekiliegetos; dveK\\d\\t]Tos, anckldletos; avt^epevvijTos, ancxereunetos; di TaTro/cptVo/xcu, antapokrinoinai; OIKO- 3eo"7r6T77s, oikodespotes; 6\\iy6^vxos, oligopsuchos;

      Trpoaava7T\\T]p6(j}, prosanapl&rdo; <Tvvat>Ti\\a./ji.f3dvo[j.a.i,

      sunantttambdnomai; virepevTvyxdvu, huperentugchdno;

      XpvcrodaKTvXios, chrusodakliUios, etc. The use of diminutives is also noteworthy in thekoineas in the modern Gr: cf OvydrpLov, thugdtrion; K\\ivdpiov, kli- ndrion; Kopdaiov, kordsion; tcwdpiov, knndrion; 6vdpiov } ondrion; o^dpiov, opxarion; irXoidpiov, ploidrion; uriov, otion, etc. The formation of words by juxta- position is very common as in TrXT/po-^op&o, plero- phoreo, x fi pb-JP ac P> , chciro-graphon. In phonetics it is to be noticed that , 01, 77, y, v, i all had the value of ee in "feet." This itacism was apparent in the early koine. So cu = e and o and w were not sharply distinguished. The Attic TT became <r<r, save in a few instances, like Adrrw, eldtto, /cpe/r- TUV, kreitton. The tendency toward de-aspira tion (cf Ionic) was manifest; cf e<j> e\\iri5i, eph helpidi, for the reverse process. Elision is less fre quent than in Attic, but assimilation is carried farther. The variable final consonants v and s are used generally before consonants. We find -et- for -iei- as in ireiv. Ovdeis, outheis, and fj-rjOeis, metheis, are common till 100 BC, when they gradually disappear before ovSeLs, oudcis, and /j.tjSeis, medeis. In general there is less sense of rhythm and more simplicity and clearness. Some of the subtle refinements of form and syntax of the classic did not survive in the koine vernacular. In accidence only a few points may be noted. In substantives the Ionic -pr?s, -rc.s, is frequent. The Attic second declension vanishes. In the third de clension forms like WKTCXJ , iniklaii, show assimilation to the first. Both x.dpiv, chdrin, &nd xdpira, chdrita, occur. Contraction is sometimes absent (cf Ionic) as in 6pewv, oreon. Adjectives show forms like dcr4>a\\7ji>, asphnJt n, and indeclinable TrX^pTjs, pleres, appears, and Trap, pan, for Trdi ra, pdnta (cf ^yav, megan), Sv<rt, dnsi, for SvoTv, duoin. The dual is gone. Even the dual pronouns eicdrepos, hckd- teros, and Trirepos, poleron, art" rare. Ti s, tin, is occasionally used like O<TTLS, h6nlis. "0? tdi>, h6s edn, is more frecjuent than 5s &v, hos an, in the 1st cent. AD. The two conjugations blend more and more into one, as the /ui-forms vanish. There is some confusion in the use of -dw and -ew-verbs, and new presents occur like a.TroKTtwu, apoklenno, oTTTiivij], oplnno, (TT-TIKU, stf-ko. The forms, ginumai, yivwcrKu, gindsko, are the rule now. There

      is much increase in aorists like eo"xa,<a, and imperfects like; elx a , cic/ia. The f(_>rm -o<rav, -osan (ei xoo-av, eichosom, <=<rx 0ffai , exchoxun) occasionally appears. Quite frequent is a perfect like SeouKav, dc/lokd/i, and t he augment is often absent in the plu perfect as in 8ed<JiKfL t drdfikri,. Per contra, a double; augment occurs in direKarfoTr], apekateste, and a treble augment in i]v<iuyj)-t)aa.v, enedchthesan. The temporal augment is often absent with diphthong as in olKodo/jL-r}6r], oikodoinethe. The koine has -Ttoffav, -tdsan, not -VTUV, -nldn. In syntax tin; tendency is toward simplicity, to short sentences, the paratactic construction, and the sparing use of particles. The vernacular koine avoids both the bombast of Asianism and the artificiality of Atti cism. There is, indeed, more freedom in violating the rules of concord as to gender, number, and case. The nominativus pendcns is common. The com parative does duty often for the superlative adjec tive, and the superlative generally has the elativc sense. The accusative is increasingly common with verbs. The line between transitive and in transitive verbs is not a hard-and-fast one. The growth in the use of prepositions both with nouns and in composition is quite noticeable, but some of the older prepositions, like d/j.(pL, am phi, are vanish ing. The cases used with various prepositions are changing. The instrumental use of iv, en, is very common. Many new adverbial and prepositional phrases have developed. The optative is nearly dead and the infinitive (apart from the use of TOV, loti, tv ry, en to, els r6, eis to, with the infinitive) is decaying before iva, hina. The future part, is rare. Mi?, mt, begins to encroach on otf, ou, with infinitives and participles. The periphrastic conjugation is specially common. The direct discourse is more frequent than the indirect. The non-final use of iva, hina, is quite noticeable. There are, besides, dialectical and provincial peculiarities, but these do not destroy the real unity of the vernacular koine any more than do individual traits of separate writers.

      //. Literary Elements in the NT. Deissmann (Light from the Ancient East, 245) is disposed to deny any literary quality to the NT books save the Ep. to the He. "The Ep. to the He shows us Christianity preparing for a flight from its native levels into the higher region of culture, and we are conscious of the beginnings of a Christian world- literature." He speaks of it also as "a work which seems to hang in the background like an intruder among the NT company of popular books." One feels that this is an extreme position and cannot be justified by the facts. It is true that Peter and John were dypdfj./j.aroi Kal t Siwrcu, agrdmmatoi kai idiotai (Acts 4 13), and not men of the schools, but this was certainly not the case with Luke and Paul who were men of literary culture in the truest sense. Luke and Paul were not Atticists, but that artificial idiom did not represent the best type of culture. Deissmann admits that the NT has be come literature, but, outside of He, he denies any literary quality in its composition. Paul, for in stance, wrote only "letters," not "epistles." But Rom and Eph confront us. See Milligan, Gr Papyri, xxxi, for a protest against the sweeping statement of Deissmann on this point. One need not go to the extreme of Blass, "Die rhythmische Komposi- tion des Hebr. Briefes," Thcol. Xtudicn und Krilik, 1902, 420-01; Die Ryllnncn der n^icitischen und roinixc/ieti Kunslprosa, 190."), to find in Hebrews and Paul s writings illustrations of the artificial rules of the Asianists. There is undoubtedly rhythm in Paul s eloquent passages (cf 1 Cor 13, 16), but it is the natural poetic quality of a soul aflame with high passions, not conformity (o rules of rhetoric. To deny literary quality to Luke and



      Paul is to give ;i narrow meaning to the word "literary" and to he the victim of a theory. Christianity did make use of the vernacular koine, the wonderful world-speech so providentially at hand. But the personal equation figured here as always. Men of culture differ in their conversa tion from illiterate men and more nearly approxi mate literary style. It is just in Luke 1 , Paul, and the author of He that we discover the literary flavor of men of ability and of culture, though free from artificiality and pedantry. The eloquence of He is that of passion, not of the art of Asianism. Indeed, the Gospels all show literary skill in the use of material and in beauty of language. _ The Gospel of Jn has the rare elevation and dignity of the highest type of mind. There is no Atticistic tendency in the NT as in Jos, Ant. There _is no posing for the present or for posterity. It is the hmguage of life, the vernacular in the main, but rising at times from the very force of passion to high plateaus of emotion and imagination and poetic grace from the pens of men of real ability, and in some instances of high culture.

      ///. The Semitic Influence. It is no longer pos sible to explain every variation in the NT from the classic Attic by the term Hebraism. That easy solution has disappeared. Sooth to say, when the true character of the vernacular koine is understood, there is not very much left to explain. The NT Or as a rule is just normal koine. Milligan (Gr Papyri, xxx) admits on the part of Moulton "an overtendency to minimize" the "presence of un doubted Hebraisms, both in language and gram mar." That is true, and is due to his strong reac tion against the old theory of so many Hebraisms. The Semiticisms (Hebraisms and Aramaisms) are very natural results of the fact that the vernacular koine was used by Jews who read the Ileb Bible and the LXX tr, and who also spoke Aram, as their native tongue. The LXX, as tr of Gr, directly from the Heb (or Aram.) , has a much great er number of these Semiticisms. See Swete, An Intro to the Or in Gr (1900), for the salient facts. Thackeray in his Grammar of the OT in Gr (1909) shows "the Koii>r) the basis of Septuagirit Gr" in 3, and in 4 discusses "the Sem element in Septuagint Gr. The matter varies in different parts of the LXX, but in all parts the Sem influence goes far beyond what it is in the NT. In the NT we have free composition in Gr, except in certain portions of the Gospels and Acts where Aram, originals (oral or written) lie beyond the Gr text. So in particular Lk 1, the words of Jesus in Lk 2, and the opening chapters of Acts. See Dalman, Words of Jesus (1902), and J. T. Marshall, "The Aram. Gospel," Expos, Ser. IV vols 1I-VIII; see also ARAMAIC su/ira. There is, to some extent, translation-Gr, as in the LXX. The quotations from the OT are either from the Heb original, or, as most fre quently, from the LXX. In either case we have translation-Gr again. These two classes cover the more obvious Semiticisms if we add Heb names (persons and places) and other transliterations like dfiaSSuv, abaddon, d\\\\t]\\ovia, allelou ia. The Gr of the LXX does not, of course, give a true picture of the Gr spoken by the Jews in Alexandria or in Pal. But the constant reading of the LXX was bound to leave its impress on the style of the people (cf the King James Version and the Eng. language). The surprise, in fact, is not the number of Semiti cisms, but, all things considered, the fewness of them. Luke, just because he was a Gentile and so noted the Hebraisms in the LXX, shows rather more of them than the other NT writers: cf irpocrteero TP ITOV TT^n^ai, prosetheto trlton pempsai (Lk 20 12). Some of the points of style so common in the LXX find occasional || in the papyri or inscriptions,

      like /SX^Trwi p\\(iru), blepon blcpo, x a P<t X a ^P <a , chard chair d, ov . . . . OLVTOV, hon .... autun. Others are more obviously imitations of the Heb style, as in dpeffKeiv {VUTTLOV TLVO<S, areskcin enopion linos, rather than dpea-Keiv rivi, areskcin tini. But there is a certain dignity and elevation of style so char acteristic of the Heb OT that reappears in the NT. The frequent use of KaL, kai, in parts of the NT reminds one of the LXX and the Heb <mic. There is, besides, an indefinable tone in the NT that is found in the OT. Swete (Apocalypse of St. John, cxx) laments the tendency to depreciate unduly the presence of Hebraisms in the NT. The pendulum may have swung too far away from the truth. It will strike the level, but we shall never again be able to fill our grammars and comma, with explana tions of so many peculiar Hebraisms in the NT. On the whole the Gr NT is standard vernacular koine.

      IV. Individual Peculiarities of NT Writers. There is not space for an extended discussion of this topic. The fact itself calls for emphasis, for there is a wide range in style between Mark s Gos pel and He, 1 Pet and Rom, Luke s Gospel and the Apocalypse. There are no Atticists found in the NT (cf 4 Mace in the LXX and Jos), but there are the less literary writings (Mt, Mk, the Johan- nine books, the other catholic epp.) and the more literary writings (Luke s writings, Paul s Epp., and He). But even so, no hard-and-fast line can be drawn. Moulton, Cambridge Biblical Essays, 484, thinks 2 Pet more like the Atticistic writings, "though certainly the Atticists would have scorned to own a book so full of solecisms. " Moulton assumes that 2 Pet is pseudepigraphie, and does not credit the notion that the crude "Babu" Gr, to use Ab bott s term, may be Peter s own un corrected style (cf Acts 4 13), while 1 Pet may have the smoothing effect of Silvanus hand (cf 1 Pet 6 12). A similar explanation is open concerning the grammatical lapses of the Apocalypse, since John is also called dypdfji./j.aTos, agrdmmatos, in Acts 4 13, whereas the Gospel of Jn may have had the revision of the elders of Ephcsus (cf Jn 21 24). But whatever the explanation, there is no doubt of the wide di vergences of style between different books and groups of books in the NT list. The Lukan, Johannine, Petrine, Pauline groups stand apart, but with cleavages within each group. Harnack (Luke the Physician, 1907; The Sayings of Jesus, 1908; The Acts of the Apostles, 1909; The Date of the Acts of the Apostles,_ 1911) has accepted and strengthened the contention of Hawkins (Horae Synopticae, 2d ed, 1909) and of Hobart (Medical Language of Luke, 1882) that the medical terms in the Gospel of Luke and of Acts show that the books w r ere written by the same writer and that a physician, and so Luke. The diversities in style here and there are chiefly due to the sources of information used. Even in the Pauline books, which form so well-marked a collection, striking diversities of language and style appear. But these letters cover a period of some 15 years of intense activity anil mental and spiritual development, and treat a great variety of topics. They properly reflect the changing phases of Paul s preaching of the cross of Christ in different places and under varying cir cumstances and confronting ever fresh problems. The plays of Shakespeare offer a useful parallel. Even in Paul s old age, in the Pastoral Epistles the stamp of Paul s spirit is admitted by those who admit only Pauline fragments; cf J. Weiss, Bei- trdge zur Paulinschen Rhetorik (1897). The style is indeed the man, but style is also the function of the subject, and style varies with different periods of a man s life. E. A. Abbott has made an ex cellent discussion of the Johannine Vocabulary



      (1005) and of Johanninc Gnunnutr (1900), but special grammars of each writer arc hardly to he expected or desired. Hut Nageli has begun a study of Paul s vocabulary in his \\\\ <>rlx(it<itz <l<n A post els I m/lux (l .)<)~>). The Gospel of Mt shows very lit tie of that Hebraism that one would expert from the general purpose and tone of the hook. It is possible, of course, that the supposed original was in Aram., or, if in (!r, of a more Hebraistic type. Whether the present Clr Mt made use; of Mark s Gospel and a collection of Logia (Q), we do not know. Cer tainly Mark s (lospel is written in colloquial koine with little evidence of the culture of the schools. Mark is a faithful reporter and does his work with rare simplicity and vividness. He reveals clearly the Aram, background of Christ s teaching. The writings of James and Jude do not show that only (Ir was spoken in the home at Nazareth, nor that they used only Aram. These two epp. are evidently free compositions in Or with much of the freshness of imagery so manifest in the parables of Jesus Himself. This brief sketch does not do justice to the richness and varietv of language in the books of the NT.

      V. The "koine" Spoken by Jesus, See ARA MAIC LAXdUAOio for proof that. Jesus spoke that language as the vernacular of the people of JPal. But Christ spoke the koine also, so that the NT is not an idiom that was unknown to the Master. (Iwilliam (1-vol II Dti, "Language of Christ") does still deny that Jesus spoke Or, while Roberts takes the other extreme in his book, Gr the Language of Christ and His Apostles (1SSS). Per contra again, Jiilicher considers it impossible to suppose that Jesus used (lr (art. "Hellenism" in EB). J. E. H. Thomson, "The Language, of Pal during the Time of Our Lord" (Temple, Bible Die/.) argues convincingly that Pal was bi-lingual and that Jesus knew and spoke (lr as well as Aram. Peter evi dently spoke in Clr on the Day of Pentecost and was understood by all. Paul was understood in Jems when lie spoke in Clr (Acts 21 37). _Jesus taught in Decapolis, a Clr region, in the region of Tyre and Bidon (Or again). Oalilee itself was largely inhabited by Oentiles who spoke Or. At the time of the Sermon on the Mount, we read that people were present from Decapolis and Peraea, besides the mixed multitude from Oalilee, Judaea, and Jerus (Mt 4 2">; Lk 6 17). Thomson proves also that in Matthew s Oospel the quotation from t he OT in the words of Jesus is from the LXX, while Matthew s own quotations are from the Heb. The case seems clear. It is not possible to say always when Jesus spoke Gr and when Aramaic. That would depend on the audience. But it is practically certain that Christ Himself knew and spoke at will the vernacular koine, and thus had this linguistic bond with the great world of that era and with lovers of the Gr Test, today.

      LITERATURE. The lit. on this subject is very exten sive. The most important volumes have been mentioned in the discussion above.




      1. Members of Semitic Family

      2. The Name Hebrew

      H. Old Hebrew Literature II. HISTORY OF THE HEBREW LANGUAGE

      1. Oldest Form of Language

      2. The Hebrew of the OT . }. Its Uniformity

      4. The Cause Thereof

      5. Differences Due to Ago (i. Differences of Stylo

      7. Foreign Influences

      8. Poetry and Prose

      9. Home of the Hebrew Language

      10. Its Antiquity

      11. When Hebrew Became a Dead Language


      1. Characteristic Sounds

      2. Letters Representing Two Sounds . 5. Consonants Representing Vowels

      4. The Syllable

      5. Three-Letter Roots

      I). Conjugations or Derived Stems

      7. Absence of Tenses

      S. The Pronouns

      .). Formation of Xouns

      10. Internal Inflexion

      1 1. Syntax of I he Verb

      12. Syntax of the Xoun

      i:{. Poverty of Adjectives

      IV. Hi HI.ICAI, A HA MAie

      1. Aramaic Portions of the OT

      2. Phonology :$. (irammar

      4. Syntax

      5. Aramaic More Decadent than Hebrew V. LITERARY CH A RACTKRISTI > <>i THE SEMITES

      1. Concrete and Abstract

      2. View of Nature

      ;i. Pictorial Imagination

      4. Prose and Poetry

      5. Hebrew Easy of Translation LITERATURE

      There were only two languages employed in the archetypes of the OT books (apart from an Egyp or Pers or Or word here and there), namely, Heb and Bib. Aram., both of which belong to the great family of languages known as Semitic.

      /. The Semitic Languages. The languages spoken in Southwestern Asia during the historical period dealt with in the Bible have been named Shemitic, after the son of Noah from whom the ma jority of peoples speaking these languages Arabs, Hebrews, Aramaeans and Assyrians (Gen 10 21 ff) were descended. To show, however, that the descript ion does not fit exactly the thing described the Elamites and Lydians having probably not spoken a Shemitic language, and the Canaanites, including Phoenicians, with the colonists descended from those at Carthage and elsewhere in the Medi terranean coast lands, as well as the Abyssinians (Kthiopians), who did, being reckoned descendants of Ham (Gen 9 IS; 10 Off) the word is now gen erally written "Semitic," a term introduced by Eich- horn (17X7). These languages were spoken from the Caspian Sea to the S. of Arabia, and from the Mediterranean to the valley of the Tigris.

      The following list shows the chief members of this family:

      (1) South Semitic or Arabic, in-

      1. Members eluding the language of the Sabaean of Semitic (Himyaritic) inscriptions, as well as Family Ge ez or Ethiopic. Arab, is now

      spoken from the Caucasus to Zanzi bar, and from the East Indies to the Atlantic.

      (2) Middle Sem or Canaanitish, including ITeb, old and new, Phoen, with Punic, and Moabitish (language of MS).

      (3) North Sem or Aram., including (a) East Aram, or Syrian (language of Syrian Christians), language of Bab Talm, Mandaean; (b) West or Palestinian Aram, of the Tgs, Palestinian Talm (Oemara), Bib. Aram. ("Chaldee"), Samaritan, language of Nabataean inscriptions.

      (4) East Sem language of Assyr-Bab inscrip tions.

      \\Yith the exception of a few chapters and frag ments mentioned below, the OT is written entirely in Heb. In the OT itself this lan-

      2. The guage is called "the Jews " (2 K 18 26. Name 28). In Isa 19 18 it is called poeti- Hebrew cally, what in fact it was, "the lan guage [Heb "lip"] of Canaan." In

      the appendix to the LXX of Job it is called Syriac; and in the introduction to Ecclus it is for the first time that is, in 130 BC named Heb. The term Heb in the NT denotes the language of the OT in Rev 9 ll,bntinJn 6 2; 19 13.17 this term means the vernacular Aramaic. In other passages it is



      doubtful which is meant. Jos uses the same name for both. From the time of the Tgs, Ileb is called the sacred tongue" in contrast to the Aram, of everyday use. The language of the OT is called Old Heb in contrast to the New Ileb of the Mish, the rabbinic, the Spanish poetry, etc.

      Of Old Ileb the remains are contained almost entirely in the OT. A few inscriptions have been recovered, i.e., the Siloam Inscriptions, 3. Old a Heb calendar, a large number of

      Hebrew ostraka from Samaria, a score of pre- Literature exilic seals, and coins of the Macca bees and of the time of Vespasian and Hadrian.

      LITKKATURK. E. Ronan, Histoire generale, et sy.ttkme comi>nre tlf.x latin uvs xe mil u/ in 1 *; F. Ilomnu l, Die fsi /itit. Yiilki r u. Sprachen; the comparative grammars of Wright and Brockelmann; O/.S; art. " Semitic Languages" ill Enc Brit, and Murray s Jlln.-<tnit,;l Bible Diet.

      II. History of the Hebrew Language. Ileb as it appears to us in the OT is in a state of decadence corresponding to the present position of spoken Arabic. In the earliest period it no doubt resem bled the classical Arabic of the 7th and following centuries. The variat ions found between the various strata of the language occurring in the OT are slight compared with the difference between modern and ancient Arabic.

      Heb was no doubt originally a highly inflected

      language, like classical Arabic. The noun had

      three cases, noin., gen., and ace., end-

      1. Oldest ing in urn, im, am, respectively, as in Form of the Sabaean inscriptions. Both ybs. Language and nouns had three numbers (sing.,

      dual and pi.) and two genders, masc. and fern. In the noun the dual and pi. had two cases. The dual and 2d and 3d pers. pi. and 2d PITS. sing. fern, of the impf. of the vb. ended in nun. In certain positions the m of the endings inn, ini, am in the noun was dropped. The vb. had three moods, indicative, subjunctive, and jussive, ending in u, a, and - respectively; as well as many forms or stems, each of which had an active and passive voice.

      In the Heb of the OT most of these inflexions have disappeared. Of the three cases of the noun only

      the ace. am has survived in a few

      2. The adverbial forms, such as oiunam, Hebrew of truly." The dual has entirely dis- the OT appeared from the vb., and also from

      the noun, with the exception of things that occur in pairs, such as hand, eye, which have no pi. The nom. case of the dual and pi. of the noun has disappeared, and the oblique case is used for both. Except in cases of poetic archaism the final nun of the vb. has been lost, and, as the final vowels have fallen away in vbs., as well as in nouns, the result is that the jussive forms serve for indie. and subj. also. Many of the forms or stems have fallen into desuetude, and the passive forms of two alone are used.

      One of the most remarkable facts connected with

      the Heb of the OT is that although that lit. extends

      through a period of over 1,000 years,

      3. Its Uni- there is almost no difference between formity the language of the oldest parts and

      that of the latest. This phenomenon is susceptible of several explanations. In the first place, nearly the whole of the OT lit. is religious in character, and as such the earliest writings would become the model for the later, just as the Koran the first prose work composed in Arab, which has survived has become the pattern for all future compositions. The same was true for many cen turies of the influence of Aristophanes and Euripides upon the language of educated Greeks, and, it is said, of t he influence of Confucius upon that of the learned Chinese.

      But a chief cause is probably the fact that the

      Sem languages do not vary with time, but with

      place. The Arab, vocabulary used

      4. The in Morocco differs from that of Egypt, Cause but the Arab, words used in each of Thereof these count ries have remained the same

      for centuries in fact, since Aral), began to be spoken in them. Similarly, the slight differences which are found in the various parts of the OT are to be ascribed, not to a difference of date, but to the fact that some writers belonged to the Southern Kingdom, some to the Northern, some wrote in Pal, some in Babylonia (cf Neh 13 23.24; Jgs 12 6; 18 3).

      The OT lit. falls into two main periods: that composed before and during the Bab exile, and

      that which falls after the exile. But

      5. Differ- even between these two periods the ences Due differences of language are compara- to Age tively slight, so that it is often difficult

      or impossible to say on linguistic grounds alone whether a particular chapter is pre- or post-exilic, and scholars of the first rank often hold the most contrary opinions on these points. For instance, Dillmann places the so-called docu ment P before D in the regal period, whereas most critics date D about 021 and P about 444 BC.

      It is needless to add that the various writers differ from one another in point of style, but these var iations are infinitesimal compared with

      6. Differ- those of (5r and Lat authors, and are ences of due, as has been said above, largely Style to locality and environment. Thus

      the style of Hosea is quite different from that of his contemporary Amos, and that of Deutero-Isa shows very distinctly the mark of its place of composit ion.

      A much more potent factor in modifying the lan guage was the influence of foreign languages upon

      Heb, esp. in respect to vocabulary.

      7. Foreign The earliest of these was probably Influences Egyp, but of much greater importance

      was Assyr, from which Heb gained a large number of loan words. It is well known that the Bab script was used for commercial purposes throughout Southwestern Asia, even before the He brews entered Canaan (see TEXT), but the influence of Babylon upon Pal seems to have been greatly exaggerated. The main point of contact is in the mythology, which may have been common to both peoples. In the later, esp. post-exilic stages of the language, many Aramaisms are found in respect to syntax as well as vocabulary; and in later phases still, Pers and even Gr words are found.

      As in other languages, so in Heb, the vocabulary

      of the poetical lit. differs from that of the prose

      writers. In Heb, however, there is

      8. Poetry not the hard-and-fast distinction be- and Prose tween these two which obtains in the

      classics. Whenever prose becomes elevated by the importation of feeling, it falls into a natural rhythm which in Heb constitutes poetry. Thus most of the so-called prophetical books are poetical in form. Another mark of poetry is a return to archaic grammatical forms, esp. the restoration of the final nun in the vb.

      The form of Sem which was indigenous in the land of Canaan is sometimes called Middle; Sem.

      Before the Israelites entered the

      9. Home of country, it was the language of the the Hebrew Canaanites from whom the Hebrews Language took it over. That Heb was_ not the

      language of Abraham before his migra tion appears from the fact that he is called _an Aramaean (Dt 26 5), and that Laban s native language was Aramaic (Gen 31 47). A further p;>int is that the word "Sea" is used for the West



      and "Nope 1 !)" for the South, indicating Pul us (he home of the language (so Isa 19 IS).

      As the aboriginal inhabitants of the land of Canaan were not Semites, we cannot infer the exist ence of the Heb language any earlier

      10. Its than the first immigrations of Semites Antiquity into Pal, that, is, during the third mil lennium BC. It would thus be a much

      younger member of the Sem family than Assyr-Bub, which exhibits all the marks of great antiquity long before the Heb language is met with.

      The Bab exile sounded the death-knell of the Heb

      language. The educated classes were deported to

      Babylon or fled to Egypt, and those who

      11. When remained were not slow to adopt the Hebrew language used by their conquerors. Became a The old Heb became a literary and Dead sacred tongue, the language of every- Language day life being probably Aramaic.

      Whatever may be the exact meaning of Neh 8 8, it proves that the people of that time had extreme difficulty in understanding classical Heb when it was read to them. Yet for the pur pose of religion, the old language continued to be employed for several centuries. For patriotic reasons it was used by the Maccabees, and by Bar Cochba (135 AD).

      LITF.RATUKE. (icscililis. Grsrhichte dcr hebr. Sprache und Srhrift: Borthi iiu, "Hebr. Sprache" in RE, 2d ed; see also "Literature" in the following suction.

      ///. Chief Characteristics of Hebrew. The

      special marks which particularly distinguish a lan guage may be found in its alphabet, in its mode of inflexion, or in its syntax.

      The Heb alphabet is characterized by the large

      number of guttural sounds which it contains, and

      these are not mere palatals like the

      1. Charac- Scotch or Ger. ch, but true throat teristic sounds, such as are not found in the Sounds Aryan languages. Hence when the

      Phoen alphabet passed over into Greece, these unpronounceable sounds, 2 , Jl , i"! , N , were changed into vowels, A, E, II, O. In Heb the guttural letters predominate. "In the Heb dic tionaries the four gutturals occupy considerably more than a fourth part of the volume; the remain ing eighteen letters occupying considerably less than three-fourths." Besides the guttural, there are three strong consonants 2, p and 2, which are sounded with compression of the larynx, and are quite different from our t, k and s. In Gr the first was softened into &, the other two were dropped as letters but retained as numerals.

      Though the Heb alphabet comprises no more than 22 letters, these represent some 30 different

      sounds, for the 6 letters b, g, d, k, p

      2. Letters and t, when they fall immediately after Represent- a vowel, are pronounced bh(v), cjh, <l/t, ing Two kh, ph (/) and th. Moreover, the gut- Sounds turals H and 3? each represent two dis tinct sounds, which are still in use in

      Arabic. The letter h is sometimes sounded at the end of a word as at the beginning.

      A peculiarity of the Heb alphabet is that the

      letters are all consonants. Four of these, however,

      were very early used to represent

      3. Conso- vowel and diphthong sounds, namely, nants Rep- S , /;, w and y. So long as Heb was a resenting spoken language no other symbols Vowels than these 22 letters were used. It

      was not until the 7th cent. AD at the earliest that the well-known elaborate system of signs to represent the vowels and other sounds was invented (sec TEXT).

      A feature of the Heb language is that no word or syllable 1 may begin with a vowel: every syllable begins with a consonant. This is also true of the

      other Sem languages, except Assyr-Bab. When in the course of word-formation a syllable would begin with a vowel, the slight consonant 4. The S is prefixed. Moreover, more than

      Syllable two consonants may not stand with out vowels intervening, as in the Eng. word "strength." At most, two consonants may begin a syllable, and even so a slight vowel is sounded between them, as Ifro . A word may end in two consonants without vowels, as dniarl, but no word or syllable ends in more than two.

      The outstanding feature of the Sem family of languages is the root, consisting of three conso nants. Practically, the triliteral root 6. Three- is universal. There are a few roots Letter with more than three letters, but

      Roots many of the quadriliterul roots are

      formed by reduplication, as knbkab in Arabic. Many attempts have been made to reduce three-letter stems to two-letter by taking the factors common to several roots of identical mean ing. Thus 21", m" , 2^", "to be still," seem all to come from a root 2" . It is more probable, how ever, that the root is always triliteral, but may appear in various forms.

      From these triliteral roots all parts of the vbs. are

      formed. The root, which, it ought to be stated, is

      not the infinitive, but the 3d sing.

      6. Conjuga- muse. perf. active, expresses the simple tions or idea without qualification, as shabliar, Derived "he broke." The idea of intensity is Stems obtained by doubling the middle stem

      letter, as shibbfr, "he broke in frag ments"; the passive is expressed by the u-vowel in the first place and the o-vowel in the last, as sluthbar, "it was broken in fragments." The reflexive sense prefixes an n to the simple root, or a t (P) to the intensive, but the former of these is often used as a passive, as nishbar, "it was broken," hithkaddcsh, "he sanctified himself." The causa tive meaning is given by prefixing the letter h, as malakh, "he was king," hinillkh, "he caused [one] to be king." A somewhat similar method of vb. building is found outside the Sem language, for example, in Turkish. In some of these Sem lan guages the number of formations is very numerous. In Heb also there are traces of stems other than those generally in use.

      There are no tenses in Heb, in our sense of the word. There are two states, usually called tenses,

      the perfect and the imperfect. In the

      7. Absence first the action is regarded as accom- of Tenses plished, whether in the past or future,

      as shdbhar, "he broke," "he has broken," "he will have broken," or (in prophetic narrative) "he will break"; in the second, the action is regarded as uncompleted, "he will break," "he was breaking," "he is breaking," etc. The present is often expressed by the participle.

      The different persons, sing, and pi., are expressed by affixing to the perfect, and by prefixing to the

      imperfect, fragments of the personal

      8. The pronouns, as shabhartl, "I broke," shd- Pronouns bharnu, "we broke," nishbdr, "we will

      break," and so on. The fragments which are added to the perfect to express the nomi native of the pronouns are, with some modification, esp. the change of t into k, added to the vb. to ex press the accusative, and to the noun to express the genitive; for example, shdbhartd, "you broke," sh bhdr kha, "he broke you," bcth khd, "your house"; sdpharnu, "we counted," s e phdrdnu, "he counted us," siphrenu, "our book."

      The same principles are followed in regard to the noun as to the vb. Many nouns consist solely of the three stem-letters articulated with one or with two vowels, except that monosyllables gen-


      erally become dissyllabic, owing to the difficulty of

      pronouncing two vowelless consonants together:

      thus, melekh, "king," sephcr, "book,"

      9. Forma- goren , "threshingfloor" (instead of malk, tion of sipfir, gnrti), dab liar, "a word or thing," Nouns kar obh, "near." Nouns denoting place,

      instrument, etc, are often formed by prefixing the letter m to the root, as mishpat, "justice," from shaphat, "he judged," mazlegh, "a fork." Intensity is given to the root idea, as in the vb., by doubling the middle consonant: thus, horesh, "working," harash (for harrash), "work man"; gonebh, "stealing," gannabh, _"a thief." Similarly, words denoting incurable physical defects, illem, "dumb," iwwer, "blind," hercsh (for hirrcsh), "deaf and dumb." The fern, of nouns, as of the 3d pers. of vbs., is formed by adding the letter t, which when final is softened to h, ybhlrah, "queen-mother," "mistress," but g e bhirtckh, "your mistress."

      The inflexion of both vbs. and nouns is accom panied by a constant lengthening or shortening of the vowels of the word, and this

      10. Internal according to two opposite lines. In Inflexion vbs. with vowel-affixes the penulti mate vowel disappears, as halakh,

      "he went," hal khu, "they went"; in the noun the ante-penultimate vowel disappears, as dabhar, "a word," pi. dfbhanm. As the vowel system, as stated above, is very late, the vocalization cannot be accepted as that of the living tongue. It repre sents rather the cant illation of the synagogue; and for this purpose, accents, which had a musical as well as an interpunctional value, have been added.

      Heb syntax is remarkable for its simplicity. Simple

      sentences predominate and are usually connected

      by the conjunction "and." Subordi-

      11. Syntax nate sentences are comparatively rare, of the Verb but descriptive and temporal clauses

      are not uncommon. In the main narrative, the predicates are placed at the beginning of the sentence, first simply in the root form (3d sing, masc.), and then only when the subject has been mentioned does the predicate agree with it. Descriptive and temporal clauses may be recog nized by their having the subject at the beginning (e.g. Gen 12). A curious turn is given to the narrative by the fact that in the main sentences, if the first vb. is perfect, those which follow are im perfect, and vice versa, the conjunction which coordinates them receiving a peculiar vocalization that of the definite article. In the Eng. Bible, descriptive and temporal clauses are often rendered as if they were parts of the main sentence, for ex ample, in the first verses of Gen of which the literal tr is somewhat as follows: "At the beginning of God s creating heaven and earth, when the earth was without form and void, and God s spirit [or, a great wind] moved upon the face of the water, God said, Let there be light." It will thus be seen that the structure of Heb narrative is not so simple as it appears.

      In the Sem languages, compound words do not occur, but this deficiency is made up by what is

      called the construct state. The old 12. Syntax rule, that the second of two nouns of the Noun which depend on one another is put

      in the genitive, becomes, in Heb, the first of two such nouns is put in the construct state. The noun in the construct state loses the definite article, and all its vowels are made as short as possible, just as if it were the beginning of a long word: for example, ha-bayith, "the house," but beth ha-melekh, "the house of the king," "the palace ; dabhar, "a word," but dibh e re ru a h, "words of wind, "windy words."

      The Heb language is very poor in adjectives, but this is made up for by a special use of the construct state just mentioned. Thus to ex- 13. Poverty press magnitude the word "God" is of Adjec- added in the gen. case, as in the ex- tives ample above (Gen 1 2), "a mighty

      wind" = a wind of God; Ps 36 6, "the lofty mountains" = the mountains of God (so 68 15); 80 10, "goodly cedars" = cedars of God; so "a holy man" = a man of God; "the sacred box" = the ark of God, and so on; of in the NT, Mt 27 54, "the son of God" = Lk 23 47, "a righteous [man]." Matthew was thinking in Aram., Luke in Gr. A similar use is made of other words, e.g. "stubborn" = hard of neck; "impudent" = hard of face; "ex tensive ^ broad of hands; "miserable" = bitter of soul.

      LITERATURE. The articles on the Heb Language in Schenkel s Bibel-Lexikon, 1875, by Noldeke; in Enc Brit, 9th ed, by Robertson Smith; llth od by Noldeke; in the Imperial Bible Diet., 18G6, by T. H. Weir; also those in HDB, EH,

      Grammars: A. B. Davidson s Elementary Heb Gram mar and Syntax; Gesenius, Heb Grammar, ET by Cow- ley, 2d ed.

      Dictionaries: Brown, Briggs and Driver, Heb and Eng. Lexicon; Gesenius, Handworterbuch, 15th ed; Feyer- abend, Heb- Eng. Pocket Dictionary; Breslau, Eng. and Heb Diet.

      IV. Biblical Aramaic. The Aram, portions of

      the OT are the following: Ezr 4 86 IS; 7 11-

      26; Dnl 2 47 28; Gen 31 47 (two

      1. Aramaic words); Jer 10 11. The language in Portions of which they are written used to be the OT called Chaldee, but is now generally

      known simply as Bib. Aram. It repre sents a further declension from classical Sem as compared with the Heb. The following are the principal points in which Bib. Aram, differs from Heb.

      The accent is placed on the last syllabic, the first vowel disappearing, e.g. *abhadh for Heb abhadh.

      It is curious that the same feature is

      2. Pho- found in Algerene and Moroccan Arab.: nology thus kasr becomes kar. Dentals

      take the place of sibilants: d e habh for zahabh; flath for shalosh. The strong Heb 2 fre quently becomes 2 , and Heb J becomes S : thus, ar d for ereg; *iik for guk.

      In Heb the definite article is the prefix hal (ha-};

      in Aram, the affix a ; the latter, however, has almost

      lost its force. The dual is even more

      3. Grammar sparingly used than in Heb. The

      passive forms of vbs. and those be ginning with nun are practically wanting; the pas sive or reflexive forms are made by prefixing the letter t to the corresponding active forms, and that much more regularly than in Heb, there being three active and three passive forms.

      In regard to syntax there is to be noted the fre quent use of the part, instead of a finite vb., as in

      Heb; the disuse of the conjunction

      4. Syntax "and" with the vocalization of the

      article; and the disuse of the con struct state in nouns, instead of which a circumlo cution with the relative dl is employed, e.g. film dl dk habh, "an image of gold." The same peri phrasis is found also in West African Arabic.

      It will thus be seen that if Heb represents a de cadent form of an original classical language which was very similar to classical Arabic, 6. Aramaic Bib. Arab, stands on a still lower More De- level. It is not to be supposed that cadent than Heb passed into Aram., though on the Hebrew analogy of Arab, that view is not un tenable. Rather, the different Sem languages became fixed at different epochs. Arab. as a literary language crystallized almost at the source; Heb and the spoken Arab, of the East far

      Languages of OT Laodiceans, Ep. to



      down the stream; and Aram, and Moroccan Aral), fart hest down of all.

      LITKH \\TT KK. l\\;uit/sch. (li iiim/i ul 1 1: : Struck. Abrixn </r.s- I, ,1,1. Aramaixrh; Marti, /<</-/. arum. .s>/-< -In-; the articles on "Aramaic" or " ( haldee " in Ihc 1Mb. Diets, cited under III, and article ARAMAIC L\\\\<;r\\<;io in this Kncyclopaeeliu; the llel) text of E/r, Nch, Did, ed by IJ.ier. Heb Diets, generally incluele Hih. Aramaic.

      V. Literary Characteristics of theSemites. The

      thinking of the Hebrews, like 1 hat of ot her Semites,

      was done, not in the abstract, lint in the concrete.

      Thus we find the material put. for the

      1. Concrete immaterial, the expression for the and Ab- thought, the instrument for the action, stract the action for the feeling. This mode

      of expression frequently gives rise to striking anthropomorphisms. Thus we have the eye for watchfulness or care (Ps 33 IS); the long hand for far-reaching powers (Isa 59 1); broken teeth for defeated malice (I s 3 7); the sword for slaughter (78 62); haughty eyes for supercilious ness (1 rov 6 17); to say in the heart for to think (Ps 10 (i). It would be an interesting study to examine to what extent, these expressions have been taken over from Ileb into English.

      The Ileb does not know the distinction between animate! and inanimate Nature. All Nat tin; is

      animate (Ps 104 2 .)). The little hills

      2. View of rejoice (65 12); the mountains skip Nature (114 4); the trees clap their hands

      (Isa 55 12); even the stones may cry out (Lk 19 40). Such expressions are not to be taken as mere poetical figures of speech; they are meant quite literally. All Nature is one: man is merely 11 part of Nature (Ps 104 23), even if he be the highest part (8 ;">). Hence, perhaps, it arises that there is no neuter gender in the Sem languages.

      The highly imaginative nature of the Heb comes

      into play when he is recounting past events or

      writing history. To his mind s eye

      3. Pictorial all past events are present. He sees Imagination history taking place before his eyes as

      in a picture. Thus the perfect may generally be tr by the Eng. past tense with "have, the imperfect by the Eng. present tense with "is or "is going to." In livelier style the participle! is used: "They are entering the city, and behold Samuel is coming out to meet them" (1,S 9 14). Hence the oratio recta is always used in preference to 1 he orntio ohliqun. Moreover, t he historian writes exactly as the professional story-teller narrates. Hence he is always repeating himself and returning upon his own words (1 S 5 1.2).

      A result of the above facts is that there is no

      hard-and-fast, distinction in Heb between prose and

      poetry. Neither is there in Heb, or

      4. Prose in the Sem language generally, epic and Poetry or dramatic poetry, because their

      prose possesses these qualities in a greater degree than does the poetry of other races. All Ileb poetry is lyric or didactic. In it there is no rhyme nor meter. The nearest approach to meter is what is called the knttih strophe, in which each verse consists of two parallel members, each member having five words divided into three and then two. The best example! of this is to be found in Ps 19 7-9, and also in the Be>ok of LAMENTA TIONS (q.v.), from which the verse has received its name.

      Fre>m the above description it may be inferreel

      that the language of the OT is one extremely easy

      of translation into foreign tongues

      5. Hebrew without loss of meaning or rhythm, Easy of themgh it, would be e xtremely difficult Translation te> rende>r any me)ele rn language into

      classical He b. Hewe the Pss, for example , are as fine 1 in their (!er. or Eng. versions

      as they are in Ihe original. Wlie-re- the OT has been tr 1 into the language of the country, it has become a classic. The Eng. Bible is as important, for the study of the Eng. language as are the plays e>f Shakespeare.

      LITERATURE. In addition to the articles cited under III, Herder, Tin: Spirit of Uth 1 ,,,-tr,/, tr by J. Marsh. is:5;5; Kd. KoniK. Stilixtik, Rhctonk, l u,tik in Bezutj au.f die hi It!. Lilt, koni imrtttirisch tlaruestfllt, 1900; the same author s brochure on the "Style of Scripture" in linn, vol V; J. F. McCurdy on the "Semites" in the same volume; J. Kennedy, Ihli Si/ no HI/ in*.


      LANTERN, lan tern (4>av6s, i>fmnoH, fr. 4>cUva>, phaino, "10 give light"): Lanterns were carrier! by the mob which arre-stcd Je>sus in Gethsemane (Jn 18 3, probably betteT "torches")- The word "lantern" in the time of early ve-rsions had a much wider significance than now. The Romans, how ever, had lante-rns in the times of Christ, made by use of translucent skins, bladders, or thin plates of horn.

      LAODICEA, la-od-i-se a (AaoSiKCa, T.nodik ta}: A e ity of Asia Minor situated in the Lvce>s valley in the province* e>f Phrygia, and the home of one of the Seven Chinvhes of Re-v (1 11). Distinguished from several other cities of that name by the appel lation Ad Lyeaim, it was foundeel by Antiochus II (201-246 BC) of Syria, who named it for his wife Laodike, anil who peculated it with Syrians and with Jews who were transplanted from Babylonia to the cities of Phrygia ami Lydia. Though Laodi- cea stood on the great highway at the; junction of several important remte s, it was a place of little ceMisequene-e until the Rom province of Asia was formed in 190 BC. It the>n suddenly became a great and wealthy centeT of industry, famous spe- e ially for the fine blae-k wool of its sheM p and for the Phrygian powele>r for the eyes, whie-h was manu factured there (cf Rev 3 IS). In the vicinity was the te inple of Men Karoti ami a re>nowne>el se he>e>l of medicine. In the> year 60 AD, the city was almost entirely destroyed by an earthquake, butso wealthy were its citi/e-ns that the>y rejectee! the profferee! aiel of Rome, and emickly rebuilt it at their own expense (cf Re V 3 17). It was a city of great wealth, with . exte-nsive banking operations (cf Rev 3 18). Little; is known of the early histe>ry of Christianity there; Timothy, Mark anel Epa- phras (Col 1 7) seem to have been the first to introduce it. Howe ver, Laoelice-a was early the chief bishopric of Phrygia, and about 166 AD Sagaris, its bishop, was martyml. In 1071 the e ity was taken by the Seljuks; in 1119 it was recovered to the Christians by Jeihn Comnenus, and in the 13th cent., it fell finally into the hands of the Turks.

      The ruins, now calleel Exld Hissar, or old castle, lie near the moelern Gonjclli on the railroael, and they have long serveel as a quarry to the builde rs of the neighboring town of Dcnizli. Among the in nothing from be>fe>rc the Rom perioel has appeareel. One of the two Rom theate rs is remarkably well preserved, anel the>re may still be se-en the stadium, a colonnade, the aqueeluct which brought the wate-r across the valle>y to the city by an inverted siphon of stone pipes, a large necropolis, and the ruins of three early Christian churches. E. J. BANKS

      LAODICEANS, la-od-i-se anz, EPISTLE TO THE (iv Tfl AaoSkKu>v KK\\T|tHa .... TTJV K AaoSiKias, en tf, Laodikeon ekklesia .... tfn ck Laodikias, "in the church e>f the Laodiceans ....

      the> epistle from Laoelicea," Col 4 16):


      1. Written by the Laexliceans ?

      2. Written by Paul from Laodicea?

      3. An Epistle Aeldressed to the Laodiceans



      Languages of OT Laodiceans, Ep. to


      1. Marcion s Opinion

      2. Reference s in Ephesians and Other Epistles

      3. Ephesian Church .Jewish in Origin

      4. Kph and ("ol Sister Epistles

      5. Recapitulation


      1. A Circular Epistle

      2. Proof from Biblical Prologues


      Paul hero writes to the Colossians, "And when this epistle hath l)een read among you, cause that it he read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye also read t he epistle from Laodicea." What was or what is this epistle?

      /. Explanations of Paul s Statement. The words used by the apostle may mean: (1) a letter written by the Laodiceans; (2) an ep. written by Paul from Laodicea; (3) an ep. written to the Laodiceans, and to be procured from them by the Colossians.

      The words may mean a letter written by the Laodi ceans. Bui here it is sufficient to refer to the fact that

      Paul enjoins the Colossians to procure the epistle Written to n "the epistle from Laodicea." How could a command of this kind bo

      Dy me La- K iven j n reference to an ep. written by odiceans? third parties? How could Paul know

      that a copy of it had been made by the Laodiceans before sending it off? How could he tell that the Laodiceans would be willing to give away a copy of it? The suppositions involved by this hypothesis are incredi ble. Besides, the context regards the Kp. to the Col, and "that from Laodicea," as companion epp.. of which the; two churches are to make an interchange, so that each church is directed to read both.

      Or. the words may refer to an ep. written by Paul from Laodicea. And it has been suggested that the ep. of

      which wo are in search may be 1 Tim, 1 O -OTV-H-ar, Thess, 2 Thess, or Gal. But in the case, wr en of these epp., the probability is that every by Paul one of them was written elsewhere than

      from from Laodicea. At the time when Paul

      T ,w4;/.oa? wrote to Colossae, he was a prisoner in .uaoaicear Rome, and for this reason alone, it was

      impossible that ho could, at any recent date, have written any ep. from Laodicea. But his own statement (Col 2 1) is that those in Laodicea had not seen his face in the ilesh. As he had never been in Laodicea, ho could not have written any ep. from that city.

      A third possibility is a letter written: (I) not by Paul, but by some other person. But 1 he whole tone of the passage does not favor this 3. An Ripest ion in the least; (2) by Paul,

      Epistle but that the epistle is lost; this is the

      Addressed ordinary interpretation; (3) the apoc- to the ryphal Lat ep. To the Laodiceans."

      Laodiceans This spurious ep. is a mere compilation clumsily put together; it has no marks of authenticity. Lightfoot (Col, 282) gives its general character thus: it "is a cento of Pauline phrases strung together without any definite connection or any clear object. They are taken chiefly from the Ep. to the Phil, but hero and there one is borrowed elsewhere, e.g. from the Ep. to the Gal. Of course, it closes with an injunc tion to the Laodiceans to exchange epp. with the Colos sians. The apostle s injunction in Col 4 1<> suggested the forgery, and such currency as it ever attained was due to the support which that passage was supposed to give to it. Unlike most forgeries, it had no ulterior aim. It has no doctrinal peculiarities. It is quite harm less, so far as falsity and stupidity combined can ever bo regarded as harmless" (Lightfoot, op. cit., 282). See APOCRYPHAL EPISTLES.

      (4) The only other alternative is that "the epistle from Laodicea" is an ep. to the Laodiceans from Paul himself, which he directs the Colossians to procure from Laodicea. There seems to be not only a high degree of probability, but proof, that the ep. from Laodicea is the ep. known as the Ep. to the Eph. Paul therefore had written an ep. to Laodicea, a city which he had twice already men tioned in the Ep. to the Col, "For I would have you know how greatly I strive for you, and for them at Laodicea" (Col 2 1): "Salute the brethren that are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church that is in their house" (4 15). Accepting Col 4:16 to mean that he wrote to Laodicea at the same time as he wrote to Colossae, what has become of the

      former ep.? Do we know nothing more of it now than is contained in this reference to it in Col? The fact that it was, by Paul s express command, to be communicated to at least the two churches in Colossae and Laodicea, would make its disappear ance and loss very strange.

      //. Evidence Favoring Epistle to Epfiesians. But is there any warrant for concluding that it is lost at all? A statement of the facts of the case seems to show that the ep. which Paul wrote to the Laodiceans is extant, but only under another title. The lines of evidence 1 which seem to show that the so-called Ep. to the Eph is in reality the ep. written by Paul to the Laodiceans are these:

      It is well known that the words "at Ephesus" (Eph 1 1) in the inscription of the ep. are very doubtful. RV reads in the margin, "Some very ancient authorites omit at Ephesus. " Among the authorities which omit "at Ephesus" are the Vatican and Sinaitic MSS, the best and most an cient authorities existing.

      Tertullian asserts that the heretics, i.e. Marcion,

      had altered the title, "t he Epist le to the Ephesians,"

      to "the Epistle to the Laodiceans."

      1. Mar- But this accusation does not carry with cion s it any doctrinal or heretical charge Opinion against Marcion in this respect. "It

      is not likely," says Motile (Eph, 25), "that Marcion was guilty here, where the change would have served no dogmatic purpose." And the fact that at that very early period, the first half of the 2d cent., it was openly suggested that the destination of the ep. was Laodicea, is certainly en titled to weight, esp. in view of the other fact already mentioned, which is of no less importance, that "at Ephesus" is omitted in the two great MSS, the Vatican and the Sinaitic.

      The "Ep. to the Eph" could not be, primarily at least, addressed to Ephesus, because Paul speaks

      of his readers as persons in regard to

      2. Refer- whose conversion from heathenism ences in to the faith of Christ he had just Ephesians recently heard: "For this cause I also, and Other having heard of the faith in the Lord Epistles Jesus which is among you, and the

      love which ye show toward all the saints, cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers" (Eph 1 15 f). These words could not well be tised in regard to the church at Ephesus, which Paid himself had founded, and in reference to persons among whom ho had lived for three years, and where he even knew personally "every one" of the Christians (Acts 20 31).

      And in Eph 3 1 f AV, he writes: "For this cause I, Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, if ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to yon-ward." But how could he ever doubt that the elders of the church in Ephesus (Acts 20 17), as well as the members of that important church, were ignorant of the fact that a dispensation of the grace of God had been given to him? The inquiry, whether his readers had heard of the one great fact on which his min istry was based, could not apply in any degree to the Christians in Ephesus. The apostle and the Ephesians had a clear and intimate mutual knowl edge. They knew him and valued him and loved him well. When he bade the elders of the church farewell, they all fell on his neck and kissed him (Acts 20 37).

      Clearly therefore the statement that he had just recently heard of their conversion, and his inquiry whether they had heard that a dispensation of the grace of God had been intrusted to him, do not and cannot describe the members of the church in Ephesus. "It is plain," writes Motile (Eph, 26),

      Laodiceans, Ep. to Lasciviousness



      "(hat the ep. docs not hear an Ephesian destination on t he face of it ."

      In the Ep. to th(> Cor there are many local ref erences, as well as allusions to the apostle s work in Corinth. In the Kp. to the Gal there are also many references to his work among the people of the churches in Galatia. The same is the case in the Ep. to the Phil, several names being mentioned of persons known to the apostle. In the two Epp. to the Thess, references also occur to his work among them.

      Turning to the Ep. to the Col, and to that to the Rom Colossae and Rome being cities which he had not visited previous to his writing to the churches there he knows several persons in Colossae; and in the case of the Ep. to the Rom, he mentions by name no fewer than twenty-six persons in that city.

      How is it then that in the Ep. to the Eph" there are no references at all to the three years which he spent in Ephesus? And how also is there no men tion of any one of the members of the church or of the elders whom lie knew so intimately and so affectionately? "Ephesians" is inexplicable on the ordinary assumption that Ephesus was the city to which the ep. was addressed.

      The other theory, that the ep. was a circular one, sent in the first instance to Laodicea, involves no such difficulty.

      Another indication in regard to the primary

      destination of the ep. is in the words, "ye, the

      Gentiles in the flesh, who are called

      3. Ephesian Uncircumcision by that which is called Church Circumcision, in the flesh, made by Jewish in hands; that ye were at that time sep- Origin arate from Christ, alienated from the

      commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of the promise, having no hope and without God in the world" (Eph 2 11.12). Do these words describe the church in Ephesus? Was the church there gentile in its origin? Very far from this, for as a matter of fact it began by Paul preaching the gospel to the Jews, as is narrated at length by Luke in Acts 18. Then in Acts 19, Paul comes again to Ephesus, where he went into the synagogue and spake boldly for the space of three months, but when divers were hardened and believed not, but spake evil of the Way before the multitude, he separated the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus.

      Here, therefore, is definite proof that the church in Ephesus was not gentile in its origin. It was distinctly Jewish, but a gentile element had also been received into it. Now the church to which Pan! writes "the Ep. to the Eph" was not Jewish at all. He does not speak to his readers in any other way than "you Gentiles."

      But an important consideration is that the "Ep. to the Eph" was written by Paul at the same sitting

      almost as that to the Col. These two

      4. Eph and are sister epistles, and these along with Col Sister the Ep. to Philem were written and Epistles sent off at the same time, Onesimus

      and Tychicus carrying the Ep. to the Col (Col 4 7.S.9), Onesimus being the bearer of that to Philem, while Tychicus in addition to carrying the Colossian ep. was also the messenger who carried "the Ep. to the Eph" (Eph 6 21).

      A close scrutiny of Col and "Eph" shows, to an extent without a parallel elsewhere in the epp. of the NT, a remarkable similarity of phraseology. There are only two verses in the whole of Col to which there is no parallel in "Eph." The same words are used, while the thought is so varied and so rich, that the one ep. is in no sense a copy or repetition of the other (see list of parallelisms, etc, in 8t. Paul s Epp. to Colossae and Laodicea, T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh). Both epp. come warm and

      instinct with life from the full heart of tin; great apostle who had not, up to that time, visited either city, but on whom, none the less, there came daily the care of all the churches.

      To recapitulate: (1) The words "at Ephesus" in the inscription of the ep. are wanting in the two oldest and best MSS. (2) Paid speaks of his readers 5 Reca- as Persons f whose conversion to Christ he knew onlv l>y report. Similarly he pituiation H p,.al< s of them as knowing only by hear say of his commission ;is ;in apostle of Christ. Also, though he had lived in Kphesus for three years, this ep. does not contain a single salutation. (3) He speaks of his readers as forming a church exclusively of the (ientiles. But the church in Kphesus, so far from being exclusively gentile, was actually .Jewish in origin. (4) "Kph" was written at the same sitting as Col, and the same messenger, Tychicus, carried them both. Therefore as the ep. was not. and could not be, addressed to Kphesus. the conclusion is that it was addressed to some church, and that it was not a treatise sent to the Christian church generally. The words of the first verse of the ep., "to the saints that are," proves that the name of the place to which it was addressed is all that is lost from the MSS, but that the name of the city was there originally, as the ep. came from Paul s hand.

      Now Paul wrote an ep. to Laodicea at the same time as he wrote to Colossae. He dispatched both epp. by Tychicus. The thought and feeling and oven the dic tion of the two epp. are such that no other explanation is possible but that they came warm from the heart of the same writer at the same time. On all these grounds the conclusion seems inevitable that the Kp. to Laodicea is not lost at all, but that it is identical with the so-called "Kp. to the Eph."

      ///. Laodicea Displaced by Ephesus. How then did Ephesus displace Laodicea? It is explained at

      once if the theory is adopted that the 1. A Cir- epistle was a "circular" one addressed cular not to Laodicea only, but to other

      Epistle cities. We know e.g. that the apostle

      orders it to be taken to the church in Colossae and read there. So also it might have been sent to other cities, such as Hierapolis (Col 4 13) and Ephesus. Hence if the church in Lao dicea were not careful to see that the ep. was re turned to them, by those churches to whom they had sent it, it can easily be understood how a copy ist in any of those cities might leave out the words "in Laodicea," as not agreeing with the name of the city where the MS actually was at the time. As copies were multiplied, the words "in Ephesus" would be suggested, as the name of the chief city of Asia, from which province the ep. had come to the knowledge of the whole Christian church, and to which, in point of fact, Paul had sent it. The feeling would be natural, that it was in keeping with the fitness of things, that Paul, who had founded the church in Ephesus, should have written an ep. to the church there.

      In an article upon "Marcion and the Canon" by Pro fessor J. Rendel Harris, LL.D., in the Ej-pu* T, June, 1907, there is reference to the Krrue Bene dictine for January of that year, which contained a remarkable article by de Bruyne, entitled "Biblical Prologues of Marcionite Origin," in which the writer succeeded in showing that a very widely spread series of prefaces to the Pauline Epp., which occur in certain Lat Bibles, must have been taken from a Marcionite Bible. Professor Rendel Harris adds that the prefaces in question may go back to Mar cion himself, for in any case the Marcionite hand, from which they come, antedates the Lat tradition in which the prologues are imbedded. "It is clear from Tertul- lian s polemic against Marcion, that the Pauline Epp. stood in the following order in the Marcionite Canon: Gal, 1 and 2 Cor, Rom, 1 and 2 Thess, then Kph (which Marcion calls by the name of the Ep. to the Laodiceans), Col, Phil, and Philem Let us turn to the pro logues that are current in Vulg and other MSS for Eph and Col: the Ephesian prologue runs as follows: Kphesii sunt Asiani. Hi accepto verbo veritatis perstiterunt in fide. Hos conlaudat apostolus, scribens eis a Roma de carcere! When, however, we turn to the Colossian prologue, we find that it opens as follows: Colossenses et hi sicut Laodicenses sunt Axiani. Et ipsi praeventi erant a pseudapostolis, nee ad hos accessit apostolus sed et hos per epistolam recorrigit. etc.

      " From this it is clear that originally the prologue to the Laodiceans preceded the prologue to Col, and that the

      2. Proof from Biblical Prologues



      Laodiceans, Ep. to Lasciviousness

      Ephesian prologue is a substitute for the Laodicean pro logue, which can be partly reconstructed from the refer ences to it in th Colossian prologue. We can see that it had a statement that the Laodiceans belonged to Asia Minor, that they had been under the influence of false apostles, and had never been visited by St. Paul,

      who corrects their error by an epistle

      "We have now shown that the original Canon had Laodiceans, Colossians. It is interesting to observe how some Lat MSS naively admit this: You must know that the ep. which we have as that written to the Kph, the heretics, and esp. the Marcionites, entitle the Ep. to the Laodiceans. "

      IV. Reason for Such an Epistle. Assuming therefore that the "Ep. to the Eph" is the ep. which Paul wrote to the Laodiceans, various questions arise, such as, Why did he write to the church there? What was there in the state of the church in Lao- dicea to call for an op. from him? Was there any heresy there, like the false teaching which existed in the neighboring church in Colossae?

      The answer to such questions is that though we do not possess much information, yet these churches in the province of Asia had many things in common. They had originated at the same time, during the two whole years of Paul s residence in Kphesus. They were com posed of men of the same races, and speaking the same languages. They were subject, to the same influences of doctrinal error. The errors into which any one church fell could not fail to affect the others also. These churches were permeated to a large extent by the same ideas, derived both from the current philosophy and from their ancestral heathen religions. They would, therefore, one and all, require the same apostolic instruction and exhortation. This ep., accordingly, bears a close resem blance to the Kp. to the Col, just for the reason that the circumstances of the church in Laodicea were- similar to those of the church in Colossae; and also, that the thoughts which filled Paul s heart as he wrote to Colossae were adapted, in the first place, to counteract the false teaching in Colossae, but they are also the foundation of all Christian experience, and the very life of all Chris tian truth and doctrine. These are the great thoughts of Christ the Creator of all things, Christ the Upholder of all things, Christ the Reconciler of all things. Such thoughts filling Paul s heart would naturally find ex pression in language bearing a close resemblance to that in which he had just written to Colossae.

      It is no more astonishing that Paul should have written to Laodicea, than that he also wrote to Colossae, which was probably the least important of all the cities and churches mentioned in the apostle s work and career. Neither is it any more to be wondered at that he should have written so profound an ep. as that to "the Eph," than that he should also have given directions that it be sent on to Colossae and read there; for this reason, that the exposition of Christ s great love to the church and of His giving Himself for it the doctrine of the grace of God is the very corrective required by the errors of the false teachers at Colossae, and is also the groundwork of Christian truth and ex perience for all ages.

      NOTE. A very remarkable circumstance in regard to the apocryphal Ep. to the Laodiceans is mentioned by Nestle in the preface to his edition of the Lat NT, published in Stuttgart in 190(5. He writes that "the Ep. to the Laodiceans was for a thousand years part of very many Lat Bibles, and obtained a place in pre- Lutheran Ger. Bibles, together with Jerome s Ep. to Damasus."


      LAP: The word is the tr of three different Heb expressions: p n n , hf k (Prov 16 3)5), T;3 , beghcdh (2 K 4 39), and ^h , huccn (Neh 6 13, besides "jiH, hcgett, Ps 129 7). In all these passages the meaning is that of a part of oriental clothing, probably the folds of the garment covering the bosom or lap of a person. The flowing garments of Orientals invite the, use of the same, on the part of speakers, in driving home certain truths enunciated by impressive gesticulation. Every reader of Rom history recalls the impressive in cident of Quintus Fabius Maximus (Citnctutor), who, in 219 BC, was ambassador of Rome to Car thage;, and who, before the city council, holding the folds of his toga in the shape of a closed pouch,

      declared that he held enclosed in the same both peace and war, whichever the Carthaginians should desire to choose. \\Vhen the Carthaginians clam ored for war, he opened the folds of his garment and said: "Then you shall have war!" Very much like it, Nehemiah, when pleading for united efforts for the improvement of social order, addressed the priests of Jerus to get a pledge of their cooperat ion: "Also I shook out my lap [hd^cn], and said, So God shake out every man from his house, and from his labor, that performeth not this promise; even thus be he shaken out, and emptied" (Neh 5 13).

      In EV the vb. "to lap" is found, which has no ety mological connection with the above-mentioned noun s. It is in Heb ppO, Itikak, and refers to the loud licking up of water by dogs (1 K 21 19; 22 38 AV), and in the story of Gideon s battle against the Midianites, of his 300 warriors (Jgs 7 5 If).

      H. L. E. LUERING

      LAPPIDOTH, lap i-doth, -doth (nrPEb , lap- pldfiolli, "flames," "torches"; AV Lapidoth) : Deborah s husband (Jgs 4 4). The Hob name is a fern. pi. like Jeremoth (1 Ch 7 8), Naboth (1 K 21 1). Tin; pi. is probably intensive. Jewish interpreters have identified Lappidoth ("flames") with Barak ("lightning"). Some have taken the words rendered "wife of Lappidoth" ( cshctti lap- pullwth) as a description of Deborah, and have tr d them, "woman of lights," i.e. maker of wicks for the sanctuary; or "woman of flames," referring to her prophetic zeal. Those explanations are more interesting than probable. JOHN A. LEES

      LAPWING, lap wing (ntt^,dukhlphath; g-iro^, epops) : A tr used in early VSS, now universally admitted to be incorrect. The lapwing had a crest, and resembled in size and color the hoopoe (Upupn epops). It appears in the lists of abominations only (Lev 11 19 AV and Dt 14 18 AV, RV HOOPOE, q.v.). The lapwing is a plover, and its flesh and eggs are delicious food.

      LASCIVIOUSNESS, la-siv i-us-nes (6ia-i\\ytia.,

      aselgcin, "licentiousness," "wantonness," "un bridled lust," "shamelessness," "outrageousness") :

      Etymologists assign three probable sources of axeli/eia, viz.: (1) from a compound of a priv. and itAyr;, Selae, a

      Pisidian city whose inhabitants accord-

      1 Srmrrps ing to Th:i .ver (AT Lexicon) "excelled

      in strictness of morals," but according to

      Trench a place whose people "were infa mous for their vices"; (2) from a compound of a intense. and cra\\ay<:Li , xalnuiin, " to raise a disturbance or noise"; (3) from a compound of a priv. and <re,\\y<u, self/6, or tfeA-yw, thett/6, "exciting disgust or displeasure." It evidently means conduct and character that is unbecoming, inde cent, unrestrainedly shameless.

      Mk uses it in 7 22 with uncertainty as to the vice meant. Paul (2 Cor 12 21) classes it with un-

      cleanness and fornication as sins to be 2. As Used repented of; also (Gal 6 19; cf Wisd in the NT 14 26, "wantonness") puts it in the

      same catalogue with other works of the flesh; and (Eph 4 19) he refers to some aged ones so covetous that they made trade of them selves by giving "themselves up to lasciviousness." The same word is tr d "wantonness" in Rom 13 13, meaning wanton manner, filthy words, unchaste movements of the body. Peter (1 Pet 4 3) men tions those who "walked in lasciviousness, lusts, winebibbings, revellings, carousings, and abominable idolatries." He speaks (2 Pet 2 2) of "lascivious doings" (AV "pernicious ways"); (2 7) "lascivious life" (AV "filthy conversation"); and (2 IS) of "lasciviousness" (AV "wantonness"), as a means "to entice in the lusts of the flesh." Judo ver 4 probably does not refer to any form of sensuality in using the word descriptive of "ungodly men"


      Latin Version, Old



      who perverted the faith of some and denied our only Master. WILLIAM EDWARD RAFFETY

      LASEA, la-se a (Acurcua, Ldftaia} : A town on the S. coast of Crete, 5 miles E. of Fair Havens (Acts 27 8). The ruins were; examined in 1850 by Rev. G. Brown (sec CII [M.I 1 ], ch xxiii, 640). If St. Paul s ship was detained long at this anchorage, it would be necessary to purchase stores from Lasea; and this in addition to the inconvenience; of the roadstead (see FAIR HAVENS) would probably ex plain the captain s reluctance to winter there.

      LASHA, la sha (yil , lusha^ : A place, named on the southern boundary of the Canaanites along with Gomorrah, Adnah and Zeboiim (Gen 10 19). Onoin identifies it with the hot springs at Callir- rhoe in Wddy Zcrka Ma l ln, on the E. of the Dead Sea; in this agreeing with Tg Jerus. This position, however, seems too far to the N., and possibly the site should be sought on the W. of the Arabah. The absence of the article (cf Josh 15 2) prevents identification with the promontory cl-Lisdn, which runs into the sea from the eastern shore. Well- hauscn (Comp. dcs Hex., 15) thinks we should read Ctp5 ? lesham, as the letters "52 (m~) and 3? 0) are like each other in their Palmyrene form. We should then have indicated the boundary from Gaza to the Dead Sea, and then from the Dead Sea to Leshem, i.e. Dan. This is very precarious. No identifi cation is possible. W 7 . EWING

      LASSHARON, la-sha ron, la-shar on lashsharon or la-sharon, AV Sharon) : A royal city of the Canaanites taken by Joshua, named with Aphek (Josh 12 18). Possiblv we should here follow the reading of LXX (B), "the king of Aphek in Sharon." Onnni (s.v. "Saron") mentions a region between Mt. Tabor and the Lake of Tiberias called Sarona. This is probably represented by the ancient site Sarona, on the plateau 6| miles S.W. of Tiberias. If MT is correct, this may be the place intended.

      LAST DAY. See DAY, LAST.


      LAST TIME, TIMES (Kaipos ea-xaros, kairos eschatos, XP VOS eo"X aT s> chronos eschatos [also pl-] crx.aTov TOV xpovov, eschaton tou chronou, upa l<r\\a.Ti\\, hora eschdtc): In A V this phrase occurs in 1 Pet 15; 1 20 (pl.)5 1 Jn 2 18; Jude vcr 18. RV has, in 1 Pet 1 20, "at the end of the times," and in 1 Jn 2 18, "the last hour," in closer adherence to the Gr. The conception is closely allied to that of "the last day," and, like this, has its root in the OT conception of "the end of days." In the OT this designates the entire eschatological period as that which the present course of the world is to issue into, and not, as might be assumed, the closing section of history. It is equivalent to what was later called "the coming aeon" (see ESCHATOLOGY OF THE NT). In the NT, on the other hand, the phrase "the last time" does mark the concluding section of the present world-period, of the present aeon. In three of the NT passages the consciousness expresses itself that these "last times" have arrived, and that the period extending from the appearance or the resurrection of Christ until His Second Coming is the closing part of the present age, that the writer and readers are living in "the last times." In one passage (1 Pet 1 5) "the last time" is projected farther forward into the future, so that it comes to mean the time immediately preceding the reappearance

      of Christ. Both usages can be readily explained. The days of the Messiah were to the OT writers part of the future world, although to the later Jew ish chiliasm they appeared as lying this side of it, because differing from the world to come in their earthly and temporal character. To the early Christians the days of the Messiah appeared more closely assimilated in character to the future world, so that no reason existed on this score for not in cluding them in the latter. Still it was also real ized that the Messiah in His first appearance had not brought the full realization of the coming world, and that only His return from heaven would con summate the kingdom of God. Accordingly, the days in which they lived assumed to them the char acter of an intermediate period, marked off on the one hand from the previous development by the appearance of the Messiah, but equally marked off from the coming aeon by His reappearance in glory. From a formal point of view the representation resembles the Jewish chiliastic scheme, but with a twofold substantial difference: (a) the chiliastic scheme restricts the Messiah and His work to the last days, and does not carry Him over into the coming world, whereas to the Christian the coming world, no less than the last days, is thoroughly Messianic; (6) to the Jewish point of view both the days of the Messiah and the coming world lie in the future, whereas to the Christian the former have already arrived. It remained possible, however, from the Christian point of view to distinguish within the last times themselves between the imme diate present and the future conclusion of this period, and this is done in 1 Pet 1 5. Also in 1 Jn 2 18 the inference that "the last hour" has come is not drawn from the presence of the Mes siah, but from the appearance of the anti-Christian power, so that here also a more contracted concep tion of the last stage of history reveals itself, only not as future (1 Pet 1 5), but as present (hence "hour" not "time").

      For literature see ESCHATOLOGY OF THE NT.


      LASTHENES, las the-nez (Aa.<rMvr\\s, Lasthenes): A highly placed official under King Demetrius II, Nicator. He is called the king s "kinsman" (AV "cousin") and "father" (1 Mace 11 31.32; Jos, Ant, XIII, iv, 9), but these are to be taken as court titles rather than as denoting blood-relationship. According to Jos (Ant, XIII, iv, 3) he was a native of Crete, and raised an army for the king when he made his first descent upon the coast, and rendered him ultimately successful in wresting the throne of Syria from Alexander Balas (1 Mace 10 67; Ant, XIII, iv, 3). The letter addressed to L. indicates that he was probably prime minister or grand vizier of the kingdom. J. HUTCHISON

      LATCHET, lach et Op TCJ , s e rokh; Ijids, himds) : Leather thong used for tying on sandals (see Gen

      14 23; Mk 1 7 |i). The stooping to untie the dusty shoeJatchet was esteemed by Orientals a service that was at once petty and defiling, and was usually assigned to menials.

      LATIN, lat in : Was the official language of the Rom Empire as Gr was that of commerce. In Pal Aram, was the vernacular in the rural districts and remoter towns, while in the leading towns both Gr and Aram, were spoken. These facts furnish the explanation of the use of all three tongues in the inscription on the cross of Christ (Mt 27 37; Mk

      15 26; Lk 23 38; Jn 19 19). Thus the charge was written in the legal language, and was techni cally regular as well as recognizable by all classes of the people. The term "Latin" occurs in the NT only in Jn 19 20, PovMuVn-f, Rhomaisti, and in Lk 23




      Latin Version, Old

      38, Poj^cu/coFs (jpdfifMffiv), Rhomaikois (grdmmasin), according to X ADN. It is probable that Tertullus made his plea against Paul before Felix (Acts 24) in Lat, though Gr was allowed in such provincial courts by grace of the judge. It is probable also that Paul knew and spoke Lat; cf W. M. Ramsay, Pauline and Other Studies, 1906, 05, and A. Souter, "Did Paul Speak Lat?" Expos, April, 1911. The vernacular Lat had its own history and develop ment with great influence on the ecclesiastical ter minology of the West. See W. Bury, "The Holy Latin Tongue," Dublin Review, April, 1906, and Ronsch, Itala und Vulgata, 1S74, 480 f. There is no doubt of the mutual influence of Gr and Lat on each other in the later centuries. See W. Sehulze, Graeca Latina, 1891; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 1888.

      It is doubtful if the Lat syntax is clearly per ceptible in the koine (see LANGUAGE OF THE NT).

      Deissmann (Linht from the Ancient East, 117 f)_ finds epyatnav SLOM/J.I., eryaxlan didomi (opcrcnn dart: ) ill an Oxyrhvnchus papyrus letter of the vulgar type from 2d cent. BO (cf Lk 12 58). A lead tablet in Amorgus has Kpu-cu rb SiKator, krtnd to dikaion, (cf Lk 12 57). The papyri (2d cent. AD) give <rvva.ip<a \\6yoi . sunalro logon (cf Mtl823f). Moulton (Expos, February, 1903, 115) shows that TO ixavbv TVOLCLV, to hikanon poieln (xatisfacere), is as old as Polybius. Even a-v/j.- /Sov/Uoi Aa/u/3cci t> , sumboiil ion lamhdnein (concilium capere), may go with the rest like <ru 6^n, su 6pse (Mt 27 4), for videris (Thayer). Moulton (1 rol., 21) and Thumb (Grierhische Sprache, 121) consider the whole matter of syntactical Latinisms in the NT inconclusive. But see also C. Wesscly, " Die lateinischen Elemente in der Oracitat d. agypt. Papyrusurkunden," Wicn. Stud., 24; Laforcade, Influence du Latin sar le Grec, 83-158.

      There are Lat words in the NT: In particular Lat proper names like Aquila, Cornelius, Claudia, Clemens, Crescens, Crisj)us, Fortunatus, Julia, Junia, etc, even among the Christians in the NT besides Agrippa, Augustus, Caesar, Claudius, Felix, Festus, Gallic, Julius, etc.

      Besides we find in the NT current Lat commercial, financial, and official terms like farvdpiov, assdrion (as), drivdpiov, dendrion (denarius ), nevrvpiuv, ken- turion (centurio), /c^wos, kfnsos (census), KoSpavr^, kodrdntes (quadrans), Ko\\uvia, kolonla (colonia), KovffTuSia, koustodia (custodia),\\eyed>v,legeon (legio), MVTIOV, lent ion (lintcum), ^ipeprlvos, libcrtinos (liber- tinus), \\lrpa, lltra (litra), /xd/ceXXov, mdkellon (macel- lum), /j.e/jippdva, membrdna (membrana), ptXiov, m dion (mille), /J.65LOS, modios (modius), &VTTJS, xestes (sex- tarius), -rrpairdipiov, pmitorinn (praetorium), crtKaptos, sikdrios (sicarius), <ritutivOiov, simikinthion (semi- cinctium), <rov5dpiov, souddrion (sudarium), <nreKov- Xdrwp, spekoiddtor (speculator), raptpva, taberna (taberna) rirXos, titlos (titulus), (pf^bvys, pheloncs (paenula), (p&pov, phnron (forum), </pa 7 AXto,, phra- gellion (flagellum), (ppa^Uu, phragelloo (JlagcUo), Xdpr-rjs, chdrtes (chartaf), x^pos, choros (chorus).

      Then we meet such adjectives as HpuSiavol, Herodianoi, $>i\\urn"fiffioi, Philippcsioi, Xpiffriavol Christianol, which are made after the Lat model. Mark s Gospel shows more of these Lat words out side of proper names (cf Rom 16), as is natural if his Gospel were indeed written in Rome. See also LATIN VERSION, THE OLD.

      LITERATURE. Besides the lit. already mentioned see Schiirer, Jewish People in the Time of Christ, Div 11, vol I 43fl - Krauss, Griechische und lateinische Lehn- worter im Talmud (1898, 1899); Hoole, Classical Ele ment in the NT (1888); Jannaris, Historical Gr Grammar (1897); W. Schmid, Atticismus, etc (1887-97); Kapp, Latinismis merito ac falso susceptis (1726); Georgi, De Latinismis NT (1733); Draeger, Historische Syntax der lat Sprache (1878-81); Pfister, Vulyarlatein und \\ulaar- griechisch (Rh. Mus., 1912, 195-208).


      1. The Motive of Translation

      2. Multiplicity of Latin Translations m the 4th Century

      3. The Latin Bible before Jerome

      4. First Used in North Africa

      5. Cyprian s Bible

      6. Tertullian s Bible

      7. Possible Eastern Origin of Old Latin

      8. Classification of Old Latin MSS

      9. Individual Characteristics

      10. Value of Old Latin for Textual Criticism LITERATURE

      The claim of Christianity to be the one true reli gion has carried with it from the beginning the obli gation to make its Holy Scriptures,

      1. The containing the Divine message of sal- Motive of vation and life eternal, known to all Translation mankind. Accordingly, wherever the

      first Christian evangelists carried the gospel beyond the limits of the Gr-speaking world, one of the first requirements of their work was to give the newly evangelized peoples the record of God s revelation of Himself in their mother tongue. It was through the LXX tr of the OT that the great truths of revelation first became known to the Gr and Rom world. It is generally agreed that, as Christianity spread, the Syr and the Lat VSS were the first to be produced; and tr 3 of the Gospels, and of other books of the Old and NT in Gr, were in all probability to be found in these languages before the close of the 2d cent.

      Of the earliest translators of the Bible into Lat no record has survived. Notwithstanding the care ful investigations of scholars in recent

      2. Multi- years, there are still many questions plicity of relating to the origin of the Lat Bible Latin to which only tent ative and provisional Transla- answers can be given. It is therefore tions in the more convenient to begin a study of 4th Century its history with Jerome toward the

      close of the 4th cent, and the com mission intrusted to him by Pope Damasus to pro duce a standard Lat version, the execution of which gave to Christendom the Vulg (see VULGATE). The need for such a version was clamant. There existed by this time a mutiplicity of tr s differing from one another, and there was none possessed of commanding authority to which appeal might _be made in case of necessity. It was the consideration of the chaotic condition of_ the existing tr 3 , with their divergences and variations, which moved Damasus to commission Jerome to his task and Jerome to undertake it. We learn particulars from the letter of Jerome in 383 transmitting to his patron the first instalment of his revision, the Gos pels. "Thou compellest me," he writes, "to make a new w r ork out of an old so that after so many copies of the Scriptures have been dispersed throughout the whole world I am as it were to occupy the post of arbiter, and seeing they differ from one another am to determine which of them are in agreement with the original Gr." Anticipating attacks from critics, he says, further: "If they maintain that con fidence is to be reposed in the Lat exemplars, let them answer which, for there are almost as many copies of tr 8 as MSS. But if the truth is to be sought from the majority, why not rather go back to the Gr original, and correct the blunders which have been made by incompetent translators^ made worse rather than better by the presumption of unskilful correctors, and added to or altered by careless scribes?" Accordingly, he hands to the Pontiff the four Gospels to begin with after a care ful comparison of old Gr MSS.

      From Jerome s contemporary, Augustine, we obtain a similar picture. "Translators from Heb into Gr," he says (De Doctrina Christiana, ii.ll), "can be numbered, but Lat translators by no means. For whenever, in the first ages of the faith, a Gr MS came into the hands of anyone who had also a little skill in both languages, he made bold to translate it forthwith." In the same context he mentions "an innumerable variety of Lat transla-

      Latin Version, Old Laver



      tors," "a crowd of 1 ranslators." His advice to read ers is to give a preference to the Itala, "which is more faithful in its renderings and more intelligible in its sense." What the Itala is, has been greatly discussed. Formerly it was taken to he a summary designation of all the VSS before Jerome s time. But Professor Burkitt (Tc.rts and titmlics, IV) strongly urges the view that by this term Augustine designates Jerome s Vnlg, which he might quite well have known and preferred to any of the earlier tr s . However this may be, whereas before Jerome there were those numerous tr s , of which he and Augustine complain, after Jerome there is the one preeminent and commanding work, produced by him, which in course of time drove all others out of the field, the great Vulg edition, as it came to be called, of the complete Lat Bible.

      We are hero concerned with the subject of the

      Lat Bible before the time of Jerome. The MSS

      which have survived from the earlier

      3. The period are known by the general Latin designation of Old Latin. When we Bible ask where; these first tr 3 came into ex- before istence, we discover a somewhat sur- Jerome prising fact. It was not at Rome, as

      we might have expected, that they were first required. The language of Christian Rome was mainly Gr, down to the 3d cent. St. Paul wrote the Ep. to t lie Rom in Gr. When Clem ent of Rome in the last decade of the 1st cent, wrote an ep. in the name of the Roman church to the Corinthians, he wrote in Gr. Justin Martyr, and the heretic Marcion, alike wrote from Rome in Gr. Out of 15 bishops who presided over the Rom see down to the close of the 2d cent., only four have Lat names. Even the pagan emperor Marcus Aurelius wrote his Meditations in Gr. If there w r ere Christians in Rome at that period whose only lan guage was Lat, they were not sufficiently numer ous to be provided with Christian literature; at least none has survived.

      It is from North Africa that the earliest Lat lit erature of the church has come down to us. The

      church of North Africa early received

      4. First a baptism of blood, and could point Used in to an illustrious roll of martyrs. It North had also a distinguished list of Lat Africa authors, whose Lat might sometimes

      be rude and mixed with foreign idioms, but had a power and a fire derived from the truths which it set forth.

      One of the most eminent of these Africans was Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, who won the martyr s crown in 257. His genuine works consist of a num ber of short treatises, or tracts, and numerous letters, all teeming with Scripture quotations. It is certain that he employed a version then and there in use, and it is agreed that "his quotations are carefully made and thus afford trustworthy standards of African Old Latin in a very early though still not the earliest stage" (Hort, Intro to the NT in Gr, 78).

      Critical investigation has made it clear that the version used by Cyprian survives in a fragmentary copy of St. Mark and St. Matthew, 6. Cyprian s now at Turin in North Italy, called Bible Codex Bobbiensis (k), and in the frag

      ments of the Apocalypse and Acts contained in a palimpsest at Paris called Codex Floriacensia (/i). It has been found that another MS, Codex Palatinus (r) at Vienna, has a text closely akin to that exhibited in Cyprian, although there are traces of mixture in it. The text of these MSS, together with the quotations of the so-called Speculum Augustini (/), is known among scholars as African Old Latin. Another MS with an inter esting history, Codex Colbertinus (c) contains also

      a valuable African element, but in many parts of the Gospels it sides also with what is called the Kuro/iaitt Old Latin more than with k or e. Codex Bobbiensis (k) has been edited with a learned in troduction in the late Bishop John Wordsworth s Old Latin Bib. Texts, the relation of k to Cyprian as well as to other Old Latin texts being the subject of an elaborate investigation by Professor Sanday. That Cyprian, who was not acquainted with Greek, had a written version before him which is here identified is certain, and thus the illustrious bishop and martyr gives us a fixed point in the history of the Lat Bible a century and a half earlier than Jerome.

      We proceed half a century nearer to the fountain- head of the African Bible when we take up the tes timony of Tertullian who flourished

      6. Tertul- toward the close of the 2d cent. He Han s Bible differed from Cyprian in being a com petent Gr scholar. He was thus able

      to translate for himself as he made his quotations from the LXX or the Gr NT, and is thus for us by no means so safe a witness to the character or exist ence of a standard version. Professor Zahn ((!K, I, (iO) maintains with considerable plausibility that before 210-240 AD there was no Lat Bible, and that Tertullian with his knowledge of Gr just tr d as he went along. In this contention, Zahn is not sup ported by many scholars, and the view generally is that while Tertullian s knowledge of Gr is a dis turbing element, his writings, with the copious quotations from both OT and NT, do testify to the existence of a version which had already been for some time in circulation and use. Who the African Wycliffe or Tindale was who produced that version has not been recorded, and it may in fact have been the work of several hands, the result, as Bishop Westcott puts it, of the spontaneous efforts of African Christians (Canon of the NJ 17 , 263).

      Although the evidence has, up to the present time,

      been regarded as favoring the African origin of the

      first Lat tr of the Bible, recent investi-

      7. Possible gation into what is called the Western Eastern text of the NT has yielded results Origin of pointing elsewhere. It is clear from Old Latin a comparison that the Western type

      of text has close affinity with the Syr witnesses originating in the eastern provinces of the empire. The close text ual relation disclosed bet ween the Lat and the Syr VSS has led some authorities to believe that, after all, the earliest Lat version may have been made in the East, and possibly at Antioch. But this is one of the problems awaiting the discovery of fresh material and fuller investiga tion for its solution.

      We have already noticed the African group, so designated from its connection with the great

      African Fathers, Tertullian and esp.

      8. Classi- Cyprian, and comprising A-, e, and to fication of some extent h and m. The antiquity Old Latin of the text here represented is attested MSS by these African Fathers.

      When we come down to the 4th cent, we find in Western Europe, and esp. in North Italy, a second type of text, which is designated European, the precise relation of which to the African has not been clearly ascertained. Is this an independent text which has arisen on the soil of Italy, or is it a text derived by alteration and revision of the African as it traveled north ward and westward? This group consists of the Codex Vercellensis (a) and Codex Veronensis (b) of the 4th or 5th cent, at Vercelli and Verona re spectively, and there may be included also the Codex Vindobonensis (i) of the 7th cent, at Vienna. These give the Gospels, and o gives for St. John the text as it was read by the 4th-cent. Father, Lucifer



      Latin Version, Old Laver

      of Cagliari in Sardinia. The Lat of the Gr-Lat MS D (Codex Bezae) known as d, and the Lat of the translator of Irenaeus are classed with this group.

      Still later, Professor Hort says from the middle of the 4th cent., a third type, called Italic from its more restricted range, is found. It is represented by Codex Brixianus (/) of the 6th cent., now at Brescia, and Codex Monacensis (q) of the 7th cent., at Munich. This text is probably a modified form of the European, produced by revision which has brought it more into accord with the Gr, and has given it a smoother Lat aspect. The group has received tins name because the text found in many of Augustine s writings is the same, and as he expressed a preference for the Itala, the group was designated accordingly. Recent investigation tends to show that we must be careful how we use Augustine as an Old Latin authority, and that the Itala may be, not a pre-Vulg text, but rather Jerome s Vulg. This, however, is still uncertain; the fact remains that as far as the Gospels are con cerned, / and q represent the type of text most used by Jerome.

      That all these groups, comprising in all 38 codices,

      go back to one original is not impossible. Still there

      may have been at first local VSS, and then an official

      version formed out of them. When

      9. Indi- Jerome s revision took hold of the vidual church, the Old Latin representatives Character- for the most part dropped out of not ice. istics Some of them, however, held their

      ground and continued to be copied down to the 12th and even the 13th cent. Codex c is an example of this; it is a MS of the 12th cent., but as Professor Burkitt has pointed out (Texts and Ktutlii s, IV, Old Latin," 11) "it came from Lan- guedoc, the country of the Albigenses. Only among heretics isolated from the rest of Western Christianity could an Old Latin text have been written at so late a period." An instance of an Old Latin text copied in the 13th cent, is the Gigas Holmiensis, quoted as (liy, now at Stockholm, and so called from its great size. It contains the Acts and the Apocalypse of the Old Latin and the rest of the NT according to the Vulg. It has to be borne in mind that in the early centuries complete Bibles were unknown. Each group of books, Gos pels, Acts and Catholic Epp., Pauline Epp., and Rev for the NT, and Pent, Historical Books, Pss and Prophets for the OT, has to be regarded sepa rately. It is interesting, also, to note that when Jerome revised, or even retranslated from the LXX, Tob and Jth of the Apoc, the greater number of these books, the Wisd, Ecclus, 1 and 2 Mace, and Bar were left unrevised, and were simply added to the Vulg from the Old Latin version.

      These Old Latin tr 3 going back in their earliest

      forms to nearly the middle of the 2d cent, are very

      early witnesses to the Gr text from

      10. Value which they were made. They are of Old Latin the more valuable inasmuch as they for Textual are manifestly very literal tr s . Our Criticism great uncial MSS reach no farther

      back than the 4th cent., whereas in the Old Latin we have evidence indirect indeed and requiring to be cautiously used reaching back to the 2d cent. The text of these MSS is neither dated nor localized, whereas the evidence of these VSS, coming from a particular province of the church, and being used by Fathers whose period is definitely known, enables us to judge of the type of Gr text then and there in use. In this con nection, too, it is noteworthy that while the vari ations of which Jerome and Augustine complained were largely due to the blunders, or natural mis takes, of copyists, they did sometimes represent various readings in the Gr originals.

      LITERATURE. Wordsworth and White, Old Latin Biblical Texts, 4 vols; V. C. Burkitt, "The Old Latin and the Itala," Texts and Studies, IV; "Old Lat VSS" by II. A. A. Kenni-dy in II DB; " Bibellibersetzungen, Lateinische " by Fritzsche-Nestle in PKE 3 ; Intros to Textual Criticism of the NT by Scrivoner, Gregory, Nestle, and Lake.


      LATTICE, lat is. See HOUSE, II, 1, (9).

      LAUD, lod: A vb. meaning "to praise," used in Rom 15 11 AV, and Ps 117 1; 145 4. RV either should have avoided the word altogether or else should have used it much more extensively preferably the latter, as the word is not obsolete in liturgical Eng.

      LAUGHING-STOCK, laf ing-stok: Something set up to be laughed at; thrice in RV the tr of p .Hp, s r hdk, "laughter," etc (Job 12 4 bis; Jer 20 7; cf Jer 48 26.27.39; Lam 3 14). See MOCK, MOCKING.

      LAUGHTER, laf ter (pnS , cahak, pHTT , sahak, "to laugh," pimp , s hok, "laughter"; -yeXdw, gcldo, Ka.Ta-ytX.tta>, katageldu) : (1) Laughter as the expres sion of gladness, pleasurable surprise, is the tr of cahak (Gen 17 17; 18 12.13.15; 21 6), which, however, should perhaps be "laugh at me," not "with me," as AV and RV (so Delitzsch and others; see also Hastings in IIDB), not in the sense of derision, but of surprise and pleasure. In the same ver for "God hath made me to laugh," RV gives in m, "hath prepared laughter for me," and this gave his name to the son, the promise of whose birth evoked the laughter (Yichdk, Isaac} , gdad (Lk 6 21.25) has the same meaning of gladness and rejoicing; s f hok, "laughter," has also this sense (Job 8 21 ; Ps 126 2). It is, however, "laughed to scorn" in Job 12 4; RV "laughing-stock"; so Jer 20 7; cf 48 26.27.39; Lam 3 14, "derision." (2) Sahak is used (except Job 29 24; Eccl 3 4) in the sense of the laughter of defiance, or derision (Job 6 22; 41 29); in Piel it is often tr d "play," "play ing," "merry." (3) Ld auh is "to scorn," "to laugh to scorn" (2 K 19 21; Neh 2 19); sahak has also this sense (2 Ch 30 10); c e hok (Ezk 23 32); s hok (Job 12 4); katagelao (Mt 9 24; Mk 6 40; Lk 8 53); the simple gelao occurs only in Lk 6 21.25; see above. Katagelao is found in Jth 12 12, "laugh to scorn" (Ecclus 7 11; 20 17; 1 Mace 10 70, RV "derision").

      For "laugh" (Job 9 23) RV has "mock"; for "mocked of his neighbor" and "laughed to scorn" (Job 12 4) "laughing-stock"; for "shall rejoice in time to come" (Prov 31 25), "laugheth at the time to come"; "laughter" for "laughing" (Job 8 21).

      W. L. WALKER

      LAUNCH, lanch, lonch. See SHIPS AND BOATS, III, 1.

      LAVER, la ver (*TP3 , klyor) : Every priest in attendance on the altar of Jeh was required to wash

      his hands and his feet before entering 1. In the upon his official duties (Ex 30 19 ff). Tabernacle To this end a laver was ordered to

      be made as part of the tabernacle equipment (30 17-21; 38 8). Its composition was of brass (bronze), and it consisted of two parts, the bowl and its pedestal or foot (30 18, etc). This first laver was a small one, and was made of the hand mirrors of the women in attendance upon the altar (38 8). Its place was between the altar and the tabernacle (40 30). See TABERNACLE.

      The difficulty as to the washing of parts of the sacrificial carcases was overcome, in the temple of



      Solomon, by the construction of "10 layers" and

      a "molten sea" (1 K 7 23-37; 2 Ch 4 2-6; see

      TEMPLE; SEA, MOLTEN). We learn

      2. In the from 2 Ch 4 6 that the "sea" was for Temple the priests to wash in therefore took

      the place of the laver in the taber nacle and the layers were used as baths for por tions of the burnt offerings. The layers them selves were artistic works of unusual merit for that age. Like that in the tabernacle, each had its own stand or base, which was cast in a separate piece from the laver. These; bases rested on wheels which allowed of the laver being moved from one part of the court to another without being turned about. Five stood on the north and five on the eolith side of the temple. They were ornamented with "lions, oxen, and cherubim," and on a lower level, with a series of wreaths or festoons of flowers (1 K 7 27-37). In modern speech, the lavers may be described as so many circular open tanks for the storage of water. Each laver contained 40 baths (about 320 gals.) of water. Its height was 5 cubits, the locomotive machinery being 3 cubits in height, and the depth of the bowl or tank, judging from its capacity, about 2 cubits. The last we hear of the lavers, apart from their bases, is that the idolatrous king Ahaz cut off the border of the bases, and removed the bases from them (2 K 16 17). During the reign of Jehoiakim, Jere miah foretold that the molten sea and the bases (there being then no lavers) should be carried to Babylon (Jer 27 19). A few years later it is recorded that the bases were broken up, and the brass of which they were made was carried away (Jer 62 17).

      The Gr word (\\ovrp6v, loutron) occurs twice in

      the NT. In Eph 6 26, Paul says that Christ gave

      Himself for the church "that he might

      3. The sanctify it, having cleansed it by the Laver in washing [Gr "laver"] of water with the the NT word"; and in Tit 3 5 he says that

      we are saved "through the washing [Gr "laver"] of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit." In these passages the reference is to the constant physical purity demanded of the Jewish priests when in attendance upon the temple. Christians are "a holy priesthood," and are cleansed not by water only, but, in the former passage, "with the word" (cf Jn 15 3); in the latter, by the "renewing of the Holy Spirit" (cf Ezk 36 25; Jn 3 5). The feet-washing mentioned by Jesus is emblematic of the same thing (Jn 13 10).



      The Term " Law"; Austin s Definition of Law


      1. The Law in the Teaching of Christ

      (1) Authority of the Law L pheld in the Sermon on the Mount

      (a) Christ and Tradition

      (b) Sin of Murder

      (c) Adultery and Divorce

      (d) Oaths

      (e) Retaliation

      (/) Love to Neighbors Love of Enemies

      (2) Other References to the Law in the Teaching of Christ

      (a) Traditions of the Elders and the 5th

      Commandment (fe) Christ s Answer to the Young Ruler

      (c) Christ s Answer to the Lawyer

      (d) References in the Fourth Gospel

      2. The Law in Relation to the Life of Christ

      (1) In His Infancy

      (2) In His Ministry

      3. The Law in Relation to the Death of Christ

      (1) Christ Charged with Blasphemy under the Jewish Law

      (2) Christ Charged with Treason under the Roman Law

      4. How Christ Fulfilled the Law in All Its Parts


      1. Stephen s Witness

      2. Practice of Peter and Paul

      3. Allusions to the Roman Law


      1. In Romans

      2. In Galatians

      3. In the Other Paulino Epistles

      4. In the Epistle to the Hebrews

      5. In the Epistle of James

      6. In the Epistles of Peter and John LITERATURE

      The Gr word for "law" is v6fias, notnos, derived from v^fj.w, nemo, "to divide," "distribute," "ap portion," and generally meant anything established, anything received by usage, a custom, usage, law; in the NT a command, law.

      It may not he amiss to note the definition of law given by a celebrated authority in jurisprudence, the late Mr.

      John Austin: "A law, in the most general Austin s anc l comprehensive acceptation in which

      npfmif-inn the term, in its literal meaning, is em- -emimuii ployed, may be said to be a rule laid down OI .Law for the guidance of an intelligent being, by an

      intelligent being having power over him." Under this comprehensive statement, he classifies "laws set by God to His human creatures, and laws set by men to men." After analyzing the three ideas, command as the expression of a particular desire; duty or obligation, signifying that one is bound or obliged by the command to pursue a certain course of conduct, and sanction, in dicating the evil likely to be incurred by disobedience, he thus summarizes: "The ideas or notions compre hended by the term command are the following: (1) a wish or desire conceived by a rational being that another rational being shall do or forbear; (2) an evil to pro ceed from the former and to be incurred by the latter in case the latter comply not with the wish; (3) an expression or intimation of the wish by words or other signs." This definition makes it clear that the term "laws of nature" can be used only in a metaphorical sense, the metaphorical application being suggested as Austin shows by the fact that uniformity or stability of conduct is one of the ordinary consequences of a law proper, consequently, "Wherever we observe a uniform order of events, or a uniform order of coexisting phe nomena, we are prone to impute that order to a law set by its author, though the case presents us with nothing that can be likened to a sanction or a duty." As used in the NT it will be found generally that the term "law" bears the sense indicated by Austin, and includes "com mand," "duty" and "sanction."

      /. Law in the Gospels. Naturally we first turn to the Gospels, where the word "law" always refers to the Mosaic law, although it has different appli cations. That law was really threefold : the Moral Law, as summed up in the Decalogue, the Cere monial Law, prescribing the ritual and all the typi cal enactments, and what might be called the Civil or Political Law, that relating to the people in their national, political life. The distinction is not closely observed, though sometimes the reference emphasizes one aspect, sometimes another, but generally the whole Law without any discrimination is contemplated. Sometimes the Law means the whole OT Scriptures, as in Jn 10 34; 12 34; 15 25. At other times the Law means the Pent, as in Lk 24 44.

      The Law frequently appears in the teaching of Christ. In the Sermon on the Mount He refers most specifically and fully to it. It is fre- 1. The Law quently asserted that He there exposes in the the imperfection of the Law and sets

      Teaching His own authority against its author- of Christ ity. But this seems to be a super ficial and an untenable view. Christ indeed affirms very definitely the authority of the Law: "Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets" (Mt 5 17). Here the term would seem to mean the whole of the Pent. "I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished" (Mt 5 17.18). A similar utterance is recorded in Lk 16 17: "It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away, than for one tittle of the law to fall."

      (1) Authority of the Law upheld in the Sermon on the Mount. The perfection and permanence of the Law as well as its authority are thus indicated,



      and the following verse in Mt still further empha sizes the authority, while showing that now the Lord is speaking specifically of the moral law of the Decalogue: "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven" (5 19). These impressive sentences should be borne in mind in considering the utterances that follow, in which there seems a contrast between the Law and His own teaching, and from which has been drawn the inference that He condemns and practically abrogates the Law. What Jesus really does is to bring out the fulness of meaning that is in the Law, and to show its spirituality and the wideness of its reach. He declares that the righteousness of His disciples must exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees (ver 20). Their righteous ness consisted largely in a punctilious observance of the external requirements of the Law; the dis ciples must yield heart obedience to the inner spirit of the Law, its external and internal requirements.

      (a) Christ and tradition: Jesus then proceeds to point out the contrast, not so much between His own teaching and that of the Law, as between His interpretation of the Law and the interpretation of other teachers: "Ye have heard that it was sa ; d by them of old time" (AV), "to them of old time" RV (ver 21). Either rendering is grammatically allowable, but in either case it is evidently not the original utterance of Moses, but the traditional interpretation, which He had in view. "Ye have heard that it was said"; Christ s usual way of quoting the C)T is, "It is written" or some other formula pointing to the written Word; and as He has just referred to the written Law as a whole, it would be strange if He should now use the formula "It was said" in reference to the particular pre cepts. Evidently He means what was said by the Jewish teachers.

      (6) Sin of murder: This is further con firmed by the citations- "Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment." The second clause is not found in the Pent as a distinct statement, but it is clearly the generalization of the teachers. ( hrist does not sot Himself in opposition to Moses; rather does He enjoin obedience to the precepts of the scribes when sitting in Moses 1 seat, they truly expound the Law (Mt 23 1-8) But these, teachers had so expounded the command as if it only referred to the art of mun/cr; so Christ shows the full and true spiritual meaning of i " But I say unto you, that every one who is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment (ver 22). See MUKDKU.

      0) Adultery and divorce: Again, " Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shalt not commit adultery (ver 27). The traditional teaching confined this mainly to the out ward act, Hut I say unto you, says Christ, that adul tery pertains even to the lustful thought (ver 2, dealing with this matter He, passes to the law of divorce which was one of the civil enactments, and did not stand on the same, level with the moral precept against com mitting adultery, nay, the very carrying out of the civil provision might lead to a real breach of the moral pre cept, and in the, interests of the precept itself , in the very desire to uphold the authority of the moral law, ( hrist pronounces against divorce on any ground save that of fornication Later on. as recorded in Mt 19 <J-9, He was ques^oned about this same law of divorce, and again He condemns the light way in which divorce was treated by the Jews, and affirms strongly. the sanctity of the marriage institution, showing that it was antecedent to the Mosaic code was from the beginning, and derived its binding force from the Divine Pronouncement .in Gen 2 24 founded upon the nature of things while as to the Mosaic law of divorce, He declares that i 1 was permitted on account of the hardness of their hearts, Eut that no other cause than fornication was sufficient to dissolve the marriage tie. This civil enactment, j ust i- fled original v" (>n arc-mint of the inability of the people to rise to thl true moral ideal of the Decalogue, Christ chums authority to transcend, but in doing so He vindi cates and upholds thelaw which said, "Thou shalt not

      00 <<fl Oaths: The next precept Jesus cites is one partly Civi and partly ritual, concerning the taking of oaths. The words are not found in the Pent as a definite enact

      ment; they are rather a gathering up of several utter ances (Lev 19 12; Xu 30 2; Dt 23 21), and again the form of the citation suggests that it is the rabbinical interpretation that is in question. But the kind of swearing allowed by the law was the very opposite of ordinary profane swearing. It was intended, indeed, to guard the 3d commandment against taking the name of Jeh in vain. Christ in condemning the flippant oaths allowed by the rabbis was really asserting the authority of that 3d command; He was enforcing its spirituality and claiming the reverence due to the Divine name. Into the question how far the words of Christ bear upon oath- taking in a court of law we need not enter. His own response to the adjuration of the high priest when practically put upon His oath (Mt 26 03.04) and other NT instances (Rom 1 .; 2 Cor 1 23; Gal 1 20; Phil 1 8; 1 Thess 25; He 6 Ki.17; Kcv 10 5.0) would tend to show that such solemn appeals to God are not embraced in Christ s prohibition: "Swear not at all"; but undoubtedly the ideal speech is that of the simple asseveration, the " Yes" or " No" of the man, who, con scious that he speaks in the presence of God, reckons his word inviolable, needing no strengthening epithet, though as between man and man an oath may be necessary for confirmation and an end of strife. See OATH.

      (i?) Retaliation: He next touches upon the "law of retaliation": "an eye for an eye" (ver 3S), and con sistently with our understanding of the other sayings, we think that here Christ is dealing with the traditional interpretation which admitted of personal revenge, of men taking the law into (heir own hands and revenging themselves. Such a practice Christ utterly condemns, and inculcates instead gentleness and forbearance, the outcome of love even toward enemies. This law, in deed, finds place among the Mosaic provisions, but it appears there, not as allowing personal spite to gratify itself in its own way, but as a political enactment to be carried out by the magistrates and so to discountenance private revenge. Christ shows that the spirit of His Gospel received by His people would supersede the necessity for these requirements of the civil code; al though His words are not to be interpreted quite lit erally, for He Himself when smitten on the one cheek did not turn the other to the siniter (Jn 18 22.23), and the principle of the law of retaliation still holds good in the, legislative procedure of all civilized nations, and according to the NT teaching, will find place even in the Divine procedure in the day of judgment. See also PUNISHMENT.

      (/) Love to neighbors; love of enemies: The last saying mentioned in the Sermon clearly reveals its rab binical character: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy" (Mt 5 43). The first part is indeed the injunction of the Law, the second part is an unwar rantable addition to it. It is only this part that Christ virtually condemns when He says. "Hut 1 say unto you, Love your enemies" (ver 44). That the interpretation of these teachers was unwarrantable may be seen from many passages in the Pent, the Prophets and the Pss, which set forth the more spiritual aspect of the Law s requirement; and as to this particular precept, we need only refer to Prov 25 21.22, " If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat." Christ while condemning the addition unfolds the spiritual import of the command itself, for the love of neighbor rightly interpreted involves love of enemies; and so on another occasion (Lk 10 25- 37) He answers the lawyer s question, " Who is my neigh bor?" by the parable of the Good Samaritan, showing that everyone in need is our neighbor. See also FOR GIVENESS; WRATH.

      The last reference in the Sermon on the Mount to the Law fully bears out the idea that Christ really upheld the authority while elucidating the spirituality of the Law, for He declares that the principle embodied in the "Golden Rule" is a de duction from, is, indeed, the essence of, "the law and the prophets" (Mt 7 12).

      (2) Other references to the Law in the teaching of Christ. We can only glance at the other references to the Law in the teaching of Christ. In Mt 11 13, "For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John," the Law in its teaching capacity is in view, and perhaps the whole of the Pent is meant. In Mt 12 1-8, in rebutting the charge brought against His disciples of breaking the Sabbath, He cites the case of David and his men eating the showbread, which it was not lawful for any but the priests to partake of; and of the priests doing work on the Sabbath day which in other men would be a breach of the Law; from which He deduces the conclusion that the ritual laws may be set aside under stress of necessity and for a higher good. In that same chapter (vs 10-13) He indicates the lawfulness of healing doing good on the Sabbath day.



      (a) Traditions of the riders and the 5th com mand men t : In Alt 15 1-6 we have the account of the Pharisees complaining that the disciples transgressed the traditions of the elders by eating with unwashed hands. Jesus retorts upon them with the question: "\\\\"hy do ye also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?" citing the specific case of the 5th commandment which was evaded and virtually broken by their ingenious distinction of korban. This is a very instructive incident in its bearing upon the point which we have sought to enforce that it was the traditional interpretation and not the Law itself which Jesus condemned or corrected.

      (ft) Christ s answer to the young ruler: To the young ruler (Alt 19 1(512) lie presents the com mandments as the rule of life, obedience to which is the door to eternal life, especially emphasizing the manward aspect of the Law s claims. The young man, professing to have kept them all, shows that he has not grasped the spirituality of their requirements, and it is further to test him that Christ calls upon him to make the "great renun ciation" which, after all, is not in itself an additional command so much as the unfolding of the spiritual and far-reaching character of the command, "Love thy neighbor as thyself."

      (c) Christ s answer to the lawyer: To the lawyer who asks Him which is the great commandment in the Law, He answers by giving him the sum of the whole moral law. "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the great and first com mandment. And a second like unto it is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself" (Alt 22 35-39). In Mark s report (Mk 12 31), He adds, "There is none other commandment greater than these," and in that of Matthew He says, "On these two commandments the whole law hangeth, and the prophets" (ver 40); both utterances showing the high estimation in which He held the Law.

      (d) References in the Fourth Gospel: In His dis cussion with the Jews, recorded in Jn 7, He charges them with failure to keep the Law: "Did not Aloses give you the law, and yet none of you doeth the law? (ver 19). And referring to the healing of the impotent man on the Sabbath day, a deed which had roused their ire, He shows how one law may conflict with another. Moses had enjoined cir cumcision, and sometimes the time for circumcising would fall on the Sabbath day. Yet with all their reverence for the Sabbath day, they would, in order to keep the law of circumcision, perform the rite on the Sabbath day, and so, He argues, it is un reasonable to complain of Him because on the Sabbath day He had fulfilled the higher law of doing good, healing a poor sufferer. In none of all Christ s utterance s is there any slight thrown upon the Law itself; it is always held up as the standard of right and its authority vindicated.

      The passages we have considered show the place

      of the Law in the teaching of Christ, but we also

      find that He had to sustain a practical

      2. The Law relation to that Law. Born under the

      in Relation Law, becoming part of a nation which

      to the Life honored and venerated the Law, every

      of Jesus part of whose life was externally regu-

      Christ tated by it, the life of Jesus Christ

      could not fail to be affected by that

      Law. We note its operation:

      (1) Jn His infancy. On the eighth day He was circumcised (Lk 2 21), thus being recognized as a member of the covenant nation, partaking of its privileges, assuming its responsibilities. Then, according to the ritual law of purification, He is presented in the temple to the Lord (Lk 2 22-24), while His mother offers the sacrifice enjoined in the

      "law of the Lord," the sacrifice she brings patheti cally witnessing to her poverty, "a pair of turtle doves, or two young pigeons" being the alternative allowed to those who were not able to provide a lamb (Lev 12). The Divine approval is set upon this consecrating act, for it is while it is being done concerning Him after "the custom of the law" (ver 27), that the Spirit of God comes upon Simeon and prompts the great prophecy which links all the Alessianic hopes with the Babe of Bethlehem.

      Again, according to the Law His parents go up to the Passover feast when the wondrous child has reached His 12th year, the age when a youthful Jew assumed legal responsibility, becoming "a son of the Law," and so Jesus participates in the festal observances, and His deep interest in all that con cerns the temple-worship and the teaching of the Law is shown by His absorption in the conversation of the doctors, whose questions He answers so intelligently, while questioning them in turn, and filling them with astonishment at His understanding (Lk 2 42-47).

      (2) In His ministry. In His ministry He ever honors the Law. He reads it in the synagogue. He heals the leper by His sovereign touch and word, but He bids him go and show himself to the priest and offer the gift that Aloses commanded (Alt 8 4). And again, when the lepers appeal to Him, His response which implies the healing is, "Go and show yourselves unto the priests" (Lk 17 14). He drives out of the temple those that defile it (Alt 21 12.13; Jn 2 15-17), because of His zeal for the honor of His Father s house, and so, while showing His author ity, emphasizes the sanctity of the temple and its services. So, while claiming to be the Son in the Father s house, and therefore above the injunctions laid upon the servants and strangers, He neverthe less pays the temple-tax exacted from every son of Israel (Alt 17 24-27). He attends the various feasts during His ministry, and when the shadows of death are gathering round Him, He takes special pains to observe the Passover with His disciples. Thus to the ceremonial law He renders continuous obedience, the motto of His life practically being His great utterance to the Baptist: "Suffer it now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness" (Alt 3 15). If He obeyed the ceremonial law, unquestionably He obeyed the moral law. His keenest-eyed enemies could find no fault in Him in regard to His moral conduct. His absolute sinless- ness attests the translation of the moral law into actual life.

      We enter not upon the theological question as to the relation of the death of Christ to the penal inflictions of the Law Divinely enforced on behalf of 3 The Law shiners that touches the doctrine of the . T> i j. Atonement we only note the fact that in Relation jjis death was brought about in professed to the Death accordance with the Law. The chief of Tesus priests, in hatred, sent officers to take , J . Him, but overawed by His matchless

      eloquence, these officers returned empty- handed. In their chagrin, the chief priests can only say that the people who follow Him know not the Law and are cursed (Jn 7 49). Nicode- mus, on this occasion, ventures to remonstrate: "Doth our law judge a man, except it first hear from himself ? " (ver 51). This sound legal principle these men are bent on disregarding; their one desire is to put an end to the life of this man, who has aroused their jealousy and hatred, and at last when they get Him itito their hands, they strain the forms of the Law to accomplish their purpose. There is no real charge that can be brought against Him. They dare not bring up the plea that Ho broke the Sabbath, for again and again Ho has answered their cavils on that score. He has broken no law; all they can do is to bribe false witnesses to testify some thing to His discredit. The trumpery charge, founded upon a distorted reminiscence of His utterance about destroying the temple, threatens to break down.

      (1) Christ charged with blasphemy in relation to the Jewish law. Then the high priest adjures Him to say upon oath whether or not He claims to be the Christ, the Son of the Living God. Such a claim would assured-



      ly, if unfounded, bo blasphemy, and affording to the L;vw, be punishable by death. On a previous occasion the Jews threatened to stone Him for this to them blas phemous claim. Now when Jesus calmly avows that He is the Son of God, the high priest, rending his clothes, declares that no further proof is needed. Ho has con fessed to the blasphemy, and unanimously the council votes Him worthy of deatli (Mt 26; Mk 14; Lk 22). If Jesus Christ were not what He churned to be, then the priests were right in holding Him guilty of blasphemy; it never occurred to them to consider whether the claim after all might not be true.

      ( 2) Christ charyed with treason under the Roman law. Not only is the Jewish law invoked to accomplish His death, but also the Rom law. On one other occasion Christ had come into touch with the law of Rome, viz. when asked the ensnaring question by the Herodians as to the lawfulness of giving tribute to Caesar (Mt 22 17; Mk 12 14; Lk 20 22). Now the Jews need the Rom governor s authorization for the death penalty, and Jesus must be tried before him. The charge cannot now be blasphemy the Rom law will have nothing to say to that and so they trump up a charge of treason against ( aesar.

      In preferring it, they practically renounce their Mes sianic hopes. The charge, however, breaks down before tho Rom tribunal, and only by playing on the weakness of Pilate do they gain their end, and the Rom law decrees His death, while leaving the .lews to see to the carrying out of the sentence. In this the evangelist sees the ful filment of Christ s words concerning tho manner of His death, for stoning would have been tho Jewish form of the death penalty, not crucifixion. See JESUS CHRIST, III, ), ii, 3, 4.

      Looking at the whole testimony of the Gospels, we can see how it was that Christ fulfilled the Law. He fulfilled the moral law by obeying, 4. How by bringing out its fulness of meaning, Christ Ful- by showing its intense spirituality, filled the and He established it on a surer basis Law in All than ever as the eternal law of right- Its Parts eousness. He fulfilled the ceremonial and typical law, not only by conform ing to its requirements, but by realizing its spiritual significance. He filled up the shadowy outlines of the types, and, thus fulfilled, they pass away, and it is no longer necessary for us to observe the Pass over or slay the daily lamb: we have the substance in Christ. He also cleared the Law from the tra ditional excrescences which had gathered round it under the hands of the rabbis. He showed that the ceremonial distinction between meats clean and unclean was no longer necessary, but showed the importance of true spiritual purity (Mt 15 1 1 ; Mk 7 18-23). He taught His disciples those great principles when, after His resurrection, "be ginning from Moses and from all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself" (Lk 24 27). And as He opened their mind that they might understand the Scriptures, He declared, "These are my words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must needs be fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moses, and the prophets, and the psalms, concerning me" (Lk 24 44). John sums this up in his pregnant phrase, "The law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ" (Jn 1 17). The grace was in con trast to the condemnation of the moral law, the truth was the antithesis to the shadowy outline of the types and ceremonies.

      II. Law in the Acts of the Apostles. Without considering questions of authenticity and historicity in relation to this book which professes to be the earliest church history, we briefly note the place of the Law therein indicated. In the book we have an account of the transition from Judaism to fully developed Christianity, and the Law comes into view in various ways. The disciples, like other Jews, observe the feast of Pentecost, and even after the descent of the Spirit, they frequent the temple and observe the hours of prayer.

      The full-orbed gospel proclaimed by Stephen arouses the suspicion and enmity of the stricter sects of the Jews, who accuse him before the

      council of speaking blasphemous words against the holy place and the Law. But this was the testi mony of suborned witnesses, having

      1. Stephen s doubtless its foundation in the, fact Witness that Stephen s teaching emphasized

      the grace of t he gospel. Stephen s own defence honors the Law as given by Moses, "who received living oracles" (Acts 7 38), shows how disloyal the people had been, and closes by charging them not only with reject ing and slaying the Right eous One, but of failing to keep the Law "as it was ordained by angels" (7 ,53).

      Peter s strict observance of the ceremonial law

      is shown in connection with his vision which teaches

      him that the grace of God may pass

      2. Practice beyond the Jewish pale (Acts 10). of Peter Paul s preaching emphasizes the ful- and Paul filling the Scriptures, Law and Proph ecy, by Jesus Christ. The gist of his

      message, as given in his first reported sermon, is, "By him everyone that believeth is justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses" (13 38 f). The conversion of the Gentiles brings up the question of their relation to the ceremonial law, specifically to circumcision. The decision of the council at Jerus treats circum cision as unnecessary for the Gentiles, and only enjoins, in relation to the Mosaic ritual, abstinence from things strangled and from blood (ch 15). The after-course of events would show that this pro vision was for the time of transition. Paul, though strongly opposed to the idea of imposing circum cision on the Gentiles, nevertheless without incon sistency and as a concession to Jewish feeling, cir cumcises Timothy (16 3), and himself fulfils the ceremonial enactments in connection with the taking of a vow (18 18). He also, following the advice of James, who wished him to conciliate the myriads of believing Jews who were zealous for the Law, and to show them the falseness of the charge that he taught the Jews among the Gentiles "to forsake Moses" (apostasy from Moses), took upon him the ceremonial duty of purifying the "four men that have a vow on them" (21 20-26). This involved the offering of sacrifices, and the fact that Paul could do so shows that for the Jews the sacrificial system still remained in force. The sequel to the trans action might raise the question whether, after all, the procedure was a wise one; it certainly did not fulfil the expectations of James. Later on, in his defence before Felix, Paid claims to be loyal to the Jewish faith, worshipping in the temple, and "be lieving all things which are according to the law, and which are written in the prophets" (24 11-14); and in his address to the Jewish leaders in Home, he declares that he has "done nothing against the people, or the customs of our fathers" (28 17), and he seeks to persuade them concerning Jesus, "both from the law of Moses and from the prophets" (28 23).

      In the Acts we find several allusions to law other

      than Jewish. In ch 16 Paul comes into collision

      with the Horn law. Beaten and im-

      3. Allusions prisoned by the magistrates of Philippi, to the he is afterward offered the oppor- Roman Law tunity of quietly slipping away, but

      standing on his dignity as a Rom citizen, he demands that the magistrates themselves, who had violated the law by publicly beating un- condcmned Romans, shotdd come and set them free. This same right as a Rom citizen Paul again asserts when about to be scourged by the command of the centurion (22 25), and his protest is successful in averting the indignity. His trial before Felix and Festus well illustrates the procedure under the Rom law, and his appeal, as a Rom citizen, to Caesar had important results in his life.



      ///. Law in the Epistles. The word is used both with and without the article, but though in sonic cases the substantive without the; article refers to law in general, yet in many other places it, undoubt edly refers to the Law of Moses. Perhaps, as has been suggested, it- is that, where it does refer to the Mosaic Law, the word without the article points to that law, not so much as Mosaic, but in its quality as law. But speaking generally, the word with and without the article is used in reference to the Law of Moses.

      (1) Law as a standard. In Rom Paul has much to say about law, and in the; main it is the moral

      law that he has in view. In this great 1. In ep., written to people at the center of

      Romans the famous legal system of Rome,

      many of them Jews versed in the law of Moses and others Gentiles familiar with the idea of law, its nature, its scope and its sway, he first speaks of the Law as a standard, want of conformity to which brings condemnation. He shows that the Gentiles who had not the standard of the revealed Law nevertheless had a law, the law of Nature, a law written upon their heart and conscience. Rom jurisprudence was familiar with the concep tion of a law of Nature, which became a law of nations (jus gentium ), so that certain principles could be assumed as obtaining among those who had not the knowledge of the Rom code; and in accord ance with these principles, the dealings between Romans and barbarians could be regulated. Paul s conception is somewhat similar, but is applied to the spiritual relations of man and God.

      (2) Gentiles condemned by the law of Nature. But the Gentiles, not having lived up to the light of that law, are condemned. They have violated the dictates of their own conscience. And the Jews, with the fuller light of their revealed law, have equally failed. In this connection Paul incidentally lays down the great principle that "Not the hear ers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified" (Rom 2 13). His great aim, in the ep., is to show that justification is by faith, but he here asserts that if anyone would have justification through law, then he must keep that law in all its details. The Law will pronounce the doer of it justified, but the mere hearing of the Law without doing it will only increase the con demnation. "As many as have sinned without the law shall also perish without the law : and as many as have sinned under the law shall be judged by the law" (2 12). Paul does not pronounce upon the question whether a Gentile may be saved by following the light of Nature; he rather emphasizes the negative side that those who have failed shall perish; they have light enough to condemn, is his point.

      (3) All men under condemnation . Having proved that both Jews and Gentiles are under sin, he closes his great indictment with the statement: "Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it speaketh to them that are under the law; that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be brought under the judgment of God" (3 19). Thus the Law shuts up into condemnation. It is impossible for any sinner to be justified "by the works of the law"; the Law not only condemns but "through the law cometh the knowledge of sin" (3 20). It shows how far short men have come of God s requirements. It is a mirror in which the sinner set s his defilement, but the mirror cannot cleanse, though it shows the need of cleansing.

      (4) The redeeming work of Christ providing righteousness apart from the Law. Then setting forth the great redemption of Jesus Christ, the apostle shows that it provides what the Law had failed to provide, a righteousness which can satisfy

      the requirements of the Law; a righteousness that is indeed "apart from the law," apart from all men s attempts to keep the Law, but i.s neverthe less in deepest harmony with the principles of the Law, and has been witnessed "by the law and the prophets" (3 21). (In this passage the "law" seems to mean the Pent, and in ver 19, in view of the preceding citations from the Pss, it appears to mean the whole OT Scriptures.) Since the right eousness secured by Christ comes upon the sinner through faith, manifestly the works of the Law can have nothing to do with our obtaining of it. But so far is faith-righteousness from undermining the Law, that Paul claims that through faith the Law is established (3 31).

      (5) Abraham s blessings came not through the Law. Proceeding to show that his idea of justi fication by faith was no new thing, that the OT saint had enjoyed it, he particularly shows that Abraham, even in his uncircumcised state, received the blessing through faith; and the great promise to him and his seed did not come through the Law, but on the principle of faith.

      (6) Law workcth wrath and intensifieth the evil of sin. Indeed, so far from blessing coming to sinners by way of the Law, the "law workcth wrath" (4 15) ; not wrath in men against the Law s restric tions as some have argued, but the holy wrath of God so frequently mentioned by the apostle in this ep. The Law worketh wrath, inasmuch as when disobeyed it brings on the sinner the Divine dis approval, condemnation; it enhances the guilt of sin, and so intensifies the Divine wrath against it; and it, in a sense, provokes to sin: the sinful nature rebels against the restrictions imposed by the Law, and the very fact of a thing being forbidden arouses the desire for it. This seems what he means in a subsequent passage (5 20), "And the law came in besides, that the trespass might abound"; as if the very multiplying of restrictions intensified the tendency to sin, brought out the evil in human nature, showed the utter vilcness of the sinful heart and the terrible nature of sin, and thus made the need for salvation appear the greater, the very despcrateness of the disease showing the need for the remedy and creating the desire for it; the abounding of sin preparing the way for the super- abounding of grace. That the presence of Law enhances the evil of sin is further shown by the statement, "But where there is no law, neither is there transgression" (4 15); transgression para- basis the crossing of the boundary, is, in the strict sense, only possible under law. But there may be sin apart from a revealed law, as he has already proved in the 2d chapter.

      (7) Law in the light of the parallel between Adam and Christ. In the 5th chapter, dealing with the parallel between Adam and Christ he says: "For until the law sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is no law" (5 13). He cannot mean that men were not held responsible for their sin, or that sin was not in any sense reckoned to their account, for he has in that 2d chapter proved the opposite; but sin was not so imputed to them as to bring upon them the punishment of death, which they nevertheless did suffer, and that is traced by him to the sin of Adam. These, he says, had not sinned after the likeness of Adam s trans gression (ver 14) ; they had not transgressed a positive command as he did, although they had undoubtedly violated the law of conscience, and knew that they were sinners. In drawing out the parallel between Adam and Christ, he plainly indi cates that as Adam s transgression of law brought condemnation on the race, so Christ s obedience to the Law brings justification.

      (8) Law and righteousness. So far he may be



      said to have spoken of the Law in regard to the sinner; and it is mainly the Law in its judicial aspect, the Law in relation to righteousness. The Law reveals righteousness, the Law demands righteousness, the Law condemns for unrighteous ness. Redempt ion is a working out of righteousness. The Law witnesses to the perfect righteousness of Christ. The righteousness secured by Christ meets all the requirements of the Law, while gloriously transcending it. The righteous penalty of the Law has been borne by Christ; the righteous require ments of the Law have been fulfilled by Christ. That perfect righteousness secured apart from the Law, but satisfying to the Law, conies to men not through their relation to the Law, but through faith. Now he proceeds to consider the Law in relation to the saint.

      (9) The saint and the Law. The believer justi fied through Christ has died with Christ. The "old man" the sinful nature has been crucified with Christ; the condemning power of the Law has terminated in the death of Christ, and through the death of the believer with Christ he has freedom from the condemnation of the Law. "He that hath died is justified from sin" (6 7). But though in one aspect the believer is dead, in another he is alive. He dies with Christ, but he rises spiritually with Him, and thus spiritually alive he is "to yield," "to present" his "members as instruments of right eousness unto God" (ver 13), ami for his comfort he is assured that in this new sphere of life sin shall not have power to bring him under the condemna tion of the Law "Sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under law, but under grace" (6 14). His relationship to the Law has been altered through his union with Christ, and this fact the apostle proceeds to illustrate. He enounces the principle that "the law hath dominion over a man for so long a time as he liveth" (7 1). Death dissolves all legal objections. The believer, spirit ually dead, is not under the dominion of the Law.

      (10) Illustrated bi/ the law of the husband. The specific case is then given of a married woman hound by law to her husband, but freed from that law through his death, and in the application, he says, " Wherefore, my brethren, yo also were made dead to the law through the body of Christ" (7 4). If the Law in this metaphorical descrip tion is the husband while tho soul is the, wife, as has been most generally understood by commentators, then the application is based on the general thought of death dis solving the legal obligation, the death of the husband involves the death of the woman as a wife, and so he can speak of the death of tho believer rather than of the death of the Law. Another explanation of the metaphor is that the old sinful state is the husband to which the ego, the personality, was bound by the Law, but that the sinful state; being brought to death through Christ, the personality is free to enter into union with Christ. Whatever view is adopted, the leading thought of the apostle is clear, that through the death of Christ the believer is free from the Law: "But now we have been discharged from the law, having died to that wherein we were held" (7 6).

      (11) The purity and perfection of the Law in its own sphere. Tho question is then raised, "Is the law sin?" (ver 7). The thought is repudiated as unthinkable, but he goes on to show how the law was related to sin, giving from his own experience the exemplification of what he had stated in the 3d chapter, that by the Law is the knowledge of sin. The Law revealed his sin; the Law aroused the opposition of his nature, and through the working of sin under the prohibition of the Law, he found the tendency to be death. Nevertheless, there is no doubt in his mind that the Law is not responsible for the sin, the Law is not in any manner to be blamed, "The law is holy, and the commandment holy, and righteous, and good" (ver 12). Sin in the light of the holy Law is shown to be exceeding sinful, and the Law itself is known to be spiritual.

      We need not deal with the difficult passage that

      follows concerning the inner conflict. There has always been much discussion as to whether this is a conflict in the soul of the unregcnerate man or of the regenerate we believe it is in the regenerate, setting forth the experience of the believer but whatever view is taken, it is clear that the law cannot bring deliverance; the higher part of man s nature, or the regenerate nature according to the interpreta tion one adopts, may "consent unto the law that it is good" (ver 16), may even "delight in the law of God" (ver 22); but there is another law at work, the law of sin in the members, and the working of this law means captivity and wretchedness from which deliverance can only come through Jesus Christ (vs 23-25). The word "law" in these verses is used in the sense of principle, "the law of my mind," "the law of sin," "the law in my members"; but over against all is the law of God.

      (12) Freedom from the penal claims of the Law. The description of the Law as holy, righteous and good, as spiritual, as the object of delight to a true heart, is enough to show that the deliverance which the Christian enjoys is freedom from the penal claims and condemning power of the Law. This is borne out by the exulting conclusion: "There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus" (8 1). The Law s claims, satisfied by Christ, no longer press upon those who are in Him. When the apostle adds, "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus made me free from the law of sin and of death" (8 2), he is using "law" in the general sense as a principle or power of producing ordered action, and "the law of the Spirit of life may be taken to mean the method of the Spirit s working, and indeed may well be a way of describing the gospel itself the new law, through which the Spirit operates. The other phrase, "law of sin and death," is not to be taken as meaning the Law of Moses, but the law, the principle of sin producing death mentioned in the previous chapter, unless we think of it as the holy Law which gives the knowl edge of sin and brings the condemnation of death. The failure of the Law to produce a satisfactory result is definitely attributed to the weakness of the flesh, which is in effect reflecting the statement of the previous chapter, but all that the Law could not accomplish is accomplished through the work of Christ. In Christ sin is condemned, and in those who are brought into union with Him the righteous ness of the Law is fulfilled.

      (13) The Law remains as a rule of life for the believer. Thus the Law is not abrogated. It remains as the standard of righteousness, the "rule of life" for believers. The utmost holiness to which they can attain under the influence of the Holy Spirit, is still the "righteousness" which the Law requires. That the apostle s teaching is far removed from Antinomianism is shown, not only by all that he says in these chapters about the believer s new life of absolute spiritual service, but by the specific statement in Rom 13 8-10, which at once prescribes the commandments as rules of life (in Eph 6 2 he cites and enforces the 5th commandment) and shows how true obedience is possible. "Owe no man anything, save to love one another: for he that loveth his neighbor hath fulfilled the law." Then, after specifying several of the commands, he de clares that these and all other commands are "summed up in this word, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." The man in Christ has found the true principle of obedience. He has entered into the true spirit of the holy law. That is all summed up in love, and he having received the love of Christ, living in His love, sees the Law not as a stern taskmaster condemning, but as a bright vision alluring. He indeed sees the Law embodied in Christ, and the imitation of Christ



      involves obedience to the L:i\\v, but. ho fulfils the Law not simply as a standard outside, but as a living principle within. Acting according to the dictates of the love begotten at the cross, his life is conformed to the image of Christ, and in so far is conformed to the Law "Love therefore is the fulfilment of the law." In 13 1-7, though the word "law" does not occur, Paul indicates the relation of the Christian to the Rom law, to the sovereignty of Rome in general, showing that "the powers that be are ordained of Clod" and that in the ideal they are reflections of Divine authority, and as such are to be obeyed.

      In the Ep. to the Gal, Paul has also a great deal to say about the Law, but as we have dealt so fully

      with the conception given in Rom, we 2. In the can only briefly note the teaching of Epistle to the Galatian Ep. the Galatians (1) Law in relation to grace and

      spiritual lihcrti/. In general, we may say that as the Law in relation to righteousness was the prominent feature in Rom, in Gal it is the Law in relation to grace and spiritual liberty, and while it was almost exclusively the moral law that Paul had in view in Rom, in Gal it is rather the Law of Moses in its entirety, with special emphasis upon the ceremonial. He introduces the subject by referring to the episode at Antioch, when he had to rebuke Peter for his "dissimulation" (2 13). He shows the inconsistency of those who knew that they had been "justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the law" (ver 16), compelling the gentile Christians to live according to the Law, and sums up with the striking statement, "For I through the law died unto the law, that I might live unto God" (ver 19). The Law in revealing his sin and pronouncing condemnation, drove him to Christ for justification. Crucified with Christ he has entered into such vital union with Christ that his whole self-life is dominated by the Christ-life: "It is no longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me" (ver 20). Here we have the same line of thought as in Rom; them Paul goes on to show that all the blessings of grace which these Christians enjoy have come to them not by way of the Law, but "by the hearing of faith" (3 2-5). Again, citing the case of Abraham as an instance of justification by faith, he shows how utterly opposed the Law is to the grace that brings salvation, "For as many as are of the works of the law are under a curse" (ver 10), but in gracious contrast, "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law" (ver 13), having Himself borne the curse, and so the blessing of Abraham can come upon the Gentiles through faith (ver 18).

      (2) The function of the Law not to give life, but to guide life. As in Rom, he shows that the promise of the inheritance was apart from the Law, was given 430 years before the Law was promulgated, and answers the question as to the purpose of the Law, by saying, "It was added because of trans gressions" (3 19), the thought already noted in Rom. Yet the Law was not in its nature opposed to the promise. If any law could have given life, "could make alive," then so perfect was the Law of Moses that it would have served the purpose; "Verily, righteousness would have been of the law" (ver 21). The Law was never meant to give life to those who had it not. "He that doeth them shall live in them" (ver 12), but the doing implies the possession of life, and the Law only guarantees the continuance of life while it is perfectly obeyed. Law controls life, but cannot confer life. It regu lates life, but cannot restore life. It may impel to righteousness, but it cannot impart righteousness.

      (3) The Law our schoolmaster. The Law, he shows, was our schoolmaster, our pedagogue, "to bring us unto Christ" (ver 24). The Grecian youth

      was under the charge of a pedagogue during his minority, one part of the pedagogue s duty being to take the boy, unwilling enough sometimes, to school. In the sense already shown in Rom, the moral law by showing us our sinfulness leads us to Christ ; but hen 1 we may take the Law as a whole, including all the ceremonial and typical observances which were designed to lead the people to Christ.

      (4) The bondage of the Law. But while there was undoubtedly much of privilege for the people under the Mosaic dispensation, there was also some thing of bondage. And so Paul says, "\\\\ e were kept in ward under the law" (ver 23), and in the next chapter, he speaks of the child, though heir to a great estate, being "under guardians and stewards until the day appointed of the father" (4 2), which seems to be the same thought as under the pedagogue, and this he calls a state of "bond age" (ver 3). The Law guarded and tutored and restrained; the great typical observances, though foreshadowing the grace of the gospel, were yet , in their details, irksome and burdensome, and the mass of rules as to every part of the Jew s conduct proved to be, speaking after the present-day man ner, a system of red tape. Little was left to the free, spontaneous action of the spirit; the whole course of the Jew from the cradle to the grave was carefully marked out.

      (5) Sonship and its freedom from the Law s re strictions. But in the fulness of time "God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, that he might redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons" (4 4f). The gospel of the grace of God embodied in Christ shows its gracious character in that it not only answers the requirements of the moral law and removes its condemnation; fulfils, and by ful filling abrogates the typical observer of the cere monial law, but also abolishes all the directions and restrictions given to the Jews as a separate people, and brings its subjects into a condition of liberty where the renewed spirit under the mighty love of Christ can act spontaneously, the great principles of the moral law remaining as its guide 4 , while the minute rules needed for the infancy of the race are no longer appropriate for the "sons of God, through faith, in Christ Jesus" (3 26). And so Paul warns these Christians against turning back to the "weak and beggarly rudiments" and observing "months, and seasons, and years" (4 9.10).

      In the remaining Epp. of Paul, little is said of the Law, and we need only indicate the connections in which the word occurs. In 1 Cor 7 3. In the 39 there is a reference to the wife being Other "bound by the law as long as her hus-

      Pauline band liveth" (AV). The word "law," Epistles however, is omitted from the critical texts and from II V. In the same ep. (9 8.9; 14 21.34) the word is used of the Pent or the Scriptures as a whole. In 9 20 Paul refers to his practice of seeking to win men to Christ by accom modating himself to their standpoint, "to them that are under the law, as under the law"; and in 15 56 occurs the pregnant statement, an echo of Rom, "The power of sin is the law." In 2 Cor the word does not occur, though the legal system is referred to as the ministration of death, in contrast to the gospel ministration of the Spirit (ch 3). The word "law" is once used in Eph (2 15), in reference to the work of Christ not only producing harmony between God and man, but between Jew and Gentile: "abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances," also spoken of as "the middle wall of partition," and referring esp. to the ceremonial enactments.

      In Phil 3 5.6.9 we have the fine autobiographical passage wherein we see the self-righteous Pharisee



      reckoning himself "blameless" in the eye of the Law, until convinced of his sin, and led to find in Christ the righteousness "which is through faith," instead of his own righteousness "which is of the law" (ver 9). The word does not occur in Col, but the thought is found of the spiritual circumcision in contrast to the physical, the blotting out through the work of the cross, of the bond written in ordinances and the consequent deliverance of the believer from the bondage of ceremonial observances (2 11-17), those being affirmed to be "a shadow of the things to come," Christ being the glorious substance. In 1 Tim 1 8.9, we have the two pregnant statements that "the law is good, if a man use it lawfully," and that "law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless."

      The word "law" occurs 14 1 in this ep., and a great deal of attention is given to the subject, but it is generally the law in its ceremonial 4. In the an ,i typical aspect that is in question. Epistle it is not necessary to look at the mat t er

      to the in detail, but simply to indicate the

      Hebrews ii nc O f teaching.

      (1) Harmony with the Pauline teaching. The ancient doubt as to the aut horship of the ep. seems today to have crystallized into certainty, albeit the grounds for a con clusion are no stronger than formerly, but in the desire to prove the non-Pauline authorship, too much empha sis is perhaps laid upon the svipposed un-Pauline char acter of the teaching. There is, after all, profound har mony between the teaching of the Pauline Epp. and the teaching of He, and the harmony applies to this matter of the Law. While Paul, as we have seen, gives promi nence- in Rom to the moral law, in Gal and elsewhere he deals with the ceremonial law, in much the same way, though not so fully, as the writer to the Hebrews. Such utterances as, "Our Passover also hath been sacrificed, even Christ" (1 Cor 5 7); "The rock was Christ"; " N T ow these things were our examples" (types of us) (1 ("or 10 4-0); "Which are a shadow of the tilings to come; but the body is Christ s" (Col 2 17) are exactly in line with the teaching of Hebrews.

      (2) The Law transcended by the gospel. The author shows how the Law, which was a word spoken through angels, is transcended by the gospel, which has been spoken by the Lord of the angels, and so demands greater reverence (He 2 2-4), and all through the ep. it is the transcendent glory of the gospel dispensation introduced by Christ and ascribed to Him, which is made to shine before us.

      (3) Law of priesthood. The author deals specifi cally in chs 7 and 8 with the law of priesthood, showing that Christ s Priesthood, "after the order of Melchisedek," surpasses in glory that of the Aaronic priesthood under the law; not only sur passes but supersedes it; the imperfect gives place to the perfect; the shadowy to the real; the earthly to the heavenly; the temporal to the eternal. And as Paul justifies his doctrine of justification apart from the deeds of the Law by reference to the OT teaching, so here the writer finds in the OT pre diction of the New Covenant, the basis for all his reasoning, and in his reference to the description of the New Covenant, he is at one with Paul in regard to the moral law, seeing it as now written on the heart, and becoming an internal pmver, rather than an external precept. See NEW COVE NANT.

      (4) The law of the sanctuary and the, sacrifices He next deals with the law of the sanctuary, and in connection therewith considers the law of the sacrifices (chs 9-10), and in the same way shows that Christ makes good all that the tabernacle and its services typified, that His one, all-perfect eternal sacrifice takes the place of the many imper fect temporary sacrifices offered under the Law. At the best the Law had "a shadow of the good things to come" (10 1). The shadow was useful for the time being, the people were greatly privi leged in having it, it directed them to the great Figure who cast the shadow. The whole ceremonial

      system was really a system of grace at the heart of it; in spite of its external rubrics which might well be abused, it made provision for satisfying for the time the breaches of the law; the sacrifices themselves could not take away sin, but periodical forgiveness was conveyed through them, by virtue of their relation to the Coming One. Now the great sacrifice having been offered, eternal redemp tion is secured, perfect forgiveness obtained, free access into the heavenly Holy Place assured, and the eternal inheritance provided. The; Substance of all the shadows has appeared, the shadows pass away, and the great truth indicated by Christ Him self is now fully made known through His Spirit- taught servants. Christ, who "is the end of the law [the moral law] unto righteousness to every one that believeth" (Rom 10 4), is also the end of the ceremonial law, the full realization of all its types and shadows.

      James mentions the "law" 10 t in his ep., and in each case it is the moral law. The influence of the Sermon on the Mount is seen through- 5. In the out the ep., and some distinct echoes Epistle of of it are heard, as e.g. the injunction, James "Swear not [at all]" (5 12). James has

      nothing but good to say of the Law, and that fact in the light of the influence of the Sermon on the Mount is enough to show that Christ, in that wonderful discourse, did not disparage the Law, far less abrogate it, but rather exalted and reinforced it. James taught by Christ exalts the Law, glorifies it, in fact seems almost to identify it with the gospel, for in ch 1, when speaking of the Word and the importance of hearing and doing it, he in the same breath speaks of looking into "the perfect law, the law of liberty" (ver 25). And indeed, it is just possible, as some think, that he means the gospel by the epithet, although it seems better to take it as the Law tr d in the gospel, the Law looked at in its spirituality, as the guide of the Christian man who has entered into the spirit of it,

      Even in the OT, as Pss 19 and 119 specifically show, it was possible for spiritually-minded men to see the beauty of the Law and find delight in its precepts. In 2 8 he speaks of the "royal law," and that here he does mean the Mosaic Law is beyond doubt, since he cites the particular requirement, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself," in this agreeing with his Master and with Paul, finding in love of neighbor the sum of the Law and its true fulfilment, Respect of persons, he affirms, is a breach of this "royal law," and leads to those in dulging in it being "convicted" by the law of trans gression (ver 9). He then affirms the solidarity of the Law, so that a breach of it in one particular is a breach of the whole, and makes a man "guilty of all" (ver 10), a far-reaching principle which Paul had also indicated when quoting in Gal the words, "Cursed is every one who continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law, to do them" (Gal 3 10), and when in Rom 7 he showed that the conviction that he had broken the l()th com mandment made him realize that he had broken the whole Law. James then exhorts his readers to speak and act as those who are to be judged by "a law of liberty" (2 12), so that he sets no limit to the range of that law. Finally, in 4 11, he warns them by implication against speaking against the Law or judging the Law, that is, to assume the place of judge instead of "doer of the law." James could not have used such language unless he had a profound conviction of the perfection of the Law. And it is the perfection of the Law as a rule of life for spiritual men redeemed from its condemnation that James considers it, and so we can call it the perfect law, the law of liberty, the Royal Law.



      In flic Epp. of Peter and John, the word "l:t\\v" docs not occur, hut Peter shows that the holiness

      of (!od remains as in the Pent th 6. In the standard of life, and the example of Epistles of Christ shows the way (1 Pet 2 21), Peter and while in the church is found the spirit- John nal realization of the sanctuary, priest hood and sacrifices of the old economy (1 Pet 2 5-9). _ Peter has one reference to the Horn law, enjoining upon his readers obedience; to it in the political sphere. John enjoins the keeping of the commandments, these being apparently the commandments of Christ (1 Jn 2 3.4; 5 2), and the test of keeping the commandments is love of the brethren, while hatred of a brother is, as in the Sermon on the Mount, murder. All sin is "law lessness" (3 4), and the sum of all law-keeping is love of God and love of the brethren, and so the summary of the old Law is echoed and endorsed.

      LITERATURE. Chiefly the works on NT theology (Weiss, Beyschlag, Schmid, etc), and on Christian ethics (Martensen, Burner, ITarlcss, etc), with coniins. on Pauline Epp. (Rom, etc); Ritschl, Ent.tte.huny der altk. Kin-he (2(1 ed ) : /all!]. Das (iexetz Clotles narh der Li lire and it IT Krfahriimj ili .i A iju.ttds I aulus; J. Doniiey. in JIDli.



      I. TKH.MS USED

      1. Torah (" Law")

      2. Synonyms of Tdrdh

      (1) Miyivdh ("Command")

      (2) Kdhah ("Witness," "Testimony")

      (3) Mishpdtlm ("Judgments")

      (4) Hukklm ("Statutes")

      (5) Pikkudhim ("Precepts")


      1. The Critical Dating of the Laws

      2. Croups of Laws in P

      3. The Book of the Covenant

      (1) Judgments. Compared with Code of Ham murabi

      (2) Basis of Law of Covenant. Earlier Cus toms

      4. The Book of the Law of Dt 31

      5. The Law of Holiness G. The Final Compilation


      1 . The Civil Law

      (1) Servants and the Poor

      (2) Punishments

      (3) Marriage

      (4) Sabbaths and Feasts

      2. The Ceremonial Law

      (1) Origin of Sacrilice

      (2) The Levitical Ritual

      (3) The Law Truly a Tdrdh


      Law, at least as custom, certainly existed among the Hebrews in the times before Moses, as appears from numerous allusions to it, both in matters civil and ceremonial, in the earlier Scriptures. But we have no distinct account of such law, either as to its full contents or its enactment. Law in the OT practically means the Law promulgated by Moses (having its roots no doubt in this earlier law or custom), with sundry later modifications or addi tions, rules as to which have been inserted in the record of the Mosaic law.

      The following are matters of pre-Mosaic law or custom to which allusion is made in Gen and Ex: the offering of sacrifice and the use of altars (Gen passim); the religious use of pillars (Gen 28 18); purification for sacrifice (35 2); tithes (14 20; 28 22); circumcision (17 10; Ex 4 25 f); inquiry at a sanctuary (Gen 25 22); sacred feasts (Ex 5 1, etc); priests (Ex 19 22); sacred oaths (Gen 14 22); marriage customs (16; 24; 25 G; 29 10-30); birthright (25 31-34); elders (24 2; 50 7; Ex 3 16); homicide (Gen 9 6), etc. We proceed at once to the Law of Moses.

      /. Terms Used. The Heb word rendered "law" in our Bibles is rnlP, , tdrah. Other synonymous

      words either denote (as indeed does tdrah itself) aspects under which the Law may be- regarded, or different classes of law.

      Tdrah is from hdrah, the Iliphil of yardh. The root meaning is "to throw"; hence in Iliphil the word means "to point out" (as by 1. Torah throwing out the hand), and so "to direct"; and tdrah is "direction." Torah may be simply "human direction," as the "law of thy mother" in Prov 1 8; but most often in the OT it is the Divine law. In the sing, it often means a law, the pi. being used in the same sense; but more frequently tor Oh in the sing, is the general body of Divinely given law. The word tells nothing as to the way in which the Law, or any part of it, was first given; it simply points out the general purpose of the Law, viz. that it was for the guidance of God s people in the various matters to which it relates. This shows that the end of the Law lay beyond the mere obedience to such and such rules, that end being instruction in the knowledge of God and of men s relation to Him, and guidance in living as the children of such a God as He revealed Him self to be. This is dwelt upon in the later Scrip tures, notably in Pss 19 and 119.

      In the completed Canon of the OT, tor ah techni cally denotes the Pent (Lk 24 44) as being that division of the OT Scriptures which contains the text of the Law, and its history down to the death of Moses, the great lawgiver.

      (1) Mi^wah, "command" (or, in pi., "com mands"), is a term applied to the Law as indi cating that it is a charge laid upon 2. Syno- men as the expression of God s will, nyms of and therefore that it must be obeyed. Torah (2) *Edhah, "witness" or "testi

      mony" (in pi. "testimonies"), is a designation of God s law as testifying the principles of His dealings with His people. So the ark of the covenant is called the "ark of the testimony" (Ex 25 22), as containing "the testimony" (ver 10), i.e. the tables of the Law upon which the covenant was based. The above terms are general, applying to the tor ah at large; the two next following are of more restricted application.

      (3) Mishpatlm, "judgments": Mishpatinfhesmg. sometimes means judgment in an abstract sense, as in Gen 18 19; Dt 32 4; sometimes the act of judging, as in Dt 16 18.19; 17 9; 24 17. But "judgments" (in the pi.) is a term constantly used in connection with, and distinction from, statutes, to indicate law r s of a particular kind, viz. laws which, though forming part of the tdrah by virtue of Divine sanction, originated in decisions of judges upon cases brought before them for judgment. See further below.

      (4) ^ Hukklm, "statutes" (lit. "laws engraven"), are laws immediately enacted by a lawgiver. "Judg ments and statutes" together comprise the whole law_ (Ley 18 4; Dt 4 l".8 AV). So also we now distinguish between consuetudinary and statute law. (5)_ Pikkudhim, "precepts": This term is found only in the Pss. It seems to mean rules or coun sels provided to suit the various circumstances in which men may be placed. The term may perhaps be meant to apply both to the rules of the actual tdrah, and to others found, e.g. in the writings of prophets and "wise men."

      //. The Written Record of the Law. The enact ment of the Law and its committal to writing must be distinguished. With regard to the former, it is distinctly stated (Jn 1 17) that "the law was given through Moses"; and though this does not neces sarily imply that every regulation found in the Pent is his, a large number of the laws are expressly as cribed to him. As regards the latter, we are dis tinctly told that Moses wrote certain laws or col-



      lections of laws (Ex 17 14; 24 4.7; Dt, 31 <)). These, however, form only ;i portion of the whole legislation; and therefore, whether the remaining portions were written by Moses, or if not by him when and by whom, is a legitimate! matter of inquiry.

      It is not necessary here to discuss the large ques tion of the literary history of the Pent, but it must briefly be touched upon. The Pent certainly appears to have reached its present form by the gradual piecing together of diverse materials. Dt being a separate composition, a distinction would seem to have been clearly established by critical examination between a number of paragraphs in the remaining books which apparently must once have formed a narrative by themselves, and other paragraphs, partly narrative but chiefly legislative and statistical, which appear to have been subse quently added. Without endorsing any of the critical theories as to the relation of these, one to the other, or as to the dates of their composition, we may, in a general way, accept the analysis, and adopt the well-known symbol JE to distinguish the former, and P the latter. Confining ourselves to their Ifi/ixldtin: contents, we find in JE a short but very important body of law, the Law of the Cove nant, stated in full in Ex 20-23, and repeated as to a portion of it in Ex 34 10-2S. All the rest of the legislation is contained in P and Dt.

      We are distinctly told in Ex that the law con tained in Ex 20 23 was given through Moses. Re jecting this statement, critics of the 1. The school of Wellhausen affirm that its

      Critical true date must be placed considerably

      Dating of later than the time of Joshua. They the Laws maintain that previous to their con quest of Canaan the Israelites were mere nomads, ignorant of agriculture, the practice of which, as well as their culture in general, they first learned from the conquered Canaanites. There fore (so they argue), as the law of Ex 20-23 pre supposes the practice of agriculture, it cannot have been promulgated until some time in the period of the Judges at the earliest; they place it indeed in the early period of the monarchy. All this, however, is mere assumption, support for which is claimed in some passages in which a shepherd life is spoken of, but with utter disregard of others which show that both in the patriarchal period and in Egypt the Israelites also cultivated land. See B. D. Eerdmans, "Have the Hebrews Been No mads?" Expos, August and October, 1908. It can indeed be shown that this law was throughout in harmony with what must have been the customs and conceptions of the Israelites at the age of the exodus (Rule, OT Instill/noun). Professor Eerdmans in his Alttestamentliche Xtudien, Part 111 (I .UO), vigorously defends the Mosaic origin of the Book of the Covenant.

      The same critics bring down the date of the legis lation of Dt, to the time of Josiah, or at most a feu- years earlier. They affirm (wrongly) that the chief object of JosialVs reformation narrated in 2 K 23 was the centralization of worship at the temple in Jerus. They rightly attribute the zeal which carried the reform through to the discovery of the "Book of the Law" (22 8). Then arguing that the frequent previous practice of worship at high places implied the non-existence of any law to the con trary, they conclude that the rule of Dt 12 was a rule recently laid down by the temple priesthood, and written in a book in Moses name, this new book being what was "found in the house of Jeh. But this argument is altogether unsound: its grave difficulties are well set out in Holler s Are the Critics Right? And here again careful study vindicates the Mosaic character of the law of Dt as a whole

      and of Dt 12 in particular. M. Kdouard Naville in La decouverte de In loi .sw/.s lc rot ,/oai<tn propounds a theory which he supports by a most interest ing argument : that the book found was a founda tion deposit, which must therefore have been built over by masonry at the erection of the temple by Solomon.

      Equally unsound, however plausible, are the arguments which would make the framing of the Levitical ritual the work of the age of E/ra. The difficulties created by this theory are far greater than those which it is intended to remove. On this also see M oiler, Are the Critics Hit/lit /

      Rejecting these theories, it will be assumed in the present art. that the various laws are of the dates ascribed to them in the Pent; that whatever may be said as to the date of some "of the laws," all which are therein ascribed to Moses are truly so ascribed.

      The laws in P are arranged for the most part in groups, with which narrative is sometimes inter mingled. These e.g. are some of the 2. Groups groups: Ex 25-31; Lev 1-7; 11-15; of Laws Nu 1-4, etc. The structure and in P probable history of these groups are

      very interesting. That many of them must have undergone interpolation appears certain from the following considerations. Each of the groups, and often one or more paragraphs within a group, is headed by a recurring formula, "Jeh spake unto Moses [or unto Aaron, or unto Moses and Aaron], saying." We might at first expect that the contents of each group or paragraph so headed would consist solely of what Jeh had said unto Moses or Aaron, but this is not always so. Not infrequently some direction is found within such a paragraph which cannot have been spoken to Moses, but must have come into force at some later date. Unless then we reject the statement of the formula, unless we are prepared to say that Jeh did not speak unto Moses, we can only conclude that these later directions were at some time in serted by an editor into paragraphs which originally contained Mosaic laws only. That this should have been done would be perfectly natural, when we consider that the purpose of such an editor would be not only to preserve (as has been done) the record of the original Law, but to present a manual of law complete! for the use of his age, a manual (to use a modern phrase) made complete to date.

      That the passages in question were indeed inter polations appears not only from the fact that t heir removal rids the text of what otherwise would be grave discrepancies, but because the passages in question sometimes disturb the sequence of the context. Moreover, by thus distinguishing be tween laws promulgated (as stated) by Moses, and laws to which the formula of statement was not intended to apply, we arrive at the following im portant result. It is that the former laws can all be shown to be in harmony one with another and with the historical data of the Mosaic age; while the introduction of the later rules is also seen to be what would naturally follow by way of adaptation to the circumstances of later times, and the gradual unfolding of Divine purpose.

      It would be much too long a task here to work this out in detail: it has been attempted by the writer of this article in OT Institution*, Their Origin and Devel opment. Two instances, however, may bo mentioned.

      Instances of interpolation. III Ex 12 4:5 fl (KKV) we read, "This is the ordinance of the passover: there shall no alien eat thereof; but every man s servant that is bought for money, when thou hast circumcised him, then shall he eat thereof. A sojourner and a hired servant shall not eat thereof." This was the original Mosaic- rule introduced by the formula in ver 4:?. Hut in vs 4X.-19 it is said that sojounn m (when circumcised) may



      cat of the passover. Tliis was plainly a relaxation of later date, made in accordance with tlu: principle which is enlarged upon in Isa 56 X *

      According to Lev 23 3-l.3 .).40-42, the Feast of Tabernacles was a feast of seven days only. This was the Mosaic rule as appeal s from the formula in ver 33, and in certain other passages. Hut as a development in the feast s observance, an eighth day was subsequently added, and therefore insertions to that effect were made here at vs 30 and 3<)/<. The introduction of this addi tional day would be in keeping witli that elaboration in the observance of the "set feasts" which we find in Nil 28 and 29 as compared with the simpler observance of the same days ordered in Lev 23. Here again the formula in \\u 28 1 plainly covered a few verses imme diately following, but not the whole content of the two chapters.

      Promising then the oxislonoo in writing from ;ui early iigo of numerous groups of Mosaic laws and thoir subsequent interpolation, the. ultimate com pilation of these groups together with other matter and their arrangement, in the order in which we now find them must have been the work, perhaps indeed of the interpolator, but in any case of some late editor. These numerous groups do not, how ever, make up the whole legislative contents of the Pent; for a very large portion of these contents consists of three distinct books of law, which we must now examine. These wore the "Book of the Covenant," the "Book of the Law" of Dt 31 26, and the so-called "Law of Holiness."

      This book, expressly so named (Ex 24 7), is stated to have been written by Moses (24 3.4). It must have comprised the contents of 3. The Ex 20-23. The making of the cove-

      Book of the nant at Sinai, led up to by the reveal- Covenant ing words of Ex 3 12-17; 6 2-8; 19 3-6, was a transaction of the very first- importance in t he religious history of Israel. God s revelation of Himself to Israel being very largely, indeed chiefly, a revelation of His moral attributes (Ex 34 0.7), could only be effectively apprehended by a people who were morally fitted to receive it. Hence it was that Israel as a nation was now placed by God in a stated relation to Himself by means of a covenant, the condition upon which the covenant was based being, on His people s part, their obe dience to a given law. This was the law contained in the "Hook of the Covenant."

      It consisted of "words of Jeh" and "judgments" (Ex 24 3 AV). The latter are contained in Ex 21 1 22 17; the former in eh 20, in the remaining portion of eh 22, and eh 23. The "judgments" (ARV "ordinances") relate entirely to matters of right between man and man; the "words of Jeh" relate partly to these and partly to duties dis tinctively religious.

      (1) The judgment* compared with Code of Hammurabi. The "judgments" appear to be taken from older consuetudinary law; not necessarily comprising the, whole of that law, but so much of it as it pleased God now to stamp with His express sanction and to embody in this Covenant Law. They may well be compared with those contained in the so-called Code of Ham murabi, king of Babylon, who is thought to have been the Amraphel of (ion 14. These are called "the judg ments of righteousness which Hammurabi the mighty king confirmed." The resemblances in form and in subject between the two sets of "judgments" are very striking. All alike have the same structure, beginning with a hypothetical clause, "if so and so," and then giving the rule applicable in the third person. All alike relate entirely to civil, as distinguished from religious, matters, to rights and duties between! man and man. All seem to have had a similar origin in judgments passed in the first place on causes brought before judges for decision: both sets therefore represent consuetudinary law.

      (2) Basis of the, law of the covenant on earlier custom and conci iitiun. It is remarkable tha_t, alike in matters of right between man and man, and in matters relating directly to the service of God, the Law of the Covenant did little (if anything) more than give a new and Di vinely attested sanction to requirements which, being already familiar, appealed to the general conscience of the community. If, indeed, in the "words of Jeh" there was any tightening of accustomed moral or (more particularly) religious requirements, e.g. in the first

      and second commandments of the Decalogue, it would seem to have been by way of enforcing convictions which must have been already gaining hold upon the minds of at least the more thoughtful of the people, and that in large measure through the lessons impressed upon them by the events of their recent history. In no other way could the Law of the Covenant have appealed to their conscience, and so formed a foundation on which the covenant could be securely based.

      As in the, "judgments" we have a ratification of old consuetudinary law; as again in -the second table of the Decalogue we have moral rules in accordance with a standard of moral right no doubt already acknowledged

      very similar indeed to thatof the " negative confession " in the lOgyp Book of the, Dead; so in the more especially religious rules of the Law of the Covenant we find, not new rules or an establishment of new institutions, but a new sanction of what was already old. These " words of Jeh" assume the rendering of service to Jeh: they do not enjoin it as if it were a new thing, but they enjoin that the Israelites shall not add to His service also the service of other gods (Ex 20 3 , 23 24). They assume the observance of the three "feasts," they enjoin that these shall be kept to Jeh "unto me," i.e. "unto me only" (vs 14.17). They assume the making of certain offerings to .Jeh, they enjoin that these shall be made liber ally "of the first," i.e. of the best and without delay (22 20 f). They assume the rendering of worship by sacrifice, and the existence of an accustomed ritual, and therefore they do not lay down any scheme of ritual, but they give a few directions designed to guard against idolatry, or any practices tending either to irreverence or to low and false conceptions of God (Ex 20 4-0.23- 20; 22 31; 23 ISf). While insisting upon the observ ance of the three "feasts," spoken of as already accus tomed, it is remarkable that they contain no command to keep the Passover, which as an annual observance was not yet an accustomed thing.

      This absence of ritual directions is indeed very no ticeable. It was in the counsel of God that He would in the near future establish a reconstituted ritual, based upon what was already traditional, but containing cer tain new elements, and so framed as more and more to foster spiritual conceptions of God and a higher ideal of holiness. This however was as yet a thing of the future. No mention therefore was made of it in the Law of the Covenant; that law was so restricted as that it should at once appeal to the general conscience of the people, and so be a true test of their desire to do what was right. This would be the firm basis on which to build yet higher things. It is impossible to estimate the true character of the subsequent legislation, i.e. of what in bulk is by far the larger part of the tdrdh except by first grasping the true character and motive of the Covenant, and the Covenant Law. See also COVENANT, BOOK OF; PENTATEUCH.

      Immediately after the making of the Covenant, Moses was called up into the mount, and there re ceived instructions for the erection of 4. The the tabernacle, these being followed

      Book of the in due course by the rules of the re- Law of constituted ceremonial of which the Dt 31 tabernacle was to be the home. All t hose for the present we must pass over.

      Having arrived on the E. of the Jordan, Moses, now at the close of his career, addressed discourses to the people, in which he earnestly exhorted them to live up to the high calling with which God had called them, in the land of which they were about to take possession. To this end he embodied in his discourse a statement of the Law by which they were to live. And then, as almost his last public act, he wrote "the words of this law in a book," and directed that the book should be placed "by the side of the ark of the covenant" (Dt 31 24-26). What now was this book? Was it Dt, in whole or in part? The most reasonable answer to this question is that the book actually written by Moses comprised at least the contents of Dt 5-26 and 28. Whether the whole or any parts of the remaining contents of Dt also formed part of this book, or were subsequently added to it, the whole being brought by a process of editing to our present Dt, is again a legitimate matter of inquiry.

      Characteristics of Deuteronomy. Regarding Dt 5-26 and 28 (with or without parts of other chap ters) as the "book" of Dt 31 24-26, we find that it is a manual of instruction for the people at large it is not a priest s manual. It deals with matters of morals, and of religion in its general principles, but

      i>Skw i




      As ,1. B. Mozley says (Lectures on (he OT), "The morality of a progressive revelation is not, the moral ity with which it, starts hut that with 1. The Civil which it concludes"; yet the excellence Law of the OT Law is evident,, not only in

      its great underlying principles, hut in the suitability of its individual rules to promote moral advance.

      (1) Servants and tlie poor. We have already noted the similarity hetween the judgments" of Ex 20 and 21 and the "judgments" of Hammurabi, in respect to form and suhject. Notwithstanding the practical wisdom found in many of the latter, there, is in one matter a marked contrast, in spirit hetween them and the former, for while both the Law of the Covenant and its enlargement in Dt guarded the interest, of and secured justice, and mercy too, to slaves and the poor, the laws of Ham murabi were framed rather in the interests of the well-to-do. Cf (e.g.) with the rule as to a runaway slave in Dt 23 15 f, the following (CH, 1(5): "If a man has harbored in his house a manservant or a maidservant fugitive; from the palace, or a poor man, and has not produced them at the demand of the commandant, the owner of that house shall be put to death." The Law indeed permitted slavery, an institution universal in the ancient world, but it made provisions which must very greatly have mitigated its hardship. It w r as en joined, both in Ex and in Dt, that after six years service a Heb manservant should "go out free for nothing," unless he himself preferred to remain in servitude (Ex 21 2-6; Dt 15 12-18). The rulo in Ex 21 7-11 as to women servants was not ex actly the same, but it nevertheless guarded their interests, while Heb women servants were afterward included in the rule of Dt 15 12. A still greater amelioration was brought in by a later rule con nected with the law of the Jubilee as set out in Lev 25 39-55. Again, though servitude was permitted on account of debt, or as a rescue from poverty (Ex 21 2.7; Dt 15 12), manstealing was a capital offence (Ex 21 16).

      (2) Punishments. The rule of Ex 21 22-25 ("eye for eye," etc; cf Lev 24 19.20; Dt 19 16- 19) sounds harsh to us, but while the justice it sanctioned was rough and ready according to the age, it put a restraint on vindictiveness. The punishment might be so much, but no more: and the same spirit of restraint in punishment is seen in the rule as to flogging (Dt 25 2f). Similarly the rule that murder was to be avenged by "the avenger of blood," a rule under the circumstance s of the age both necessary and salutary, was pro tected from abuse by the appointment of places of refuge, the rule with respect to which was designed to prepare the way for a better system (see Ex 21 12-14; Nu 35 9-24; Dt 19 1-13).

      (3) Marriage. The marriage customs of the Mosaic age permitted polygamy and concubinage, marriage by purchase or by capture in war, slave- marriage, and divorce. The Law allowed the con tinuance of these customs, but did not originate them; on the contrary, its provisions were designed to restrict the old license, giving protection to the weaker party, the woman, limiting as far as possible the evils of the traditional system, a system which could not suddenly be changed, and preparing the way for a better. Consider the effect of the follow ing rules: as to slave-wives (Ex 21 7-11); captives of war (Dt 21 10-14); plurality of wives (Dt 21 15-17); adultery (Ex 20 14.17; Dt 22 22); forni cation (Dt 22 23-29; 23 17.18; Lev 21 9); divorce (Dt 24 1-4); Levirate marriage (Dt 25 5-10); in cest (Lev 18 6-18); marriage of priests (Lev 21 7.10-15); royal polygamy (Dt 17 17).

      (4) Sabbaths and feasts. The law as to these,

      though partly ceremonial, yet served social ends. The Sabbath day gave to all, and particularly to servants and the poor, and domestic cattle too, a needful respite from daily toil; it also served men s spiritual welfare, and did honor to God (Ex 23 12; Dt 5 14.15; Ex 31 12-17). The seventh year s rest to the land it also "a sabbath of solemn rest, a sabbath unto Jeh" was for the land s re cuperation, but it served also to safeguard common rights at perhaps a time of transition as to customs of land tenure: connected with it also there wore rules as to release of slaves and relief of debtors (Ex 23 9-11; Lev 25 2-7; Dt 15 1-18). The ob servance of the Sabbath year as a rest to the land seems to have fallen into disuse, perhaps as early as some 500 years before the Bab captivity (2 Ch 36 21), and it is probable that the Jubilee (the design of which seems to have been to adjust conflicting rights under new customs of land tenure and in the relation of employer to employed) was instituted to take its place (Lev 25). The law as to the an nual feasts insured both the social advantages of festive gatherings of the people, and their sancti- fication by the worship of God, and the public recog nition of His hand in matters agricultural and politi cal, \\vhich were either the occasion of, or connected with, these gatherings. Considerate liberality to the poor and dependent was, on these occasions, esp. enjoined (Ex 23 14-17; Dt 16 1-17; 12 12.18.19). We have already noted that the conception of sin as uncleanness, rendering the sinner therefore

      unfit for the presence of God, must 2. The have been an outgrowth from the earlier

      Ceremonial conception of purely ritual (physical) Law uncleanness. This development, and

      an accompanying sense; of the hein- ousness of sin and of its need of atonement by sacrifice;, were undoubtedly brought about by the gradual working of the law of the sin offering (Lev 4 15 13; 12-15; 16). Similarly the rules as to guilt offerings (Lev 5 14 6 7) must by degrees have led to a true conception of repentance, as in cluding both the seeking of atonement through sacrifice and restitution for wrong committed. The sin offering was, however, a peculiarly Mosaic in stitution, marking a development in the sacrificial system. The only sacrifices of which we have any trace in pre-Mosaic times were meal and drink offerings, whole burnt offerings and sacrifices (or, to use the Levitical term, peace offerings).

      (1) Origin of sacrifice. W read of the offering of sacrifice all through the patriarchal history, and farther back even than Noah in the story of Cain and Abel; and there can bo no doubt that the Levitical scheme of sacri fice was based upon, and a development (under Divine ordering) of, the sacrificial system already traditional among the Hebrews. Sacrifice was undoubtedly of Divine origin; yet we have no account, or even hint, of any formal institution of sacrifice. The sacrifices of Cain and Abel are spoken of in a way that leaves the impression that they were offered spontaneously, and the most probable assumption would seem to bo that the very first offering of sacrifice was the outcome of a spontaneous desire (Divinely implanted, we may be sure) in early men to render service to the higher Being of whose relation to themselves they were, if ever so dimly, conscious.

      Prehistoric research has not yet been able to present to us a distinct picture of primitive men; and even if the results of anthropology were more certain than they can yet claim to be, what in this connection we are con cerned in is the conceptions, not of early men every where, but of the early ancestors of the Heb race. However infantile their ideas may have been and probably were, there may well have been far more of elementary truth in them in simple ideas Divinely implanted than students of anthropology have any knowledge of. Sooner or later early men did make offerings to God; and as the Mosaic sacrificial system was certainly based upon the patriarchal, so we may fairly assume that the ideas underlying the latter were an outgrowth from those which underlay the sacrifice of the patriarch s own still earlier ancestors.

      It is well observed by Dr. A. B. Davidson (OT The ology, p. 315) that the sacrifices of Cain and Abel arc called



      a minhdh or present; and this idea of sacrifice as a gift to Oocl most easily accounts for the facts with which we have to deal in the history of OT sacrifice. When early men first made offerings to God, they probably did so in the spirit of young children who give gifts to older persons without knowing whether, or in \\yhat way, the gifts will be of any use to them. They simply give in affection what is of value in their own eyes. The one only thing of prime value to the earliest men must have been food ; hence offerings to God were everywhere in the first place offerings of food. But here a difficulty must soon have arisen, for men must have become convinced very soon that the Divine Being did not feed upon the food o ffered, at least in men s way of feeding. Ultimately, among the Israelites, the idea of His actual feeding became eliminated altogether (Ps 50 13. 14), but in the mean time the difficulty seems to have been met by the assump tion that the Divine Being consumed an inner essence of food; and this being supposed to be set free by fire, food offered in sacrifice came to be burnt in order to fit it to become the food of God. This certainly appears from Lev 3 11.10 (cf Lev 21 O.S.17.21).

      Coming, however, to animal as distinguished from vegetable sacrifice, we do not find that its origin can be accounted for as at the Jirxt being an offering of food. We learn from Lev 17 10-14 that the essential part of animal sacrifice was the offering of the blood, and that blood was offered because blood was life. The idea that life can be given by giving blood lay at the root of a cus tom which must have been well-nigh universal in primi tive times, that of blood covenanting (see H. Clay Trum- bull, Jilnod Cor/ iiitnt). In this, two persons would give each to the other of his own blood, drawn from the living vein. Persons united in blood covenant were supposed, by the commingling <if t/n-ir lilnml, to become actual sharers of one life. To give to another of one s own blood was to give one s own life, i.e. one s own self, with all the dedication of love and service which that would imply. Now a similar idea would seem to have lain at the root of the primitive offering of blood to God: it was the offering of the life of the offerer.

      In the very first blood offerings it is probable that the blood offered was the blood of the offerer, and that there! was no infliction of death only in this way the dedi cation of life. The dedicatory rite of circumcision may have been a survival of sacrifice in this its earliest form; so also what is narrated in 1 K 18 2S. When, however, the blood offered had come to be the blood of a substi tute, and that a substitute animal, the sacrifice would come (no doubt soon) to include the slaughter of the animal and further the consumption, in whole or in part, of its carcase by fire as an offering of food.

      (2) The Lcritical ritual. Whether the above theory be accepted or not, in so far as animal sacri fice became an offering of food, it. would stand in lino with vegetable sacrifice; but in both the excel lence of the Levitical ritual stood in thin, that while it was framed for a people whose conceptions were in a stage of transition, it was yet adaptable to higher conceptions, and fitted to become at length symbolical of purely spiritual truth. It was through the teaching, not only of prophets but of the Levitical ritual itself, and while it was still in full force, that the words of I s 50 13.14 were uttered: "Will I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats? Offer unto God the sacrifice of thanksgiving; and pay thy vows unto the Most High." The Levitical ritual, as respects animal sacrifice in particular, was so framed as, on the one hand, to keep alive the idea of sacrifice as the offer ing of life, not of death, of life s dedication, not its destruction, and therefore to make it a true type; of Christ s living sacrifice . On the other hand, the rules of sacrifice guarded against abuses which, as a matter of fact, sprang up widely among the heathen. The rule, e.g. in Lev 1 2 and elsewhere, that "ye shall offer your oblation of the cattle, even of the herd and of the flock," excluded human sac rifice!. The rule that the first act in every sacrifice 1 must be to slay the creature offe-red excluele-el the- infliction of unnecessary suffering. The detailed rules as to the offering and disposal of the blood, anel the varying modes of disposal of the carcase, kept alive the essential iele a of all such sacrifice-, and saved it from degenerating into a meTe heaping up, as in Egypt, erf altars with mere loads of fooel. The rules of the pe-ace offering, clothing it always with a spiritual motive (see Lev 7 12.16), raised it to a level far above the sacrifice: of that class among the

      surrounding heathen, guarding it against their licentious festivity (cf Hos 2 11-13; 4 13.14; Am 2 8; 5 21-23) and gross ideas as to the part of Goel in the feasting.

      (3) The Law truly a torah. In every one of its departments the Law proved itself to be indeed a torah directing God s people in the upward way; leading them on from the state of advancement, such as it was, to which they had already attained by Moses time, to higher anel higher stanelards, both of faith and of duty, till they were prepared for the gospc-1 of Christ, who Himself saiel of the old Law, "Till heaven and earth pass, one 1 jot or one tittle shall in no wise 1 pass from the law till all be fulfilled" _(Mt 5 18 AV). Meanwhile we have 1 , in the teaching of the prophets, not a counter influence, not a system rivaling the Law, but its unfolding, both inspired of God, both instruments in His progressive revelation. "To obey is better than sacrifice-, and to hearken than the fat of rains" wore the words of Samuel, a faithful servant of the Law, and himse-lf a frequent offe-rer of sacrifice. What the 1 Law was to the heart of de-vemt Israelites in the prophet ie: age is see-n in the fervent words of Ps 119.

      IV. The Passing Away of the Law. The great general principle s of the Law we re not transitory but abiding, and reappear under the gospel dispen sation. Otherwise, however, i.e. in those particu lars, whether ceremonial or civil, in which it was adapted to merely passing needs, the Law passed away when Christ came. It is not always roalizoel that already before Christ came it had begun to pass away. The following are illustrations:

      (1) The whole rationale of the Levitical worship consisted in its be>ing based upon the covenant made at Sinai, and the symbol of the Covenant was t he- ark containing the table s of the Law and surmount e d by the mercy-seat. Therefore one of its most sig nificant acts was the sprinkling of the blood of sin ofTe-ring within the veil upon the mercy-seat, or without the veil, but yet before the more-y-soat . But this most significant act coulel ne> longer be- per- formed when, after the Bab captivity, there was no longer either ark or mercy-seat.

      (2) The law that tithe should be paid to the Levites, a tithe only of it being paiel by them te> "Aaron the priest" (Nu 18), was practicable: so long as the priests were a small portion only of the whole Levitical body, as they appear in the history down to the middle: pe-riod e>f the monarchy. But by the time of the exile they disappeared from his tory exempt as actual temple: ministrants, anel, after the return from the exile, even these were in numlx r a mere handful compared with the 1 priests (Ezr 2 30-42; 8 15-20.24-30; Neh 11 10-19). The at tempt to revive the old law (Xeh 10 38.39) was well-intentioned but impracticable: it was evi dently soon abandoned (Neh 13 10-13; Mai 3 8- 10). We learn from Jos that tithes wen- regarded later as due to the priests, not to the: Levites (Jos, Ant, XX, viii, 8; ix, 2).

      (3) That the Mosaic law as to elivorce was to give place to one more stringent appeal s not e>nly from Our Lord s words in Mt 19 7-9, but from Mai 2 16.

      (4) It is probable 1 that some: of the supplementary rules in Nu may have been designed for temporary use only, anel may have passe -el away before the e-losc of the OT. It may have been so, e.g., with the law of Nu 6 11-31, a law probably most useful in the circumstances of the Mosaic age, anel perhaps itse-lf an endorsement of a pre-Mosaic custom.

      LITERATURE. Drive-r, LOT, with which should be reael Moller, Are the Critics Itii/htt and Orr, POT; A. B. Davidsem, Tliroloay of the OT; J. J$. Me>/,ley, Iilfax in Early Ages; Rule, OT Institutions, Their Orii/in and Development; Kurt/,, Sn.-rifit-inl H>r.s////) of the OT; llooiiacke-r, Le sacerdoce levitique; Kdouard Naville,

      Law, Judicial Lay, Laying



      La derouverte de la loi sous le roi Josias; H. Clay Trum- bull, The Blood Covenant; Milligan, Resurrection of Our Lord (274 if, on "blood-oflering").

      I T LUIC Z. RULE

      LAW, JUDICIAL, jo7>-dish al: This was the form of Divine law which, under the dominion of God, as the Supreme Magistrate, directed the policy of the Jewish nation, and hence was binding only on them, not on other peoples. The position of Jeh, as the Supreme Ruler, was made legally binding by a formal election on the part of the national assembly (Ex 19 3-8); and that there might be no question about the matter, after the death of Moses, Joshua, in accordance with instructions received by his great predecessor in the office of federal judge, in the public assembly caused the contract to be renewed in connection with most solemn exer cises (Josh 8 30-35). No legal contract was ever entered into with more formality and with a clearer understanding of the terms by the several parties than was the contract which made it binding on the Hebrews permanently to recognize Jeh as the Su preme Ruler (Ex 24 3-8). He was to be acknowl edged as the Founder of the nation (Ex 20 2); Sovereign, Ruler, and Judge (Ex 20 2-6); and in these capacities was to be the object of love, rever ential fear and worship, service, and absolute obe dience. Flagrant disregard of their obligations to Him manifested in idolatry or blasphemy was re garded as high treason, and like high treason in all nations and history was punishable bv death (Ex 20 3-5.7; 22 20; Lev 24 1(5; Dt 17 2-5). The will of Jeh in critical cases was to be ascertained through special means (Nu 9 8; Jgs 1 1.2; 20 18. 23.28; 1 S 10 22).

      The ruling official recognized by the Hebrews as a nation was the chief magistrate, but he stood as Jeh s vicegerent, and therefore combined various authorities in his person. We must distinguish the functions of the chief magistrate (1) under the republic, (2) under the constitutional monarchy, and (3) under the senatorial oligarchy _ after the Bab captivity. Moses was the first chief magis trate under the republic; after him, Joshua, and the other judges. Under the constitutional monarchy, it was the king whose government was limited, for he was to be elected by the people; must be a native Hebrew; must not keep a large cavalry; must not support a harem; must not multiply riches; must be a defender of the national religion; must be guided by law, not whim; must be gracious and condescending to the people (Dt 17 15-20). After the Bab captivity, the senatorial oligarchy com bined ecclesiastical and state authority, later sharing it with the Rom government. See also SANHEDRIN.



      LAWFUL, lo fool (usually uSTlJ Q , mishpat, "re lating to judgment," or "a pronounced judgment"; p Hi , gaddlk, "relating to that which is righteous" or "just"; |CTTI, excsti, eiivojAos, eunomos, "that which is authorized according to law," or "a privi lege according to legitimate custom" [cf Ezk 18 5.19. 21.27; Isa 49 24; Mt 12 10; Acts 16 21; 19 39]): Used of persons: of God, as being righteous both in the punishment of the wicked and the reward ing of the righteous (Ps 145 17 Heb); of man, as being just and equitable in all his dealings with his fellow-man (Ezk 33 19). It is used of things when the same are in accord with a pronounced judgment or a declared will of God, and thus pleas ing in His sight (Mk 3 4). When the course of individual conduct is according to God s law of righteousness, it is declared to be "lawful" (Ezk 33 19). The word is used in a forensic sense as de claring the legal status of a person conforming to

      law. The idea of slraightness, rigid adherence to God s law, whether religious, civil or ceremonial, cannot be excluded from the definition of the word "lawful."

      Neither AV nor ARV is consistent in its tr of the Heb and Gr words tr d "lawful." Ofttimes the words "just" and "righteous" are used. To arrive at the full and proper meaning of "lawful," therefore, it is necessary that we study the passages containing these synonymous terms. The written Law of God is the recognized standard by which things, actions and persons are to be judged as being lawful or unlawful. WILLIAM EVANS

      LAWGIVER, 16 giv-er (ppp , m hdkek; TT]S, nomothetes) : There are two words, one Heb and one Gr, which arc tr d "lawgiver." The former occurs 7 t in the OT, and in AV in every case except Jgs 6 14 is thus tr d . In RV it bears the tr "law giver" but twice (Dt 33 21; Isa 33 22), though in the other passages (Gen 49 10; Nu 21 18; Jgs 6 14; Ps 60 7; 108 8) this meaning is retained in the margin. The Gr word occurs in the NT but once (Jas 4 12), where it has a meaning that is almost the exact equivalent of the Heb word in Isa 33 22. In both passages God is declared to be the "lawgiver," and in the NT passage is so called because He has the power to rule and judge, to save and destroy. Man is denied the authority to judge because he is not the lawgiver. God is the lawgiver, and therefore possesses the right to pronounce judgment (cf Isa, supra). The word, however, implies more than mere legislative func tion; it also connotes the idea of ruling. Isaiah makes this very plain, since he adds to the statement that God is our judge and lawgiver the further declaration that He is also king. This meaning adheres in the very history of the word. It is based upon the monarchical conception in which the legis lative, judicial and administrative functions are all vested in one person. In Jas the two terms "law giver and judge" express the idea of God s absolute sovereignty. The vb. nomothetein occurs in He 7 11; 8 6, but it does not extend beyond the meaning "to enact laws."

      The Heb word is restricted to poetic passages, and except in Isa 33 22 is applied to a tribal or kingly ruler. Moses is preeminently the lawgiver in Jewish and Christian circles, but it should be noted that in the Scriptures of neither is he given this title. The primary meaning of the vb. from which m^fiokek is derived is "to cut," "to carve," and a derived meaning is "to ordain." The mean ing of the part. m e hdkek is based upon this last. It means (1) the symbol which expresses the law maker s authority, that is, the commander s staff; and (2) the person who possesses the authority (Dt 33 21). It has the first of these meanings in Nu 21 18; Ps 60 7; 108 8, and probably in Gen 49 10, though here it may have the second meaning. The parallelism, however, seems to require an imper sonal object to correspond to scepter, and so the reading of the text (RV) is to be preferred to that of the margin (Skinner, ad loc.). In Dt 33 21; Jgs 6 14; Isa 33 22, it means the person who wielded the symbol of authority, that is the pre- scriber of laws. In a primitive community this would be a military commander. In Gen 49 10 the "ruler s staff" is the symbol of kingly authority (Driver), and this verse consequently implies the supremacy of Judah which came in with the Davidic kingdom. This word contains no reference to the Messiah. In Nu 21 18 there is an allusion to the custom of formally and symbolically opening fountains under the superintendence and at the instruction of the leader of the tribe. Such a custom seems to have been in vogue till compara-



      Law, Judicial Lay, Laying

      lively modern times. Gray cites Budde in the New World for March, 1895, and Muir s Mohamet and Islam, 343 f. In Jgs 5 14 the word means "mili tary commander," as the context shows. This is the meaning also in Dt 33 21, where it is affirmed that Gad obtained a position worthy of its warlike character. Tg, Vulg, Fesh, and some moderns have seen here a reference to the grave of Moses, but Nebo was in Reuben and not in Gad.

      W. C. MORRO

      LAWLESS, lo les (avojj.os, dnomos): While occur ring but once in AY (I Tim 1 9), is tr d in various ways, e.g. "without- law" (1 Cor 9 21); "unlawful" (2 Pet 2 8 AV); "lawless" (1 Tim 1 9); "trans gressor" (Mk 15 2S; Lk 22 37j; "wicked" (.Acts 2 23 AY; 2 Thess 2 S AV). When Paul claims to be without law," he lias reference to those things in the ceremonial law which might well be passed over, and not to the moral law. Paul was by no means an antinomian. Those are "lawless" who break the law of the Decalogue; hence those who disobey the commandment, "Honor thy father and thy mother," arc; lawless (1 Tim 1 9). The civil law is also the law of God. Those breaking it are lawless, hence called "transgressors." Those 1 who are unjust in their dealings are also "lawless"; for this reason the hands of Pilate and those who with him unjustly condemned Jesus are called "wicked [unlawful] hands" (Acts 2 23 AV). The most not able example of lawlessness is the Antichrist, that "wicked [lawless] one" (2 Thess 2 8).


      LAWYER, lo yer (VOJAIKOS, nomiki is, "according or pertaining to law," i.e. legal; as noun, "an expert in law," "about the 1 law," "lawyer" [Mt 22 35; Lk 7 30; 10 2.V, 11 45,4t>.52; 14 3; Tit 3 13]): The work of the "lawyers," frequently spoken ot as "scribes," also known as "doctors" of the law (Lk 2 46 m), was first of all that of jurists. Their business was threefold: (1) to study and interpret the law; (2) to instruct the Heb youth in the law; (3) to decide questions of the law. The first two they did as scholars and teachers, the last as ad visers in some court. By virtue of the first-named function, they gradually developed a large amount of common law, for no code can go into such detail as to eliminate the necessity of subsequent legis lation, and this usually, to a great extent,, takes the form of judicial decisions founded on the code rather than of separate enactment. And so it was among the Hebrews. The provisions of their code were; for the most part quite general, thus affording much scope for casuistic interpretation. As a result of the industry with which this line of legal development had been pursued during the centuries immediately preceding our era, the Heb law had become a very complicated science; and since it was forbidden to record these judicial decisions, a protracted study was necessary in order to commit them to memory.

      But since the law must have universal application, the views of the individual scribe could not be taken as a standard; hence the several disciples of the law must frequently meet for discussion, and the opin ion of the majority then prevailed. To these meet ings the youth interested in the study would be invited, that they might memorize the formulas agreed upon and might clear up the points upon which they were uncertain by asking questions of the recognized doctors (Lk 2 40).

      Such centers of legal lore, of course, would seldom bo found in rural communities; the authorities would natu rally gather in large centers of population, esp. until 70 U) in Jerus. While the deliverances of these law schools were purely theoretical, yet they stood in close relation to t he practical. Whenever doubt arose regard ing the application of the law to a particular case, the question was referred to the nearest lawyer; by him to

      the nearest company of lawyers, perhaps to the Sanhe drin; and the resultant decision was henceforth author ity. Thus the lawyers became law makers, and after the destruction of Jerus, which brought an end to the exist ence of the Sanhedrin, the, rabbinical doctors were recog nized as the absolute authority in such matters. Fre quently a single lawyer of great rank, as for instance Hillel or (Jamaliel I, might pronounce dicta of unques tioned recognition with as much authority as a supreme court in our day, though sometimes his opinions were received and corrected by the legal tribunal, especially the Sanhedrin. Of course, frequently, these tribunals were under the sway of such a man s influence, so that what he said upon his own authority would be ratified in the assembly of the doctors.

      The second function of the lawyers was that of teachers. The renowned rabbis always sought to gather a company of pupils about them whose business it was to repeat the teachers law formulas until they had "passed into their flesh and blood." For the purposes of such instruction as well as for the discussion of the teachers and the students, then 1 were special schoolhouses, which are often mentioned in connection with the synagogues as places of special merit and privilege. In Jerus, these law schools were conducted in the temple probablv in the hall dedicated to this special pur pose (Mt 21 23; 26 55; Mk 14 49; Lk 2 40; 20 1; 21 37; Jn 18 20). The students during the lectures sat on the floor, the teacher on a raised platform, hence tin 1 expression "sitting at the feet of" (Acts 22 3; Lk 2 40). Finally, the lawyers were called upon to decide cases in court or to act as advisers of the court. Before the destruction of Jerus, technical knowledge of the law was not a con dition of eligibility to the office of judge. Anyone who could command the confidence of his fellow- citizens might be elected to the position, and many of the rural courts undoubtedly were conducted, as among us, by men of sterling quality but of limited knowledge 1 . Naturally such men would avail themselves of the legal advice of any "doctor" who might be within reach, esp. inasmuch as the latter was obliged to give his services gratuitously. And in the more dignified courts of large munici palities, it was a standing custom to have a com pany of scholars present to discuss and decide any new law points that might arise. Of course, fre quently, these men were elected to the office of judge, so that, practically the entire system of jurisprudence was in their hands.


      LAY, la, LAYING, la ing: (1) U"JI,slm, "to put," and the Gr equivalent, T0Ti(xi, tUhcmi, are very frequently tr fl by "to lay." RV very often changes the AV rendering of .s7/w, but never that of tithoui: 1 S 15 2, "how he set himself against him in the way" (AV "he laid wait for him"); 2 K 11 16, "So they made way for her" (AV "And they laid hands on her"); cf 2 Ch 23 15; Job 24 12, "God regardethnot the folly" (AV "God layeth not folly") ; Job 34 23, "For he needet h not further to consider a man" (AV "For he will not lay upon man more"); Isa 28 17, "And I will make justice the line" (AV "Judgment also will I lay to the line"); Job 17 3, "Give now a pledge" (AV "Lay down now"). (2) "(P3, nalhan, lit. "to give," is very commonly tr d by "to lay." RV changes the tr of AV in Ezk 4 5, "I have appointed"; Ezk 33 28 f, "I will make the land a desolation" (AV "I will lay the land most desolate"). (3) "To lay" of AV is frequently rendered differently in RV; Isa 64 11, "I will set thy stones" (AV "lay thy stones"); Dt 29 22, "the sicknesses wherewith Jeh hath made it sick" (AV "sicknesses which the Lord hath laid upon"). For other difference s of RV and AV cf Dt 21 8; 2 K 9 25m; 2 K 12 11; Ezr 8 31; Ps 104 5m; Isa 53 0; Jer 5 20; Mk 7 8; Lk 19 44; Jas 1 21; 1 Pet 2 1. In most of these passages t ho change of RV is due to the peculiar use of the word "to lay"

      Lazarus Leah



      in AY. The following expressions are found very frequently: "to lay hands on," "1o lay wait," "to lay up," "to lay aside," "to lay upon," "to lay down," etc.

      "Laying of wait," AV, is rendered "lying in wait" in Nu 35 20 IT; Acts 9 2-1 reads: "But their plot became known" (AY "Hut their laying await was known"). The "laying on of hands" is a very general expression. See HANDS, LAYING ON OF.

      A. L. BKKSLICH

      LAZARUS, laz a-rus (Adapos, Ltiznrox, an ab ridged form of the lleb name Klea/.ar, with a (Jr termination): Means "(Jod has helped." In LXX and Jos are found the forms EX.eadp, Elt iizdr, and EXed^apos, Elcnznros. The name was common among the, Jews, and is given to two men in the NT who have nothing to do with each other.

      The home of the Lazarus mentioned in Jn 11 1 was Bet haii} . lie was the brother of Martha and Mary (Jn 11 1.2; see also Lk 10 3X- 1. Lazarus 41). All three were esp. beloved by of Bethany Jesus (Jn 11 5), and at their home He more than once, and probably often, was entertained (Lk 10 3S-4 1 ; Jn 11). As in timated by the number of condoling friends from

      Traditional Tomb of Lazarus.

      the city, and perhaps from the costly ointment used by Mary, the family was probably well-to- do. In the absence of Jesus, L. was taken sick, died, and was buried, but, after having lain in the grave four days, was brought back to life by the Saviour (Jn 11 As a result many Jews believed on Jesus, but others went and told the Pharisees, and a council was therefore called to hasten the decree of the Master s death (Jn 11 45-53). Later, six days before the Passover, at a feast in some home in Bethany where Martha served, L. sat at table as one of the guests, when his sister Mary anointed the feet of Jesus (Jn 12 1-3). Many of the common people came thither, not only to see Jesus, but also the risen L., believed in Jesus, and were enthusiastic in witnessing for Him during the triumphal entry, and attracted others from the city to meet Him (Jn 12 9.1 1.17. IS). For that reason the priests plotted to murder L. (Jn 12 10). This is all that we really know about the man, for whether the Jews accomplished his death we are not informed, but it seems probable that, satiated

      with the death of Jesus, they left L. unmolested. Nothing is told of his experiences between death and resurrection (cf Tennyson, "In Memoriam," xxxi), of his emotions upon coming out of the tomb, of his subsequent life (cf Browning, "A Letter to Karshish"), and not a word of revelation does he give as to the other world. His resurrect ion has been a favorite subject for various forms of Chris tian art, and according to an old tradition of Epi- phanius he was 30 years old when he was raised from the dead, and lived 30 years thereafter.

      As might be expected this miracle has been vigorously assailed by all schools of hostile critics. Ingenuity has been exhausted in invent!, ig objections to it. Hut all told, they really amount only to three.

      (1) The silence of the ottnr Go^jiels. There is here no doubt, some difficulty. But the desire of the early Christians, as many scholars think, to screen the family from danger may have kept the story from becoming current in the oral tradition whence tlie Synoptics drew their materials, though Matthew was probably an eye witness. But, in any case, the .Synoptics do not pretend to give all the deeds of Jesus, and in the rep;>/t by thein we have lew save those which were wrought in Galilee. Each of them has omitted elements of highest interest which others have preserved. Thus Lk alone gives us the raising of the widow s son at Nain. John, knowing that the others had omitted this, tells us what he had himself witnessed, since all clanger to thefamilv had long ago passed away, as it was of especial int. ivst to his story, and he, had recorded no other case; of resur rection. At any rate, the (iospel writers do not seem to regard a resurrection from the dead by the power of Jesus as so much more stupendous than other miracles, as they seem to modern scholars and to the. Jews, and, moreover, the Synoptics do unconsciously attest this miracle by describing a sudden outburst of popular excitement in favor of Jesus which can be accounted for only by some extraordinary event.

      (2) The stupendous character of the miracle. But to a philosophical believer in miracles this is no obstacle at all, for to omnipotence there are no such things as big miracles or little ones. Of course, Martha s statement as to the decomposition of the body was only her opinion of the probability in the case, and He, who sees the end from the beginning and who had intended to raise L., might well in His providence have watched over the body that it should not see corruption. When all is said, "He who has created the organic cell within inorganic matter is not incapable of reestablishing life within the inanimate substance."

      (3) Its non-use as an accusation against Jesus. The objection that Jn 11 47-53 is inconsistent with the fact that in accusing Jesus before Pilate no mention is made of this miracle by the enemies cif Jesus has little weight. Who would expect them to make such a self-convicting acknowledgment? The dismay of the priests at the miracle and their silence about it are perfectly compatible and natural.

      No one of the attempted explanations which deny the reality of the miracle can offer even a show of probability. That L. was just recovering from a trance when Jesus arrived; that it was an imposture arranged by the family and sanctioned by Jesus in order to overwhelm His enemies; that it was a fiction or parable In into a fact and made up largely of synoptic materials, an alle gorical illustration of the words, "I am the resurrection, and the life," a myth such explanations require more faith than to believe the fables of the Talm. They well illustrate the credulity of unbelief. The narrative holds together with perfect consistency, is distinguished by vivacity and dramatic movement, the people who take part in it are intensely real and natural, and the picture of the sisters perfectly agrees with the sketch of them in Lk. No morbid curiosity of the reader is satisfied. Invented stories are not like this. Even a Renan de clares that it is a necessary link iu the story of the final catastrophe.

      The purpose of the miracle seems to have been :

      (1) to show Himself as Lord of life and death just before He should be Himself condemned to die;

      (2) to strengthen the faith of His disciples; (3) to convert many Jews; (4) to cause the priests to hasten their movements so as to be ready when His hour had come (Plummcr, HOB, III, 87).

      In the parable in Lk 16 19-31, L. is pictured as in abject poverty in this world, but highly rewarded

      and honored in the next. It is the 2. The only instance of a proper name used

      Beggar in a parable by Jesus. Some think

      that he was a well-known mendicant in Jerus, and have even attempted to define his



      Lazarus Leah

      disease. But this is no doubt simple invention, and, since "in Christ s kingdom of truth names indicate realities," this was probably given because of its significance, suggesting the beggar s faith in God and patient dependence upon Him. It was this faith and not his poverty which at last brought him into Abraham s bosom. Not one word does L. speak in the parable, and this may also be sug gestive of patient submission. He does not murmur at his hard lot, nor rail at the rich man, nor after death triumph over him. The parable is related to that of the Rich Fool (Lk 12 10-21). This latter draws the veil over the worldling at death; the other lifts it. It is also a counterpart of that of the Unjust Steward (Lk 16 1-13), which shows how wealth may wisely be used to our advantage, while this parable shows what calamities result from failing to make such wise use of riches. The great lesson is that our condition in Hades depends upon our conduct here, and that this may produce a complete reversal of fortune and of popular judg ments. Thus L. represents the pious indigent who stood at the opposite ext reme from the proud, cove tous, and luxury-loving Pharisee;. The parable made a deep impression on the mind of the church, so that the term "lazar," no longer a proper name, has passed into many languages, as in lazar house, lazaretto, also lazzarone, applied to the mendicants of Italian towns. There was even an order, half-military, half-monastic, called the Knights of St. Lazarus, whose special duty it was to minister to lepers.

      The rich man is often styled Dives, which is not strictly a proper name, but a Lat adj. meaning "rich," which occurs in this passage in the Yulg. But in Eng. lit., as early as Chaucer, as seen in the "Sompnoure s Tale" and in "Piers Plowman," it appears in popular use as the name of the Rich Man in this parable. In later theological lit. it has become almost universally current. The name Nineuis given him by Euthymius never came into general use, though the Sahidic version has the addition, "whose name was Ninuc." His sin was not in being rich, for Abraham was among the wealthiest of his day, but in his worldly unbelief in the spiritual and eternal, revealing itself in ostenta tious luxury and hard-hearted contempt of the poor. Says Augustine, "Seems he [Jesus] not to have been reading from that book where he found the name of the poor man written, but found not the name of the rich, for that book is the book of life?"

      G. II. TREVER

      LEACH, lech. See HORSELEACH.

      LEAD, led (PHE^, *5phcrdh}: Lead was one of the first metals to be used in the free state, prob ably because it was so easily obtained from its ores. Lead was found anciently in Egypt and the Sina- itic peninsula. There is no lead found in Pal proper, but in Northern Syria and Asia Minor it occurs in considerable quantities, usually associated with silver. These sources no doubt furnished an im portant supply in Bible times. It was also brought by the Phoenicians from Spain (Tarshish) (Ezk 27 12) and the British Isles.

      Lead was used, as it still is, all along the Mediter ranean shores for sinkers. Pieces of Egyp fish nets probably dating from 1200 BC are now pre served in the British Museum, with their lead sink ers still attached. Since lead was the heaviest metal known to the ancients, gold excepted, it was generally used for fish-lines and sounding lines (cf Acts 27 28), esp. in the dense waters of the Medi terranean. Moses mentioned the sinking qualities of lead in the sea in his simile of the sinking of Pharaoh s hosts "as lead in the mighty waters" (Ex 15 10).

      Lead was used by the ancients for binding stones

      together. In most of the ancient ruins of Syria the Arabs have dug holes at the seams between stones in walls and columns in order to remove the iron, bronze, or lead thus used. In the museum of the Syrian Protestant College, Beirut, there are several specimens of cast-lead sarcophagi dating from the time of Christ.

      In Job 19 23.24, lead is mentioned as used in the engraving of permanent records. Two inferences might be drawn from this passage: either that the letters were cut with a chisel (pen) and then the cutting was filled with lead, or that sheets of lead were used as tablets on which to grave the record with an iron tool. Lead is frequently referred to along with iron, brass, silver and tin (Nu 31 22; Ezk 22 1S.20; 27 12). The use of lead for plumblines is implied in Am 7 7.8; Zee 4 10; as a weight in Zee 5 7.8. That ()T writers under stood the use of lead for purifying gold is shown by Jer 6 29 and Ezk 22 18-22 (cf "Mai 3 2.3). See METALS; REFINER. JAMES A. PATCH

      LEAF, lef, LEAVES, levz: Used in three different senses, with reference: (1) To trees (!"15> , l dlch, "a coming up"), Gen 3 7; 8 11; Lev 26 36 (CHE, tcrejth); Ezk 17 9; (f>v\\\\oi>, phullon. Figuratively (a) of spiritual blessings (Ezk 47 12; cf Rev 22 2) and prosperity (Ps 1 3); (ft) of moral decay (Isa 64 6), and (c) of a formal, empty profession (Mt 21 19). (2) To a book (fib^ , deletK), Jer 36 23 (m "columns" ; see ver 2) ; as the parchment was gradu ally unfolded the successive columns could be read. (3) To doors (?bs, gclu\\ "side," ^ , Ma\\ "a screen," "hanging"), 1 K 6 34. The door of the Holy Place consisted of two halves, but each half had two leaves (cf Ezk 41 24). M. O. EVANS


      LEAH, le a (Hi55, le ah; Acta, Lcia, "wearj r ," "duh" [?], "wild cow"): Rachel s sister, and the elder daughter of Laban (Gen 29 .16). We are told that her eyes were "tender" (HIS"), rakkoth). Gesenius renders it "weak," LXX dadevels, asthe- ru is; accordingly, she was weak-eyed, but by no means "blear-eyed" (cf Vulg). Her eyes were lacking that luster which always and everywhere is looked upon as a conspicuous part of female beauty. Jos (Ant, I, xix, 7) says of her, TTJV 6^iv OVK evirpeirfj, ttn opsin ouk euprepS, which may safely be ren dered, "she was of no comely countenance."

      L. became the wife of Jacob by a ruse on the part of her father, taking advantage of the oriental cus tom of heavily veiling the prospective bride. When taken to task by his irate son-in-law, Laban excused himself by stating it was against the rule of the place "to give the younger before the first-born" (Gen 29 21-26). Although Rachel was plainly preferred by Jacob to L., still the latter bore him six sons: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah (Gen 29 31 ff), Issachar, Zebulun, and a daughter, Dinah (Gen 30 17-21). Up to this time Rachel had not been blessed with children of her own. Thus the lesson is brought home to us that Jeh has a special and kindly regard for the lowly and despised, pro vided they learn, through their troubles and afflic tions, to look to Him for help and success. It seems that homely L. was a person of deep-rooted piety and therefore better suited to become instrumental in carrying out the plans of Jeh than her handsome, but worldly-minded, sister Rachel.

      When Jacob decided to return to the "land of his fathers," both of his wives were ready to accom pany him (Gen 31 4.14). Before they reached the end of their journey their courage was sorely

      Leannoth Lebanon



      tried at the time of the meeting between Jacob and his brother Es:iu. Although L. was placed between the handmaids in the front, and Rachel with her son Joseph in the rear, she still cannot have derived much comfort from her position. We may well imagine her feeling of relief when she saw Esau and his 400 men returning to Seir ((Jen 33 2.1(1,).

      According to Gen 49 31, L. was buried at Mach- pelah. We cannot know for a certainty that she died before Jacob s going down to Egypt, though it is very likely. If she went down with her hus band and died in Egypt, he had her body sent to the family burying-place. Ruth 411 discloses the fact that her memory was not forgotten by future generations. When Boaz took Ruth for a wife the witnesses exclaimed, "Jeh make the woman that is come into thy house like Rachel and like; Leah, which two did build the house of Israel."


      LEANNOTH, le-an oth (Ps 88, title). See PSALMS.

      LEAPING, lep tng. See GAMES.

      LEASING, lez ing pT2 , kazabh, "to devise," "to fabricate," hence "to lie"; occurs but twice in AV [Ps 4 2, RV "falsehood"; 6 6, RV "lies"]; the Heb word is tr 1 "liars" [ Ps 116 11]; "lie" or deceive [Job 6 2S]): The idea of treachery, lying, and de ceit, lies at the root of this word. Joab s conduct is a good illustration of the meaning (2 S 3 27; 20 8-10). In Ps 5 6 David is referring to the cunning, treachery, and falsehood of his adver saries; cf 2 S 13 2S; 15 7-9. Doubtless David had a special person in mind as being guilty of "leasing," probably Ahithophel.


      LEATHER, leth er. See SKIN; GIRDLE; TAN NER.

      LEAVEN, lev"n ("iiZJ , s* or, "p?n, hanie?; l*m, zume; Lat fermentum) . The nomadic ancestors of the Hebrews, like the Bedouin of today, probably made their bread without leaven; but leaven came to play a great part in their bread-making, their law and ritual, and their religious teaching (see Ex

      12 15.19; 13 7; Lev 2 11; Dt 16 4; Mt 13 33; 16 6-12; Mk 8 15 f; Lk 12 1; 13 21).

      (1) In bread-making. The form of leaven used in bread-making and the method of using it were simple and definite. The "leaven" consisted always, so far as the evidence goes, of a piece of fermented dough kept over from a former baking. There is no trace of the use of other sorts of leaven, such as the lees of wine or those mentioned by Pliny (NH, xviii.26). The lump of dough thus preserved was either dissolved in water in the kneading-trough before the flour was added, or was "hid" in the flour (AV "meal") and kneaded along with it, as was the case mentioned in the parable (Mt 13 33). The bread thus made was known as "leavened," as dis tinguished from "unleavened" bread (Ex 12 15, etc). See BREAD.

      (2) In law and ritual. The ritual prohibition of leaven during "the feast of unleavened bread" in cluding the Passover (Ex 23 15, etc) is a matter inviting restudy. For the historical explanation given in the Scriptures, see esp. Ex 12 34-39;

      13 3fT; Dt 16 3. The antiquity of the prohibi tion is witnessed by its occurrence in the earliest legislation (Ex 23 18; 34 25). A natural reason for the prohibition, like that of the similar exclusion of honey, is sought on the ground that fermentation implied a process of corruption. Plutarch voices this ancient view of the matter when he speaks of it as "itself the offspring of corruption, and corrupt ing the mass of dough with which it is mixed."

      Fn-nu-ntatum is used in Persius (Sat., i.24) for "corruption." For this reason doubtless it, was excluded also from the offerings placed upon the altar of Jeh, cakes made from flour without leaven, and these only, being allowed. The regulation name for these "unleavened cakes" was mn^rolh (Lev 10 12). Two exceptions to this rule should be noted (Lev 7 13; cf Am 4 5): "leavened bread" was an accompaniment of the thank offering as leavened loaves were used also in the wave offering of Lev 23 17. Rabbinical writers regularly use leaven as a symbol of evil (Light foot).

      (3) In icac/iiny. The; figurative uses of leaven in the NT, no less than with the rabbins, reflect the ancient view of it as "corrupt and corrupting," in parts at least., e.g. Mt 16 6 ||, and csp. the prover bial saying twice quoted by Paul, "A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" (1 Cor 5 (if; (!al 5 9). But as Jesus used it in Mt 13 33, "The king dom of heaven is like unto leaven," it is clearly the hidden, silent, mysterious, but all-pervading and transforming action of the leaven in the measures of flour that is the point of the comparison.

      LITERATURE. Nowack, Heb Arch., II, 145f; Talm, Bcrakhoth, lla; Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. on Mt 16 <i.

      GKO. B. EAGKR

      LEBANA, lO-ba na, leb a-na (Ninb, I bhdna ), or LEBANAH (H:rp , I bhru.dh, "white"): Head of a family of returning exiles (Ezr 2 45; Neh 7 4S; cf 1 Esd 5 29).

      LEBANON, leb a-non CpIIlb , I bhandu; LXX Agaves, Libanos; Vulg Libattus): Derived from

      the root ]?P, Idbhen, "to be white," 1. Name probably from the snow which covers

      its summits the greater part of the year. "White mountains" are found in almost every country. The light color of the upper limestone

      Anti-Lebanon: Souk-Wady-Barrada.

      may, however, form a sufficient reason for the name. In prose the article is usually connected with the name. In poetry it is more often without the article. In the LXX, however, the article is gen erally present both in prose and poetry.

      The Lebanon range proper borders the east coast of the Mediterranean, for a distance of 100

      miles, running N.X.E and S.S.W. 2. General from the mouth of the Litany river, Description the classic Leontes (which enters the

      sea a little N. of Tyre), to the mouth of the Eleuthurus (Nahr el-Kebir), a few miles N. of Tripolis. This river comes through a depression between Lebanon and the Nuseiriyeh mountains, known as "the entrance to Hamath," and connects with a caravan route to the Euphrates through Palmyra. For a considerable distance N. of the Litany, the mountain summits average from 4,000 to 6,000 it. in height, and the range is more or less



      Leannoth Lebanon

      dissected by short streams which enter the Medi terranean. Most prominent of those is the Nahr ez-Zaherdny, which, after running 25 or 30 miles in a southerly direction through the center of the range, like the Litany, turns abruptly W. opposite Mt. Hermon, reaching the sea between Tyre and Sidon. In roughly parallel courses \\ahr el-^Awleh and Nahr Danutr descend to the sea between Sidon and Beyrout, and Nahr Beyrout just N. of the city. Throughout this district the mountain recesses are more or loss wooded. Opposite Beyrout the range rises in Jebel Sannin to an elevation of 8,560 ft. Thirty miles farther N.E. the summit is reached in Jebel Mnkhmal, at an elevation of 10,225 ft., with several others of nearly the same height. An amphitheater here opens to the \\V., in which is sheltered the most frequented cedar grove, and from which emerges the Nahr Kadisha ("sacred stream") which enters the Mediterranean at Tripolis. Snow is found upon those summits throughout the year (Jer 18 14), while formerly the level area between them furnished the snow fields from which a glacier descended several miles into the headwaters of the Kadisha, reaching a level of about 5,000 ft. The glacier deposited in this amphitheater a terminal moraine covering several sq. miles, which at its front , near Bshcrrch, is 1,000 ft. in thickness. It is on this that the grove of cedars referred to is growing. The view from this summit reveals the geographi cal features of the region in a most satisfactory manner. Toward the E. lies Code-Syria (the modern Buka), 7,000ft. below the summit, bordered on the eastern side by the mountain wall of Anti- Lebanon, corresponding to the cliffs of Moab E. of the Jordan valley, opposite Judaea. This depression in fact is but a continuation of the great geological fault so conspicuous in the Jordan valley (see ARABAH). As one looks down into this valley, Ba albck appears at the base of Anti-Lebanon, only 20 miles away. The valley is here about 10 miles wide, and forms the watershed between the Orontes and the Litany. To the N.E. the^valley of the Orontes is soon obscured by intervening peaks, but, to the S.W. the valley of the Litany closes up only where the glistering peak of Mt. Hermon pierces the sky, as the river turns abruptly toward the sea 40 miles distant. Toward the W., the blue waters of the Mediterranean, only 25 miles distant as the crow flies, show themselves at intervals through the gorges cut by the rapid streams which have fur rowed the western flanks of the mountain (Cant 415); 3,500 ft. beneath is the amphitheater many sq. miles in area, filled with the terminal moraine; from which the Kadisha river emerges, and on which the grove of ced ars (cf 1 K 4 33; Ps 92 12; Hos 14 5) appears as a green spot in the center. On ward to the W. the river gorge winds its way amid numerous picturesque village sites and terraced fields, every foot of which is cultivated by a frugal and industrious people. To the traveler who has made the diagonal journey from Beyrout to the cedars, memory fills in innumerable details which are concealed from vision at any one time. He has crossed Nahr cl-Kelb ("Dog River"), near its mouth, where he has seen Egyp and Assyr inscrip tions dating from the time of Sennacherib s inva sion. Ascending this river, after passing numerous villages surrounded by mulberry and olive groves, vineyards, and fields of wheat, and pausing to study the ruins of a temple dating from Rom times, and having crossed a natural bridge at Jisr el-Hagar with a span of 120 ft., rising 75 ft. above the stream, he arrives, at the end of the second day, at the ruins of the famous temple of Venus destroyed by the order of Constantine on account of the impurity of the rites celebrated in it. Here, too, is a famous spring, typical of many others which gush forth

      on either side of the Lebanon range from beneath the thick deposits of limestone which everywhere crown its summit. The flow of water is enormous, and at certain seasons of the year is colored red with a mineral matter which the ancients regarded with mysterious reverence (see LB, III, 244). The lower part of the amphitheater is covered with verdure and a scanty growth of pine and walnut trees, but the upper part merges in the barren cliffs which lie above the snow line. Onward, alternately through upturned limestone strata, left by erosion in fantastic forms, and through barren areas of rod sandstone, where the cedars of Lebanon would flourish if protected from the depredations of man and his domestic animals, he crosses by turns at higher and higher levels the headwaters of the Ibrahim, Fcdar, Jozeli, Byblns and the Botrys rivers, and at length reaches, on the fourth day, the Ka disha, 5 miles below the cedars of Lebanon. Viewed from the Mediterranean the Lebanon range pre sents a continuous undulating outline of light- colored limestone peaks, the whole rising so abruptly from the sea that through most of the distance there is barely room for a road along the shore, while in places even that is prevented by rocky promon tories projecting boldly into the sea. The only harbors of importance are at Beyrout and Tripolis, and these are only partially protected, being open to the N.W. The eastern face of the range falling down into Coele-Syria is very abrupt, with no foot hills and but one or two important valleys.

      Geologically considered, the Lebanon consists of three conformable strata of rock thrown up in an anticline with its steepest face to the 3. Geology E. The lowest of these are several thousand ft. thick, consisting of hard limestone containing few fossils, the most character istic of which is Cidaris glandaria, from which the formation has been named Cilandarian limestone. In its foldings this has been elevated in places to a height of 5,000 ft. Through erosion it is exposed in numerous places, where it presents picturesque castellated columns, whose bluish-gray sides are beautifully fluted by atmospheric agencies. The second formation consists of several hundred feet of red-colored sandstone alternating with soft limestone and clay deposits, occasionally contain ing a poor quality of bituminous coal, with pyrites and efflorescent salts. It is this that occasionally colors the water of the spring at Adonis. The char acteristic fossil is Trigonia syriaca. Altogether this formation attains a thickness of 1,000 ft., and it is on its exposed surfaces that the most of the Lebanon pines are found. It contains also many signs of volcanic action. The third formation con sists of hippurite limestone, a cretaceous formation, in some places almost wholly composed of fragments of the fossils from which it derives its name. This formation appears on all the highest summits, where in most cases it is nearly horizontal, and in places attains a thickness of 5,000 ft. Between the sum mits of the range and the foothills this formation has been almost wholly carried away by erosion, thus exposing the underlying formations. Cre taceous strata of still later age are found at low levels near the sea, which in places are covered by small deposits of Tertiary limestone, and by a porous sandstone of the Pleistocene age.

      The scenery of the western slopes of Lebanon is

      most varied, magnificent, and beautiful, and well

      calculated, as indeed it did, to impress

      4. Scenery the imagination of the Hob poets.

      Originally it was heavily covered with

      forests of pine, oak and cedar; but these have for

      the most part long since disappeared, except in the

      valley of Nahr Ibrahim, which is still thickly

      wooded with pine, oak and plane trees. Of the

      Lebaoth Lend, Loan



      cedars there remain, besides the grove at the head of the Kdittxhu, only two or three, and they are of less importance. Every available spot on the western flanks of the Lebanon is cultivated, being sown with wheat or planted with the vine, the olive, the mulberry and the walnut. Irrigation is ex tensively practised. When we let the eye range from the snowy summits of the mountain over all that lies between them and the orange groves of Sidon on the seashore, we understand why the Arabs say that "Lebanon bears winter on its head, spring on its shoulders, autumn in its lap, while summer lies at its feet."

      In the more desolate places jackals, hyenas, wolves, and panthers are still found (cf 2 K 14 9).

      The original inhabitants of Lebanon were Ilivites

      and Gcbalites (Jgs 3 3; Josh 13 5.6). The whole

      mountain range was assigned to the

      5. History Israelites, but was never conquered

      by 1 hem. It seemed generally to have been subject to the Phoenicians. At present it is occupied by various sects of Christians and Mo hammedans, of whom the Maronites, Druzes and Orthodox Greeks are most active and prominent. Since 1X1)0 the region has been under the protection of European powers with a Christian governor. No exact figures are available, but the population at present numbers probably about 275,000.

      Ruins of ancient temples are numerous through out Lebanon. Bacon estimates that within a radius of 20 miles of Ba albck there are 15 ruined sun-temples, the grandeur and beauty of which would have made them famous but for the surpass ing splendor of Ba ulbck.

      Anti-Libanus (Jth 1 7; Josh 13 5; Cant 7 4)

      is an extension northward of the great mountain

      system facing on the E. the great

      6. Anti- geological fault most conspicuous in Lebanon the valley of the Jordan (see JORDAN,

      VALLEY OF), extending from the Gulf of Akabah to Antioch on the Orontes River. The system begins at the Barada River just N. of Mt. Hermon, and, running parallel to Mt. Lebanon for 05 miles, terminates at HI/HIS, the "entering in of Hamath." The highest points of the range reach an elevation of over 8,000 ft. Eastward the range merges into the plateau of the great Syrian desert. South of Bn alhck the Yahfufah, a stream of con siderable importance, empties into the Litany, while the Barada (the "Abana" of Scripture), rising in the same plateau, flows eastward to Damascus, its volume being greatly increased by fountains coming in from the base of the dissected plateau.

      LITERATURE. The geographical and geological de scriptions arc largely obtained by the -writer from an extended excursion through the region in the company of Professor Day of the Protestant College at Beyrout, whose knowledge of the region is most intimate and comprehensive. For more detailed information see Robinson, BltP"-, II, 43511, 493; G. A. Smith, I1GHL, 45 If; Burton and Drake, Unexplored Syria; Benjamin W. Bacon, and <;. F. Wright in Records of the Past 1900 V, C7-83, 195-204; Baedeker-Socin, Pal.

      GEOBGB FREDERICK WRIGHT LEBAOTH, lo-ba oth, -6th (fnfittb, I bha dlh): An unidentified city in the S. of the territory of Judah (Josh 15 32). It is the same as Beth- lebaoth of Josh 19 6, which, by a clerical error appears in 1 Ch 4 31 as "Beth-biri."

      LEBBAEUS, le-be us (Aeppatos, Lebbaios) : Men tioned in Mt 10 3 AV as "Lebbaeus, whose sur name was Thaddaeus" (RV omits); one of the twelve apostles. See THADDAEUS.

      LEBONAH, IS-bo na (Plpab, l*bhonah): A place on the great north road between Shiloh and Shechem (Jgs 21 19). It is represented by the modern Khan d-Lubban, about 3 miles W.N.W. of

      Hcihln ("Shiloh"), on the way to Nablu-s. It is a wretched village lying on the slope of a hill, with many rock tombs in the vicinity.

      LECAH, le ka (HD! Judah (1 Ch 4 21).

      lekhah): A descendant of

      LEDGE, lej (15$, shulubh): The word in the sense of side-projection is used in 1 K 7 2.S.29 in connection with the bases of Solomon s MOLTEN SKA (q.v.); in vs 35.36, where AV uses the same word, 11V has "stay" (yadh, lit. "hand"). RV likewise has "ledge" (round) for AV "compass" (karkobfi) in the description of the altar in Ex 27 5; 38 4 (see ALTAR), and ARV substitutes "ledge" for "settle" (\\izarah) in E/k 43 14.17.20; 45 19. See TEMPLE.

      LEEKS, leks ("P3in , Imfir; TO. irpdcra, td prdsa) : This word, elsewhere tr d "grass," is in Nil 11 5 rendered "leeks" in all the ancient VSS, on account

      Leek (Allium porrum).

      of its association with garlic and onions; such a use of the word occurs in the Talm. The leek (Allium porrum) is much grown today in Pal, while in ancient Egypt this vegetable was renowned.

      LEES, lez. See WINE.

      LEFT, left (bXTair , sama l, "to go to the left," "to turn to the left," blSEE , bXEtt , s> m d l, "the left hand," "^Jtpip, s e m<Tll, "belonging to the left," "situated on the left"; dpio-repos, aristerus, and euphemistically cvuvujios, euonumos, lit. "having a good name," "of good omen"): The words are chiefly used in orientation with or without the addi tion of the word "hand." So Abraham says to Lot: "If thou wilt take the left hand [^nw l], then I will go to the right; or if thou take the right hand, then I will go to the left [sama l]" (Gen 13 9). Frequently in Heb idiom the right hand and the left are mentioned together in order to express the idea "everywhere," "anywhere," "altogether" (Gen 24 49; Ex 14 22.29; Nu 22 26; Dt 2 27; 6 32;



      Lebaoth Lend, Loan

      2 Cor 67). In the geographical sense the left is synonymous with north (Gen 14 15; Josh 19 27; Ezk 16 46; Acts 21 3). While the left hand is considered as weaker than the right (see LEFTHANDED), it is the hand which holds the bow (Ezk 39 3). The left hand is the side from which bad omens come, and therefore less lucky and less honored than the right hand (see HAND, note).

      H. L. E. LUKRING

      LEFTHANDED, left hand-ed Op^~~- "^ , iltcr yadh-yo/min; LXX d(j.<j>oTepoS^ios, ampho- terodexios, i.e. "ambidextrous"): The Heb presents a combination of words signifying lit. a man whose right hand is impeded or lame, who therefore uses the left hand instead, or one who by habit prefers the use of the left hand, where others use the right. It is interesting to note that in both instances, where the expression occurs in the Scripture, it refers to individuals belonging to the tribe of Ben jamin (which name itself signifies "a son of the right hand" !). The first is Ehud, son of Gera, who killed Eglon, king of Moab, and thereby delivered Israel from paying tribute to the Moabites (Jgs 3 15). The other instance is that of the 700 selected Benjamites, who, though lefthanded, "could sling stones at a hair-breadth, and not miss" (Jgs 20 10; cf 1 Ch 12 2). H. L. E. LUERING

      LEG ([1] ptt, shok, Aram. W , shok; [2] kdra\\ dual D"?"^3 , k e ra*ayim; [3] "3"^,rcyhd; <nXos, skclos; AV tr 3 also ^2113, shdbhd, and n"75 , G e *adhdh, with "leg," but mistakenly): (l) T The first Heb word (shok} denotes the upper leg, and is therefore synonymous with THIGH (q.v.). It ex presses metaphorically the muscular strength, and the pride of the runner. "He taketh no pleasure in the legs of a man" (Ps 147 10). "His legs are as pillars of marble, set upon sockets of fine gold" (Cant 6 15). If the legs have lost their strength as in the lame or the Beri-beri patient, they become a metaphor for anything useless, inefficient or dis appointing: "The legs of the lame hang loose; so is a parable in the mouth of fools" (Prov 26 7). The Aram, form is found in the description of the image of Nebuchadnezzar, "its legs of iron" (Dnl 2 33). (2) Kara , dual k"ra*ayim, the "leg," "respecting the legs," mentioned as a portion of the paschal lamb (Ex 12 9), or, usually, in connection with the head and the inwards, as a sacrificial portion (Ex 29 17; Lev 1 9.13; Am 3 12). The word des ignates also the legs of leaping insects of the orthop- terous family, locusts, etc, which were permitted as food to the Israelites (Lev 11 21). (3) Reghd, lit. "foot" (q.v.), found in this sense only once: "lie [Goliath] had greaves of brass upon his legs" (1 H 17 6).

      Two passages of wrong tr in AV have been cor rected by RV. The virgin daughter of Babylon is addressed: "Make bare the leg, uncover the thigh" (Isa 47 2), RV renders: "Strip off the train [sho- bhel], uncover the leg," the idea being that the gentle maid, who has been brought up in affluence and luxury, will have to don the attire of a slave girl and do menial work, for which her former garments are unsuited. The other passage is in Isa 3 20, where AV reads: "the bonnets, and the ornaments of the legs," RV corrects: "the head- tires [g e *adhah], and the ankle chains."

      In the NT the word "leg" is found only in con nection with the breaking of the legs of the persons crucified with the Saviour (Jn 19 31.3 2.33). We know from Rom and Gr authors that this was done as a coup de grace to shorten the miseries of criminals condemned to die on the cross. The practice bore the technical name of <rKe\\oKoirta, skelolcopia, Lat crurifragium. The vb. (nceXoKoireiVy skelokopein

      ("to break the legs"), is found in the apocryphal Gospel of St. Peter (4 14), where it is distinctly stated that the legs of Jesus were not broken, that His sufferings on the cross might be extended, while the two malefactors crucified with Him were merci fully dispatched in this way. The crurifragium consisted of some strokes with a heavy club or mallet, which always materially hastened the death of the sufferer, and often caused it almost imme diately.

      Edersheim, in LTJM, II, 013, suggests that the break ing of legs was an additional punishment, and that it was always followed by a coup </< </ran-, the ;< rforatio or pt-rcussio sub alas, a stroke with sword or lance into the side. This, however, is not borne out by any classical information which is known to me, and is contradicted by the statement of the evangelist that Jesus received the percussio, while the malefactors endured the cruri fragium. Cf on this subject, esp. for parallels from classical authors, Sepp, Das Li licn Jtn, VII, 441, and Keim, Jesus von Nazara (ET), VI, 2515, note :5.

      H. L. E. LTJERING LEGION, le jun. Sec ARMY; ARMY, ROMAN.

      LEGISLATION, lej-is-la shun, OF SANCTITY.

      See ASTRONOMY, 1, 5.

      LEHABIM, 10-ha bim (D^n , WiuMrini) : Named in Gen 10 13; 1 Ch 1 11 as descendants of Miz- raim. They are probably to be identified with the LUBIM (q.v.), and the one word may be a corruption of the other.

      LEHI, le hi. See RAMATH-LEHI.

      LEMUEL, lem il-el (Sfils , l-mil cl, or l e md el ): A king whose words, an "oracle [taught him by his mother]," are given in Prov 31 1-9; and possibly the succeeding acrostic poem (vs 10-31) is from the same source. Instead of translating the word after this name as "oracle," some propose to leave it as a proper name, translating "king of Massa," and referring for his kingdom to Massa (Gen 25 14), one of the sons of Ishmael, supposedly head of a tribe or sheikh of a country. It is to be noted, however, that the words of Agur in the pre vious chapter are similarly called mussd , "oracle," with not so clear a reason for referring it to a country. See for a suggested reason for retaining the meaning "oracle" in both places, PUOVKRHS, BOOK OF, II, 0. JOHN FRANKLIN GENUNG

      LEND, LOAN, Ion: The tr of 7 Ileb and 2 Gr

      vbs. :

      In the OT: nib, Idwdh, "to join," "cause to join," "lend" (Ex 22 25; Dt 28 12.44; Ps 37 26; Prov 19

      17); miJ:, nashah, "to bite," "lend" (Dt 1. Lexical 24 11; T Jer 15 10); miJj. nashah (same Usages root as last, though different vb. stem,

      Hiphil), "to cause to bite," "lend on usury" (Dt 15 2; 2410); tfttjj , ndshakh, "to bite," "lend" "[cause to lend] on usury" (Dt 23 19.20); "jri3 , nathan, "to give" (Lev 25 37, RV "to give"); U?^ . dbhat (Hiphil), " to cause to borrow," "to lend" (Dt 15 6.8); bXTlJ, shd al (Hiphil), "to cause to ask," "to lend" (Ex 12 36, RV "ask"; 1 S 1 27). In LXX Saveifr, daneizo, Savifr, danizO, "to lend," tr" "ib , uD37. and bXTlJ in above passages and in Neh 5 4; Prov 22 7, and Isa 24 2; KIXP W , kichrdo, also tr^ JT15 and bXtB

      (Ps 1125; Prov 13 11); reio.< (->.), ddneion(-ion), "loan," occurs in Dt 15 8.10; 24 11; 4 Mace 2 8. In the NT "lend" tr a two (lr ybs., daneizo, "to lend money" (Lk 6 34.35, usually in commercial sense); KIXPIA", ktchremi, "to lend [as a friendly act]" (Lk 11 5). The subst. "loan," nbj<T!3 , she eldh, occurs only once in the OT (1 S 2 20 AV aiid ERV), not at all in the NT.

      (1) Lending on interest to the poor is prohibited

      Lentils Leper, Leprosy



      in the code in Ex 22 25. (2) In the code in Dt 15 1-6; 23 19.20; 24 10.11; 28 12.44, borrow ing and lending are taken for granted 2. History as existing in Israel, but the creditor of Lending is required to release his Heb brother in the Bible as debtor in the 7th year (either the and Apoc- cancellation of the loan [so in Jewish rypha lit. and early Christian scholars] or sus

      pension of payment that year [so most modern scholars]), though ho may exact payment from a foreigner. Israel may lend, and will be able to lend, because of Jell s blessing, to other nations, but must not borrow from them. A pledge, or security, must not be taken in person by the creditor from the house of the debtor, nor kept over night, if the debtor be poor. (3) The code in Lev 25 35-38 requires that the Israelite receive no interest from his poor brother, because of the goodness of Jeh to Israel. (4) Notwithstanding the prohibition of the early laws against lending on interest or usury, the same seems to have become common in Israel before the exile (Isa 24 2; Jer 15 10), was prac tised on the return, and was an evil to be corrected by Nehemiah (Neh 5 7.10). (5) According to Ps 37 20; 112 5; Prov 19 17, lending to the needy was regarded as a mark of the pious Hebrew, but no interest is to be charged. (6) According to Apoc (Wisd 15 16; Sir 8 12; 18 33; 20 15. 29; 4 Mace 2 8), borrowing is discouraged, and lending is exalted as a mark of the merciful man. (7) Jesus teaches that His followers should lend, even to enemies, to men from whom_they have no reasonable hope of expecting anything in return, because thus to do is to be like the Most High (Lk 6 34.35). He did not discuss lending for commer cial purposes, and so does not necessarily forbid it. LITERATURE. See Driver on Dt 15 1-6; Benzinger, Heb Archaol. (1894), 350 f; Oehler, OT TheoL, 150, 10; Pluinmer on Lk 6 34.35.


      LENTILS, len tilz (tPtHy, *&dhashlm; <J>aKos, phakos; Gen 25 34; 2 S 17 28; 23 11; Ezk 4 9; AV Lentiles): These are undoubtedly identical with the Arab. Was, a small, reddish bean, the

      Lentil (Ervum lens).

      product of Ervum lens, a dwarf leguminous plant, half a foot high, which is extensively cultivated in Pal as a summer crop. The flour is highly nutri tious, and the well-known food, Revalenta arabica, is simply one form, specially prepared; Was are highly esteemed in Pal, and are used in soup and as a "pottage" known as mujedderah. This last is of a reddish-brown color and is without doubt the

      "pottage" of Gen 25 34. Lentils were part of the provisions brought, to David when fleeing from Absalom (2 S 17 28) and were used in the making of the bread for the prophet E/ekiol (4 9). In a "plot of ground full of lentils," Shammah, one of David s "mightv men," stood and defended it and slew the marauding Philis (2 S 23 11.12).

      E. W. G. MASTKRMAN

      LEOPARD, lep erd ([1] I 1 ?: , namer [Cunt 4 8; Isa 11 6; Jer 56; 13 23; Hos 13 7; Hub 1 8];

      cf Arab.

      nimr, "leopard." [2] Chald

      n e mar [Dnl 7 6]. [3], pdrdalis [Rev 13 2; Ecclus 28 23]; cf D Hp: , nimrlm, Nimrim [Isa 15 6; Jer 48 34], rnp: , nimrah, Nimrah [Nu 32 3], and !"np3 fPS, beth-nimrah, Beth-nimrah [Nu 32 36; Josh 13 27]): The leopard is found through-

      Leopard (Fdis Icopardis).

      out Africa and ranges through Southern Asia from Asia Minor to Japan, being absent from Siberia and Central Asia. Its range is much the same as that of the lion, which latter, however, does not extend so far to the E. Like other animals of wide range, it has local varieties, but these shade into each other imperceptibly, and the one specific name, Felis pardus, includes all. Leopards live in some of the valleys E. and S. of the Dead Sea, and in the mountains of Sinai and Northwestern Arabia. They have but rarely been seen of recent years in Lebanon or the more settled portions of Pal. So far as can be judged from skins which are available for comparison, the leopard of Pal is rather light in color, and is not as large as some found in Africa or India. It is not certain that the place-names, NIMRIM, NIMRAH, and BETH-NIMRAH (q.v.), have to do with ncimer, "leopard," but their location is in Moab, where leopards are well known, even at the present day. One of the valleys entering the Dead Sea from the E., S. of the Arnon, is called Wddi-en-Numeir ("valley of the little leopard"; numeir, dim. of nimr).

      In the Bible "leopard" occurs mainly in fig urative expressions, as a large and fierce beast. The leopard is mentioned with the lion and bear in Dnl 7 6; Hos 13 7; Rev 13 2; with the lion, wolf and bear in Isa 11 6; with the lion and wolf in Jer 5 6; with the lion alone in Ecclus 28 23; with the wolf alone in Hab 1 8. The leopard is smaller than the lion and the tiger, but is more active than either. Its swiftness is referred to in Hab 1 8: "Their horses also [of the Chaldaeans] are swifter than leopards." The spots of the leopard are referred to in Jer 13 23: "Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?"

      The Gr -rrdpda\\i.s, pdrdalis, and tnivdrip, pan ther, were both applied to the leopard. "Panther" is sometimes used of large leopards, while in Amer ica, with its corrupt form "painter," it is one of the names applied to the cougar or puma, Felis concolor,



      Lentils Leper, Leprosy

      which, as the specific name implies, is not spotted like the leopard, or striped like the tiger.


      LEPER, lep er, LEPROSY, lep ro-si (nJlS , Cara ath; \\t-rrpa, lepra): A slowly progressing and intractable disease characterized by subcutaneous nodules (Heb s e eth; LXX oult>; AV "rising"), scabs or cuticular crusts (Heb sappahath; LXX semasia) and white shining spots appearing to be deeper than the skin (Heb bahereth; LXX teltiut/cma). Other signs are (1) that the hairs of the affected part turn white and (2) that later there is a growth of "quick raw flesh." This disease in an especial manner rendered its victims unclean; even contact with a leper denied whoever touched him, so while the cure of other diseases is called healing, that of lep rosy is called cleansing (except in the case of Miriam [Nu 12 13] and that of the Samaritan [Lk 17 15] where the word "heal" is used in refer ence to leprosy). The disease is described in the Papyrus Ebers as ukhcdu (the Coptic name for leprosy is $eht). It is also mentioned in ancient Indian and Japanese history. Hippocrates calls it "the Phoen disease," and Galen names it "ele phantiasis." In Europe it was little known until imported by the returning soldiers of Pompey s army after his Syrian campaign in (51 BC; but after that date it is described by Soranus, Aretaeus and other classic authors.

      The first OT mention of this disease is as a sign given by God to Moses (Ex 4 G [Jj), which may

      be the basis of the story in CAp, I, 1. OT 31, that Moses was expelled from

      Instances Heliopolis on account of his being a

      leper (see also I, 2(5 and Ant, III, xi, 4). The second case is that of Miriam (Nu 12 10), where the disease is graphically described (EPj). In I)t 24 8 there is a reference to the oral tradition concerning the treatment of lepers, without any details, but in Lev 13, 14 (PC) the rules for the recognition of the disease, the preliminary quar antine periods and the ceremonial methods of cleansing are given at length. It is worthy of note that neither here nor elsewhere is there any ment ion of treatment or remedy; and Jehoram s ejaculation implies the belief that its cure could be accomplished only by miracle (2 K 6 7).

      Group of Lepers Begging.

      The case of Naaman (2 K 6 1) shows that lepers were not isolated and excluded from society among the Syrians. The leprosy of Gehazi (2 K 6 27) is said to have been the transference of that of Naaman, but, as the incubation period is long, it must have been miraculously inflicted on him. The four lepers of Samaria of 2 K 7 3 had been excluded from the city and were outside the gate.

      The leprous stroke inflicted on Uzziah (2 K 16 5; 2 Ch 26 23) for his unwarrantable assumption of the priestly office began in his forehead, a form of the disease peculiarly unclean (Lev 13 43-46) and requiring the banishment and isolation of the leper. It is remarkable that there is no reference to this disease in the prophetical writings, or in the Hagiographa.

      In the NT, cleansing of the lepers is mentioned

      as a specific portion of Our Lord s work of healing,

      and was included in the commission

      2. Leprosy given to the apostles. There are few in the NT individual cases specially described,

      only the ten of Lk 17 12, and the leper whom Our Lord touched (Mt 82; Mk 1 40; Lk 5 12), but it is probable that these are only a few out of many such incidents. Simon the leper (Mt 26 6; Mk 14 3) may have been one of those cured by the Lord.

      The disease is a zymotic affection produced by a microbe discovered by Hansen in 1871. It is con tagious, although not very readily

      3. Nature communicated by casual contact; in and Locality one form it is attended with anaes- of the thesia of the parts affected, and this, Disease which is the commonest variety now

      met with in the East, is slower in its course than those forms in which nodular growths are 1 he most prominent features, in which parts of the limbs often drop off. At present there are many lepers to be seen at the gates of the cities in Pal. It is likewise prevalent in other eastern lands, India, China, and Japan. Cases are also to be seen in most of the Mediterranean lands and in Norway, as well as in parts of Africa and the West Indies and in South America. In former times it was occasionally met with in Britain, and in most of the older English cities there were leper houses, often called "lazarets" from the mistaken notion that the eczematous or varicose ulcers of Lazarus were leprous (Lk 16 20). Between 1096 and 1472, 112 such leper houses were founded in England. Of this disease King Robert Bruce of Scotland died. There was special mediaeval legislation excluding lepers from churches and forbidding them to wander from district to district. Leprosy has been some times confounded with other diseases; indeed the Gr physicians used the name lepra for the scaly skin disease now called psoriasis. In the priestly legis lation there was one form of disease (Lev 13 13) in which the whiteness covers all the body, and in this condition the patient was pronounced to be clean. This was probably psoriasis, for leprosy does not, until a very late stage, cover all the body, and when it does so, it is riot white. It has been surmised that Naaman s disease was of this kind. Freckled spots (Heb buhak), which were to be dis tinguished from true leprosy (Lev 13 39), were either spots of herpes or of some other non-con tagious skin disease. The modern Arab, word of the same sound is the name of a form of eczema. RV reads for freckled spot "tetter," an old Eng. word from a root implying itchiness (see Hamlet, I, v, 71).

      The homiletic use of leprosy as a type of sin is not Bib. The only Scriptural reference which might approach this is Ps 61 7, but this refers to Nu 19 18 rather than to the cleansing of the leper. The Fathers regarded leprosy as typical of heresy rather than of moral offences. (See Rabanus Maurus, Allegoria, s.v. "Lepra.")

      (1) Leprosy in garments. The occurrence of certain greenish or reddish stains in the substance of woollen or linen fabrics or in articles made of leather is described in Lev 13 47 ff, and when these stains spread, or, after washing, do not change their color, they are pronounced to be due to a fretting

      Leshem Levitical Cities



      leprosy (farn*iiih inam ereth), and such arc 1o he burnt. As among the fcllahin articles of clothing art- worn for years and are often hereditary, it is little wonder that they become affected by vegetable as well as animal parasites, and that which is here referred to is probably some form of mildew, such as J cnicillinin or inold-fungus. The destruction of such garments is a useful sanitary precaution. Possibly this sort of decaying gar ment was in .Job s mind when he compares him self to a "rotten thing that consumeth, like a garment that is moth-eaten" (13 2S); see also Jude ver 23, "the garment spotted [espttdm&non] by the flesh."

      (2) Lc proxy in the house. (Lee 14 34 ff). The occurrence of "hollow streaks, greenish or reddish," in the plaster of a house is regarded as evidence that the wall is affected with leprosy, and when such is observed the occupant first clears his house of furni ture, for if the discoloration be pronounced leprous, all in the home would become unclean and must be destroyed. Then he asks the priest to inspect it. The test is first, that the stain is in the substance of the wall, and, second, that it is spreading. In case these conditions are fulfilled, it is pronounced to be leprosy and the affected part of the wall is taken down, its stones cast outside the city, its plaster scraped off and also cast outside the city; new stones are then built in and the house is newly plastered. Should the stain recur in the new wall, then the whole house is condemned and must be destroyed and its materials cast outside the city. The description is that of infection by some fungus attacking whatever organic material is in the mud plaster by which the wall is covered. If in wood work, it might be the dry rot (Mcrulius lacrimans), but this is not likely to spread except where there is wood or other organic matter. It might be the efflorescence of mural salt (calcium nitrate), which forms flocculent masses when decomposing nitro genous material is in contact with lime; but that is generally white, not green or reddish. Consider ing the uncleanly condition of the houses of the ordinary fellah, it is little wonder that such fungus growths may develop in their walls, and in such cases destruction of the house and its materials is a sani tary necessity.

      It should be observed here that the attitude of the Law toward the person, garment or house sus pected of leprosy is that if the disease 4. The be really present, they are to be de-

      Legal dared unclean and there is no means

      Attitude provided for cure, and in the case of the garment or house, they are to be destroyed. If, on the other hand, the disease be proved to be absent, this freedom from the disease has to be declared by a ceremonial purification. This is in reality not the ritual for cleansing the leper, for the Torah provides none such, but the ritual for declaring him ceremonially free from the suspicion of having the disease. This gives a peculiar and added force to the words, "The lepers are cleansed," as a testimony to Our Lord s Divine mission. ALEX. MACALISTER

      LESHEM, le shem. See LAISH.

      LESSAU, les o (Aeo-o-aoV), Lcssaou; AV Dessau) : A place 1 mentioned only in 2 Mace 14 16 as the scene; of a battle between Nicanor and the Jews. "Dessau" e>f AV arise-s from confusion of A with A in the Gr. The place may be identical with ADASA (q.v.).

      LET (Karc xo), katecho} : Usually in the sense of "permit" (AS Itrtan), but also in Old Eng. with meaning of "hinder" (AS lettari). This latter sense

      is found in 2 The>ss 2 7 AV, "Only he> who now let- teth will let ," where ItV has, "( )nly there is one that rest rainet li now."

      LETHECH, le- thek (Tjnb , lethekh): A liquid

      measure equivalent to half a homer (Iios 3 2 m)

      and containing about 5 bushels. See WKICHTS AND MEASUUES.

      LETTER, Id er. Se-e EPISTLE.

      LETTERS, le l er/. See ALPHAHKT; WKITINCJ.

      LETUSHIM, IfMeTo shim, le-tu shim (Z^TlJrjb , I tushlm) . A De danite tribe in North Arabia (den 25 3). With it are connected the ASSIIUIUM and LEUMMIM (q.v.).

      LEUMMIM, tf-urn im (2^ , l ummim): A De danite tribe of North Arabia, connected with the; LETUSHIM (q.v.).

      LEVI, le vl fib, Kwi; Atvt, Letti; WII Atvtl, Lean) :

      (1) The 3d sem of Jacob by Leah. See separate article.

      (2) (3) Twe> ancestors of Jesus in Lk s genealogy (Lk 3 24.29).

      (4) The apostle Matthew. See MATTHEW.

      LEVI fnb, lewl; AevcC, Leuri): The third of Leah s sons born to Jae ob in Paddan-aram (de>n 29 34). In this passage the name is connected with the vb. Idwdh, "to adhere ," or "be; joine-el to," Leah expressing assurance that with the birth of this third son, her husband might be drawn closer to her in the bonels of conjugal affection. There is a play upon the name in Nu 18 2.4, where direction is given that the tribe of Le-vi be "joined unto" Aaron in the ministries of the sanctuary. The etymology here suggested is simple and reason able. The grounds on which some modern scholars ivject it are purely conjectural. It is assertcel, e.g., that the name is adjectival, not nominal, describing one who attaches himself; and this is usenl to sup port the theory that the Levites were those; who joined the Sem people when they left Egypt to return to Pal, who therefore were probably Egyp tians. Others think it may be a gentilic form I? ah, "wild cow" (We-llhausen, Proleg., 146; Stade, GVI, 152) ; and this is held to be the more probable, as pointing to early totem worship!

      Levi shared with Simeon the infamy incurreel at Shechem by the treacherous slaughter of the Shee-hemites (Gen 34). Jacob s displeasure was expressed at the time (ver 3), and the memory was still bitter to him in his last days (49 5f). The fate predicted for the descendants of Simeon and Levi (ver 7), in the case of the latter on ae-f-ount of the tribe s stedfast loyalty in & period of stern test ing, was change d to a blessing (Ex 32 26 ff). In later lit. the action condemned by Jae-ob is men tioned with approval (Jth 9 2ff). Le>vi was in volved in his brothers guilt with regard to Joseph (Gen 37), and shared their experiences in Egypt before Joseph maele himse lf known (chs 42-45). Three sons, Gershon, Kohath, and Merari, were born to him in Canaan, and went down with the caravan to Egypt (46 11). Nothing further is knenvn of the personal history of this patriarch. He elieel and founel sepulture in Egypt. For the tribal history and possessions, see PRIESTS AND LEVITES.

      W. EWINO

      LEVIATHAN, Ig-vl a-than W?? , liwydthdn [Job 41 1-34], from i/ iTD , lawdh, "to fold"; cf Arab.



      Leshem Levitical Cities

      x- y 7 f-

      namo of UK; wry neck, lynx torguilla, ^-.J _:! ,

      ^ * S?

      abu-luwa, from kindred i/, -J, Zatm, "tobeiid"):

      (1) The word "leviathan" also occurs in Isa 27 1, where it is characterized as "the swift serpent .... the crooked serpent"; in Ps 104 26, where a, marine monster is indicated; also in Ps 74 14 and Job 3 8. The description in Job 41 has been thought by some to refer to the whale, but while the whale suits better the expressions denoting great strength, the words apply best on the whole to the crocodile. Moreover, the whale is very seldom found in the Mediterranean, while the crocodile is abundant in the Nile, and has been known to occur in at least one river of Pal, the Zarka, N. of Jaffa. For a discussion of the behemoth and levia than as mythical creatures, see El3, s.v. "Behe moth" and "Leviathan." The points in the de scription which may well apply to the crocodile are the great invulnerability, the strong and close scales, the limbs and the teeth. It must be ad- nutted that there are many expressions which a modern scientist would not use with reference to the crocodile, but the Book of Job is neither modern nor scientific, but poetical and ancient.

      (2) See ASTRONOMY, II, 2, 5.


      LEVIS, le vis (AevCs, Leuis): 1 Esd 9 14, properly the Levite of Ezr 10 15; "Shabbethai the Levite" for "Levis and Sabbateus."

      LEVITES, le vits. See PRIESTS AXD LEVITKS. LEVITICAL, ki-vit i-kal, CITIES:


      1. Numbers

      2. Deuteronomy


      1. Traces of the Cities

      2. Wellhauseu s Arguments Answered

      3. Van Hoonacker s Reply

      4. Ezekid s Vision

      5. Priestly Cities and Cities in Which Priests Dwell


      /. Legal Provisions. Nu 35 1-8 provides that 48 cities should be given to the Levites, each sur rounded by a pasturage. The _ exact

      1. Numbers det ails are not quite clear, for in the

      Ileb, ver 4 would naturally be read as meaning that the pasturage was a radius of 1,000 cubits from the city walls, while yer 5 makes each city the center of a square, each side of which was 2,000 cubits long. Extant variants in the VSS suggest, however, that the text has suffered slightly in transmission. Originally there seems to have been no discrepancy between the two verses, and it may be doubted whether the intent was that the city was always to be in the mathematical center of the patch. The Levites were to have the right of redeeming the houses at any time,_and in default of redemption they were to go out in the Jubilee. The field was not to be sold (Lev 25 32 f).

      Dt 18 8 undoubtedly recognizes patrimonial possessions of the Levites outside the religious

      capital, and sees no inconsistency with

      2. Deuter- its earlier statement that Levi had no onomy portion or inheritance with ^Israel

      (vcr 1). The explanation lies_ in the fact that these cities were not a tribal portion like the territories of the secular tribes. The area occupied by the whole 48 jointly would only have amounted to less than 16 miles.

      II. Wellhausen s View. Josh 21 relates that this command was fulfilled by the allocation of 48 cities, but it is clear that some of those cities were

      not in fact reduced into possession; see e.g. Josh 16 10; Jgs 1 21) as to (lexer, and Jgs 1 27 as to Taanach. Wellhausen treats the whole arrangement as fictitious. His main reasons are: (1) that the arrangement is physically impracticable in a moun tainous country, and (2) that "there is not a his torical trace of the existence of the Levitical cities." Many remained in the hands of the Canaanites till a late period, while others were "important but by no means ecclesiastical towns" (Prolegomena, 160). Two pages later he says that "four of them were demonstrably famous old seats of worship," and conjectures that most, if not all, were ancient sanctuaries. He also regards Ezekiel s scheme of a heave offering of land (eh 45) as the origin of the idea. Yet "Jerus and the temple, which, properly speaking, occasioned the whole arrangement, are buried in silence with a diligence which is in the highest degree surprising" (p. 164).

      ///. Alternative View and Evidence. In point

      of fact, there are traces of some of the Levitical

      cities in the later history. Such are

      1. Traces Anathoth (1 K 2 26; Jer 1 1; 32), of the Jattir (2 S 20 26, where, as shown Cities in the art. PRIESTS AND LEVITES

      [q.v.], Jattirite should be read for the Massoretic Jairite), Beth-shemesh (1 S 6 IB- IT); see PRIESTS AND LEVITES as to the text). (From Am 7 17 it appears that Amaziah of Bethel had land, but we do not know r that he was of Leviti cal descent or where the land was.) Further, the

      fact that many other Levitical cities

      2. Well- appear to have been centers of worship hausen s points to the presence of priests. Was Arguments the great high place of Gibeon (1 K Answered 3 4) unserved by priests? It is surely

      natural to suppose that during the period between the capture of the Ark and its trans port to Jerus there was a tendency for high places to spring up in cities where there were priests rather than elsew T here; indeed there would probably be a disposition on the part of unemployed priests to go astray in a direction that would prove lucrative. With regard to the other objection, Van Hoon acker s answer is convincing: "As to the way in which the measurements were to be

      3. Van carried out in the mountainous country Hoonacker s of Pal, the legislator doubtless knew Reply what method was usually employed.

      Besides, we are free to believe that he only gives these figures as approximate indications" (Sacerdoce levitigue, 433).

      The same writer s reply to the theory that the

      idea originated with Ezekiel is wholly admirable.

      "Strictly we could ask .... whether

      4. Ezekiel s Ezekiel did not found himself on the Vision description of the camp of the Israel ites in the desert. It is only too mani fest that the division and appointment of the terri tory as presented in ch 48 of the prophet are scarcely inspired by practical necessities, that they have a very pronounced character of ideal vision; and as no fancy is pure fancy, we ought also to find the elements which are at the basis of Ezekiel s vision. The tents of the tribe of Levi ranged around the tabernacle explain themselves in the PC; we may doubt whether the Levites, deprived of territory (Ezk 44 28) and nevertheless grouped on a common territory, in the conditions described in Ezk 48, explain themselves with equal facility. A camp is readily conceived on the pattern of a chessboard, but not the country of Canaan. We need not stop there. It is in fact certain that Eze kiel here has in view the protection of the holiness of the temple from all profanation; and in the realm of the ideal, the means are appropriate to the end" (op. cit., 425 f).






      Lastly there runs through Wellhausen s discussion the confusion between ;i city when; priests may be

      dwelling and a priestly city. There; 5. Priestly were priests in Jems, as there, are today Cities and in London or Chicago; but none, of Cities in these three places can be regarded as Which a priestly city in the same sense as the

      Priests Levitical cities. Not one of them has

      Dwell ever been a patrimonial city of priests,

      or could be the origin of such an arrangement.

      While therefore the whole of the cities mentioned in Josh 21 were certainly not reduced into pos session at the time of the conquest, the Wellhausen theory on this matter cannot be sustained.

      LITERATURE. J. Wellhausen, Prolegomena, 159-63; A. Van Hoonacker, Sacerdoce livitique. 423-35 (very brilliant and important). HAROLD M. WIENER

      LEVITICUS, tf-vit i-kus:

      I. d KNKHAL DATA

      1. Name

      2. Character of Book

      3. Unity of Book: Law of Holiness Examination of Critical Theory


      1. Modern Analyses

      (1) Theories of Disintegration

      (2) Reasons for Dismemberment

      (3) Insufficiency of These Reasons

      2. Structure of the Hihlical Text

      (1) Structure in General

      (2) Structure of the individual Pericopea OHHJIN

      1. Against the Wellhausen Hypothesis

      (1) The Argument from Silence

      (2) Attitude of Prophets toward Sacrificial System

      (3) The People s Disobedience

      (4) Indiscriminate Sacrificing

      (5) Dt and PC

      2. Connection with Mosaic Period

      (1) PC and Desert Conditions

      (2) Unity and Construction Point to Mosaic Origin


      1. Positive

      (1) The Law Contains God s Will

      (2) The Law Prepares for the Understanding of Christianity

      (3) The Law as a Tutor unto Christ

      2. Negative LITERATURE

      /. General Data. The third book of the Pent

      is generally named by the Jews according to the

      first word, fcC"}j? H , wayyikra (Origen

      1. Name OviKpei, Ouikrd, by the LXX called

      according to its contents ASVITIKOV, Leuitikon, or AeviTiK6v, Lc licit ikon, by the Vulg, accordingly, "Leviticus" [i.e. Liber], sometimes "Leviticum"). The Jews have also another name taken from its contents, viz. D^nS fTllH, torath kolinnlni, "Law of the Priests."

      As a matter of fact ordinances pertaining to the priesthood, to the Levitical system, and to the

      cultus constitute a most important

      2. Charac- part of this book; but specifically ter of Book religious and ethical commands, as

      we find them, e.g. in chs 18-20, are not wanting; and there are also some historical sections, which, however, are again connected with the matter referring to the cultus, namely the con secration of the priests in chs 8 and 9, the sin and the punishment of two sons of Aaron, Nadab and Abihu (10 1 ff), and the account of the stoning of a blasphemer (24 10 ff). Of the Levites, on the other hand, the book does not treat at all. They are mentioned only once and that incidentally in 25 32 ff. The laws are stated to have been given b e har $lnay (7 38; 25 1; 26 4G;_ 27 34), which expression, on account of ch 11, in which Jeh is described as speaking to Moses out of the tent of meeting, is not to be tr d "upon" but "at" Mt. Sinai. The connection of this book with the pre ceding and following books, i.e. Ex and Nu, which


      is commonly acknowledged as being the case, at least in some sense, leaves for the contents of Lev exactly the period of a single month, since the last chronological statement of Ex 40 17 as the time of the erection of the tabernacle mentions the 1st day of the 1st month of the 2d year of the Exodus, and Nu 1 1 takes us to the 1st day of the 2d month of the same year. Within this time of one month the consecration of the priests fills out 8 days (Lev

      8 33; 9 1). A sequence in time is indicated only by 16 1, which directly connects with what is re ported in ch 10 concerning Nadab and Abihu. In the same way the ordinances given in 10 (iff are connected with the events described in 8 1 10 5. The laws are described as being revelations of Jeh, generally given to Moses (cf 1 1 ; 4 1; 5 14; 6 19.24 (Heb 12.17]; 7 22. 2S, etc); sometimes to Moses and Aaron (cf 11 1; 13 1; 14 33; 15 1, etc), and, rarely, to Aaron alone (10 8). In 10 12 ff, Moses gives some directions to the priests, which are based on a former revelation (cf 6 16 [IIeb .)]fi; 7 37 ff). In 10 16 ff, we have a difference of opinion between Moses and Aaron, or rather his sons, which was decided on the basis of an independent applicat ion of principles given in Lev. Most of these commands are to be announced to Israel (1 2; 4 2; 7 23.29;

      9 3ff; 11 2; 12 2; 15 2; 18 2, etc); others to the priests (6 9.2o [Hob 2. IS]; 21 2; 22 2, etc); or to the priests and the Israelites (17 2; 22 IS), while t he directions in reference; to the Day of Atonement, with which Aaron was primarily concerned (16 2), beginning with ver 29, without a special super scription, are undeniably changed into injunctions addressed to all Israel; cf also 21 24 and 21 2. As the Book of Ex treats of the communion which God offers on His part to Israel and which cul minates at last in His dwelling in the tent of meeting (40 34 ff; cf under EXODUS, I, 2), the Book of Lev contains the ordinances which were to be carried out by the Israelites in religious, ethical and cul tural matters, in order to restore and maintain this communion with Clod, notwithstanding the im perfections and the guilt of the Israelites. And as this book thus with good reason occupies its well- established place in the story of the founding and in the earliest history of the theocracy, so too even a casual survey and intelligent glance at the con tents of the book will show that we have here a well- arranged and organic unity, a conviction which is only confirmed and strengthened by the presentation of the structure of the book in detail (see under II, below).

      As a rule, critics are accustomed first of all to regard chs 17-25 or 26 as an independent section, and find in these chapters a legal code 3. Unity of that is considered to have existed at Book: Law one time as a group by itself, before it of Holiness was united with the other parts.

      It is indeed true that a series of peculiarities have been found in these chapters. To these peculiarities belongs the frequent repetition of the formula: "I am Jeh your God" (18 2.4; 19 2.4, etc) ; or "I am Jeh" (18 5.6.21; 19 14.16, etc), or "I am Jeh .... who hath separated you" (20 24), or "who sanctifleth you" (20 X; 21 8.15.2:5, etc). To these peculiarities belong the references in words, or. in fact, to the land of Canaan, into which Israel is to be led (18 3. 24 if; 19 2311.29; 20 22 if; 23; 25), and also to Egypt, out of which He has led the people (18 3; 19 34; 22 33; 26 13.45, etc); as, further, the demand for sanctilication (19 2), or the warning against desecration (19 12; 21 23, etc), both based on the holiness of Jeh. In addition, a number of peculiar expressions are repeatedly found in these chap ters. Because of their contents these chapters have, since Klostermann, generally been designated by the letter H (i.e. Law of Holiness); or, according to the sug gestion of Dillmann, by the letter S (i.e. Sinaitic La\\\\0, because, according to 25 1 ; 26 46, they are said to have been given at Mt. Sinai, and because in certain critical circles it was at one time claimed that these chapters contain old laws from the Mosaic period, although these had been changed in form. These earlier views have apparently now been discarded by the critics entirely.




      Examination of critical theory. We, however, do not believe that it is at all justifiable to separate these laws as a special legal code from the other chapters. In the first place, these peculiarities, even if such are found here more frequently than elsewhere, are not restricted to these chapters ex clusively. The Decalogue (Ex 20 2) begins with the words, "I am Jeh thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bond age." Ex 22 31 contains the demand, "Ye shall be holy men unto me." Ex 29 44.45 contains a promise that God will dwell in the midst of the Israelites, so that they shall learn that He is Jeh, their God, who has brought them out of Egypt in order to dwell in their midst as Jeh, their God (cf, further, Ex 6 6-8; 31 13 f; Lev 10 10.11; 11 44; Nu 16 37-41; 33 52 f. oof; Dt 14 2.21). It is a more than risky undertaking to find in these and in other sections scattered remnants of H, esp. if these are seen to be indispensable in the connec tion in which they are found, and when no reason can be given why they should be separated from this collection of laws. Then, too, the differences of opinion on the part of the critics in assigning these different parts to II, do not make us favorably inclined to the whole hypothesis. Hoffmann, esp. (Die ivichtigsten Inslanzen gcgen die Graf-Well- hausensche Hypothese, 16 ff), has shown how impos- sible it is to separate H from the other ordinances of the PC in so radical a manner. In saying this we do not at all wish to deny the peculiar character of these chapters, only we do not believe that ch 17 can be added or ch 26 can be taken away from this section; for in ch 17 all the characteristic peculiari ties of the Holiness Law are lacking; and, on the other hand, in ch 26 the expression "I am Jeh your God," or a similar one in vs 12. 13. 44 f, is found. The subscription in ver 46 connects ch 26 with the

      K receding; and, further, the reference to the Sab- atical year as described in ch 25, found in 26 34 f . 43, is not to be overlooked. Finally, also, other legal codes, such as that in the first Book of the Covenant (Ex 23 20-33) and that of Dt (27 11- 28 68) close with the offer of a blessing or a curse. The chapters under consideration (Lev 18-26) are most closely connected with each other solely through their contents, which have found expression in a particular form, without these facts being suffi cient to justify the claim of their being a separate legal code. For since in chs 1-17 all those things which separate the Israelites from their God have been considered and bridged over (cf chs 1-7, the laws concerning sacrifices; chs 8-10, the mediator- ship of the priests; chs 11-15, the unclean things; ch 16, the Day of Atonement ; ch 17, the use made of blood), we find in chs 18-26 an account of the God-pleasing conduct, which admits of nothing that desecrates; namely, chs 18-20 contain laws dealing with marriage and chastity and other matters of a religious, ethical or cultural kind, together with the punishments that follow their transgression; chs 21 f determine the true character of the priests and of the sacred oblations; chs 23 f, the conse cration of the seasons, of life and death, etc; ch 25, the Sabbath and the Jubilee year; ch 26 contains the offer of a blessing or a curse. Chs 1-17 have, as it were, a negative character; chs 18-26 a posi tive character. In chs 1-17 the consciousness of what is unclean, imperfect and guilty is awakened and the possibility of their removal demonstrated; while in chs 18-26 the norm of a holy life is set forth. Even if these two parts at certain places show so great a likeness that the occurrence of an interchange of ordinances could be regarded as possible, nevertheless the peculiar character of each part is plainly recognized; and this is also a very essential argument for the view that both parts

      have one and the same author, who intentionally brought the two parts into closer connection and yet separated the one from the other. On this supposition the peculiarities of chs 18-26 are suffi ciently explained, and also the positive contents of these chapters and the fact that just these chapters are referred to in preexilic lit. oftener than is the case with chs 1-17, and particularly the close con nection between Ezk and H is to be regarded as a consequence of the common tendency of both authors and not as the result of their having used a common source (see EZKKIEL, II, 2). In 26 46 we have what is clearly a conclusion, which corre sponds to 25 1; 7 37 f; 1 1, and accordingly regards chs 1-26 as a unity; while ch 27, which treats of vows and of tithes, with its separate sub scription in ver 34, shows that it is an appendix or a supplement, which is, however, in many ways connected with the rest of the book, so that this addition cannot, without further grounds, be re garded as pointing to another author.

      //. Structure. Modern criticism ascribes the entire Book of Lev, being a special legal code, to

      the PC. The questions which arise 1. Modern in connection with this claim will Analyses be discussed under III, below. At

      this point we must first try to awaken a consciousness of the fact, that in this special par ticular, too, the documentary theory has entered upon the stage of total disintegration; that the reasons assigned for the separation of the sources are constantly becoming more arbitrary and sub jective; and that the absurd consequences to which they consistently lead from the very outset arouse distrust as to the correctness of the process. Just as in the historical parts the critics have for long been no longer content with J (Jahwist) and E (Elohist), but have added a J 1 and J 2 , an E 1 and E 2 , and as Sicvers and Gunkel have gone farther, and in detail have completely shattered both J and E into entirely separate fragments (see GENESIS), so P, too, is beginning to experience the same fate. It is high time that, for both the historical and the legal sections, the opposite course be taken, and that we turn from the dismemberment to the com bination of these documents; that we seek out and emphasize those features which, in form and con tent, unite the text into a clear unity. For this reason we lay the greatest stress on these in this section, which deals with the structure of the book, and which treats of the matter (1) negatively and (2) positively (see also EXODUS, II).

      (1) Theories of disintegration. We have already seen in the art. DAY OF ATONEMENT (I, 2, [2]) in connection with Lev 16 an example of these at tempts at dissection, and here still add several ex amples in order to strengthen the impression on this subject.

      (a) General considerations: If we for the present dis regard the details, then, according to Bertholet (Kurzer Hand-Kommentar zum Alien Testament), not only chs 17- 26 (see, above, under I) at one time existed as a separate legal corpus, but also the sacrificial legislation in chs 1-7 and also the laws concerning the clean and the un clean in chs 11-15. Concerning ch 16 see above. Then, too, ch 27 is regarded as a supplement and is ascribed to a different author. Finally, the so-called "fundamental document" of P (marked Pg) contained only parts from chs 9 f (also a few matters from ch 8), as also one of the three threads of ch 16, for Lev 8-10, it is said, described the consecration of the priests demanded in Ex 25 ff. which also are regarded as a part of Pg, and ch 16 1. is claimed to connect again with Lev 10 (cf on this point DAY OF ATONEMENT, I, 2). All these separate parts or Lev (i.e. chs 1-7, 8-10, 11-15, 16, 17-26, 27) are further divided into a number of more or less independent sub- parts- thus, e.g., chs 1-7, containing the sacrificial laws, are made to consist of two parts, viz. chs 1-5 and chs 6-7; or the laws concerning the clean and the unclean in chs 11-15 are divided into the separate pieces, chs 11. 12 13 1-46; and these are regarded as having existed at one time and in a certain manner independently and




      separated from each other. But how complicated in detail the composition is considered to be, we can see from chs 17 26.

      (l>) (Mis 17 26 considered in detail: While Baentsch (Hand-Kommentar zni Alien Testament) accepts, to begin with, three fundamental strata (H 1 =chs 18-20 and certain portions from chs 23-25; H-=chs 21 f ; H 3 = ch 17), Bertholot, too (op. cit., x), regards the development of tliese chapters as follows: "In detail we feel justified in separating the following pieces: (i) 17 3.4 (~>.7a).S.<).10- 14; (ii) 18 7-10.12-20.22 f; and this united with (iii) 19 3 f.ll f.27 f.3(>.31.3. r >.3<>, which was probably done by the author of (iiij. The following were inserted by the person who united tliese purls, viz. 18 30; (iv) 19 9.10.13-; (v) 19 5-8.2.H-26; (vi) 202(3).6(27); (vii) 20 .). 10-21; 19 20; (viii) 21 l/j-5.7. 9-lf).17/< 24; 22 3.X. 10-14. lX(,-25. 27-30; (ix) 23 10-20. 39-43; (x) 24 15-22, except vs UiaUb; (xi) 25 2-7 (4). 18-22.35-38.39.40a.42f. 47.53.55; (xii) 25 8.9/).10a.l3. 14-1(5. 17. 24 f. In uniting these pieces Kh (the Redac tor of the Law of Holiness) seems to have added de sm> the; following: 17 - r > (beginning); 18 26-5.21. 24. 2(K;,tf. 29; 19 33f.37; 20 4f.7f. 22-2(1; 21 <>.; 22 2.9.15f.31-33; 2322; 25 1 1 f ; 26 If. At the same time he united with these an older parenetic section, 26 3-45, which, by insert ing vs 10. :U f. 39-43, he changed into a concluding ad dress of this small legal code. All the rest that is found in chs 17 26 seems to be the result of a revision in the spirit of P, not-, however, as though originally it all came from the hand of Up (Redactor P). That he rather added and worked together older pieces from P (whichdid

      not belong to Pg) is seen from an analysis of ch 23

      As far as the lime when these; parts were worked to gether is concerned, we have a reliable terminus ail qui-m in a comparison of Xeh 8 14-18 with Lev 23 36 (P). 39ft (H). Only we must from the outset remember, that still, afler the uniting of these different parts, the niarks of the editorial pen are to be noticed in the follow ing chs, 17-26, i.e. that after this union a number of addi tions were yet made to the text. This is sure as far as 23 26-32 is concerned, and is probable as to 24 1-9. 10-14.23; 25 32-34; and that this editorial work even went so far as to put sections from P in the place of parts of H can possibly be concluded from 24 1-9."

      (c) Extravagance of critical treatment: This is also true of v\\\\ the other sections, as can be seen by a reference to the books of Bertholet and Baentsch. What should surprise us most, the complicated and external manner in which our Bib. text, which has such a wonderful history back of it, is declared by the critics to have originated, or the keenness of the critics, who, with the ease of child s play, are able to detect and trace out this growth and develop ment of the text, and can do more than hear the grass grow? But this amazement is thrust into the Background when we contemplate what becomes of the Bible text under the manipulations of the critics. The compass of this article makes it im possible to give even as much as a general survey of the often totally divergent and contradictory schemes of Baentsch and Bertholet and others on the distribution of this book among different sources; and still less possible is it to give a criti cism of these in detail. But this critical method really condemns itself more thoroughly than any examination of its claims would. All who are not yet entirely hypnotized by the spell of the docu mentary hypothesis will feel that by this method all genuine scientific research is brought to an end. If the way in which this book originated had been so complicated, it certainly could never have been again reconstructed.

      (2) Reasons for dismemberment. We must at this place confine ourselves to mentioning and dis cussing several typical reasons which are urged in favor of a distribution among different authors.

      (a) Alleged repetitions: We find in the parts be longing to P a number of so-called repetitions. In chs 1-7 we find a twofold discussion of the five kinds of sacrifices (1-5; 6 1 ff); in ch 20 punitive measures are enacted for deeds which had been described already in ch 18; in 19 3.30; 23 3; 26 2 the Sabbath command is intensified; in 19 5ff; 22 29 f, we find commands which had been touched upon already in 7 15 ff; 19 9 f we find almost ver bally repeated in 23 22; 24 2 ff repeats ordinances concerning the golden candlestick from Ex 27 20

      ff, etc. The existence of these repetitions cannot be denied; but is the conclusion drawn from this tact correct? It certainly is possible that one and (lie same author could have handled the same ma terials at different places and from different view points, as is the case in chs 1-7 in regard to the sac rifices. Chs 18 and 20 (rnisd-eds and punishments) :ire even necessarily and mutually supplementary. Specially important laws can have been repeated, in order to emphasize and impress them all the more; or they are placed in peculiar relations or in a unique light (cf, e.g., 24 Iff, the command in reference to the golden candlestick in the pericope chs 23-24; sec below). Accordingly, as soon as we can furnish a reason for the repetition, it becomes unobjection able; and often, when this is not the case, the ob jections are unremoved if we ascribe the repeti tions to a new author, who made the repetition by way of an explanation (see EXODUS, II, 2, [5]).

      (6) Separation of materials: Other reasons will probably be found in uniting or separating materials that are related. That ch 16 is connected with chs 8-10, and these connect with Ex 26 ff, is said to prove that this had been the original order in these sections. But why should materials that are clearly connected be without any reason torn asunder by the insertion of foreign data? Or has the interpolator perhaps had reasons of his own for doing this? Why are not these breaks ascribed to the original author? The sacrificial laws in chs 1-7 are properly placed before Lev 8-10, because in tliese latter chapters the sacrifices are described as already being made (9 7.15, the sin offering; 9 7. 12.10, the burnt offering; 9 17; 10 12, the meal offering; 9 18, the peace offering; 9 3 f, all kinds). In the same way chs 11-15, through 15 31, are in wardly connected with Lev 16, since these chap ters speak of the defiling of the dwelling-place of Jeh, from which the Day of Atonement delivers (16 10f.33). As a matter of course, the original writer as well as a later redactor could have at times also connected parts in a looser or more ex ternal manner. In this way, in 7 22 ff, the com mand not to eat of the fats or of the blood has been joined to the ordinances with reference to the use of the peace offerings in 7 19 ff. This again is the case when, in ch 2, vs 11-13 have been inserted in the list of the different kinds of meal offering; when after the general scheme of sin offerings, according to the hierarchical order and rank in ch 4, a number of special cases arc mentioned in 5 1 ff; and when in 5 7 ff commands are given to prevent too great povert y ; or when in 6 19 ff the priestly meal offerings found connected with other ordinances with refer ences to the meat offerings in general (6 14 ff) ; or when the share that belongs to the priest (7 8 ff; is found connected with his claim to the guilt offer ing (7 1 ff); or the touching of the meat offering by something unclean (7 19 ff) is found connected with the ordinances concerning the peace offerings; or when in ch 11 the ordinances dealing with the unclean animals gradually pass over into ordinances concerning the touching of these animals, as is already indicated by the subscription 11 4.6f (cf with ver 2). Still more would it be natural to unite different parts in other ways also. In this way the ordinances dealing with the character of the sacri fices in 22 17-30 could, regarded by themselves, be placed also in chs 1-7. But in ch 22 they are also well placed. On the other hand, the character of chs 1-7 would have become too complicated if they were inserted here. In such matters the author must have freedom of action.

      (c) Change of singular and plural: Further, the fre quent change between the sing, and the pi. in the ad dresses found in the laws which are given to a body of persons is without further thought used by the critics as a proof of a diversity of authors in the section under con-




      sideration (cf 10 12 ff; 19 9.11fT,15ff, etc). But how easily this change in numbers can be explained! In case the pi. is used, the body of the people are regarded as hav ing been distributed into individuals; and in the case of a more stringent application the pi. can at once be con verted into the sing., since the author is thinking now only of separate individuals. Naturally, too, the sing. is used as soon as the author thinks again rather of the people as a whole. Sometimes the change is made suddenly within one and the same verse or run of thought; and this in itself ought to have banished the thought of a difference of authors in such cases. In the case of an interpolator or redactor, it is from the outset all the more probable that he would have paid more attention to the person used in the addresses than that this would have been done by the original writer, who was completely absorbed by the subject-matter. Besides, such a change in number is frequently found in other connections also; cf in the Book of the Covenant (Ex 22 20-25. 29 f; 23 Off; cf l)t 12 2ff.l3ff). In regard to these passages, also, the modern critics are accustomed to draw the same conclusion; aud in these cases, too, this is hasty. In the same way the change in the laws from the 3d to the 2d person can best be explained as the work of the lawgiver himself, before whose mind the persons addressed are more vividly present and who, when speaking in the 2d person, becomes personal (cf Lev 2 4 IT with 2 1-3, and also 1 2; 3 17; 6 IS. 21. 25 if).

      (d) Proofs of religious development: A greater importance seemingly must be attributed to the reasons based on a difference in the terminology or on contradictions in the laws, as these appear to lead to a religio-historical development. But the following examples are intended to show how all- important it is to be slow in the acceptance of the materials which the critics offer in this connection.

      (3) Insufficiency of these reasons. (a) In 5 1-7, in the section treating of the sin offering (4 1 5 13), we find the word Yi.--A <i, which also signifies "guilt offering" (cf vs 14 IT; 7 1 fT). Accordingly, it is claimed, the author of 5 1-7 was not yet acquainted with the difference be tween the two kinds of offerings, and that this part is older than that in 4 1 if; 5 1-1 ff. However, in 5 1 ff the word axln iin is evidently used in the sense of "repent ance," and does not signify "sin offering" at all; at any rate, already in vs 6f we find the characteristic term (mi{nth to designate the latter, and thus this section appears as entirely in harmony with the connection.

      (b) Critics find a contradiction in 6 2fi; 7 33.7, and in 6 29; 7 31.0. since in the first case the officiating priest and in the other case the entire college of priests is described as participating in the sacrifice. In reply it is to be said that the first set of passages treat of the individual concrete cases, while the second set speak of the general principle 1 . In 7 S f, however, where the individual officiating priest is actually put in express con trast with all the sons of Aaron, the matter under con sideration is a difference in the meal offerings, which, beginning with ch 2, could be regarded as known. Why this difference is made in the use of this sacrifice is no longer intelligible to us, as we no longer retain these sacrifices, nor are we in possession of the oral instruction which possibly accompanied the written formulation of these laws; "but this is a matter entirely independent of the question as to the author.

      (c) According to Ex 29 7; Lev 4 3.5. 10; 6 20.22; 8 12; 16 32; 21 10.12, the high priest is the only one who is anointed; while, on the other hand, in Ex 28 41; 29 21; 30 30; 40 !"">; Lev 7 3(1; 10 7, all the priests are anointed. But the text as it reads does not make it impossible that there was a double anointing. Accord ing to the first set of passages, Aaron is anointed in such a manner that the anointing oil is poured out upon his head (cf esp. Ex 29 7 and Lev 8 12). Then, too, ho and all his s,ms are anointed in such a way that a mixture of tlu oil and of the blood is sprinkled upon them and on their garments (cf esp. Ex 29 21 and Lev 8 30). Were we here dealing with a difference in reference to the theory and the, ranks of the priesthood, as these dis cussions were current at the time of the exile (see III, below), then surely the victorious party would have seen to it that their views alone would have been reproduced in these laws, and the opposing views would have been suppressed. But now both anointings are found side by side, and even in one and the same chapter!

      (d) The different punishments prescribed for carnal intercourse with a woman during her periods in 15 24 and 20 IS are easily explained by the fact that, in the first passage, the periods are spoken of which only set in during the; act, and in the second passage, those which had alreadv set in before


      (e) As far as the difference in terminology is con rned, it must be remembered that in their claims the critics either overlook that intentional differences may decide the preference for certain words or expressions; or else they ignore the fact that it is possible in almost every section of a writer s work to find some expressions which are always, or at least often, peculiar to him; or

      finally, they in an inexcusable way ignore the freedom of selection which a writer has between different syno nyms or his choice in using these.

      All in all, it must be said that however much we acknowledge the keenness and the industry of the modern critics in clearing up many difficulties, and the fact that they bring up many questions that demand answers, it nevertheless is the fact that they take the matter of solving these problems entirely too easily, by arbitrarily claiming different authors, without taking note of the fact that by doing this the real difficulty is not removed, but is only transferred to another place. What could possibly be accepted as satisfactory in one single instance, namely that through the thoughtlessness of an editor discrepancies in form or matter had found their way into the text, is at once claimed to be the regular mode of solving these 1 difficult ies a procedure that is itself thoughtlessness. On the other hand, the critics overlook the fact that it makes little difference for the religious and the ethi cal value of these commands, whether logical, sys tematic, linguistic or aesthetic correctness in all their parts has been attained or not; to which must yet be added, that a failure in the one particular may at the same time be an advantage in the other. In this respect we need recall only the anacoluths of the apostle Paul.

      (1) Structure in general. The most effective antidote against the craze to split up the text in the manner described above will be 2. Structure found in the exposition of all those of the features which unite this text into

      Biblical one inseparable whole. What we have Text tried to demonstrate in the arts.

      GENESIS; EXODUS, II; DAY OP ATONEMENT, I, 2 (cf also E/EKIEL, I, 2, [2]) can be repeated at this point. The Book of Lev shows all the marks of being a well-constructed and or ganic literary product, which in its fundamental characteristics has already been outlined under I above. And as this was done in the several articles just cited, we can here add further, as a confirma tory factor in favor of the acceptance of an inner literary unity of the book, that the division of the book into its logical parts, even down to minute details, is here, as is so often the case elsewhere, not only virtually self-evident in many particulars, but that the use made of typical numbers in many passages in this adjustment of the parts almost forces itself upon our recognition. In other places the same is at least suggested, and can be traced throughout the book without the least violence to the text. The system need not be forced upon the materials. We often find sections but loosely con nected with the preceding parts (cf under 1 above) and not united in a strictly logical manner, but which are nevertheless related in thought and asso ciation of ideas. In harmony with the division of the Book of Gen we find at once that the general contents, as mentioned under I above, easily fall into 10 pericopes, and it is seen that these consist of 2 sets each of 5 pericopes together with an appendix.

      (a) Ten pericopes in two parts: Part I, the separation from God and the removal of this sep aration: (i) chs 1-7; (ii) clis 8-10; (iii) chs 11-15; (iv) ch 16; (v) ch 17.

      Part II, the normal conduct of the people of God: (i) chs 18-20; (ii) chs 21-22; (iii) chs 23-24; (iv) ch25; (v) ch 26.

      Appendix, ch 27 ; cf for the number 10 the division of Ex 1 87 7; 7 813 16; 13 1718 27; also the Decalogue, 20 Iff; 21 123 19; 32 1-35 1; and see EXODUS, II, 2; and in Lev probably 18 6-18; 19 9-18, and with considerable certainty 19 1-37 (see below).




      (b) Correspondence and connections: I leave out of consideration in this case the question whether an intentional correspondence among the different parts he traced or not. even in their details. Thus, e.g., when the 2d pel-Scope (clis 8 10 and 21 f) treats particularly of the order of the priests, or when the 4th pcricope of the I d set (ch 25> stales that t lie beginning of the Year of Jubilee fell on the loth day of the 7th month, i.e. on the Day of Atonement as described in Lev 16, in the 4th pericope of the 1st set (cf 25 .I with 16 29); or when both sets close with two shorter perieopes, which evi dently express high stages of development (chs 16 and 17, respectively, chs 25 and 26 treating of the Day of Atonement, of the use made of blood and the purposes of blood for the altar or the Jubilee Year, of the blessing and the curse).

      And, us fur ;ts the order in oilier respects is con cerned, it- is throughout to be regarded as founded in the subject-matter itself that chs 1-17 must pre cede chs 18-26. First that which separates the people from (Jod must he removed, and then only is a God-pleasing conduct possible. Just as easily, and in agreement, with the context, it is possible that the consecration of the priests in chs 8-10 pre supposes the sacrificial lord ft (chs 1-7; cf under 1 above) and follows the latter, and is immediately introduced by the mention made of the installation sacrifices for which otherwise there are no reasons assigned in the concluding formula in 7 37 (cf 8 22-32). The Day of Atonement (ch 16), which in vs 16 f and . >. ! is spoken of in connection with the purification of the sanctuary, is in turn introduced by chs 11-15, or more particularly by the remark it 15 31, where mention is made of the pollution of the dwelling-place of Jeh. And on the other hand, the ordinances dealing with the priests (chs 8-10) in 10 10, where (he command is given to discriminate between what is holy and what is unholy and to teach Israel accordingly, already point to the con tents of chs 11-15. The sacrifices, with which the first part in chs 1-7 begins, are taken up again by the conclusion in ch 17, in the commandment con cerning (he blood for the altar. The second part, too, already at the beginning (chs 18-20) in its religiously cultural and ethical ordinances, shows in the clearest possible manner what matters it proposes to discuss. In this way the systematic structure of the book is apparent in all particulars.

      Close connections: comparison with Ex: And, further, the different perieopes are also so closely connected among themselves and with the corre sponding pericopes in the books of Ex and Nu, that many have thought it necessary to regard them as a special body of laws. But the connection is so close and involves all the details so thoroughly, that all efforts to divide and distribute them after the examples described under 1 above must fail absolutely. We shall now give the proofs for the different pericopes in Lev, but in such a manner as to take into consideration also Ex 25-31; 35 ff, treating of the tabernacle and its utensils and the Aaronitic priesthood, which are most intimately connected with Lev. All details in this matter will be left out of consideration.

      (a) Tabernacle and priesthood: That Lev 8-10 (the consecration of the priests, etc), together with Ex 25 ff, constitutes a single whole is accepted on all hands. But the tent of meeting and its utensils, and also the priesthood, both with and without any emphasis on the Aaronitic origin, are presupposed also in almost each one of the other pericopes of Lev; cf for chs 1-7 eg 1 3.5; 3 2.8.13; 4; 6 26 (tent of meet ing); 1 5.12; 35; 4 7.25.30; 6 12 (altar of burnt sacrifices); 4 7.18 (altar of incense sacrifices); 4617 (veil); 6 9.19 (court); 1 5.7.S.11; 2 2; 3; 6, etc (Aaron and his sons as priests)- for Chs 11-15 see 12 4.6; 14 11.23; 15 14.29.31 (sanctuary, tent of meeting, dwelling-place); 11 1; 12 6f; 13 1 If- 14 2ff.33ff; 15 1 (priesthood); for ch 16 see vs 2.7 16f.20.23.33 (sanctuary and Holy of Holies, tent of meeting); 16 2.12 (veil); 16 2.13ff (lid of the Ark of the Covenant); 16 12. is. 20. 33 (altar); 16 1 ff (Aaronitic priesthood); for ch 17 see vs 4-6.9 (tent of meeting)- vs 6.11 (altar); ver 5 (priesthood); for chs 18-20 see 19 30.21 (sanctuary of Jeh, tent of meeting); 19 22

      (priesthood); for ch 21 f see 21 12 (sanctuary); 21 23 (sanctuaries of Jeh) ; 21 23 (veil, altar) ; 21 Iff. 21 (Aaron itic, priesthood); for chs 23. 24 see 23 f (sanctuary); 24 Iff (candlestick, tent of meeting); 24 5 If (table of showbread); 23 10.20 (priesthood); 24 3.!) (Aaronitic priesthood); for ch 26 see vs 2.11.31 (sanctuary, dwelling-place of Jeh. sanctuaries); for ch 27 see vs 10.33 (sanctuary); vs 8 ff (priesthood).

      (ft) In t lie same way the sacrificial laws of chs 1-7 are mentioned in the following pericopes as matters that an; well known. For chs 8-10 see 9 7.15 (sin offering); 9 7.12.16 (burnt offering) ; 9 17: 10 12 (meal offering) ; 9 18 (peace offering); 9 3f (all together); cf also Kx 29 14.18.2S. In Lev 9 21; 10 14 f (wave-breasts and heave-thigh) direct reference is made; to 7 30-36. In the same manner 10 16 ff presupposes the ordinances dealing with the different ways of offering the sin offer ings in 4 3 If. 13 ff; 6 24-30; for chs 11-15 see 12 6ff-

      14 12 If (cf esp. 14 13 with 4 24); 14 21 ff; 15 14 f. 2!) f; for ch 16 see vs 3.5 f. 9.1 1.15. 24 f.27; for ch 17 see vs 5 If. 8. 11; for chs 18-20 see 19 6 ff.21 f (here is there fore (.he Tishilm found in It, which is claimed to be of a later date); for ch 21 f see 21 6.21 f; 22 17 ff.29f; for chs 23, 24 see, 23 12 f; 18 19.27.37; 24 9; for ch 26 sec; vs30f; for ch 27 cf vs with 5 16; 6 5.

      (y) Laws on clean and unclean: The laws in refer ence; to the clean and the unclean in chs 11-15 are also interwoven with the whole book. For chs 1-7 see 5 2f- 6 27; 7 19 ff; for chs 8-10 see 10 10 f; for ch 16 see vs 16.19: for ch 17 see vs 13.15f; for chs 18-20 cf 20 25 with 11 44, and in general with cli 11; for chs 21 f see 21 10; 13 45; 22 3 If with chs 13-15; for ch 27 see vs 11 and 27, as also ch 11.

      (5) The laws in reference to the Day of Atonement found in Lev 16 are prepared for by those found in chs 11- 15, viz. in 14 4 If. 49 If (the ceremony with the two birds in connection with the purification from leprosy), and in

      15 31 (cf 16 16.19; see above). For chs 23 24 cf 23 26 ff with 16 29 If, and for 25 9 with 16 29 see above; cf also Ex 30 10.

      (<0 Oh 17 is reechoed in chs 1-7 (7 26 f) and in chs 18-20 (19 26).

      (O Finally ch 25 (Year of Rest and Year of Jubilee) is presupposed in ch 26 (vs 34f.43) and in ch 27 (vs 17 ff.23f).

      The above, however, by no means exhausts this list of references and similar thoughts, and we have here given only some leading illustrations. What literary tricks must be resorted to when, over against this overwhelming mass of evidence, critics yet insist that the different parts of the book were originally independent writings, esp., too, when the entire tabernacle and utensils of the Aaronitic priesthood, the Day of Atonement, the Year of Jubilee, the whole sacrificial scheme and the laws dealing with the great festivals, the restriction of the slaying of the sacrificial animals to the central sanctuary, are regarded as the products of imagina tion alone, according to the Wellhausen hypothesis (cf III, below, and see also EXODUS, III, 5; DAY OF ATONEMENT, III, 1; EZEKIEL, II, 2). And how little is gained in addition when, as is sometimes done, in a most arbitrary manner, the statements found in chs 1-3 concerning the tabernacle of reve lation ("tent of meeting") and concerning Aaron s sons, or concerning Aaron and his sons together, are regarded as later additions. In Lev and Ex 25 ff, 35 ff, everything is so entirely of one and the same character and has so clearly emanated from one and the same spirit, that it is impossible to separate 1 from this product any constituent parts and to unite these into groups that were originally inde pendent, then to split up these still further and to trace the parts to their sources, and even to con struct a scheme of religious and historical develop ment on this reconstruction of the sources.

      (2) Structure of the individual pericopes. As the windows and the column capitals of a mediaeval cathedral are arranged according to different schemes and this divergence is regarded as an enrichment of the structure, thus, too, we find it to be in the structure of the various pericopes of the Book of Lev. These latter, too, possess a certain symphony of different tones, but all are rhythmically arranged, and only when united do they produce the entire symphony.

      (a) The laws concerning the sacrifices (Lev 1-




      7): In the first place, the five different kinds of sacrifices in Israel are mentioned in succession twice, in 1 17 21: Part I, chs 1-6, namely (i) ch 1, burnt offerings; (ii) ch 2, meal offering; (iii) ch 3, peace offerings; (iv) 4 15 13, sin offering; (v)

      5 14-26, guilt offering; Part II, 6 17 21, namely (i) 6 8-13, burnt offerings; (iij 6 14-23, meal offer ing; (iii) 6 24-30, sin Offering; (iv) 7 1-7 with appendix, vs 8-10, dealing with that part of the sacrifices which belongs to the priest (see under 1, above), guilt offering; (v) 7 11-21, peace offer ings. With this is found connected in 7 22-27 the prohibition of the use of the. fat, or the blood, and in 7 28-30, the laws concerning the wave-breast and the heave-thigh. We have accordingly at once twelve of these laws (cf on Ex 25 130 10 in art. on Exom-s, II, 2, [5] and on EZKKIKL, I, 2, [.">]). But even apart from this we have no right to ascribe chs 1-5 and 6 1 7 21, on (lie ground that they are duplicates, to different authors.

      That there is a difference between these two accounts is proved, not only by the fact that the first set of laws from chs 1-5 is addressed to all the Israelites (cf 1 2; 4 2), and the second set 6 S; 721 to Aaron and his sons (cf 6 0.25); but the second set has also in content a number of altogether dill erent viewpoints as compared with the first set, so that the same author found himself induced or compelled to write both sets. On the other hand, the fact that both have the same author is evident from the very close connection between the two sections. [n addition to the fact that both make mention of all five kinds of sacrifices, we can yet compare 3 5 with

      6 22 (fat pieces of the peace Offering over the burnt sacrifices upon the pieces of wood); and, further, the express reference of 6 17 to ch 4, while 6 30 presupposes the distinct separation of the sin offering, the blood of which is brought into the tent of meeting, from theother sacrifices, as these, are given in 4 3ff.l3ff over against 4 22 If. 27 ff. Ch 4, with its reference to the peace, offerings (vs 10.2C>.Hl.:5r, is again most closely connected with ch 3. We must accordingly insist that the whole account is most intimately interwoven. Over against this the omission within the first set, chs 1-5, in 5 14-1(>, of the ritual for the peace offering, is sufficiently explained only bv the fact that this ritual was to be used in the second set (6 S 7 21), and here for the first time only in

      7 1 ir>, which fact again speaks for the same author for both sets and against the supposition that they were merely mechanically united by a redactor. The fact that the second set 6 S 7 21 has a different order from that of chs 1-5, by uniting the sin offering immediately with the meal offering (6 24 ff with vs 1 4-23), is probably on account of the similar ordinances in 7 and 7 1 (manner of eating the meal offering and the sin offering). On the other hand, the position of the peace offering at the close of the second set (7 11 ff) furnished the pos sibility of giving to the piece of the entire nericope em braced in 7 22 27.2s-3(> a suitable conclusion; since 7 22 if (prohibition of the eating of the fat and the blood), connected with 7 10 ff, contained in 7 28ft an ordinance that pertained to the pence offering (heave- breast and wave-thigh). At any rate, these last two pieces are to be regarded separately from the rest, since they are no longer addressed to the priests, as is 6 <S 7 21, but to all Israel; cf 7 2H.29. On some other data less intimately connected with the matter, cf above under 1.

      Q>} Consecration of priests and related matters (Lev 8-10): In this pericope, as in the following, down to ch 17 inclusive, but esp. from ch 11 on, the principle of division on the basis of the number four predominates, in many cases in the details, too; so that this could scarcely be regarded as an accidental feature (cf also the history of Abraham in Gen 12-26; further, in Ex 35 440 38; and in Exom-s, II, 2, [7]; Lev 16, under DAY OF ATONE MENT, I, 2, [1]); Dt 12-26, too, is probably to be di vided on this principle, even to the minutest details (of finally Lev 2122 10; 22 17-30; chs 23 f and 26).

      (i) Ch 8, treating of the first seven days of the consecration of the priests: The outline is found in ver 2, namely Aaron, the sacred garments, the anointin"- oil, the bullock of the sin offering, two rams, unleavened bread (cf vs 0.7 ff.10 ff.14 ff.18 ff. 22 ff.20 ff). (ii) Ch 9 the first sacrifices of Aaron and his sons on the 8th day (vs 2-4 contain the outline,

      after the manner of 8 2; cf vs 7ff.llff, the sin offering and the burnt offering of Aaron, with ver 2; also vs 15-18, treating of what the people brought for the sacrifices, with vs 3 f; but it is to be noticed that the meal offering and the peace offering [vs 17. IS] are given in inverted order from that found in vs 3 f). Here too we find the number seven, if we add the burnt offering for the morning (ver 17). (iii) 10 1-7, the sin of Nadab and Abiliu and their punishment by death; (iv) 10 8-20, ordinances concerning the priests, occasioned by 8 1 10 7 and provided with a new superscription in 10 8, namely (a) 10 8, dealing with the pro hibition of the use of wine and intoxicants; ((1) 10 Of, distinction between the holy and the unholy; (7) 10 12-15, the eating of the sacred oblations; (5) 10 10-20, the treatment of the goat for the sin offering.

      (r) Laws concerning the clean and unclean (Ley 11-15): (i) ch 11, treating of clean and unclean ani mals. The outline of the chief contents is found in 11 46 with a free transposition of one number. There are accordingly four pieces, viz. (a) vs 2-8, quadrupeds; () vs 0-12, water animals; (7) vs 13-23, birds (with an appendix, treating of contact with the unclean, vs 24-28, which give a summary of the animals mentioned [a + 7]j see tinder 1); (5) vs 20-45, the small animals upon the earth (again in four subdivisions, viz. [i] vs 29-38; [ii] vs 39 ff; [iii] vs 41 f; [iv] vs 44 f).

      (ii) Ch 12 treats of women in confinement, also in four pieces (vs 2-4, birth of a male child; ver 5, birth of a female child; vs f, purification cere mony; ver S, ordinances in case of extreme poverty). These parts are not joined logically, but in a rather external manner.

      (iii) The passage 13 1 14 53, containing the laws of leprosy, with the subscription in 14 54 ff. (Because seven points are to be enumerated, ver 55 [garments and houses], this is not as in its further exposition separated from the other laws and is placed in their midst.) The exposition contains four pieces, viz. (a) 13 1-44, leprosy on human beings (with concluding verses, 45 f), with seven subdivisions, of which the first five longer ones are constructed along fairly parallel lines, and again can be divided into four sub-subdivisions, viz. vs 1-8; 0-17; 18-23; 24-28; 20-37; 38 f; 40-44. The significance of the number seven for the struc ture (see [2], [b], i, above) is akin to that found, e.g., in Ex 24 18631 18 (sec EXODUS, II, 2, [5]); Lev 8, 9 (see above); Lev 23, 25, and 27; and possibly 26 3-13.14-30 (see below); finally, the whole Book of Ex is divided into seven parts (see Exonrs, II, 1). (/3) 13 47-50, leprosy in connection with garments, with four subdivisions, namely vs 47-50; 51 f; 53 f; 55 ff. The last subdivision can again be readily separated into four sub-subdivisions, viz. vs 55; 50; 57; 58. (7)14 1-32, purifications (ver 2 being a special superscription), with 4 subdivisions, viz. (i) vs 26-3, the leper before the priestj (ii) vs 36-0, the purification ceremonies on the first seven days, again divided into 4 sub-subdivisions: vs 36 f; 5-7; 8; 0; (iii) vs 10-20, the ceremony of the eighth day (4 sacrifices, namely vs 12-18, guilt offering; ver 10a, sin offering; ver 106, burnt offer ing; ver 20, meal offering; in the 4 sacrifices (5 12 6 7) there arc again 4 different actions: vs 14; 15 f; 17; 18; (iv) vs 21-32 (in cases of poverty) (5) 14 33-53, leprosy in houses, with four subdi visions: vs 33-35; 30-38; 39-42; 43-53.

      (iv) Ch 15, sickness or natural issues, with 4 subdivisions, viz. (a) 15 1-15, checked or running issues together with their purification (vs 3-12 con tain 12 laws: vs 3; 4n; 46; 5; 0; 7; 8; 0; 10a; 106; 11; 12); ((3) vs 10-18, issue of seed; (7) vs 10-24, periods; (5) vs 25-30, other flows of blood and their



      purification, a -\\- ft refer to in on and y + 5 to women; and in addition to these implied sugges tions, as o+5 to dealing with abnormal issues and their purification ceremonies, /3+7 with normal issues.

      (</) The Day of Atonement, (Lev 18) : See IV, 1, (2), 2, and under ATONKMIONT, DAY OF.

      (c) I ses and significance of the blood of sacri fices (Lev 17) : (i) Vs 3-7, only one place for kill ing the sacrifices and the rejection of all foreign cultures; (ii) vs 8.9, only one place for sacrificing; (iii) vs 10-14, prohibitive of eating the blood; (iv) vor 15, pertaining to carcases of animals found dead or which have been torn by wild beasts.

      Here the form and the con t (nits of tho section have been brought into perfect harmony by the author. Vs 3 tf. sir. 1C) tr. 13 If begin with same words, and each contains a similar formula in reference to the punish ment, while logically vs 10 If and 1:5 ff are evidently only subdivisions of the third part in vs 10-14. which treats of the prohibition of out ing blood. In the fourth di vision, again, while in substance connected with the rest, there is lacking tho formal agreement with the first three divisions.

      (f) ((/ ) (Lev 18-20, 21): These naturally fall each into 2 parts. Chs 18-20 contain (i) chs 18 f, religious and ethical laws; (ii) ch 20, laws dealing wit h punishments.

      (/i) Religious and ethical laws (chs 18 f) : (a) ch 18: Ordinances with reference to marriage and chastity, (a) 18 1-5, introductory; (/3) vs 6-1S, prohibition of marriage between kindred of blood; (7) vs 19-23, prohibition of other sexual sins; (5) vs 24-30, warnings.

      The subdivision (ft) can perhaps be divided into 10 subordinate parts, if it is permitted to combine the different degrees of relationship mentioned in vs 12-14 (viz. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12-14. 15. 1<>. 17. IS). Since (y) of itself manifestly consists of 5 ordinances (vs, this whole section, if we are permitted to divide (a) into 5 commandments (vs 2.3a.36.4.5) and (&) also into 5 (vs 24 f. 26 28.29.30o.306), would contain 5X5 words; but this is uncertain.

      (5) Ch 19: various commands of the deepest significance. In order to discover the divisions of this chapter we must note the characteristic for mula, "I am Jeh, your (Jod, 1 or a similar expression, which often appears at the beginning and at the end of certain divisions, e.g. in series (1) (9) and (10), but which in the middle series appears in each case only once, and which in all the series is found also at the conclusion.

      In this way we can compute 10 tctralogues. Thus after tho superscription in vor 2 containing a summary, wo have (i) vs 3.4 (vs 3n.36.4a.46) ; (ii) vs 5-10 (vs 5 f . 7f.9.10j; (iii) vs 11 f (vs llo.116a.1160.12) : (iv) vs 13 f (vs 13a.136.14a.14/-); (v) vs 15 f (15a.156.16a.166) ; (vi) vs 17 f (vs 17a.l76.1,Sa.l86); (vii) vs 19-25 (vs 19a. 196. 20-22. 23-25); (viii) vs 26-28 (vs 26a.266.27.28), (ix) 29-32 (vs ; (x) vs 33-36 (vs ; ver 37 constitutes the conclusion of the whole. (Note that tho number ten here is certain in the conviction of the present writer; but he is not quite so sure of the number of subdivisions \\yithin the main divisions; we may have to do hero with pentalogues and not with tetralogues. If this is tho case, then the agreements with ch 18 would under certain circumstances be even greater.)

      Possibly groupings of two can yet form a closer union (cf on Ex 1-18, 21-23, EXODUS, II, 2, [1-4]). At any rate (iii) and (iv) can be summarized under the general heading of defrauding one s neighbors; (v) and (vi) tinder that of observation of the laws; (vii) and (viii) under that of heathen abuses; while (ix) and (x) perhaps intentionally mingle together the religious and cultural and ethical elements, in order thereby already to express that all these things are most intimately connected (but cf also vs 12.14. 17, in the middle sections). In vs 5 ff .20 ff.23 ff, the author develops his subject somewhat more fully.

      (/ii) Laws dealing with punishments (ch 20): The regulations in reference to punishments stand

      in such clf)se relation to the contents of ch 18 and to parts of ch 19, that it is absolutely incompre hensible how the critics can assign these three chapters to different authors. Even if certain regulations of ch 18 are not found here in ch 20 (vs 7. 10. 176. IS), and even if another order has been followed, this variation, which doubt-less also hangs together with a new grouping of the mate rials, is rather an advantage than a disadvantage for the whole. It is impossible to conceive that a redactor would have; altered anything in two entirely parallel and similar texts, or would him self have written a parallel text differing from the other. Ch 20 can probably bo, divided into 4 parts, viz. (i) vs 1-8, punishment s for idolatry and witch craft with a concluding formula, vs 7f; (ii) vs 9-18, punishment of death for ten crimes, all of which, with the exception of the first, are of a sexual nature (vs 9-1 8). It is a question whether the first in the second group (ver 14), i.e. the sixth in the whole series, was intended to be made prominent by tho peculiar character of the punishment (burn ing to death); (iii) vs 19-21, other sexual sins, with lighter punishments; (iv) vs 22-27, with 4 subdi visions (warning, vs 22 f; promise, ver 24; em phatic repetitions of two commands already given, vs 2") ff; [cf with 11 44 ff, and in general with ch 11]; and ver 27 with 19 20.31; 20 (i). Per fectly certain in this chapter is the fact, that the different kinds of punishments are likewise decisive for their order. It is doubtless not to be regarded as accidental that both at the beginning and at the end death by stoning is mentioned.

      (</) (Lev 21 122 33): (i) Laws concerning the quality of the priests (21 1-22. 16); and (ii) con- corning sacred oblations (22 17-30) with the sub scription vs 31-33.

      (</i) Qualities of priests: 21 1 22 10 in four sec tions (21 1 ff.10ff.10ff; 22 Iff; note also in 21 18-20 the 12 blemishes; in 22 4-8 the 7 cases of uneleanness).

      (</ii) Sacred oblations: 22 17-30 in four sections (22 18-20.21-25.20-28.29 f).

      (/<) Consecration of seasons, etc (chs 23, 24): (i) ch 23, laws for the feasts (7 sections, vi/. vs 3. 4 f.G-14. 15-22.23-25.26-32.33-3(3, with the appen dix that in every particular suits the connection, in vs 39 ff, added to the feast of the tabernacles;; (ii) 24 1-4, treating of the sacred candlestick, which represents the moral conduct of the Israelites, and for this reason suits admirably in the connection; as this is true also of (iii) 24 5-9, treating of the shewbroad, which represents the results of the labor of Israel; (iv) 24 10-23, containing the report of the punishment of a blasphemer of God and of one who cursed.

      Probably the example was made of a person who took tho name of (iod in vain at the time which this chapter describes. But possibly there is a still closer connection to be found with that which precedes. The shewbread and the candlestick were found in the holy place, which with its utensils pictured the relation of Israel s char acter to their God; while the utensils in tho Holy of Holies indicated God s relation to His people (cf Hengs- tenberg, Hcitrayr, 111, 644 If). But since the holy place, in addition to tho shewbread and the candlestick, con tained only the incense altar, which symbolized the prayers of Israel, and as the blasphemer represents the exact opposite of prayer, it is probable that in 24 10 ff prayer is indicated by its counterpart. This section consists of 4 parts, viz. vs 10-12; _ 13-14; 15-22 (giving a series of punishments for certain wrongdoings which are more or less closely connected with that found in tho text) ; vor 23.

      (i) Sabbatic and Jubilee years (ch 25): Sabbatic and Jubilee years in 7 sections, viz. vs 1-7; 8-12; 13-28; 29-34; 35-38; 39-40; 47-55.

      (j) Conclusion: Curse and blessing (ch 26): The grand concluding chapter, offering a curse and a blessing and containing all the prophetic utter-



      ances of later times in a nutshell, viz. (i) vs 1-2, repetition of four important demands (vs \\a.\\b:2a. 26); (ii) 26 3-13, the blessing, possibly to be di vided into 7 stages, one more spiritual than the other; (iii) 26 4-39, the curse, possibly to be di vided into seven stages, one more intense than the other (cf also the play on words 7 times repeated, in reference to shabbath, possibly found in vs 34 f, and certainly found in vs f); (iv) 26 40-45, the mercy finally shown by Jeh for His covenant s sake.

      (k) Appendix: Finally, the appendix in ch 27, dealing with vows and tithes, in 7 parts, viz. vs 1-S; 9-13; 14-15; 16-21; 20 f; 28-29; 30-33.

      ///. Origin. As in the art. ATOXEMEXT, DAY OF, I, 2, (2) , we took a stand against the modern attempts at splitting up the text, and in III, 1 1. Against against the theory of the late origin the Well- of the whole pericope, we must, after hausen trying under II to prove the unity of

      Hypothesis the Book of Lev, yet examine the modern claim that the book as a whole is the product of later times. Since the entire book is ascribed to the PC (see II, 1 above), the answer to the question as to the time when it was written will depend on the attitude which we take toward the Wellhausen hypothesis, which insists that the PC was not published until the time of the exile in 444 BC (Xch 8-10 j.

      (1) Argument from silence. One of the most important proofs for this claim is the "argument from silence" (argumentum e silentio). How care ful one must be in making use of this argument can be seen from the fact that, e.g., the high priest with his full title is mentioned but a single time in the entire Book of Lev, namely in 21 10; and that the Levites are not mentioned save once (25 32 iTj, and then incidentally. As is well known, it is the adherents of the Wellhausen hypothesis themselves who now claim that the bulk of the entire literature of the OT originated in the post -exilic- period and long after the year 444 BC. Leaving out of con sideration for the present the Books of Ch, Ezr and Neh, all of which describe the history of Israel from the standpoint of P, we note that this later liter ature is not any richer in its references to P than is the older literature; and that in those cases \\yhere such references are found in this literature assigned to a late period, it is just as difficult to decide whether these passages refer merely to a custom or to a codified set of laws.

      (2) Attitude of prophet* toward sacrificial system. A further proof against, the preexilic origin of the priestly legislation is found in what is claimed to be the hostile attitude of the prophets to the sacri ficial system (cf Am 6 21 ff; 44f; Hos 6 6; MicG (iff; Isa 1 lift; Jer 6 20; 7 21 ff ; Ps 40 6; 50 8.9: 51 16 f). But this cannot possibly be an absolute antithesis; for in this case, it would be directed also against the Books of the Covenant and, in part, too, against Dt, which books in Ex 20 24; 22 19; 23 18; 34 25; Dt 12 5 f. 11. 13. 17. 26; 15 19-23; 16 2.5 f; 17 1; 18 1.3 also give directions for sacrifices, and which, at least in part, are yet regarded as older writings. Further, these passages under discussion are also, in part, as signed to a later and even a very late period (cf even such cases as Ps 40 6; 50 8f; 51 16 f; Mic 6 6 ff, and in addition also Mai 1 10), i.e. they are assigned to a time in which, according to the views of the critics, the priestly laws are said to have had their origin or were already regarded as authorita tive. As a rule, the prophets make sacrifices, Salt- baths, sacred places and persons a part of their pictures of the future; cf, as far as sacrifices are concerned, e.g. Jer 17 26; 31 14; 33 14 ff. Fi nally, Lev 26 31 shows how, under certain cir

      cumstances, even P can declare sacrifices to be use less.

      (3) The people s disobedience. Further, the transgressions of the Levitical laws in the course of Israel s history cannot be regarded as a proof of the non-existence of the priestly legislation in pre- exilic times. This is clear from an analogous case. Idolatry was forbidden by the Books of the Cove nant (Ex 20-24; 34), which are recognized as ancient documents; but according to 2 K 22 the pious king Josiah down to the year 622 BC takes no offence at idolatry. Even after the reformation, which had been inaugurated in consequence of the finding of the Book of the Law in the temple during the reign of Josiah (2 K 22 f), idolatry was again practised in Israel, as is proved by Ezk 8 and Jer 44, notwithstanding that the Books of the Covenant and Dt already were extant at that time, even according to the views of the critics.

      But let us pass on to P itself, and not forget that the directions given for the Jubilee Year (Lev 25), according to Jewish tradition, were never actually observed. According to the reasoning of the critics, this law could not be in existence even in the present day. According to all reports the transgressions of the Divine ordinance s began even as early as the Mosaic period; cf Ex 32 (J, E, golden calf); Am 5 25; Ezk 20; Dt 12 8 and also Lev 17 7 (sac rifice to the Satyrs in PC). This condition of affairs can readily be understood because the reli gion of Jeh does not claim to be an emanation from the spirit of the people, but the result of a revela tion from on high. In the light of these facts can we be surprised, that in the times of the Judges, when a great prophetic leader was so often not to be found in Israel, the apostasy was so great and so widespread? But all of these cases of disobe dience, that have been demonstrated as actual facts in Israel s history, are not able to eliminate the fact that there are many data to prove the existence of a central sanctuary already in the earliest history of the people, which fact presupposes as a matter of course that there were also laws for the cultus in existence (see EXODUS, III, 5). We must further not forget how the sacrifices of the sons of Samuel (1 S 2 11 ff), notwithstanding all their arbitrary conduct, presupposes such passages as Lev 7 30- 32; 1015; Ex 29 31 f; Lev 8 31; Nu619f; Lev 7 23-32; or that the high priest, as described in PC, is already before the year 444 BC as well- known a character as he is after the exile (cf E/K- KIEL, II, 2); or that the question of H;ig 2 1 1 ff takes into consideration a code of cultus-laws, ;iml that the answer is given on the basis of Lev 6 27; Nu 19 22.

      (4) Indiscriminate sacrificing. To this must be added that the transgressions, to which the critics appeal in proof of their claims, and which_they abuse for their own purposes, must in part be inter preted differently from what they are. In the case of sacrificing indiscriminately at any place whatever, and by any person whatever, we have in many cases to deal with extraordinary instances of theophanies (cf Jgs 2 1 ff; 6 11 ff; 13 1 ff), as these had been foreseen in Ex 20 24. Even the Book of Dt does not insist throughout (cf 16 21) that the sacrifices must be made at one and the same place (cf also PC: Lev 24 31; Josh 22). After the rejection of Shiloh, at which the central sanctuary had been deposited, as recorded in 1 S 4, the cultural ordi nances of PC, as we learn from Jer 7 llif; 26 6; Ps 78 59 ff, became more or less a dead letter. Even the Books of Ch, which throughout record history from the standpoint of the PC, at this period and down to the dedication of the temple take no offence at the cultural acts of a Solomon in contrast with their attitude toward the conduct of



      Uzziah (sec 2 Ch 1 6; 6 1-4; 7 1-7, as compared with 26 Hi ff). In (he same way the pious people in the Northern Kingdom, after it had, by Divine consent, been separated from the Southern, could not do otherwise than erect altars for themselves, since (hey could not participate in (he worship of the calves in Bethel and Dan. Further, modern criticism overlooks (he fact that what is regular and normal is much less liable to be reported in his torical narrative than that which is irregular and abnormal.

      (5) I)t ami re. etc. It is not possible at this place to enter into further details; we accordingly refer only to Exonrs, III and I V ; l).\\y op ATONEMENT, III, and esp. Kzi. HII:I., 11.2. where the proof has been furnished that this prophet- belongs to a later period than PC as far as Kzk 40-48 (containing his picture of the future) in gen eral is concerned, and as far as K/k 44 4 If (where it is claimed that the prophet first- introduces the distinction between priests and Levites) in particular is concerned. All the important problems that are connected with this matter, esp. the difficulties which result from the Well- hausen hypothesis, when the questions as to the purpose, the form, the success and the origin of the priestly legis lation come under consideration, are discussed in my book, Arr the Critic* Itii/lit. The result of this investi gation is all the more noteworthy, as I was myself formerly an adherent of the \\Vellhausen school, but Was forced to the conclusion that this hypothesis is un tenable.

      We have here yet. to refer to the one fact that the relation of Dt and the PC, as far as Lev in par ticular is concerned, justifies (he scheme of P fol lowed by D as the historical order, while Well- hausen makes D older than P. Dt 10 8f; 33 8 ff presuppose more detailed ordinances in reference to the priests such as those which have been given in P. The book of Dt further takes into account different kinds of sacrifices (cf 12 5 f.ll. 13. 17.26; 15 19-23; 17 1; 18 1.3, such as are described in Lev Iff). The law in Dt 14 (ordinances with reference to what, is clean) agrees almost word for word with Lev 11, and is in such perfect harmony with the linguistic peculiarities of PC, that Lev 11 must be regarded as the original, and not vice versa. Dt 24 8 f refers directly to the injunctions concern ing leprosy, as we find these in Lev 13 f, and the Deuteronomic passage is doubtless modeled after that of Lev. Dt 12 1.">.22; 15 22 cannot be under stood at all, except in the light of Lev 17 13. Dt 26 14 ff again expressly takes into account ideas that have been taken from Lev 22 3 ff. As far as the laws dealing with the great feasts in Dt 16 are concerned, it is impossible to understand ver 9 without Lev 23 loff.lOf; and the designation "feast of tabernacles" in vs 13 ff cannot even be understood without a reference to such a law as we find in Lev 23 39 ff. The other passages to be discussed on this subject lead us to the following results.

      Even if the Book of Dt were the product of the

      7th cent. BC, the facts that have been stated above

      would nevertheless disprove the claim

      2. Connec- of (he Wellhausen hypothesis as to an

      tion with exilic or post-exilic date for the PC.

      Mosaic But if Dt, even in its essential and

      Period fundamental parts, merely, is Mosaic

      (cf Are the Critics Right? 1-55), then

      the PC which is still older than Dt must also belong

      to the Mosaic period.

      (1) PC and desert conditions. This conclusion is in this point confirmed still further by a series of facts. As Dt permits the firstborn to be ran somed (Dt 14 22 ff), but the PC demands their consecration in natura (Lev 27 20 f; cf Nu 18 15 ff), the lalter ordinances could be preferred and enforced only during the wandering in the desert, where the whole nation was in the neighborhood of the sanctuary. The fact that the ordinances deal ing with the domestic celebration of the Passover in the private houses on the 14th of Nisan and the

      holy convocation on the 15th of Nisan at the sanc tuary could be carried out only during the wander ings in the desert (cf Ex 12 3 ff.O; Lev 23 5; Nu 28 16; Lev 27 (iff; Nu 28 17ff), and that this was changed iu Dt 16 5 f to correspond to changed conditions, can be seen by reference to EXODUS, III, 3. Si ill more important is a third command in Lev 17 in comparison with Dt 12. The command ment that every animal that is to be slain is to be brought to the central sanctuary can have a pur pose only for the Mosaic period, and could not even have been invented at a later period. Because of the entrance of Israel into Canaan, the Book of Dt changes this ordinance in such a way that from this time on the killing of (he animals is permit ted at any place (12 13ff.20ff). The different commands in reference to the carcases of animals that have died and of (hose torn to pieces are all dependent on Lev 17. In Dt 14 21, it was possible to forbid the use of such animals absolutely for Israel, because from now on, and in contrast to Lev 17, the killing of sacrificial animals was permitted at any place (vs 13 ff). In Ex 22 30 all use of such meat could be forbidden, because Lev 17, with its command to bring all blood to the sanctuary, had not yet been given. Lev, now, on the other hand, forbids this_use only to the priests (22 8), and sees in this use in the case of the other Israelites only a transi tory defilement (cf Lev 17 15; 11 40); and in 7 24 forbids only the use of the fat, but not of the meat of these animals; for now r , according to Lev 17 1 ff, all the killing is a sacrifice which only those who are clean were permitted to eat and which could not be secured at all times (cf Hoff mann, op. cit., 23 f).

      Our exposition of Lev 17 1 ff is, however, in another respect also of the greatest significance, for in vs 4-6.8 f the tent of meeting is presupposed as existing; in vs 5.8 also different kinds of sacri fices, and in ver 6 the priesthood; so that at once further ordinances concerning the tent of meeting, the sacrificial code, the priesthood, such as we find in Ex 25 ff; 35 ff; Lev 1-7; Ex 29; Lev 810 21 ff, were possible and necessary, and these very laws must probably originate in and date from the Mosaic period. This same conclusion is sustained by the following considerations. For what other source or time could be in harmony with such state ments found very often in other parts of Lev also, as "into the camp" in 4 11 ff; 6 11; 13 46; 14 3.8 (unconscious contrast to later times); 14 33 IT. 40. 41.45.53; 16 26-28; 24 10-23; or "into the desert," in 16 10.21f. In 5 15.18; 6 6 (cf also 27 2ff), the words "according to thy estimation" are addressed personally to Moses. In 6 20 a calculation is based on the day on which Aaron was consecrated to the priesthood, while ver 22 is the first that has general coloring. Such hints, which, as it were, have only been accidentally scattered in the body of the laws, and which point to the situation of the lawgiver and of his times, are of especial value for the argument in favor of the Mosaic origin of these laws. Furt her, we everywhere find that Aaron and his sons are as yet the only incumbents of the priestlv office (cf 1; 2.3; 3 13; 6 9.14.16, etc). All the laws claim to have been given through Moses or Aaron or through both at Mt. Sinai (see I above). And who, in later times, if it was the purpose to magnify the priesthood of Aaron, would have thought of inventing the fact that on the Day of Atonement and on other occasions it was necessary for Aaron to bring a burnt offering and a sin offer ing for himself (Lev 16; 8-10; 6 19 ff), or that Moses in his view of a certain cultural act had been mistaken (cf Lev 10 16 ff)? The law concerning the Jubilee Year (Lev 25) presupposes that each tribe is confined in its own district and is not inter-




      mingled with the other tribes, a presupposition which was no longer possible after the occupation of Canaan, and is accordingly thinkable only in the Mosaic times. And now let us remember that this fact, when we recall (see II, above) that the unity of the book was proved, is a ground for claiming that the entire book dates from the Mosaic period. As far as Lev at least is concerned, there is nothing found in the book that calls for a later date. Lev 18 24 ff can be regarded as post-Mosaic only if we translate these verses thoughtlessly, as though the inhabitants of the country were here described as being expelled earlier. On the other hand, in ver 24, just as is the case with the parallel passage, 20 22 IT, the idea is, without any doubt, that Israel is not yet in the Holy Land. Accordingly the waw consecutives at this place are to be regarded not as indicating temporal but logical sequences. In the passage 18 27, we further find the archaic form ha el for ha click; cf in the Pent Gen 19 8.25; 26 3.4; Dt 4 42; 7 22; 19 11. Just as little docs ch 26 take us into the exilic period. Only dogmatical prejudices can take offence at prediction of the exile. Lev 26 cannot be regarded as a "prophecy after the event," for the reason, too, that the resto ration of the people by God s pardon is here prom ised (cf vs 40 ff). And, too, the exile is not the only punishment with which Israel is threatened; and filially as far as Israel is concerned, by the side of the statements concerning their dwelling in one single country (vs, it is also said that they are to be scattered among many nations and countries (cf vs 23. 3(i. 3 .)).

      (2) Unity and construction point to Mosaic origin. If to this we yet add the unity of the thought and of the external construction, looking at the whole matter, we do not see anything that would lead us to accept a post-Mosaic period for this book. Then, too, it is from the outset in itself only probable that Moses gave his people a body of cultus-laws and did not leave this matter to chance. We need only think of the great role which among the oriental peoples was assigned to their religious cult us. It is indeed nowhere said, in so many words, that Moses wrote even the laws of the PC. But the references made by Dt to the PC; the fact that Nu 33, which also is credited to Moses, is characterized by the style of PC; further, that the author of Dt could write in the style of P (cf Dt 14 with Lev 11) ; and, per contra, that the author of Lev 26 had the mastery of the style peculiar to Dt (cf Dt 28) all this makes it probable that Moses even wrote these things himself; at any rate, no reasons can be cited against this view. Very interesting in connection with the question of the unity of the Pent are the close connecting links between Lev 18 24 ff; 20 22 ff, and JE. The question whether Moses in the composition of the book made use of his own notes or of those of others, cannot be decided; but this is an irrelevant matter. What the facts may be in reference to the develop ment of other ordinances, which have taken differ ent forms in the Books of the Covenant and in PC, or in Dt and in PC, and whether the existence of these differences in the cases of particular laws compels us to accept later additions, cannot be dis cussed at this place. Yet from the outset it is to be emphasized that already in the Mosaic period there could possibly have been reasons for chang ing some of these laws; esp. was this so in the Book of Dt, just before the people entered the promised land (cf e.g. the laws concerning tithes, Dt 12 6f.l7ff; 14 22 ff; 26 12 if; Lev 27 30 ff; Nu 18 20 ff, or the laws concerning contributions for sacri fices, Dt 18 3; Lev 7 29 ff).

      Then, too, the decision whether this development took place as early as the time of Moses or not is not to be

      made dependent on the possibility of our being able to explain the reasons for such changes. We lack both the daily practice in cultural ordinances, as also the oral instruction which makes these ordinances intelli gible. The manner in which in Lev 1 ff the different kinds of sacrifices are introduced sounds as though these were already known to the people and were practised by them, except in the case of sin and guilt offerings. This is further in harmony with earlier narratives, which already report concerning sacrifices. It is possible that in this way we can also explain a certain relationship between the Jewish sacrificial ritual and that of Babylon (cf Zimmern, Beitrdye zur Kin nt nix dfr babylonischen Reliyion). The ordinances in reference to the clean and the unclean may also have emanated from religious and ethical ideas which are older than Moses times. In this matter the thought was decisive, that everything that was impure, everything that suggested death or decay or sin or displeasure to (Jod, should be kept separated and apart from the religion of Jeh. In all such cases it is not the newness of the laws but their adaptability to the character and spirit of the Jeh-religion that is to be regarded as the decisive factor.

      IV. The Significance. (1) The law contains God s will, although in transitory form. In the art.

      EZEKIEL under II, 2, (3) we have re- 1. Positive ferred to the fact that Leviticism is an

      important and necessary stage in the development of true religion, and that the entire OT did not advance beyond this stage and was not in tended to go beyond it. The leading prophets (Isa 40 ff, Jer, Ezk), even in their visions of the future, cling to the temple, sacrifices, holy obla tions, sacred seasons and persons. Christianity was the first to discard this external shell, after it had ripened the kernel that was concealed in this shell (cf worship in the spirit and in the truth, Jn 4 20-24). Down to this time, kernel and shell were inseparably united. This must not be for gotten, if we would appreciate the Book of Lev properly. It is true that this book to a large extent deals with laws and ordinances, to which we Chris tians should not and need not return (cf the voice from heaven to Peter, Acts 10 15, "What God hath cleansed, make not thou common," and Paul s opposition to all work-righteousness that was based on compliance with these external institutions, e.g. in Rom, Gal, Col, as also his independent atti tude over against the Jewish law in those cases where it could not be taken into consideration as the way to salvation; cf Acts 21 17 ff; Rom 14 1 ff; 1 Cor 9 19 ff). But these laws and ordi nances were something more than merely external matters, since they contained the highest religious thoughts. We surely should not forget from the outset that Lev 19 contains also the word, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself" (ver 18), a command which in vs 33 f is even made to cover the strangers too, and which by Jesus, next to the absolute love demanded for God, is designated as the chief commandment of the law (Mt 22 39); and when in 19 17 f the hatred of the brother and desire for revenge on him are forbidden, we already seem to breathe the atmosphere of Christianity. The entire ch 19 is, in addition, as it were, a sermon on almost all of the commandments of the Deca logue, the abiding authority of which the Christian, after the example and interpretation of Jesus, will at once recognize. But as the Decalogue itself is found inclosed in the specifically Jewish national shell (cf Ex 20 2, exodus out of Egypt; ver 8, Sabbath commandment; ver 12, promise of the holy land; ver 17, slaves), so, too, this is the case in Lev 19 (cf vs 3.6 ff. 20-22.23- f). But how little the specifically Levitical ordinances, in the narrower sense of the term, exclude the spirit ual factor, and how closely they are interwoven with the deepest of thoughts, can be seen from ch 26, according to which all merely external sacrifices, into which formalism naturally the Levitical legal code could degenerate, do not protect from punish ment, if the heart remains uncircumcised (vs 30 f .41).

      Leviticus Libnah



      Above nil, there are four leading thoughts which are emphasized forcibly, particularly by the legal system of PC. In reality all times, all places, all property, all persons arc sacred to (lod. But us it is impossible that, this ideal should be realized in view of the imperfections and guilt of man, it was decided that certain particular seasons and places, gifts and persons should be separated from others, and that in these this sacredness should be realized as far as possible, and that these repre sentatives should by their mere existence contin ually remind the people of (iod s more compre hensive claims, and at the same time arouse and maintain the consciousness that their entire life was to be saturated by the thoughts of a holy Cod and ITis demands. From this point of view, none of the particular laws are worthless; and when they are once appreciated in this their central signifi cance, we can understand that each law has its share in the eternal authority of the law (cf Mt 5 17 f). Paul, too, who absolutely rejects the law as a way to salvation expresses no doubt that the law really contains the will of God (Rom 8 3f); and lie declares that it was the purpose of the send ing of Jesus, that 1 he demands made upon us by the law should be fulfilled; and in Rom 13 10 he tells us that, love is 1 he fulfilment of the law (cf ver 8); and according to Rom 7 12, it is certain that the law is holy and the commandment is holy, righteous and good.

      (2) The Ifiw prepares for the understanding of Christianity. But the ceremonial law, too, con tains not only the demands of God s will. It pre pares also for the understanding of the work, the person and the mission of Jesus. In Ex 25 8; 29 45 f ; 40 34 if the indwelling of God in the tent of meeting is declared, which prophesied the incarna tion of God in Christ Jesus (Jn 1 14); and then the indwelling of God through the Holy Ghost in the Christian congregation (I Pet 2 5; Eph 4 12) and in the individual (I Cor 3 10; 6 19; 2 Cor

      6 16; Jn 14 23). Through the sacrificial system in Lev 1-7, and the ordinances of the Day of Atonement (Lev 16), we arc enabled to understand the character of sin, of grace and of the forgiveness of sin (cf ATONEMENT, DAY OF, II). Let us remem ber to what extent Jesus and Paul, the Ep. to the He, and the other NT writings operate with OT thoughts, particularly with those of Lev (priest hood, sacrifices, atonement, Passover, signification of blood, etc), and Paul correctly says that the righteousness of God was prophesied, not only by the prophets, but also by the law (Rom 3 21).

      (3) The law as a tutor unto Christ. Finally, the ceremonial law too has the purpose to protect Israel from the errors of the heathen, a thought that is esp. emphasized in the Law of Holiness (cf Lev 18 3.24 ff; 19 20 ff; 20 2 ff.22 ff ; 26 1) and which is in harmony with the elementary stage of Israel s education in the OT, when the people still stood in need of the "tutor .... unto Christ" (Gal 3 2)5 f; 4 1). This already leads us over to the negative side, which Paul particularly emphasizes.

      The law is in itself holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good (Rom 7 12), but

      it has lost its power because the flesh 2. Negative of man is sinful (cf Rom 8 3); and

      thus it happens that the law is the occasion for sin and leads to a knowledge of sin and to an increase of sin (cf Rom 3 20; 4 15; 6 20;

      7 13); and this shall be brought about according to the purposes of God in order that in upright hearts the desire for forgiveness should arise. It is true_that nothing was so well adapted as were the details of the law, to bring to consciousness in the untutored mind that in which man yet came short of the Divine commands. And as far as the removal

      of (lie guilt was concerned, nothing was needed except, the reference to this in order to make men feel their imperfections (cf He 7-10). God merely out of grace was for the time being con tented with the blood of goats and of calves as a means for atonement; He was already counting on the forgiveness in Christ (Rom 3 25 ). All the sacrifices in Lev 1-7, e.g., did not make the ritual of the Day of Atonement superfluous (Lev 16); and in this case the very man who brought the sac rifice; was also a sinful creature who must first secure the forgiveness of God for himself. Only Jesus, at once the perfect priest and the perfect sacrifice, has achieved the perfect redemption. It according ly remains a fact that the righteousness which avails before God can be secured only through faith in Jesus Christ, and not through the deeds of the law (Rom and Gal).

      The law with its incomplete atonement and with its arousing of the consciousness of sin drives man to Jesus; and this is its negative significance. Jesus, however, who Himself has fulfilled the de mands of the law, gives us through His spirit the power, that the law with its demands (1, [1] above) may no longer stand threateningly over against us, but is now written in our hearts. In this way the OT law is fulfilled in its transitory form, and at the same time becomes superfluous, after its eternal contents have been recognized, maintained and surpassed.

      LITERATURE. Comms. by Ryssel. Lunge, Kcil, Strack, Baentsch, Bertholet; esp. for tho Law of Holi ness see Horst, Let 17-26 and Ezk; Wurster, ZAT\\\\ , 1884, 112 if; Baentsch, Das Heiliakeitsijcuvtz; Kloster- mann, Dcr Pentateuch, 368 ff; Delitzsch, Zeitschrift fur kirch. Wissenschaft und Leben, 1880, 617 ff; Intros to the OT by Baudissin, Strack, Kuenen, Konig, Oornill, Driver, Sellin; Archaeology, by Benzinger, Nowaek; History of Israel, by Kohler, Konig, Kittcl, Oettli, Klostermann, stade, Wellhausen; for kindred laws in Babylonia, cf Zimmern, Beitrciye zur Kenntnis der babyl. Rdiyion; against the Graf- Wellhausen hypothesis, Moller, Are the Critics Riyht? (ib, "Literature"), and art. EzEKiBLin this Encyclopaedia; Orr, POT; AViener, EPC, OP; Hoffmann, Die wichtiysten Instnnzen gi t/fn die Graf-Welthausensche Hypothese; Kegel, Wilh. Vatkeund die Graf-Wellhausensche Hypothese.

      WILHELM MOLLER LEVY, lev i. See WAR.

      LEWD, lud, LEWDNESS, lud nes (HST , zim- tndh, irSTp , m c zimmah, rn^ZlS , nabhlilth; TrovTip6s, poncros, p<jSt.oijpYT][ia, rhadiourgcnia) :

      There are three Heb words tr d "lewd," "lewd- ness": (1) Zimnidh, meaning a "plan," a "purpose," so tr d several times and then shading

      1. In the off into "evil plan"; tr d also "heinous OT crime," "wicked purpose or device."

      It is the most frequent word for "lewdness": Ezk 16 27, "lewd way"; found in Jgs 20 6; Ezk 16 27.43.58; 22 9.11; 23 48.49; 24 13; Hos 6 9. (2) M e zimmah means a "plan," generally "[evil] machination"; used only in Jer 11 15, "lewdness." (3) Nabhluth, meaning "disgrace" in reference to females. Found only in Hos 2 10, ARVm "shame."

      The word tr d "lewd," "lewdness" in AV occurs only twice in the NT, and in each instance is more

      correctly tr d in RV by another word:

      2. In the (1) Poncros, found in Acts 17 5, tr d in NT ARV "vile." The Gr word elsewhere

      istr d "bad," "evil," "grievous," "harm ful," "malicious," "wicked." AV "lewd" gives the wrong impression. The idea of unchastity is not present in the text or context. (2) Rhadiourgema likewise occurs only once, viz. Acts 18 14, and is correctly tr d in RVand ARV "wicked villany." The thought of impurity or lewdness is foreign to the meaning in this connection.




      Leviticus Libnah

      LIBANU3, lib a-i

      See LEBANON.

      LIBATION, ll-lm shun. See SACRIFICE.

      LIBERAL, lib er-al, LIBERALITY, lib-er-al i-ti, LIBERALLY, lib er-al-i: The different: forms of the word all refer to one who is generous, bountiful, willing and ready to give and to help. Both the Heb words of the OT and the Gr words of the NT tr 1 Into the Eng. word "liberal" have a deeper and nobler meaning than is generally conveyed by the Eng. word. In Prov 11 25, the liberal soul (nt i)hesh b rdkhah) means a soul that carries a bless ing. In Isa 32 5, ARV has "bountiful" where AV has "liberal," and in ver <S "noble" takes the plaee of "liberal" (ndiUnbh). The j)rincipal (!r words are dTrXirijs, haplotcs, lit. "simplicity," "sincerity," and xapej, char is, "grace," "favor." In 1 Cor 16 3, "bounty" substitutes "liberality." It is well to bear in mind that a Bib. liberality can spring only out of a noble soul, and is Godlike in its genesis and spirit. G. II. GKHHKKDIM;

      LIBERTINES, lib er-tinz, li-biir tinz (Aiffcprivoi,

      Lib( rti/toi): These were among Stephen s oppo nents: "There arose certain of them that were; of the synagogue called [the synagogue] of the Liber tines, and of the Cyrenians, and of the Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and Asia, disputing with Stephen" (Acts 6 9).

      How many synagogues aro denoted . The answer may

      aid in the interpretation of "Libertine i": ( 1 ) The words

      may be read as denoting one synagogue

      -, <io (Calvin). However (a) the number of

      1. oyna worshippers would be extremely large, (I,) gogue of the bond of union is not obvious, (<) rab- th.3 Liber- binic tradition speaks of 4SO synagogues t npc" in Jerus. (2) The double tfi (" of them ")

      seems to denote two parties, the one con sisting "of them that were of the syna gogue called [the synagogue] of Libertines and Cy renians and Alexandrians," the other "of them of Cilicia and Asia" (Winer, Wendt, Holtzmann). But tlic second tfni is dependent oil synagogue. "As Cy renians and Alexandrians both belong to towns .... a change of designation would b, necessary when the Jews of whole provinces ca;ne to lie mentioned: this being tin: case, the article could not but be repeated, without any reference to the tun. before" (Alford). (H) There were three synagogues: (a) that of the Liber- lines. (I,) that of the Cyrenians and Alexandrians and (c) that "of them of Cilicia and Asia" (Alford). There is no grammatical reason for this division, but it is based on an interpretation of "Libertines." There were "Libertines," Africans and Asiatics. (4) Each party had a separate synagogue (Schiirer, Hausrath). The number of worshippers, their different origin and con nections, and the number of synagogues in Jerus give weight to this view.

      (1) They are "frccdmen," liberated slaves or their

      descendants. Against this it is held that, the Gr

      equivalent (apeleutheroi) would have

      2. Interpre- been used in this case. However, the tation of Rom designation would be common all "Liber- over the empire. In what sense were tines" they "freedmen"? Various answers are

      given: (a) they were freedmen from Jewish servitude (Lightfoot); (b) they were Italian freedmen who had become proselytes; (c) they were "the freedmen of the Romans" (Chrysostom), the descendants of Jewish freedmen at Rome who had been expelled by Tiberius. In G3 BC Pompey had taken prisoners of war to Rome. These, being liberated by those who had acquired them as slaves, formed a colony on the banks of the Tiber (Philo, Lcyat. ad Caiinn ). Tacitus relates that the senate decreed (19 AD) that a number of Jewish Liber tines should be transported to Sardinia, and that the rest should leave Italy, unless they renounced, before a certain day, their profane customs (Ann. ii, 85; see also Jos, Ant, XVIII, iii, 5)._ Many would naturally seek refuge in Jerus and build there a synagogue.

      (2) They are an African community. There were two synagogues, one of which was Asiatic. In the other were men from two African towns (Gyrene and Alexandria), therefore the Libertines must have been African also, all forming an African synagogue. Various explanations are given: (a) They were inhabitants of Libert inn, a town in Africa proper: an "Episcopus Ecclesiae Catholicae Libertinensis" sat in the Synod of Carthage (411 AD), (b) Some emend the text; Wetstein and Blass, following the Armenian VS, conjecture Libuxtinon, "of the Libystines." Schulthesa reads for "Libertines and Cyrenians" (Libertvnon kni Kurenaion) "Libyans, those about Gyrene" (Lib- uon ton katu Kart ncn) (cf Acts 2 10).

      These emendations are conjectural; the MSS read "Libertines." It seems, therefore, that 2, (1) (c) above is the correct interpretation.

      S. F. HUNTER

      LIBERTY, lib er-ti ("fifl , d rur, 2rn , rahabh; \\u0pa, dcuthcrid): The opposite of servitude or bondage, hence applicable to captives or slaves set free from oppression (thus li ror, Lev 25 10; Isa 61 1, etc). Morally, the power which enslaves is sin (Jn 8 34), and liberty consists, not simply in external freedom, or in possession of the formal power of choice, but in deliverance from the darkening of the mind, the tyranny of sinf til lust s and 1 he enthral- ment of the will, induced by a morally corrupt st ate. In a positive respect, it consists in the possession of holiness, with the; will and ability to do what is right and good. Such liberty is possible only in a renewed condition of soul, and cannot exist apart from godliness. Even under the OT godly men could boast of a measure of such liberty (Ps 119 4. r ), rahabh, "room," "breadth"), but it is the gospel of Christ which bestows it in its fulness, in giving a full and clear knowledge of God, discovering the way of forgiveness, supplying the highest motives to holiness and giving the Holy Spirit to destroy the power of sin and to quicken to righteousness. In implanting a new life in the soul, the gospel lifts the believer out of the sphere of external law, and gives him a sense of freedom in his new filial relation to God. Hence the NT expressions about "the glorious liberty" of Cod s children (Horn 8 21 AV; cf Gal 2 4; 5 13, etc), about liberty as resulting from the possession of the Spirit (2 Cor 3 17), about "the perfect law of liberty" (Jas 1 25). The instrument through which this liberty is imparted is "the truth" (Jn 8 32). Christians are earnestly warned not to presume upon, or abuse their liberty in Christ (Gal 5 13; 1 Pet 2 10). JAMES OUR

      LIBNAH, lib na (":nb , libhnah, "whiteness," "transparency," "pavement" [cf Ex 24 10 where r:35, libhnath, is tr d "paved work" or a "compact foundation"]; Aepvd, Lcbnd):

      (1) A desert camp of the Israelites between Rimmon-perez and Rissah (Xu 33 20.21). Prob ably the same as Laban (Dt 11). See \\VA.\\DF.K- INCJS of ISRAEL.

      (2) A town in the Shephelah of Jtidah (Josh 15 42). "Joshua passed from Makkedah, and all Israel with him, unto Libnah, and fought against Libnah: and Jeh delivered it also, and the king

      thereof, into the hand of Israel And Joshua

      passed from Libnah, and all Israel with him, unto Lachish, and encamped against it, and fought against it" (Josh 10 29-31; 12 15). It was one of the cities given to the "children of Aaron" (Josh 21 13; 1 Ch 6 57). In the reign of Joram, Lib nah joined the Edomites in a revolt against the king of Judah (2 K 8 22; 2 Ch 21 10). In the reign of Ilezekiah, Libnah was besieged by Sennacherib (2 X 19 8; Isa 37 8). The wife of King Josiah

      Libni Libraries



      \\\\;is "I I;iiiiul;il the daughter of .leremiah of Lib- n;ili," she was the mother of Jehoahaz and Xede- kiah (2 K 23 !51; 24 IS; ,)er 52 1).

      The site of this important stronghold remains unknown. In the Onoin it- is described, under the name Lobana or Lolma, as near Eleutheropolia (licit Jclirtn). All the indications point to a site in (lie S.\\V. of tho Shophelah, not, very far from Lacliish. The Palestine Exploration Fund sur veyors su^es) e<l (rKI<\\ III, 12.V.)) the commanding site \\\\rnk el Menshiyeh, or rather the \\vhite chalky mound 2.10 ft. high to the X. of this village, and Stanley proposed Till <* N"//. (Both these identi fications are due to the interpretation of Libnah as meaning "whiteness.") In the / AV- N (1X97, Sh XX) Conder suggests a ruin called cl Jiendiry, 10 miles S.E. of Lacliish. E. W. ( i. MASTERMAN

      LIBNI, lib iit 0>?5, libfin-t):

      (1) Son of (lershon (Ex 6 17; Xu 3 IS; 1 Ch 6 17.20). J ; amilies who traced their descent from Libni are called Libnitea (Xu 3 21; 26 f>S;.

      (2J A son of Merari (1 Ch 6 2U). See LADAX.

      LIBNITES, lib niis LIBNI.

      LIBRARIES, ll bra-rix, ll brer-iz:

      1. The Bible a Library

      2. Mythological and Apocryphal Libraries

      3. Libraries for the Dead

      4. .Memory Libraries

      5. Prehistoric and Primitive Libraries G. Mesopotamia!! Period

      7. Patriarchal Period

      8. Egyptian Period

      9. The Kxodus

      10. Palestine at the Conquest

      1 1. Period of the Judges

      12. Saul to the Maccabees 1:5. NT Times

      14. Bookcases and Buildings LITERATURE

      A library is a book or books kept for use, not for sale. A one-book library is just as much a library as a one-cell animal is animal. The earliest libra ries, like the earliest plants and animals, were very simple, consisting of a few books or perhaps only a single tablet, or manuscript. An archive is a library of official documents not in active use; a registry, a library of going documents.

      The Bible is itself a library. During the Middle Ages it was commonly called, first, "The Divine Library," and then, "The Library" 1. The (Bibliotheca), in the same exclusive

      Bible a sense as it is now known as "The Book"

      Library (Kiblia as Lat sing.). Even the word

      "Bible" itself is historically "Library" rather than "Book" (for it was originally the neuter pi. liiblin, "The Books"; cf Dnl 9 2). The Bible is also a library in that it is an organized collection of books rather than a single work.

      This fact that the Bible is itself a library is in creasingly mentioned of late, esp. in OT studies (Kent, Narratives of the Beffinnings of II cb Hixlory, 1, "The Old Testament as a Library"; Delit/sch, lidbcl ami Bible, 4, "the Old Testament, that small library of books of the most multifarious kind"). Its profound bearing on the theory of the composi tion and inspiration of the Bible (cf BOOK) has given the fact new significance and makes an understand ing of the nature of a library one of the best tools for the interpretation of the Bible in the face of modern problems. While it is not possible to elabo- rate this within these limits, it may be said briefly that the logical end of the applicat ion of the doct rine of evolution to books and libraries is that the Bible is, like man, the result of natural selection, and is as unique among books as man among the animals. And, whatever may be true of men, in the case of

      2. Mytho logical and Apocryphal Libraries

      3. Libra ries for the Dead

      1 Minks the formation of a book-library by natural selection tends toward the elimination of error. The more numerous the individuals and the longer the period, the greater the reduction of error, so that the logical inference as to the Bible is that on purely natural grounds it may be, or is, the nearest approximation to inerrancy among books, because of its history as a library. This does not quite lead to the position that, the Bible is as unique among books as Jesus Christ among men, but under the doctrine of a creative Providence, it, does imply what may be called real superhuman authorship and authority.

      Somewhat apart from historical libraries, but closely connected with Ilible study, are the alleged superhuman libraries, libraries of, or written by, the gods, libraries for the dead and apocryphal libraries. Tho Vedas are said to have ex isted as a collection even before the Creator created Himself ( Afonu 1 2\\). All religions have their book-gods Thoth and Seshait, Apollo, Hermes, Minerva, Ida, Bridget, Soma, Brahma, Odin, Kvasir, Ygdrasil and mp.ny others. To the ancient Babylonians the whole firmament was a library of "celestial tablets." The mythological ideas often have important bearing on Bib. doctrines, e.g. the Creation, the ^yord, the Tree of Life, the Book of Life, the Holy Spirit. Apocryphal libraries include the library which Jeh is alleged to have formed oil the 7th day of creation on a mount E. of the Garden of Eden, and other libraries ascribed to Enoch, Noah and Seth. See for this the OT pseudepigrapha.

      Another class of collections of real books, written or gathered for mythological purposes, is what may be called libraries for the dead. It is well known that in most countries of antiquity, at one time or another, and among primi tive people like the American Indians, in modern times, it has been the custom to bury with the dead tho things which friends thought would be useful in the Elysian fields or happy hunting grounds, or on the way thither the bow and horse of the warrior, the uxhabli servants, children s playthings, tho models of food objects, and so on. This same motive led also to the burying of books with the dead. For long periods in the history of Egypt every Egyptian of any position was buried with one o r more book s. These books were not his chance possessions, buried with him as, in some burials, all a man s personal belongings are, but hooks selected for their usefulness to him after death. For the most part these were of the nature of guidebooks to the way to tho heavenly world, magic formulae for the opening ot doors, instruction as to the right method of progress toward, or introduction into, paradise, etc. These books were afterward gathered together and form what is now known as "the Book of the Dead" and other such books. In modern times tho actor or professional story-teller often has in memory a collection of remembered books which is in ell ect a library. Among primi- 4 Menorv * ve Peoples the medicine-man was lit. a > library of tribal traditions. The priests Libraries O f India and the minstrels of Greece or of tho Middle Ages often had a large reper tory. By the prevailing theory of the origin of the books of the OT such memory traditions, transmitted orally, were the chief source of the Hex. but in view o i what is now known of the library situation of the time, this must be doubted.

      In general terms it may be said that when man began not only to make but to keep records, libraries began. 1C veil a memorial stone contains the germ K p of a mnemonic library. The primitive

      medicine-man s collection of notched historic and message sticks, tallies, quipus or wampum Primitive belts is a great advance in complexity on T ., these, and the simplest collection of pic-

      L<1DI ture narratives of Hottentot, or American

      Indian, an advance on this. A com bination of pictures with signs is still another forward step, and this step is already to be found in the Pyre- nean caves of the Stone Age (see WRITING). Most of these earliest libraries were kept at the sanctuary. The gathering together of books in libraries had its origin in tho ideas of (1) preservation, (2) gathering together like books in order to join together their contents, and (H) circulation the great modern expansion of the idea. The owner of flocks and herds gathers together his lists of cattle or other possessions, his receipts for purchases and record of sales, whether these are recorded on tho walls of his cave or on wooden tallies or on knotted cords or on clay tablets gathered in little jars and buried under the tloor of his house. Large owners and sovereigns and the temples of Egypt and Assyria gathered large stores of these archival records and with them records of trib ute, oracles, etc. As early as 2700 BO we have the account of King Dedkero isesi, his archival library and



      Libni Libraries

      his librarian Senczemib. The annals of Thutmoso III were preserved in the palace library as well as cut in selections on the walls of the temple. A few years later, and wo know that the archival records were kept in a special room in the palace at Amarna and many of the records themselves wero found there. All this was before fche year 1300.

      Bible history through the 10th chapter of Gen

      covers the whole civilized world, but its main line

      up to about 2000 BC is almost wholly

      6. Mesopo- Mesopotamian. Up to the time of tamian Abram s migration from Haran, the Period history of Bib. libraries and the his tory of Bab and Sumerian libraries

      arc one. Most of the eities mentioned in this period are now known to have had collections of books in those days. At the time when Abram left Ilaran there were hundreds of collections of written docu- m >nts in scores of different geographical localities an, I containing millions of tablets.

      From Abram s emigration out of Haran to Jacob s

      emigration to Egypt was, on the face of Bib. data,

      mainly a time of wandering in Pal, but

      7. Patriar- this was not wholly nomad nor wholly chal Period Palestinian. Whether there were li braries in Pal at this time or not, the

      Patriarchs were all in close personal contact with l!ie library lands of Babylonia and Egypt. Abram himself was familiar with both Mesopotamia and Egypt. His son Ishmael married an Egyptian, his soii Isaac a Mesopotamian. His grandson Jacob married two wives from between the rivers, and had himself 20 years residence in the region. _ While it does not appear that Isaac lived at any time either in Syria or in Egypt, during most of his life all the members of his nearest family, father, mother, wife, sons wives, had had from one to three score years life in the mother-country. Whether there were public records in this region at this time is another matter, but it would seem that the whole region during the whole period was under the influence of the Bab civilization. It was freely traversed by trading caravans, and the Hittite_ and Mesopo tamian records extend at least a little back into this period.

      The Egyp period of Bible history begins with the

      immigration of Jacob and his sons, but fringes back

      to the visit of Abram (den 12 10-20),

      8. Egyptian if not to Mizraim of Gen 10 6. On Period the other hand, it ends properly with

      the exodus, but fringes forward through frequent points of contact to the flight of the Virgin and Pentecost. Whether the sojourn was 430 or 215 years, or less, it was a long residence at a time when libraries were very flourishing in Egypt. Already at the time of Abram s visit, col lections of books, not only of official accounts, but of religious texts, medical texts, annals, and the like, had been common in Egypt for nearly 1,000 years, and had perhaps existed for 1,000 years or more before that.

      Under the older of the modern datings of the exodus, the period of the sojourn included the times of Thothmes III (Thutmose), and in this reign there are peculiarly interesting records, not only of the existence of temple and palace libraries, but of the nature of their contents. The official recorder of Thothmes III, accompanying him on his campaign in Syria and Pal, set down each day the events of the day, while IK; or others also made lists of tribute, spoils, commissary matters, etc. These daily rec ords were deposited in the palace library, as it appears, but a narrative compiled from these and written on a leather roll was deposited in the temple library, and from this roll in turn an abstract was engraved on the walls of the temple, where it remains to this day. This probably gives the library sit uation of the time in a nutshell: (1) the simple

      saving of utilitarian documents, often on papyrus or wood tablets, (2) the gathering of books written for information on more durable material, (3) pre serving choice books for posterity by a local series of inscriptions.

      The rolls must have been kept in chests or in small boxes, like the box containing the medical papyri of King Neferikere some 1,300 years before, or the "many boxes" at Edfu long after. Many pictures of these book-chests or bookcases are found in the monuments (Birt, Buchrolle, 12, 15 ff).

      Again, the palace library of King Akhnaton (c 13150 BC) at Amarna, which contained collections of the royal foreign correspondence on clay tablets, has been excavated. Its bricks bear the inscription, "Place of the records of the palace of the king," and some hundreds of tablets from this spot have been recovered.

      At the time of the exodus there were thus prob ably libraries in all palaces, temples and record offices, although the temple libraries were by no means confined to sacred writings or the palace to secular. There were also at least archives, or regis ters, in the royal treasury and in all public depart ments. Schools for scribes were, it would seem, held in the palace, temple and treasury libraries. There were, therefore, apparently, at this time millions of documents or books, in hundreds of organized collections, which could be called archives or libraries.

      Supposing any exodus at all, Moses and Aaron and all the Heb "officers" ("scribes" or writers) under the Egyp taskmasters (Ex 6 9. The, brought up as they

      Exodus were in the scribal schools, were of

      course quite familiar with the Egyp ways of keeping their books. It is not surprising, therefore, to find the first and chief provision which Moses made for the Tabernacle was a book-chest for the preservation of the sacred directions given by Jeh. It makes little difference whether the account is taken in its final form, divided horizon tally into Ex, Lev, Nu, Dt and Josh, or divided per pendicularly into J, E, D, P, the fact of the ark and enough of its details are given even in the very old est sources to show that the authors understood the ark to be a glorified book-chest in or near which were kept written documents: the tables of stone, the inscribed rod, all the testimony given from the mercy-seat which formed its lid, and perhaps the Book of Dt. The ark is in fact much the size and shape of a portable bookcase, and the LXX tr renders the word by the ordinary technical Gr word for the book-chest (kibuios; cf Birt, op. cit., 248-49). It appears also to have been the later Ileb word for book-chest (cf Jew Enc, II, 107 IT). At the exodus, whenever that may have been, Moses is alleged to have made the ark the official library, and in it apparently he is thought to have kept the oracles as uttered from time to time and the record of his travels from day to day (as well as the tables of stone), precisely as the scribe of Thutmose recorded his Syrian campaigns from day to day. This record (if it was a record) was in all likelihood on a leather roll, since this became the traditional form of books among the Hebrews, and this too was like the annals of Thutmose. When the tribes sepa rated to N. and S., the books may have been either separated or copied, and doubtless they suffered much wear and tear from the harsh times until we find Dt turning up again in a temple library (2 K 22 8ff; 2 Ch 34 14 ff).

      The evidence from Egyp, Bab, Mitanman, Arnorite and Hittite documents shows the exist ence of official chanceries and by implication of archives throughout the whole region of Syria and Pal at the time when the "Hebrew" invasion




      began (Winckler, TdLd-Amarna Tablets). The Am

      Till) :ind tlu 1 tablets from Ihc Hiltitc archives at

      Boghaz-keui (Winckler, DOC Mil/.,

      10. Pales- 1 ( .M)7, no. 35) include act ual let tcrs from tine at the the princes, elders and governors of Conquest dozens of places, scattered all over this

      region from Egypt to the land of the Ilittitesand the Mitannians. These places include among others .lerus, Damascus, Tyre, Sidon, Acco, Ashkelon, Cla/a, Lacliisli, Keilali and Ai.jalon.

      Remains of two of such archival libraries have been dug up one at Lachish and one at Taanach near Megiddo, both dating back to the 14th cent. BC.

      Whether there were temple libraries as well does not appear so clearly from external evidence 1 but may probably be inferred from the names, Debir and (perhaps) Nebo, as well as from the well- known fact that each of the many city-lands must have had its center of worship. When it, was thought that writing did not exist to any extent in Pal before the time of David, it was the fashion to account for the name of the city of "Kirjath Sepher," the "City of Books," by curious lours de force of conjectural emendation (Sephur for Sepher, Tabor for Debir), but with the recent progress of excavation the possibility of the name has been fully established and the insight of Sayce probably justified.

      That the situation at the Conquest continued

      also during the period of the Judges appears from

      sundry considerations: (1) The fact

      11. Period that all the surrounding nations, Moab- of the ites, Edomites, Amorites, Hittites, Judges Mitannians, etc, were literate nations

      with public archives. (2) The high state of organization under David requires an evo lutionary background, (3) Even the extreme (and quite untenable) theory that the Hebrews were illiterate wild Arab nomads and remained so for a long time would actually demonstrate the matter, for, as has been pertinently observed (Sellin, Einl, 7), many at least of the Can. cities were not destroyed or even occupied fora long time, but, were surrounded by the Hebrews, and finally occupied and assimi lated. It follows, therefore, that the archival system continued, and, under this theory, for a long time, until the Hebrews absorbed the culture of their neighbors and, by inference, libraries with 1 he rest . (4) Taking the evidence of the documents as they stand, the matter is simple enough; various works were kept in or near the ark. Joshua added to these at least the report of a boundary commis sion (Josh 18 9.10) which was brought to the sanctuary, and Samuel laid up" the book that he wrote "before Jeh," i.e. at the ark. Moreover, the Books of Jasher, the Wars of Jeh, etc, imply a lit. which in turn implies libraries. Whenever or however composed, there is no good reason to dis trust their historical existence. (5) Even on the extreme critical hypothesis, "Most of the stories found in the first S books of the OT originated before or during the age of song and story (c 1250- 1050)" (Kent, Beginnings, 17). (6) To this may also be added, with all reservations, the mysterious metal ephod which appears only in this period. The ephod seems to have been either (a) a case (Bl)Ii, ()(5) or (/>) an instrument for consulting an oracle (BOB, 65). The linen ephod had a pouch for the I rim and Thummim. The metal ephod seems to be distinguished from the image and may have contained the written oracular instructions (torah?) as well as the oracular instruments. (7) The Kenite scribes of Jabez(l Ch 2 55); the simple fact that a chance captive from Succoth could write out a list of names and some one at least of the rudest 300 survivals of Gideon s 32,000 primitive

      warriors in those bloody frontier times could read it, the reference to the staff of the muster-master, marshal or scribe, and the "governors" (inscribers), in Deborah s Song, point in the same direction.

      While, therefore, the times were doubtless wild, the political unity very slight, and the unity of worship even less, there is evidence that there were both political and religious libraries throughout the period.

      Beginning with the monarchy, the library sit uation among the Israelites appears more and more clearly to correspond with that of the 12. Saul to surrounding nations. The first act the Mac- recorded after the choice and proc- cabees lamation of Saul as king was the

      writing of a constitution by Samuel and the depositing of this in the sacred archives (t S 10 25). This document (LXX hihlion) was perhaps one of the documents ("words") of Samuel whose words (1 Ch 29 29, history, chronicles, acts, book, etc) seem to have been possibly a regis ter kept by him, perhaps from the time that he suc ceeded Eli, as later the high-priestly register (< lay- book) of Johannes Maccabaeus was certainly kept from the beginning of his high-priesthood (1 Mace 16 24).

      Whether these "words" of Samuel were equiva lent to the technical register or "book of the words of days" or not, such registers were undoubtedly kept from the time of David on, and there is not hing so illuminating as to the actual library conditions of the times as the so-called chronicles, histories or acts the registers, journals or archives of the time. The roll-register seems to be called in full "the book of the words of days," or with explanatory fulness "book of the records of the words of days," but this appears to be an evolution from "words of days" or even "words," and these forms as well as the abbreviations "book of days" and "book" are used of the same technical work, which is the en grossing in chronological book-form of any series of individual documents all the documents of a record-office, general or local. The name is used also of histories written up on the basis of these register-books (the Books of Ch are in Heb, "words of days") but not themselves records. These charter-books, of course, so far as they go, mirror the contents of the archives which they transcribe, and the key to the public-library history of the period, both sacred and royal, as regards contents, at least, is to be found in them, while in turn the key to the understanding of this technical book- form itself lies in the understanding of the "word" as a technical book-form.

      The "word" in Heb is used of books, speeches, sayings, oracles, edicts, reports, formal opinions, agreements, indictments, judicial decisions, stories, records, regulations, sections of a discourse, lines of poetry, whole poems, etc, as well as acts, deeds, "matters," "affairs," events and words in the nar rowest sense. It is thus very exactly, as well as lit., tr d in the LXX by logos, which as a technical book-term (Birt, Antikes Buchwesen, 28, 29) means any distinct composition, long or short, whether a law, an epigram, or a whole complex work. The best Eng. equivalent for this "work-eomplete-in- itself," in the case of public records, is "document," and in the case of literary matters, it is "work or writing." The "words" of Samuel or David thus are his "acts" or "deeds" in the sense, not of doings, but of the individual documentary records of those doings quite in the modern sense of the "acts and proceedings" of a convention, or the "deeds" to property.

      In the pi., dibhre and logoi or logia alike mean a collection of documents, works or writings, i.e. "a library." Sometimes this is used in the sense of




      archives or library, at other times as a book con taining these collected works.

      These collected documents in register-form con stituted apparently a continuous series until the time when the Book of Ch was written and were extant at that time: the "words" of Samuel, "chronicle s" and "last words" of David (1 Ch 23 27; 27 24), the "book of the words [acts] of Solo mon" (1 K 11 41), the book of the words of days of the kings of Judah, and the book of the words of days of the kings of Israel the kingdoms after division each having naturally its own records.

      The general situation during the period as to archival matters is pretty well .summarized by Moore in the EB. From the time of Solomon, and more doubtfully from the time of David, he recog nizes that "records were doubtless kept in the palace," and that "the temples also doubtless had

      Plan of Pergamon.

      (Showing typical rrl;,ti.,,, ,,f tuinpl.-,;i.les, ami library.)

      their records," while there may have be-e-n also local recorels of cities and towns. These m-ords con tained probably chief events, treaties, edicts, etc probably brief annals "never wrought into narrative memoirs." The 1 temple ree-ords contained annals of succession, repairs, changes, etc (Eli, II, 2021- 28). The records were, however, probably not brief, but contained treaties, e tc, verbatim in full. To this should moreover be 1 adeled the significant fact that these archives contained not only busi ness records but also various works of a more or less literary character. Those mentioned include letters, prophecies, prayers, and even poems and Wisdom literature. The "wemls" of the kings of Israel contained prayers, visions and other matter not usually counte-d archival. The "acts" (words) of Solomon also containeel literary or quasi-literary material. According to Jos the archives of Tyre con tained similar material and this was also true of the; Amarna archive s (c 1380 BC) and those- at Boghnz- keui, as well as of the palace are-hives of Nineveh and the great temple archives of Nippur and Abu Habeh (Sippara). So, too, in Egypt the palace archives of King Neferikere containeel medical works and those of Rameses III, at least, magical works, while the temple archives in the- time of Thutmose III (Breasted, Ancient Records) con tained military annals, and those of Denderah cer tainly many works of a non-re gisterial character. The temples of early Greece also contained literary works and secular laws as we ll as temple archives proper.

      In short, the palace collections of Israel were no exception to the general rule of antiquity in con taining, besides palace archives proper, more or less of religious archives and literary works, while the temple collections contained more or less political records and literary works.

      This record system in Israel and Judah, as appears from the OT itself, was the system of Persia in OT 1 hues. It was the system of the Jews in Maccabean times, of Egypt during this whole period and for centuries before and after, and of Northern Syria likewise at about this time (Zakar-Baal, of Gebal, c 1113 BC). The books of Ex, Lev, Nu and Dt, whenever written, reveal the same system, Ex to Nu being in the form of a register, and Dt repre sented as an abstract prepared for engraving on stone, a use which Joshua is said to have made of it. We have, therefore, the same system existing before and after and on all sides geographically.

      All this neighboring practice points to a sys tem of (1) archival collections, (2) contemporary book registers, (3) contemporary publication by inscription, and, in the light of these, the OT method, from the time of David at least, becomes clear, certainly as to archival collections and registers and hardly less so as to the setting-up of inscriptions in permanent material. Even if D is not earlier than 621 BC, it assumes public inscription long before that time, quite comparable in extent to the inscrip tions of Thutmose 111 or King Mesha of Moab, and, although few long inscriptions have been re covered thus far, then; is at least the Siloam in scription (cf also Isa 30 8; Job 19 23.24; Isa 8 1; Jer 17 1; also the Decalogue). Each one of these three elements (even the 1 collection of inscriptions in the temple) was, it must be remembered, called in antiquity a "library."

      The reference to "the books" in Dnl (9 2) may pos sibly point to or foreshadow the synagogue library.

      Little weight is generally and properly given to the statement of 2 Mace 2 13, that Nehemiah founded a library and gathered into it, the writings "about the kings, the prophets and David, and the letters of the kings concerning votive offerings," but it is, as a matter of fact, evident that he, as well as Judas Maccabaeus, who is linked with him in the statement, must have done just this.

      From the time of the LXX tr, the idea of the library (bibliothekc) and even the public library ("books of the people," i.e. public records) was familiar enough, the LXN itself also, according to Jos, linking the temple library of Jerus with the Alexandrian library through the furnishing of books by the former to the latter for copying.

      With the Rom conquest and the rise of the lelu- maeans, naturally the methods developed in accord ance with Rom practice. It appears 13. NT from the frequent reference s of Jos

      Times that the public records were; extensive;

      and contained genealogical records as well as official letters, decrees, etc. The triple method of record continues. It appears, further (Blau, 9(i; Krauss, III, 179), that there were libraries and even lending libraries in the schools and syna gogues, not of Pal only, but wherever Jews were settled. Jos and Chrysostom with the Mish con firm the already very clear inference from St. Luke s account of Our Lord s teaching in the synagogue that at this time, and probably from the beginning of the synagogue, the books, the manner of their keep ing ami the ritual of their using were already essen- t ially as in t he modern synagogue . The first preach ing-places of the Christians were the synagogues, and when churche-s succeeded these, the church library naturally followed, but whether in Bible times or not is a matter of conjecture; they appear at least in very early churches.

      Libraries Lie, Lying



      Old Egyptian Bookcase.

      Whether the rich secular lit. to which Jos had access \\VMS in public or private libraries does not appear directly. It. is well known that it was as much a part of Rom public policy in Herod s time to found public libraries in the provinces as it was to restore temples. Twenty-four such provincial libraries, chiefly temple libraries, are known.

      The Rom practice of the lime still mixed literary with the archival material, and it is likely therefore that the public records of the Jewish temple had in them both fir and Lat secular books in con siderable quantity, as well as the Or Apoe and a large amount of Aram, or late Ileb lit. of Talmudic, character.

      As to the receptacles and places in which the books were kept, we have reference! even in the Ileb period to most of the main forms used 14. Book- among the nations: the wooden box, cases and the clay box or pot, the pouch, and on Buildings the other hand, once, the "house of books" so familiar in Egyp use and apparently referring to an individual chamber or semi-detached building of temple or palace. Most significant, how ever, is the statement that, the books were kept in the palace and temple treasuries or store houses.

      The sacred ark ( (iron), what ever it may have originally con tained, was looked on when D was written as a sacred wooden book-chest, and the ark in which the teaching priests carried the law about for public reading was in fact likewise a chest.

      Such chests were common among the Jews later, some with lids and some with side-opening (Jew Enc, II, 107-8; Blau, 178). It is tempting to find in D, where the book is to he put "by [AV "in"] the side of the ark" (Dt 31 20), a chest having both lid and openings in the side, but more likely per haps I) means a separate chest, like the coffer or pouch with the golden mice, which was also put "by the side" (niitffulli) of the ark (1 S 6 8).

      In the NT the "cloak" which Paul left behind at Troas (2 Tim 4 13) was probably (Wattenb., 614; see also Birt and Gardthausen), if not a wooden "capsa," at least some sort of bookcase or cover.

      The earthen vessel in which Jeremiah (32 14) puts the two "books" (1r ci "deeds"), one sealed and one unsealed, was one of the commonest bookcases of the ancient world. This information has lately been widely reinforced and associated with Bib. history by the discovery of the Elephantine papyri, which were, for the most part, kept in such clay jars (Meyer, Papyrusfund, If)). The word Penta teuch perhaps harks back to a five-roll jar, but more likely to a basket or wooden box with five compart ments (Blau, 65; Birt, Buchrolle, 21, 22). It was the collective label of a five-roll case, whether of earthenware, wood or basket work.

      The pouch or bag bookcase has perhaps its repre sentative in the phylactery (Mt 23 5), which was a sort of miniature armarium in that each of the four little rolls of its four compartments was tech nically a "book" (.ST /;/(rr). This name is commonly explained as an amulet guarding against evil spirits, but the term actually occurs in the papyri (Biblio- plujl i.r) of the preservation of books.

      The "house of books" (Ezr 6 1m) or "place of books" is a very close; parallel to bibliotheke, by which (in the pi.) it is tr d in the LXX. The phrase was a common term in Egypt for library, perhaps also sometimes for ncri/ or even registry, and it points to a chamber or semi-detached room or

      building where the book-chests, jars, etc, were kept. That at Edfu is a semi-detached room and contained many such cases.

      While there is little record of libraries in Bib. times, the very formation of the Canon itself, whether by the higher critical process, or by natural processes of gathering whole literary works, implies the gathering together of books, and the temple libraries common to both Egypt and Assyria- Babylonia are almost inevitably implied wherever there was a temple or sanctuary, whatever may be the facts as to the temple libraries. According to Ililprecht there were certainly such libraries and from very ancient times. The palace library of Assurbani-pal, though itself a discovery of the last times, brings the story down to the times of the written history. For the rest of the story see lit. below, esp. Dziatzko, Bibliothckcn, and the art. on "Libraries" in the Enc Brit. See also NINEVEH, LIBRARY OF.

      In the earlier period at least and including for the Jews the NT times, the particular locality in palace or temple seems to have been the treasury. In the Book of Ezr, search for the decree of Cyrus was to be made in the king s treasure-house (Ezr 6 17), and was made in the "house of books where the treasures were laid up" (Ezr 6 1m). The document was finally found in the palace at Ecbatana so too in 1 Mace 14 49 the archives are placed in the t reasury.

      In NT times there had already been a good deal of development in the matter of library buildings. A general type had been evolved which consisted of (1) a colonnade, (2) a lecture-room, a reading-room or assembly room, (3) small rooms for book storage. Such accounts as we have of the Alexandrian li braries, with the excavations at Pergamus, Athens and Rome, reveal the same type the book-rooms, the colonnade where piasters walked or sat and talked with their pupils, the rooms for assembly where the senate or other bodies sometimes sat. In short, as long before in Egypt, whether in palace or temple, the place of teaching was the place of books.

      It is significant thus that Our Lord taught in the Treasury, which in Herod s Temple was in the court of the temple proper probably the porticos under the women s gallery, some of the adjoining rooms being used for books. As this was within the barrier which no Gentile could pass, Herod must have had also a library of public records in the outer colonnade. See further, NINEVEH, LIBRARY OF.

      LITERATURE. Luclwig Blau, Studien zum althe- braischcn Buchwesen. StrassburR i, E, 1902, 17&-.SO; Sam. Krauss, Talmudische Arcliiioloi/ie, Leipzig, 1912,111, 193-98; J. W. Clark, Care of Books, Cambridge, 1901; E. C. Richardson, Bililical Libraries: A Sketch of Lihrnri/ Ilistory from 3400 BC to !, ,() AD. London. Oxford University Press, 1914. See the lit. under WHITING.



      LIBYA, lib i-a, LIBYANS, lib i-anz: In the OT the word occurs in AV in 2 Ch 12 3; 16 8; Nah 3 9 for "Lubirn" (thus RV). RV, however, retains "Libyans" in Dnl 11 43. In Jer 46 9; Ezk 30 5; 38 5, the words are replaced in RV by PUT (q.v.). In the NT the word "Libya" (Ai/3tfij, Libue) occurs, in close connection with CYRENE (q.v.) (Acts 2 10). (ir and Rom writers apply the term to the African continent, generally exclud ing Egypt. See LUBIM.

      LICE, Us (D" 1 ??, kinnlm [Ex 8 17.18; Ps 105 31], C23 , kinnim [Ex 8 Hi], C33 , kinnam [Ex 8 17. 18]; LXX O-KVI<|>S, skniphes [Ex 8 16.18], T&V



      <rKv<|>a, ton sknipha, once in Ex 8 IS; O-KVITTCS, sknlpcs [Ps 105 31]; Vulg scniphcs; ace. to Lid- dell and Scott, s.v. o-Kvty, Slav. sknipa = culex): The references, both in Ex and in Pss, are all to the plague of "lice." RVm suggests "fleas" or "sand- flics." The LXX rendering would favor "sand- flies" or "mosquitoes," between which two insects the OT writers would hardly be expected to dis criminate. Mosquitoes belong to the order of Diplcra, family Culicidae; the sandfly (Plcbotomus p(ipataci) to the family of Simuliidae of the same order. The sandfties are much .smaller than mos quitoes, and arc nearly noiseless, but give; a sharp sting which may leave an unpleasant irritation. They are abundant in the Levant. In South ern Europe they cause the "three-day fever" or "papataci." As stated under GNAT Cq.v.), there is little ground other than the authority of tin; LXX for deciding between "lice," "fleas," "sand-flies," or "mosquitoes" as 1r- H of kinnim. See also under GNAT the note on ken, RVm "gnat" (Isa 51 G).


      LICENCE, ll sens: This word is not found at all in RV (except in Jth 11 14; Ecclus 15 20; 1 Mace 1 13), and twice only in AV (except in 2 Mace 4 9), both times in Acts. In Acts 21 40 (as tr of ^Tnrp^Tro;, cpilrcpu) ARV has "leave" where AV has "licence." In 25 16, "opportunity to make his de fence" (as trof T6-n-ovdTro\\oytas, (upon apologias) takes the place of "have licence to answer for himself."

      LIDEBIR, lid 6-ber (T3"f? , lidh bhlr): For "of Debir" in EV; RVm suggests the name "Lidebir" (Josh 13 20), a city in the territory of Gad. It is probably identical with LO-DEBAK (q.v.).

      LIE, H, LYING ("IpE , shelf cr [usually, e.g. Isa 9 15; Zee 13 3], or 313 * ka-ab/i vb. [Job 34 0; Mic

      2 11]; \\J/v5os, pwuilos [.In 8 44; L. Lying Rev 21 27], "to speak falsely," "to Denned fabricate," "to make a false state

      ment"; \\J/v8o(j,ai, psciidomai, in Acts 5 3.4): In its very essence, a lie is something said with intent to deceive. It is not always a spoken word that is a lie, for a life lived under false pre tenses, a hypocritical life, may be a lie equally with a false word (Jer 23 14). A vain thing, like an idol, may be a lie (Isa 59 4), as also a false system (Rom 3 7). Error, as opposed to truth, is a lie (1 Jn 2 21). The denial of the deity of Jesus Christ is regarded as "the" lie (I Jn 2 22).

      The origin of lies and lying is traced to Satan who is called "a liar, and the father thereof" (Jn 8 44; Acts 5 3). Satan s dealing with Eve (Gen 3) furnishes us with a splendid illustration of the first lie, so far as we have any record of it.

      The whole race is guilty of this sin: "The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon

      as they arc born, .speaking lies" (Ps 58

      2. A Racial 3). It is a part of the old Adamic Sin nature, "the old man" (Col 3 9),

      which the believer in Jesus Christ is called upon to put off. So prominent a factor is it in the experience of the race that among the condensed catalogue of sins, for the commission of which men are finally condemned, the sin of lying finds its place: "All liars shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone" (Rev 21 8AV).

      God s attitude toward this sin is strongly marked throughout both the OT and NT. The righteous

      are called upon to hate lying (Prov

      3. God s 13 f>), to avoid it (Zeph 3 13), to Attitude respect not those who lie, and utterly to It reject their company (Ps 40 4; 101

      7), to pray to be delivered from it (Ps 119 29). The wicked are said to love lying (Ps

      Libraries Lie, Lying

      52 3), to delight in it (Ps 62 4), to seek after it (Ps 4 2), and to give heed to it (Prov 17 4). Lying leads to worse crimes (Hos 4 1.2).

      The punishment to be meted out to liars is of the

      severest kind. They are positively and absolutely

      excluded from heaven (Rev 21 27;

      4. The 22 15), and those who arc guilty of this Penalty sin are cast into the lake of fire (Rev

      21 S). We are reminded of the awful fate meted out to Ananias and Sapphira when they lied to God and man (Acts 5 1-11). God will "destroy them that speak lies" (Ps 5 0), and "lie that uttereth lies shall not escape" (Prov 19 5), yea "a sword is upon the liars" (Jer 50 36 AV). The liar is thereby debarred from rendering any true and acceptable worship unto the Lord (Ps 24 4).

      The Scriptures abound with illustrations of lying and the results and penalties therefor, A careful study of these illustrations will reveal the subtilty of falsehood. Sometimes a lie is a half-truth, as set forth in the story of Satan s temptation of Eve (Gen 3). Cain s lie (Gen 4 9) was of the nature of an evasive answer to a direct question. Jacob s deception of his father, in order that he might inherit the blessing of the firstborn, was a bare faced and deliberate lie (Gen 27 1!)). The answer which Joseph s brethren gave to their father when he asked them concerning the welfare of their brother Joseph is an illustration, as well as a reve lation, of the depth of the wickedness of hearts that deliberately set themselves to falsify and deceive (Gen 37 31.32). Even good men are sometimes overtaken in a lie, which, of course, is no more ex cusable in them than in the wicked; indeed, it is more shameful because the righteous are professed followers of the truth (David in 1 S 21 2). What more striking example of the heinousness of lying in the sight of God can we have than the fate which befell Gehazi who, in order to satisfy a covetous desire for possessions, misrepresented his master Elisha to Naaman the Syrian whom the prophet had healed of his leprosy: "The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee, and unto thy seed for ever. And he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow" (2 K 5 22-27)? The story of Peter s denial of his Lord, and his persistent asseverations that he did not know Him and was not one of His followers, makes us shudder to think that it is possible for a follower of Christ so far to forget himself as not only to lie, but buttress lying with swearing (Mt 26 72).

      Throughout the Scriptures we find pscudos joined to

      other words, e.g. "false apostles" Otu6an-6crToAo5,

      pseudapdstolos, 2 Cor 11 1:5), so called

      5. Pseudos probably because a true apostle delivers United tno message of another, namely, God, , ., n-Vi Q f wnil(! these "false apostles" cared only wun uuier fq r self. Such are from Satan, and, like Words him, they transform themselves into

      angels of light, and sail under false colors. We read also of "false prophets" (i//ci<6o7rpo./)T>)s, p.ii uilt>i>ri>i>fif-tcx, Mt 7 15; cf Jer 23 16f), thereby mean ing those; who falsely claim to bring messages from CJod and to speak in behalf of God. .Mention is made also of "false brethren" (y/eu6d<$eAf|>os, pseuddili-l ithus, 2 Cor 11 2(i), meaning Judai/.ing teachers, as in Cial 2 4; "false teachers" (^tu6o6ioao-ttAos-, pseudodiddskalos, 2 Pet 2 1), men whose teaching was false and who falsely claimed the teacher s office. We read further of "false wit nesses" (i^eufio/AapTV?, pxeuilnmartiix, Mk 26 (30); by such are meant those who swear falsely, and testify to what they know is not true. Ko, too, we find mention of the "false Christs" (i^tuftoxpicn-oi, pseuddchristoi, Mt 24 24; Mk 13 22). This personage! does not so much deny the existence of a Christ, but rather, on the contrary, builds upon the world s expectations of such a person, and falsely, arrogantly, blasphemously asserts that he is the Christ promised and foretold. It is the Antichrist who denies that there is a Christ; the false Christ affirms him self to be the Christ. Of course thereis a sense! in which the man of sin will be both Antichrist and a false Christ. See FALSK CHKISTS; FALSE PROPHETS; FALSE S WEAUI NO, FALSE WITNESS.


      Liers-in-Wait Life



      LIERS-IN-WAIT, ll-erz-in-wat (Jgs 9 25; 16 12;

      20 30 (T). Sec AMHTSH.

      LIEUTENANT, hi-ton ant, lef-ten ant. See SATRAPS.

      LIFE, llf (-"^n, fiayylin, TEE:,, m-pltcxfi, rPI , ril"h, <~Pn , hayah; SWT|, zP, xl/ux^i l>xi t" j P s, 67s, irvii(j.a, pncunid) .


      1. Popular I se of the Term

      2. Complexity of the Idea


      IV. 1 s THI-: N T

      1. In the Synoptic Gospels

      2. In the Fourth Gospel

      J5. In the Acts of the Apostles

      4. In the Writings of Paul

      5. In tin! Writings of John

      (i. In the Other Hooks of the NT LITERATURE

      / The Terms. Of the Heb terms, ftni/nh is the yb. which means "to live." "to have life." or the vital prin ciple "to continue to live." or "to live prosperously." In the Piel it signifies "to give life, or preserve, or quicken and restore life." The Hiphil is much like the Piel. The noun ham/im generally used in the pi. is an abstract nonn meaning "life." i.e. the possession of the vital prin ciple with its energies and activities. A> ;)//../, often means "living being" or "creature." Sometimes 11 has the force of the reflexive "self." At other times it refers to the seat of the soul, the personality, the emo tions the appetites passions and even mental acts. Frequently it means "life," the "seat of life," and m this way it is used about 171 t in the OT, referring to the principle of vitality in both men and animals. Ru a h signifies "wind," "breath." principle or source of vitality, but is never used to signify life proper.

      //. The OT Teaching. The term "life" is used

      in the OT in the popular sense. It meant life in

      the body, the existence and activity

      1. Popular of the man in all his parts and energies. Use of the It is the person complete, conscious Term and active. There is no idea of the

      body being a fetter or prison to the soul; the body was essential to life and the writers had no desire to be separated from it. To them the physical sphere was a necessity, and a man was living when all his activities were performed in the light of God s face and favor. The secret and source of life to them was relationship with God. There was nothing good or desirable apart from this relation of fellowship. To overcome or be rid of sin was necessary to life. The real center of gravity in life was in the moral and religious part of mail s nature. This must be in fellowship with God, the source of all life and activity.

      The conception of life is very complex. Several

      meanings are clearly indicated: (1) Very frequently

      it refers to the vital principle itself,

      2. Complex- a part from its manifestations (Gen 2 ity of the 7). Here it is the breath of life, or Idea the breath from God which contained

      and communicated the vital _ principle to man and made him a nci>hcxh or living being (see also Gen 1 30; 6 17; 7 22; 45 5, etc). (2) It is used to denote the period of one s actual existence, i.e. "lifetime" (Gen 23 1; 25 7; 47 9; Ex 6 16; IS. 20, etc). (3) The life is represented as a direct gift from God, and dependent absolutely upon Him for its continuance (Gen 1 11-27; 2 7; Nu 16 22). (4) In a few cases it refers to the conception of children, denoting the time when conception was possible (den 18 10.14m; 2 K 4 10.17m). (5) In many cases it refers to the totality of man s relation ships and activities, all of which make up life (Dt 32 47; 1 S 25 29; Job 10 1, etc). (6) In a few instances it is used synonymously with the means of sustaining life (Dt 24 G; Prov 27 27). (7) Many times it is used synonymously with happiness or well-being (Dt 30 15.19; Ezr 6 10; Ps 16 11; 30 5; Prov 2 19, and frequently). (8) It is

      always represented as a very precious gift, and offences against life were to be severely punished (Gen 9 4.5; Lev 17 14; 24 17).

      Capital punishment is here specifically enjoined be cause of the value of the life that has been taken. The lex talionis required life for life (Kx 21 23; Dt 19 21); and this even applies to the beast (Lev 24 IK). The life was represented as abiding in the blood and therefore the blood must not be eaten, or lightly shed upon the ground (Lev 17 15; Dt 12 23). The Decalogue for bids murder or the taking of human life wrongfully (Kx 20 13; Dt 5 17). Garments taken in pledge must not be kept over night, for thereby the owner s life might be endangered (Dt 24 <>). That life was considered precious appears in 2 K 10 24; Est 7 7; .lob 2 4; Prov 4 23; 6 26. The essence of sacrifice consisted in the fact that the life (the uevhcsh) resided in the blood; thus when blood was shed, life was lost (Dt 12 23; Lev 17 11). Oppression on the part of judges and rulers was severely condemned because oppression was detrimental to life.

      (9) Long life was much desired and sought by the Israelites, and tinder certain conditions this was possible (Ps 91 10). The longevity of the ante diluvian patriarchs is a problem by itself (see ANTKDIMTVIANS). It was one of the greatest of calamities to be cut off in the midst of life (Isa 38 10-12; 53 S); that a good old age was longed for is shown by Ex 20 12; Ps 21 4; 34 12; 61 0, etc. This long life was possible to the obedient to parents (Ex 20 12; Dt 5 16), and to those obe dient to (iod (Dt 4 4; Prov 3 1.2; 10 27); to the wise (Prov 3 16; 9 11); to the pure in heart (Ps 34 12-14; 91 1-10; Eccl 3 12.13); to those who feared God (Prov 10 27; Isa 65 18-21; 38 2-5, etc). (10) The possibility of an immortal life is dimly hinted at in the earliest writing, and much more clearly taught in the later. The Tree of Life in the midst of the garden indicated a possible im mortality for man upon earth (Gen 2 9; 3 22.24) (see TREE OF LIFE) .

      Failing to partake of this and falling into sin by par taking of the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil," they were driven forth from the garden lest they should eat of the tret; of life and become immortal beings in their sinful condition. To deprive man of the possibility of making himself immortal while sinful was a blessing to the race; immortality without holiness is a curse rather than a blessing. The way to the tree of life was henceforth guarded by the cherubim and the name of a sword, so that men could not partake of it in their con dition of sin. This, however, did not exclude the possi bility of a spiritual immortality in another sphere. Enoch s fellowship with God led to a bodily translation; so also Elijah, and several hundred years after their deaths God called Himself the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, implying that they were really alive then. In Isa 26 10 there is a clear prophecy of a resur rection, and an end of death. Dnl 12 2 asserts a resur rection of many of the dead, some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt. Some of the psalmists firmly believed in the continuity of the life in fellowship with God (Ps 16 10 11; 17 15; 23 6; 49 15; 73 24.25). The exact meaning of some of these statements is difficult to understand, yet this much is clear- there was a revolt against death in many pious minds, and a belief that the life of fellowship with (iod could not end or be broken even by death itself. See IMMORTALITY.

      (11) The fundamental fact in the possession of life was vital relationship with God. Men first lived because God breathed into them the breath of life (Gen 2 7). Man s vital energies are the outflowing of the spirit or vital energies of God, and all activities are dependent upon the vitalizing power from God. When God sends forth His spirit, things are created, and live; when He withdraws that spirit they die (Ps 104 30). "In his favor is life" (Ps 30 5 AV). He is the fountain of life (Ps 36 9; 63 3). "All my fountains are in thee" (Ps 87 7). The secret of Job s success and happiness was that the Almighty was with him (Job 29 2). This fellowship brought him health, friends, prosperity and all other blessings. The consciousness of the fellowship with God led men to revolt against the idea of going to Sheol where this fellowship must



      Liers-in-Wait Life

      cease. They felt that such a relationship eould not cease, and God would take them out of Sheol.

      ///. In the Apocrypha. A similar conception of life appears here as in the <JT. Zoe and psuche are used and occur most frequently in the books of Wisd and Kcclus. In 1 and 2 Esd the word is little used; 2 Esd 3 5; 16 61 are but a quotation from (ion 2 7, and refer to the vital principle; 2 Esd 14 30. Tob, Jth, Ad Est use it in the same sense also. Wisd and Ecclus use it in several senses closely resembling the use in Prov (cf Ecclus 4 12; Prov 3 IS; 10 1<>). In general there is no additional meaning attached to the word. The Ps Sol refer to everlasting life in 3 1<>; 13 10; 14 2. 0.

      IV. In the NT. Of the Or terms bios is used at times as the equivalent of the Heb hni/i/im. It refers to life extensively, i.e. the period of one s existence 1 , a lifetime; also to the means of sustaining life, such as wealth, etc. 1 xufhe is also equivalent to Inujuim at times, but very frequently to nrpln-xlt and sometimes to n mh. Thus it means the vital principle, a living being, the imma terial part of man, the seat of the affections, desires and appetites, etc. The term ziii- corresponds very closely to Itni/i/im, and means the vital principle, the state of one who is animate, the fulness of activities and rela tionship both in the physical and spiritual realms.

      The content of the word zoe is the ehief theme of the NT. The life is mediated by Jesus Christ. In the OT this life was through fellowship with God, iu the NT it is through Jesus Christ the 1 Mediator. The OT idea is carried to its completion, its highest development of meaning, being enriched by the supreme teaching and revelation of Jesus Christ. In the NT as well as in the OT, the center of gravity in human life is in the moral and religious nature of man.

      The teaching here regarding life naturally links itself with OT ideas and the prevailing conceptions

      of Judaism. The word is used in the 1. In the sense of (1) the vital principle, that Synoptic which gives actual physical existence Gospels (Mt 2 20; Mk 10 45; Lk 12 22 f;

      14 20). (2) It is nlso the period of one s existence, i.e. lifetime (Lk 1 75; 16 2")). (3) Once it may mean the totality of man s relation ships and activities (Lk 12 15) which do not con sist in abundance of material possessions. (4) Generally it means the real life, the vital connection with the world and God, the sum total of man s highest interests. It is called "eternal life (Mt 19 29; 25 40). It is called "life" (Mt. 18 8.9; 19 17; Mk 9 43.45.40). In these passages Jesus seems to imply that it is almost equivalent to "laying up treasures in heaven," or to "entering the kingdom of God. The entering into life :ind entering the kingdom are practically the same, for the kingdom is that spiritual realm where God con trols, where the principles, activities and relation ships of heaven prevail, and hence to enter into these is to enter into "life." (5) The lower life of earthly relationship and activities must be sub ordinated to the higher and spiritual (Mt 10 39; 16 25; Lk 9 24). These merely earthly interests may be very desirable and enjoyable, but whoever would cling to these and make them supreme is in danger of losing the higher. The spiritual being infinitely more valuable should be sought even if the other relationship should be lost entirely. (0) Jesus also speaks of this life as something future, and to be realized at the consummation of the age (Mt 19 29; Lk 18 30), or the world to come.

      This in no wise contradicts the statement that eternal life can be entered upon in this life. As Jesus Him self was in vital relationship with the spiritual world and lived the eternal life, He sought to bring others into the same blessed state. This life was far from being per fect. The perfection could come only at the consumma tion when all was perfection and then they would enter into the perfect fellowship with Ood and connection with the spirit-world and its blessed experiences. There is no conflict in His teaching here, no real difficulty, only an illustration of Browning s statement, "Man never is but wholly hopes to be." Thus in the synoptists .Jesus teaches the reality of the eternal life as a present pos session as well as future fruition. The future is but the

      flowering out and perfection of the present. Without the present bud, there can be no future flower.

      (7) The conditions which Jesus lays down for entering into this life are faith in Himself as the one Mediator of the life, and the following of Him in a life of obedience. He alone knows the Father and can reveal Him to others (Mt 11 27). He alone can give true rest and can teach men how to live (11 28 f). The sure way to this life is: "Follow me." His whole ministry was virtually a prolonged effort to win confidence in Himself as Son and Me diator, to win obedience, and hence bring men unto these spiritual relationships and activities which constitute the true life.

      The fullest and richest teachings regarding life are found here. The greatest word of this Gospel is "life." The author says he wrote 2. In the the Gospel in order that "ye may have Fourth life" (20 31). Most of the teachings

      Gospel recorded, circle around this great word

      "life." This teaching is in no way distinctive and different from that of the synoptists, but is supplementary, and completes the teaching of Jesus on the subject. The use of the word is not as varied, being concentrated on the one supreme subject. (1) In a few cases it refers only to the vital principle which gives life or produces a life time (10 11.15-1S; 13 37; 15 13). (2) It repre sents Jesus the Logos as the origin and means of all life to the world. As the preincarnate Logos lie was the source of life to the universe (1 4). As the incarnate* Logos lie said His life had been derived originally from the Father (5 20; 6 57; 10 IS). He then was the means of life, to men (3 15.10; 4 14; 6 21.39.40); and this was the purpose for which He came into the world (6 33.34.51; 10 10). (3) The prevailing reference, however, is to those activities which are the expression of fellow ship with God and Jesus Christ.. These relation ships are called "eternal life" (3 15.10.30; 4 14, etc). The nearest approach to a definition of eternal life is found in 17 3. Though not a scien tific or metaphysical definition, it is nevertheless Jesus own description of eternal life, and reveals His conception of it. It is thus more valuable than a formal definition. It is "to know God and Jesus Christ whom He hath sent."

      This knowledge is vastly more than mere intellect ual perception or understanding. It is moral knowledge, it is personal acquaintance, it is fellowship, a contact, if we may so speak, of personality with personality, an inner affinity and sympathy, an experience of similar thoughts, emotions, purposes, motives, desires, an inter change of the heart s deepest feelings and experiences. It is u bringing of the whole personality of man into right relationship with the personality of Ood. This rela tion is ethical, personal, binding the two together with ties which nothing can separate, it is into this expe rience that Jesus came to bring men. Such a life Jesus says is satisfying to all who hunger and thirst for it (4" 14; 6 :*">); it is the source of light to all (1 4; 8 12); it is indestructible (6 - r ><S; 11 2(>>; it is like a well of water in the soul (4 14); it is procured by personally partaking of those qualities which belong to Jesus (6 53).

      (4) This life is a present possession and has also a glorious future fruition, (a) To those who exer cise faith in Jesus it is a present experience and possession (4 10; 6 24.40). Faith in Him as the Son of God is the psychological means by which persons are brought into this vital relationship with God. Those who exercised the faith immediately experienced this new power and fellowship and exercised the new activities. (/>) It has a glorious fruit ion in the future also (4 30; 6 29; 6 39.44.54). John does not give so much prominence to the eschatological phase of Jesus teachings as to the present reality and actual possession of this blessed life.

      (5) It has been objected that in speaking of the Logos as the source of lif(! John is pursuing a metaphysical line,

      Life Light



      whereas the life which he so much emphasizes has an ethical basis, and he makes no attempt to reconcile the two. The objection may have force to one who has imbibed the Kitsehlian idea of performing the impos sible task of eliminating all metaphysics from theology. It will not appeal very strongly to the average Christian. It is a purely academic objection. The ordinary mind will think that if .Jesus Christ is the source of ethical and eternal life it is because lie possesses something of the essence and bri>,</ of Cod, which makes ilis work for men possible. The metaphysical and the ethical may exist together, may run concurrently, the one being the source and seat of the other. There is no contradic tion. Hoth metaphysics and ethics are a legitimate and necessary exercise of the human mind.

      Ill His intercessory prayer (.In 17), Jesus said His

      mission was 1<> give eternal life to as many as the

      Father had given Him (17 2). The

      3. In the record in Acts is the carrying out of Acts of the that, purpose. The word "life" is used Apostles in several senses: (1) the vital prin ciple or physical life (17 2f>; 20 10.24;

      27 10.22); (2) also the sum total of man s relation ships and activities upon earth (5 20; 26 4); (3) Jesus Christ is regarded as the source and principle of life, being called by Peter, "the Prince of life" (3 15). Also the life eternal or everlasting is spoken of with the same significance as in the Gospels (11 IS; 13 4G.4S).

      Here also the words for "life" are used in various

      senses: (1) the vital principle which gives physical

      vitality and existence (Rom 8 11.38;

      4. In the 11 ir>; 1 Cor 3 22; Phil 1 20; 2 30); Writings (2) the sum total of man s relationships of Paul and activities (1 Cor 6 3.4; 1 Tim 2

      2; 48; 2 Tim 1 1; 3 10 AV); (3) those relationships with God and with Christ in the spiritual realm, and the activities arising therefrom which constitute the real and eternal life. This is mediated by Christ (Rom 6 10). It is in Christ (Rom 6 11). It is the free gift of God (6 23). It is also mediated or imparted to us through the Spirit (Horn 8; 2 Cor 2 16; 3 6; Gal 6 8). It comes through obedience to the word (Rom 7 10; Phil 2 16); and through faith (1 Tim 1 16). It may be apprehended in this life (1 Tim 6 12. 10). It is brought to light through the gospel (2 Tim 1 10). It is a reward to those who by patience in well-doing seek it (Rom 2 7). It gives conquer ing power over sin and death (Rom 5 17.18.21). It is the end or reward of a sanctified life (Ilom 6 22). It is a present possession and a hope (Tit 12; 37). It will be received in all its fulness hereafter (Rom 2 7; 2 Cor 5 4). Thus Paul s use of the word substantially agrees with the teach ing in the Gospels, and no doubt was largely based upon it.

      In the Johannine Epp. and Rev, the contents of the teim "life" are the same as those in the Fourth

      Gospel. Life in certain passages (1 6. In the Jn 3 16; Rev 80; 11 11; 12 11) V/ritings is mere physical vitality and existence of John upon earth. The source of life is

      Christ Himself (1 Jn 1 1 f ; 5 llf.16). The blessed eternal life in Christ is a present pos session to all those who are in fellowship with the Father and the Son (1 Jn 6 11.12). Here is an echo of the words of Jesus (Jn 17 3) where John describes the life, the eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested unto us. It is virtually fellowship with the Father and with the Son (1 Jn 1 2.4). Life is promised to those who are faithful (Rev 2 7); and the crown of life is promised to those who are faithful unto death (Rev 2 10). The crown of life doubtless refers to the realization of all the glorious possibilities that come through fellowship with God and the Son. The thirsty are invited to come and drink of the water of life; freely (Rev 21 6; 22 17). The river of life flows through the streets of the New Jerusalem (22 1), and the

      tree of life blooms on its banks, bearing twelve manner of fruit (22 2.14). Sec; TREE OF LIFE.

      The Ep. to the He speaks of our lifetime or periods of existence upon earth (2 1~>; 7 3) , like wise of the power of an indissoluble 6. In the life (7 16); James promises the crown Other of life to the faithful (1 12). This

      Books of reward is the fulness of life s possi- the NT bilities hereafter. Our lifetime is

      mentioned in 4 14 and represented as brief as a vapor. Peter in 1 Pet 3 7 speaks of man and wife as joint-heirs of the grace of life, and of loving life (3 10), referring to the totality of rela tionships and activities. The "all things that _per- tain unto life and godliness" (2 Pet 1 3) constitute the whole Christian life involving the life eternal.

      LITERATURE. Articles on "Life" in IIDB, DCfl, Jew Enc; on "Soul," "Spirit," etc, ibid, and in Knc Brit, EB, Kitto, Smith, Standard, etc; Laidlaw, Hihlr Doctrine of Man; Delitzsch, A Si/stem of liih. Psychology; comms. on the various passages; Davidson, (> T Theolni/i/; Oehler and Schultx, <)T Thr<>lo,/i/; Stevens, Johnnnini- Theology and Pauline Thcoloi/i/; Holtzmann, -V T The ology, I, 2!3 ff; G. Dalman, Words of .Ms MS; Phillips Brooks, More Abundant Life; B. F. WestCOtt, Historic. Faith; F. J. A. Hort, The Wan, the Truth, the Life; J. (!. Hoare, Life in St. John s Gospel*; E. White, Life and Christ; Salmond, Tim Christ/mi Doctrine of Immortality; II. J. Knowling, Witness of the Epistles and The Testi mony of St. I aul to Christ; comms. on the various pas sages; McPherson, "The NT View of Life," Expos, I, ser. v, 72 if; Massie, "Two NT Words Denoting Life," Expos, II, ser. iv, 380 if; Schrenk, Die Johannistische Anschauung vom Leben.


      LIFT: To make lofty, to raise up. A very com mon word in EV representing a great variety of Ilcb and Gr words, alt-hough in the OT used chiefly as the tr of &^5 , ndsd . Of none of these words, however, is "lift" used as a technical tr, and "lift" is interchanged freely with its synonyms, esp. "exalt" (cf Ps 75 5; 89 24) ami "raise" (cf Eccl 4 10; 2 S 12 17). "Lift" is still perfectly good English, but not in all the senses in which it is used in EV; e.g. such phrases as "men that lifted up axes upon a thicket" (Ps 74 5), "lift up thy feet unto the perpetual ruins" (Ps 74 3, etc), and even the common "lift up the eyes" or "hands" are dis tinctly archaic. However, almost all the uses are perfectly clear, and only the following need be noted. "To lift up the head" (Gen 40 13.10.20; 2 K 25 27; Ps 3 3; Sir 11 13; Lk 21 28) means to raise from a low condition (but on Ps 24 7.0 see GATE). To "lift up the horn" (Ps 75 5) is to assume a confident position, the figure being taken from fighting oxen (see HORN). "Lift up the face" may be meant lit. (2 K 9 32), or it may denote the bestowal of favor (Ps 4 6) ; it may mean the atti tude of a righteous man toward God (Job 22 26), or simply the attitude of a suppliant (Ex.r 9 6).


      LIGHT, lit piX, or, "lisp , ma or; <J>s, phos; many other words) :

      1. Origin of Light

      2. A Comprehensive Term

      (1) Natural

      (2) Artificial

      (3) Miraculous

      (4) Mental, Moral, Spiritual

      3. An Attribute of Holiness

      (1) God

      (2) Christ

      (3) Christians

      (4) The Church

      4. Symbolism

      5. Expressive Terms

      The creation of light was the initial step in the creation of life. "Let there be light" (Gen 13) was the first word of God spoken after His creative Spirit "moved" upon the primary material out of which He created the heavens and the earth, and



      Life Light

      which lay, until the utterance of that word, in

      the chaos of darkness and desolation. Something

      akin, possibly, to the all-pervasive

      1. Origin electro-magnetic activity of the aurora of Light borealis penetrated the chaotic night

      of the world. The ultimate focusing of light (on the 4th day of creation, Gen 1 14) in suns, stars, and solar systems brought the initial creative process to completion, as the essential condition of all organic life. The origin of light thus finds its explanation in the purpose and very nature of God whom John defines as not only the Author of light but, in an all-inclusive sense, as light itself: "God is light" (1 Jn 1 5).

      The word "light" is Divinely rich in its compre hensiveness and meaning. Its material splendor

      is used throughout the Scriptures as

      2. A Com- the symbol and synonym of all that is prehensive luminous and radiant in the mental, Term moral and spiritual life of men and

      angels; while the eternal God, because of His holiness and moral perfection, is pictured as "dwelling in light unapproachable" (1 Tim 6 16). Every phase of the word, from the original light in the natural world to the spiritual glory of the celestial, is found in Holy Writ.

      (1) Natural light. The light of day (Gen 1 5); of sun, moon and stars; "lights in the firmament" (Gen 1 14-18; Ps 74 16; 136 7; 148 3; Eccl 12 2; Rev 22 5). Its characteristics are beauty, radiance, utility. It "rejoiceth the heart" (Prov 15 30); "Truly the light is sweet" (Eccl 11 7); with out it men stumble and are helpless (Jn 11 9.10); it is something for which they wait with inexpressible longing (Job 30 26; cf Ps 130 6). Life, joy, activity and all blessings are dependent upon light.

      Light and life are almost synonymous to the inhabit ants of Pal, and in the same way darkness and death. Theirs is the land of sunshine. When they go to other lands of clouded skies their only thought is to return to the brightness and sunshine of their native land. In Pal there is hardly a day in the whole year when the sun does not shine for some part of it, while for five months of the year there is scarcely an interruption of the sun shine. Time is reckoned from sunset to sunset. The day s labor closes with the corning of darkness. "Man goeth forth unto his work and to his labor until the evening" (Ps 104 23).

      The suddenness of the change from darkness to light with the rising sun and the disappearance of the sun in the evening is more striking than in more northern coun tries, and it is not strange that in the ancient days there should have aris.-n a worship of the sun as the giver of light and happiness, and that Job should mention tho enticement of sun-worship when IK; "beheld the sun when it shined, or the moon walking in brightness" (Job 31 2(5). The severest plague in Kgypt next to the slaying of the firstborn was the plague of darkness which fell upon the Egyptians (Ex 10 23). This love of light finds expres sion in both OT and NT in a very extensive use of the word to express those things which are most to be desired and most helpful to man, and in this connection we find some of the most beautiful figures in the Bible.

      (2) Artificial light Whm_ natural light fails, man by discovery or invention provides himself with some temporary substitute, however dim and inadequate. The ancient Hebrews had "oil for the light" (Ex 25 6; 35 8; Lev 24 2) and lamps (Ex 35 14; Mt 5 15). "There were many lights [Xa/jLTrds, lampds] in the upper chamber" at Troas, where Paul preached until midnight (Acts 20 8); so Jer 25 10 II V, "light of the lamp," AV "candle."

      (3) Miraculous light. When the appalling plague of "thick darkness," for three days, enveloped the Egyptians, terrified and rendered them helpless, "all the childn>n of Israel had light in their dwell ings" (Ex 10 23). Whether the darkness was due to a Divinely ordered natural cause or the light was the natural light of day, the process that pre served the interspersed Israelites from the encom passing darkness was supernatural. Miraculous, also, even though through natural agency, was the

      "pillar of fire" that gave light to the Israelites escaping from Pharaoh (Ex 13 21; 14 20; Ps 78 14), "He led them .... all the night with a light of fire." Supernatural was the effulgence at Christ s transfiguration that made "his garments . . . . white as the light" (Mt 17 2). Under the same category Paul classifies the great light that suddenly shone round about him from heaven on the way to Damascus (Acts 22 6; cf 93). In these rare instances the supernatural light was not only symbolic of an inner spiritual light, but instrumental, in part at least, in revealing or pre paring the way for it.

      (4) Mental, moral, spiritual light. The phenom ena of natural light have their counterpart in the inner life of man. Few words lend themselves with such beauty and appropriateness to the experiences, conditions, and radiance of the spiritual life. For this reason the Scriptures use "light" largely in the figurative sense. Borrowed from the natural world, it is, nevertheless, inherently suited to portray spiritual realities. In secular life a distinct line of demarkation is drawn between intellectual and spiritual knowledge and illumination. Education that enlightens the mind may leave the moral man untouched. This distinction rarely obtains in the Bible, which deals with man as a spiritual being and looks upon his faculties as interdependent in their action.

      (a) A few passages, however, refer to the light that comes chiefly to the intellect or mind through Divine in struction, e.g. Ps 119 130, "The opening of thy words giveth light"; so Prov 6 23, "The law is light." Even here tho instruction includes moral as well as mental en lightenment.

      (6) Moral: Job 24 13.10 has to do exclusively with man s moral attitude to truth: "rebel against the light"; "know not the light." Is a 5 20 describes a moral con fusion and blindness, which cannot distinguish light from darkness.

      (c) For the most part, however, light and life go together. It is the product of salvation: "Jeh is my light and my salvation" (Ps 27 1). " Light," figuratively used, has to do preeminently with spiritual life, including also the illumination that floods all the faculties of the soul: intellect, conscience, reason, will. In the moral realm the enlightenment of these faculties is dependent wholly on the renewal of the spirit. "In thy light .... we see light" (Ps 36 9); "The life was the light of men " (Jn 1 4).

      Light is an attribute of holiness, and thus a per sonal quality. It is the outshining of Deity.

      (1) God. "God is light, and in him 3. An is no darkness at all" (1 Jn 1 5).

      Attribute Darkness is the universal symbol and of Holiness condition of sin and death; light the symbol and expression of holiness. "The light of Israel will be for a fire, and his Holy One for a flame" (Lsa 10 17). God, by His pres ence and grace, is to us a "marvellous light" (1 Pet 2 9). The glory of His holiness and presence is the "everlasting light" of the redeemed in heaven (Isa 60 19.20; Rev 21 23.24; 22 5).

      (2) Christ, the eternal Word (\\6yos, logos, Jn 1 1), who said "Let there be light" (Gen 1 3), is Himself the "effulgence of [God s] glory" (He 1 3), "the light which lighteth every man, coming into the world" (Jn 1 9) (cf the statements concerning Wisdom in Wisd 7 25 f and concerning Christ in He 1 3; and see CREEDS; LOGOS; JOHANNINE THEOLOGY; WISDOM). As the predicted Messiah, He was to be "for a light of the Gentiles" (Isa 42 6; 49 6) . His birth was the fulfilment of this prophecy (Lk 2 32). Jesus called Himself "the light of the world" (Jn 8 12; 95; 12 46). As light He was "God .... manifest in the flesh" (1 Tim 3 16 AV). "The Word was God" (Jn 1 1). Jesus as \\6yos is the eternal expression of God as a word is the ex pression of a thought. In the threefold essence of His being God is Life (M, zdt) (Jn 5 26; 6 57); God is Love (dydin), agape) (1 Jn 4 8); God is Light



      (0ws, phox) (1 Jn 1 5V Thus Christ, the /r>r/o*. manifesting the three aspects of the Divine Nature, is Life, Love, and Light, and these three are insep arable and constitute the alori/ which the disciples beheld in linn, "glory as of the, only begotten from the Father" (Jn 1 14). In revealing and giving life, Christ becomes "the light, of men" (Jn 1 4). God gives "the light of the knowledge of [his] glory in the face of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 4 0), and t his salvat ion is called "1 he light, of t he gospel of the glory of Christ" i4 4). Christ is thus the Teacher, Enlightener ("Christ shall givethee light.," Eph 6 14 AV), Guide, Saviour of men.

      C?) Ml u-ho cntrh and reflect th: ii<//<t of C<>,1 and of Christ <ire r<ill<-<l " liyht," " lii/lits." (,i) Jollil the Baptist : "a burning and a sliiniiig light" (Jn 5 80 AV). It is significant that this pre-Christian prophet was termed a AuxrcK, lucfiinis, while the disciples of the new dispensa tion are. called </X.K. phi * (Mt 5 14) : " Ve are the light of the world." (l>) Henceforth Christians and saints were; called "children of light " (Lk 16 s; .In 12 :i(\\; Kph 5 S), and were expected to lie "seen as light s in the world" (Phil 2 1". (< ) The Jew who possessed t he law mistakenly supposed he was "a light of them that are in darkness" (Bom 2 1 .).).

      (4) The church. Zion was to shine" because her light had come (Isa 60 1). The Gentiles were; to come to her light (60 3). Her mission as the enlightener of the world was symbolized in the ornamentations of her priesthood. The Trim of the high priest s breastplate signified light, and the name itself is but the pi. form of the Heb or. It stood for reflation, and Thummim for truth. The church of the Christian dispensation was to be even more radiant with the light of God and of Christ. The seven churches of Asia were revealed to John, by the Spirit, as seven golden candlesticks, and her ministers as seven stars, both luminous with the light of the Gospel revelation. In Eph, Christ, who is the Light of the world, is the Head of the church, the latter being His body through which His glory is to be manifested to the world, "to make all men "see," etc (Eph 3 9.10). "Unto him be the glory in the church" (ver 21), the church bringing glory to God, by revealing His glory to men through its reproduction of the life and light of Christ.

      Light symbolizes: (1) ///<" ci/e, "The light of the

      body is the eye" (Mt 6 22 AV; Lk 11 34); (2)

      watchfulness, "Let your lights [RV

      4. Sym- "lamps"] be burning, the figure being bolism taken from the parable of the Vir gins; (3) protection; "armor of light"

      (Rom 13 12), the garment of a holy and Christ- like life; (4) the sphere of i/tc < hrixlian s dailij ii dlk, "inheritance of the saints in light" (Col 1 12); (5) heaven, for the inheritance just referred to in cludes the world above in which "the Lamb is the light thereof"; (0) prosperity, relief (Est 8 10; Job 30 20), in contrast with the calamities of the wicked whose "light .... shall be put out" (Job 18 5);

      (7) joy a ml (jliulness (Job 3 20; Ps 97 11; 112 4);

      (8) God s faror, "the light of thy countenance" (Ps 4 6; 44 3; 89 15), and a king s fnmr (Prov 16 15);

      (9) life (Ps 13 3; 49 19; Jn 1 4).

      Expressive terms are: (1) "fruit of the light" (Eph 5 9), i.e. goodness, righteousness, truth; ( 2) "light in tin- Lord" (Kph 5 8), indicating the source of

      5. Express- light (of Isa 2 - r ; (:i) "inheritance of the ive Terms saints in light" (Col 1 12), a present

      experience issuing in heaven; (4) "Father of lights" (Jas 1 17), signifying the Creator of the heaven ly bodies; (">) "marvellous light" (I Pet 2 9), the light of God s presence and fellowship; (0) " Walk in the light " (1 .In 1 7). in the light of God s teaching and compan ionship: (7) "abideth in the light" (1 .In 2 10). in love. Divine and fraternal; (S) "Light of the glorious gospel of Christ "; "light of the knowledge of the glory of ( lod" C2 Cor 4 4.0 AV).


      LIGHT, LIGHTNESS, llt nes: "Light" is used in Scripture, as in ordinary speech, in the sense of

      what is small, slight, trivial, easy; "lightness" with the connotation of vacillation or lasciviousness. Thus in the OT, "a light thing," a small, easy, slight thing (bbj2 , k<llal, 2 K 3 18; Isa 49 6; Ezk 8 17; 22 7, in the last case "to treat slight ingly"). "Lightness" (~^p , kdl) occurs in Jer 3 9 ("the lightness of her whoredom"); in 23 32, RV changes "lightness" (a different word) to "vain boasting. In the NT the phrase occurs in Mt 22 5, "made light of it" (d^eX^w, ameleo), i.e. "treated it with neglect"; and St. Paul asks (2 Cor 1 17), "Did I show lightness?" (RV "fickleness"). These examples sufficiently illustrate the meaning.


      LIGHTNING, Ht ning (p^3 , bdrak, rin , hdzlz; do-TpairT), (islrape): Lightning is caused by the dis charge of electricity between clouds or between clouds and the earth. In a thunder-storm there is a rapid gathering of particles of moisture into clouds and forming of large drops of rain. This gathers with it electric potential until the surface of the cloud (or the enlarged water particles) is insufficient to carry the charge, and a discharge takes place, producing a brilliant flash of light and the resulting thunder-clap. Thunder-storms are common in Syria and Pal during the periods of heavy rain in the spring and fall and are often severe. Light ning is usually accompanied by heavy rainfall or by hail, as at the time of the plague of hail (Ex 9 24). See HAIL.

      In the Scriptures it i.s used: () indicating the power of God: The power of God is shown in His command of the forces of Nature, and He is the only one who knows the secrets of Nature: "lie 1 made .... a way for the lightning" (Job 28 20); "Hedirecteth .... his lightning" (Job 37 3AV); "Canst thou send forth lightnings, that they may

      go?" (Job 38 35); "Ask ye of Jeh


      maketh lightnings" (Zee 10 1). See also Ps 18 14; 97 4; 135 7; Job 36 32; Jer 10 13; (6)

      figuratively and poetically: David sings of Jeh, "He sent .... lightnings manifold, and discom fited them" (Ps 18 14); used for speed: "The chariots .... run like; the lightnings" (Nah 2 4): "His arrow shall go forth as the lightning" (Zee 9 14); "The living creatures ran and returned as the appearance of a flash of lightning" (Ezk 1 14). The coming of the kingdom is described by Jesus as the shining of the lightning from one part of heaven to another, even "from the east unto the west" (Mt 24 27; Lk 17 24); (c) meaning bright or shining: Daniel in his vision saw a man and "his face [was] as the appearance of lightning" (Dnl 10 0). See also Rev 4 o; 8 5; 16 18. ALFKKD H. JOY

      LIGN-ALOES, lin-al oz, lig-nal oz. See ALOES.

      LIGURE, lig nr (Ex 28 19; 39 12 AV, RV "ja cinth"). See STOXKS, PKKCIOUS.

      LIKE, Ilk, LIKEN, llk"n, LIKENESS, llk nes, LIKING, llk ing: (1) As a noun, "like" in modern Eng. is virtually obsolete, except in the phrase "and the like," which is not found in EV. "The like," however, occurs in 1 K 10 20 2 Ch 9 19; 2 Ch 1 12; Ezk 5 9; 18 10 (RV "any one of these things" the text is uncertain); 45 25; Joel 2 2; Wisd 16 1 (RV "creatures like those"); Sir 7 12. "His like" is found in Job 41 33; Sir 13 15; "their like" in Sir 27 9. "And such like" (Gal 5 21) is only slightly archaic, but "doeth not such like" (Ezk 18 14) is quite obsolete.

      (2) As an adj. "like" is common in AV in such combinations as "like manner" (frequently), "like weight" (Ex 30 34), "like occupation" (Acts 19 25), etc. Modern Eng. would in most cases replace



      "like" by "the same," as has been done in 1 Thess 2 14 RV (cf Rom 15 5; Phil 2 2). So RV has modernized the archaic "like precious faith" of 2 Pet 1 1 by inserting "a" before "like." AV s rendering of 1 Pet 3 21, "the like figure where- unto," could not have been very clear at any time, and RV has revised completely into "after a true likeness" (m "in the antitype").

      (3) As an advb. "like" is used in Jer 38 9, "He is like to die"; Jon 1 4, "like to be broken." RV could have used "likely" in these verses. Most com mon of all the uses of "like" is the quasi-prepo sitional construction in "He is like a man," etc. This is of course good modern Eng., but not so when "like" is enlarged (as it usually is in EV) into the forms "like to" (Dnl 7 5), "like unto" (very com mon), "like as" (Isa 26 17, etc). These forms and the simple "like" are interchanged without much distinction, and the RVhas attempted little system atizing beyond reducing of "like as" (cf Mt 12 13, and ARV Isa 13 4; Jer 23 29).

      (4) The vb. "like" has two distinct meanings, "be pleased with" and "give pleasure to." The latter sense occurs in Dt 23 16 (AV, ERV), "in one of 1 liy gates, where it liketh him best," and in Est 8 8; Am 4 5 AV; Sir 33 13 (ARV has "pleaseth" in the three OT passages). The other use of "like" belongs also to modern Eng., although in a much weakened sense. On account of this weakening, 1 Ch 28 4 AV, "liked me to make me king" and Rom 1 28 AV, "did not like to retain God," have become in RV "took pleasure in" and "refused to" (m "did not approve"). It would have been better if Dt 25 7.8, "like not to take," had been modified also into "hath no wish to take." From this use of "like" is derived liking in the modern sense in \\\\ isd 16 21, "tempered itself to every man s liking" (RV "choice"). In 1 Esd 4 39, "All men do well like of her works" is a further obsolete use.

      (5) Liken and "make like" are common. To be noted only is that, in He 7 3. "made like unto the Son of God," the sense really is "likened to," "pre sented by the writer with the qualities of." Likeness normally means "a copy of, "but in Pa 17 l.">it means the actual form itself ("form" in ARV, ERVm); cf Rom 6 5; 8 3; Phil 2 7, and perhaps Acts 14 1 1 . Closely allied with "likeness" is an obsolete use oi "liking" (quite distinct from that above) in Job 39 4 AV, ERV, "Their young ones are in good liking"; Dnl 1 10, "see your faces worse liking." The mean ing is "appearance," "appearing," and ARV renders "their young ones become strong," "sec your faces worse looking." Likewise varies in meaning from the simple conjunct ion "and" to a strong advb., "in exactly the same way." RV has made some at tempt to distinguish the various forces (e.g. cf AV with RV in Lk 22 36; 15 7; 22 20). But com plete consistency was not attainable, and in certain instances was neglected deliberately, in order to preserve the familiar wording, as in Lk 10 37, Go, and do thou likewise." BTHTON SCOTT EASTON

      LIKHI, lik hi pnpb , likhi): A descendant of Manasseh (1 Ch 7 19).

      LILITH, lil ith, ll lith. See NIGHT-MONSTER.

      LILY, lil i Cjtt ittJ, shushun [1 K 7 19], fihdshannuh [2 Ch 4 5; Cant 2 1 f; IIos 14 f>]; pi. [Cant 2 16; 4 o; 5 13; 6 2 f ; 7 2; Ecclus 39 14; 50 81; Kptvov, krinon [Mt 6 28; Lk 12 27]): The Heb is probably a loan word from the Egyp, the original s-sh-n denoting the lotus-flower, Nymphaca lotus. This was probably the model of the architectural ornament, tr d "lily-work," which appeared upon the capitals of the columns in the temple porch (1 K 7 19), upon the top of the

      pillars (ver 22) and upon the turned-back rim of the "molten sea" (ver 26 J.

      Botanically the word shoshannah, like the similar modern Arab. NH.SY///, included in all probability a great many flowers, and was used in a way at least as wide as the popular use of the Eng. word "lily." The expression "lily of the valleys" (Cant 2 1) has nothing to do with UK; plant of that name; the flowers referred to appear to have been asso ciated with the rank herbage of the valley bottoms (Cant 4 o) ; the expression "His lips are as lilies" (5 13) might imply a scarlet flower, but more prob ably in oriental imagery signifies a sweet-scented flower; the sweet scent, of the lily is referred to in Ecclus 39 14, and in 50 8 we read of "lilies by the rivers of water." The beauty of the blossom is implied in IIos 14 5, where Jeh promises that repentant Israel shall "blossom as the lily." A "heap of wheat set about with lilies"_ (Cant 7 2) probably refers to the smoothed-out piles of newly threshed wheat on the threshing-floors decorated by a circlet of flowers.

      The reference of Our Lord to the "lilies of the field" is probably, like the OT references, quite a general one.

      The Heb and the Or very likely include not only any members of the great order Liliaccac, growing in Pal, e.g. asphodel, squill, hyacinth, ornithogalum ("Star of Bethlehem"), frilillaria, tulip and colo- cynth, but also the more showy irises ("Tabor lilies," "purple irises," etc) and the beautiful gladioli of the N.O. /m/mr and the familiar nar cissi of the N.O. AmnrylUdcnc.

      In later Jewish lit. the lily is very frequently referred to symbolically, and a lotus or lily was commonly pictured on several Jewish coins.

      E. \\V. G. MASTERMAN

      LILY- WORK: The ornament of the capitals on the bronze pillars, Jachin and Boaz, in front of Solomon s temple (1 K 7 19.22). See LILY; TEMPLE; JACHIN AND BOAZ.

      LIME, liin ([1] Ti, sWi; cf Arb. jt,, shad, "to plaster"; [2] "Pit, (fir; cf Arab. \\^,jir, "gyp

      sum" or "quick-lime"; [3] irr^X , <tl>k nc-ghir): ,S7r//i is tr d "lime" in Isa 33 12, "And the peoples shall be as the burnings of lime, as thorns cut down, that are burned in the fire," and in Am 2 1, "He burned the bones of the king of Edom into lime." It is tr d "plaster" in Dt 27 2, "Thou slialt set thee up great stones, and plaster them with plaster," also in Dt 27 4. Clr is tr d "plaster" in Dnl 5 5, "wrote .... upon the plaster of the wall." In Isa 27 9 we have, "Tie maketh all the stones of the altar as chalkstones" ( abh e ne-ghir} .

      Everywhere in Pal limestone is at hand which can be converted into lime. The lime-kiln is a thick-walled, cylindrical or conical, roofless structure built of rough stones without mortar, the spaces between the stones being plastered with clay. It is usually built on the side of a hill which is slightly excavated for it, so that the sloping, external wall of the kiln rises much higher from the ground on the lower side than on the upper. The builders leave a passage or tunnel through the base of the thick wall on the lower side. The whole interior is filled with carefully packed fragments of limestone, and large piles of thorny-burnet and other shrubs to serve as fuel are gathered about the kiln. The fuel is intro duced through the tunnel to the base of the lime stone in the kiln, and as the fire rises through the mass of broken limestone a strong draft is created. Relays of men are kept busy supplying fuel day and night. By day a column of black smoke rises from the kiln, and at night the flames may be seen

      Limit Lion



      bursting from (lie top. Several days arc required to reduce the stone to lime, the amount of time depending upon the size of the kiln and upon the nature of the fuel. At the present day, mineral coal imported from Europe is sometimes employed, and requires much less time than (lie shrubs which are ordinarily used. See CHALKSTONE; CLAY.


      LIMIT, lim it PDii, (fhlnil, "bound"): Occurs once in Ezk 43 12 ("limit" of holy mountain). "Limited" (Ps 78 41) and "limiteth" (optfw, hurizu, He 4 7) are changed in RV to "provoked * (in re tains "limited") and "defineth" respectively.

      LINE, 1m p, Aw/-, bin, Jitbhcl): Usually of a measuring line, as Jer 31 30; Ezk 47 3; Zee 1 10 (Aw/0; Ps 78 55; Am 7 17; Zee 2 1 (hchhcl). Other Ilcb words mean simply a cord or thread (Josh 2 IS. 21; 1 K 7 15; Ezk 40 3). In Ps 19 4 (ktui , "Their line is gone out through all the earth"), the reference is probably still to measure ment (the heaven as spanning and bounding the earth), though the LXX, followed by Horn 10 IS, takes it as meaning a musical cord (tfrdbyyos, />hlhof/(/o8). The "line," as measure, suggests a rule of conduct (Isa 28 10). For "line" in Isa 44 13, RV reads "pencil," m "red ochre" (seredh), and in 2 Cor 10 Hi, "province," in "limit" (kanon). See also MEASURING LINE; WEIGHTS AND MEAS URES. JAMES OUR

      LINEAGE, lin e-iij (iraTpid, pat rid): Found only once in Lk 2 4 (AV, RV "family"), and signifying the line of paternal family descent. A word preg nant in meaning among the Jews, who kept all family records with religious care, as may be seen from the long genealogical records found everywhere in the OT.

      LINEN, lin en ("2, bailh, "white linen," used chiefly for priestly robes, "pi 3 , hilt;, "byssus," a fine white Egyp linen, called in the earlier writings TUTl? , DD, pcshcth, "flax," "p"10 > sddhln; PVO-O-OS, 666viov, othonion, XLvov, llnon, o-iv8wv, situ/on): Thread or cloth made of flax.

      Ancient Egypt was noted for its fine linen (Gen

      41 42; Isa 19 9). From it a large export trade

      was carried on with surrounding na-

      1. History tions, including the Hebrews, who

      early learned the art of spinning from the Egyptians (Ex 35 25) and continued to rely on them for the finest linen (Prov 7 16; Ezk 27 7). The culture of flax in Pal probably antedated the conquest, for in Josh 2 we read of the stalks of flax which Rahab had laid in order upon the roof. Among the Hebrews, as apparently among the Canaanites, the spinning and weaving of linen were carried on by the women (Prov 31 13.19), among whom skill in this work was considered highly praiseworthy (Ex 35 25). One family, the house of Ashbea, attained eminence as workers in linen (1 Ch 4 21; 2 Ch 2 14).

      Linen was used, not only in the making of gar ments of the finer kinds and for priests, but also

      for shrouds, hangings, and possibly for

      2. General other purposes in which the most Uses highly prized cloth of antiquity would

      naturally be desired.

      The robes of the Heb priests consisted of 4 linen

      garments, in addition to which the high priest wore

      garments of other stuffs (Ex 28, 39;

      3. Priestly Lev 6 10; 16 4; 1 S 22 18; Ezk Garments 44 17. IS). Egyp priests are said to

      have worn linen robes (Herod, ii.37). In religious services by others than priests, white linen was also preferred, as in the case of the

      infant Samuel (1 S 2 IS), the Levite singers in the temple (2 Ch 5 12), and even royal person ages (2 S 6 14; 1 Ch 15 27). Accordingly, it was ascribed to angels (Ezk 9 2.3.11; 10 2.0.7; Did 10 5; 12 0.7). Fine linen, white and pure, is the raiment assigned to the armies which are in heaven following Him who is called Faithful and True (Rev 19 11). It is deemed a fitting symbol of the righteousness and purity of the saints (Rev 19 S).

      Garments of distinction were generally made of

      the same material: e.g. those which Pharaoh gave

      Joseph (Gen 41 42), and those which

      4. Other Mordecai wore (Est 8 15; cf also Garments Lk 16 ID). Even a girdle of fine

      linen could be used by a prophet as a means of attracting attention to his message; (Jer 13 1). It is probable that linen wrappers of a coarser quality were used by men (Jgs 14 12.13) and women (Prov 31 22). The use of linen, how ever, for ordinary purposes probably suggested unbecoming luxury (Isa 3 23; E/k 16 10.13; cf also Rev 18 12.10). The poorer classes probably wore wrappers made either of unbleached flax or hemp (Ecclus 40 4; Mk 14 51). The use of a mixture called sha\\itticz, which is defined (Dt 22 11) as linen and wool together, was forbidden in garments.

      The Egyptians used linen exclusively in wrapping their mummies (Herod. ii.SO). As many as one

      hundred yards were used in one band-

      5. Shrouds age. Likewise, the Hebrews seem to

      have preferred this material for wind ing-sheets for the dead, at least in the days of the NT (Mt 27 59; Mk 15 40; Lk 23 53; Jn 19 40; 20 5ff) and the Talm (Jerus Killnyim 9 32ft).

      The use of twisted linen (shcsh moshzdr) for fine hangings dates back to an early period. It was

      used in the tabernacle (Ex 26 1; 27

      6. Hang- 9; 35; 36; 38; Jos, Ant, III, vi, 2), ings in the temple (2 Ch 3 14), and no

      doubt in other places (Mish, Yomd , iii.4). Linen cords for hangings are mentioned in the description of the palace of Ahasuerus at Shu- shan (Est 1 0).

      Other uses are suggested, such as for sails, in the imaginary ship to which Tyre is compared (Ezk

      27 7), but judging from the extrava-

      7. Other gance of the other materials in the Uses ship, it is doubtful whether we may

      infer that such valuable material as linen was ever actually used for this purpose. It is more likely, however, that it was used for cover ings or tapestry (Prov 7 10), and possibly in other instances where an even, durable material was needed, as in making measuring lines (Ezk 40 3).

      ELLA DAVIS ISAACS LINTEL, lin tel. See HOUSE, II, 1,(4).

      LINUS, H nus (Avo S , Linos [2 Tim 4 21]): One of Paul s friends in Rome during his second and last imprisonment in that city. He was one of the few who remained faithful to the apostle, even when most of the Christians had forsaken him. And writing to Timothy when he realized that his exe cution could not be very far distant for he was now ready to be offered, and the time of his depart ure was at hand (2 Tim 4 0) he sends greeting to Timothy from four friends whom he names, and Linus is one of them. There is a tradition that Linus was bishop of the church at Rome. "It is perhaps fair to assume, though of course there is no certainty of this, that the consecration of Linus to the government of the Rom church as its first bishop was one of the dying acts of the apostle Paul" (H.D.M.Spence, inEllicott s A T Cumin. <m 2 Tim).

      Irenaeus bishop of Lyons about 178 AD in



      Limit Lion

      liis defence of orthodox doctrine against the Gnos tics "appeals esp. to the bishops of Rome, as de positaries of the apostolic tradition." The list of Irenaeus commences with Linus, whom he identifies with the person of this name mentioned by St. Paul, and whom he states to have been "entrusted with

      the office of the bishopric by the apostles

      \\\\ith the many possibilities of error, no more can safely be assumed of Linus .... than that he held some prominent position in the Rom church" (Lightfpot s "Dissertation on the Christian Min istry," in Comin. on Phil, 220 f).

      "Considering the great rarity of this Gr mytho logical name as a proper name for persons, we can hardly doubt that here, as Irenaeus has directly asserted, the same Rom Christian is meant who, according to ancient tradition, became after Peter and Paul the first bishop of Rome. Among the mythical characters in Apos Const, vii, 46 occurs Linos ho Klaudias, who is declared to have been ordained by Paul as the first bishop of Rome. He is thus represented as the son or husband of the Claudia whose name comes after his in 2 Tim 4 21.

      "These meager statements have been enlarged upon by Eng. investigators. The Claudia mentioned here is, they hold, identical with the one who, according to Mar tial, married a certain I udens (S">-i)0 AD), and she, in turn, with the Claudia Rufina from Britain, who is then made out to bo a daughter of the British king, Cogidum- niH, or Titus Claudius Cogidubmis. For a refutation of these assumptions, which, even chronologically con sidered, are impossible, see Lightfoot, St. Clement, I, 70 -7U" (Zahn, Intro to the NT, 20).


      LION, ll un: (1) Occurring oftenest in the OT

      is rV~|X , (iryt-1), pi. PlTHS , urdyulh. Another

      form, "HX, art, pi. 2">"nX , draylm, is

      1. Names f ou nd less often.

      Cf bamX, (Jrt eZ, "Ariel" (Kzr 8 10; Isa 29 1.2.7): -SC"1H . luir fl, "upper altar," and blSjHSS, dri el, "altar hearth" (Ezk 43 1.", f); n""^X , arJi/C" . \\rieh" (2 K 15 25); ibiHS?, ur fll, " Areli " and "Arelites" ((ion 46 Hi; Xu 26 17). (2) -PE2, k- i>hir, "young lion, "often tr-i "lion" (Ps 35 17; Prov 19 12; 23 1, etc). (3) -TIT. sltiihul, tri "fierce lion" or "lion" (Job 4 10; 10 10; 28 S; Hos 5 14). (4) EJib , lavish, ti-i "old lion" or "lion" (Job 411; Prov 30 30; Isa 30 0).

      Cf Arab. cy.AJ , laith, "lion"; TJJvj , laijixh, " Laish," or "Leshem" (Josh 19 -17; Jgs 18 J); fljib , Itii/ixh, "Laish" (1 S 25 44; 2 S 3 15). (5) 13 b , //</, pi. 2" I X25, I l li l im, "lioness"; also X"qb , labhl , and iTab, I lihuja (Gen 49 .); Xu 23 21; 24 9); of town in S. of Judah, Lebaoth (Josh 15 82) or Beth-

      lebaoth (Josh 19 0); also Arab. S.xJ, labwat, "lioness";

      3 *-J- , Lebweh, a town in Coole-Syria. (0) "1-3. our,

      "li3, !i ~>r, "whelp," with uri/rli or a pronoun, e.g. "Ju dah is a lion s whelp," yii/- aryeh ((ion 49 .)) ; "young ones" of the jackal (Lam 4 . 5). Also X"Qb ^IS . If ne labhl , "whelps [sons] of the lioness" (Job 4 11); and r,"P1i<5 "PE2, k<*i>lilr nrdi/dth, "young lion," lit. " the young of Hoiis " (Jgs 14 5). In Job 28 8, AV has "lion s whelps for "ITtTU "^3 b c ne shahay, RV "proud beasts," RVm"sonsof pride"; of Job 41 34 (Hob 20). (7) Aeo.1 , lean, "lion" (2 Tim 4 17; He 11 33; 1 Pet 5 S; Rev 4 7; 5 5; Wiscl 11 17; Ecolus 4 30; 13 19; Bel 31.32.34). (8) oW/xi os, skuinnos, "whelp" (1 Mace 3 4).

      The lion is not found in Pal at the present

      day, though in ancient times it is known to have

      inhabited not only Syria and Pal but

      2. Natural also Asia Minor and the Balkan pen- History insula, and its fossil remains show that

      it was contemporary with prehistoric man in Northwestern Europe and Great Britain.

      Its present, range extends throughout Africa, and it is also found in Mesopotamia, Southern Persia, and the border of India. There is some reason to think that it may be found in Arabia, but its occur rence there remains to be proved. The Asiatic male lion does not usually have as large a mane as the African, but both belong to one species, Fdis leo.

      Lion (Fdis leo).

      Lions are mentioned in the Bible for their strength

      (Jgs 14 IS), boldness (2 S 17 10), ferocity (Ps

      7 2), and stealth (Ps 10 9; Lam 3

      3. Figur- 10). Therefore in prophetical refer- ative ences to the millennium, the lion, with

      the bear, wolf, and leopard, is men tioned as living in peace with the ox, calf, kid, lamb and the child (Ps 91 13; Isa 11 6-8; 65 25). The roaring of the lion is often mentioned (Job 4 10; Ps 104 21; Isa 31 4 [RV "growling"]; Jer 61 38; Ezk 22 2. r >; IIos 11 10). Judah is a "lion s whelp" (Gen 49 9), likewise Dan (Dt 33 22). It is said of certain of David s warriors (1 Ch 12 8) that their "faces were like the faces of lions." David s enemy (Ps 17 12) "is like a lion that is greedy of his prey." "The king s wrath is as the roaring of a lion" (Prov 19 12). God in His wrath is "unto Ephraim as a lion, and as a young lion to the house of Judah" (IIos 5 14). "The devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour" (1 Pet 5 8). "Lion" occurs in the figurative language of Ezk, Dnl, and Rev. The figures of lions were used in the decorations of Solomon s temple and throne (1 K 7 29. 30; 10

      19 f).

      Nearly all references to the lion are figurative.

      The only notices of the lion in narrative are of the

      lion slain bv Samson (Jgs 14 5); by

      4. Narra- David (1 S 17 34 f); by Benaiah (2 S tive 23 20; 1 Ch 11 22); the prophet

      slain by a lion (1 K 13 24; also 1 K

      20 36); the lions sent by the Lord among the set tlers in Samaria (2 K 17 2~>); Daniel in the lions den (Dnl 6 1(5). In all these cases the word used is aryeh or an.

      The Arab, language boasts hundreds of names for the lion. Many of these are, however, merely

      adjs. used substantively. The com- 6. Vocabu- monest Arab, names are sab , asad, lary laith, and labivat, the last two of

      which are identified above with the Ileb layish and labhl . As in Arab., so in Heb, the richness of the language in this particular gives opportunity for variety of expression, [is in Job 4 10.11:

      "The roaring of the lion [ aryeh], and the voice of tho fierce lion [shahal],


      Lit., Sub-apostol.



      And the teeth of the young lions \\L i>hiriin], arc


      The old lion ]/<;</< .-/<] perishet h for lack of prey. And the whelps of the lioness [ /< ;<; l<il,li, \\ are

      scattered abroad. "

      In .Ills 14 5 IS. no! less than three different terms, l"i>hlr tirnijolli, nry<-h, and <~ir~i, :irc used of Samson s lion. ALFKKD ELY DAY

      LIP ("VV* K W" . ~?" . *< j>} lh, lip," "lan guage," "speech," "talk" [also "rim," "border," "shore," "bank," etc], "pip, x/lp/nltn, "[upper] li]i," "moustache," "heard"; x ^- s > hcilox, "lip" [also onee, "shore" in the quotation lie 11 12 = Gen 22 17]): (1) Lips stand in oriental idiom for speech or language, like "mouth," "tongue"; there fore they stand in parallelism. "The lip of truth shall he established for ever; hut a lying tongue is but for a moment" (Prov 12 19). "To shoot out the li]>" (Ps 22 7) means to make a mocking, contemptuous, scornful face. As the lips are the chief instrument of speech, we find numerous idiomatic phrases for "speaking," such as: "the utterance of the lips" (Xu 30 (>.S), "to proceed out of the lips" (Xu 30 12), "to open the lips" (Job 32 20), "to go out of the lips" (Ps 17 1). These ex pressions do not convey, as a rule, the idea that the utterance proceeds merely out of the lips, and that it lacks sincerity and the consent, of the heart, but occasionally this is intended, e.g. "This people draw nigh unto me, and with their mouth and with their lips do honor me, but have removed their heart far from me" (Isa 29 13; cf Alt 15 8). The "fruit of the lips" (Isa 57 19 = He 13 15) and "calves of the lips" (IIos 14 2 AY) designate the praise and thanksgiving due to God. "Fervent [AV "burning"] lips" (Prov 26 23) are synonymous with eloquence. "To refrain the lips" (Ps 40 9; Prov 10 19) means to keep silence, where the godless or unwise would wish to assert his rights.

      Numerous other expressions need no further explana tion, such as "perverse lips" (Prov 424), "uncireum- cised lips" (Ex 6 12. MO), "feigned lips" (Ps 17 1), "lying lips" (Ps 31 IS; Prov 10 IS; 12 22), "wicked [or false] lips" (Prov 17 4), "unclean lips" (Isa 6 5), "strange[AV "stammering"] lips" (Isa, 28 11), "flatter ing lips" (Ps 12 2.3; Prov 7 21), "righteous lips" (Prov 16 13).

      (2) The Heb word mlpfulni is found only in the phrase "to cover the lip or lips," which is an ex pression of mourning, submission and shame. The Oriental covers his lips with his hand or a portion (jf his garment, when IK; has been sunk into deep grief and sorrow, lie expresses, thereby, that he cannot open his mouth at the visitation of (lod. Differently, however, from common mourners, Ezekiel was forbidden of God "to cover his lips" (Ezk 24 17; see also ver 22), i.e. to mourn in the usual way over Israel s downfall, as Israel had brought these judgments upon himself. The leper, victim of an incurable disease, walks about with rent clothes and hair disheveled, covering his lips, crying: "I nclean, unclean!" (Lev 13 45). The thought here is that even the breath of such a one may defile. The prophet calls upon all seers and diviners, to whom God has refused the knowledge of the future, to cover their lips in shame and con fusion (Mic 3 7). II. L. E. LUERING

      LIQUOR, lik er: Every sort of intoxicating liquor except the beverage prepared from the juice of the grape (ijnijin), according to the usage of the OT, is comprehended under the generic term "121?? , shckhdr (cf nh<lkh<ir, to "he drunk"), rendered "strong drink" (cf Or sikcra in Lk 1 15). The two terms, ynyin and shckhdr, "wine" and "strong drink," are often found together and are used by OT writers as an exhaustive classification of the beverages in

      use among the ancient Hebrews (Lev 10 9; 1 S 1 lo; Prov 20 1, etc;. See WINE; DRINK, STRONG.

      LIST: A variant of "lust" (sen: LUST), meaning "to wish," found in AY of Mt 17 12 Mk 9 13; ,Jn 3 S, as tr of 0Aw, Ihclo, and in Jas 3 4 as tr of f-iov\\ofw.i, bouloniui. The last case ERV has ren dered "will," and ARV has made the same change throughout. The word is obsolete in modern Eng., but Jn 3 8 is still used proverbially, "The wind bloweth where it listeth."

      LITERATURE, lit er-a-tur, SUB-APOSTOLIC,

      sub-ap-os-tol ik (Christian) :


      1. Authorship and Date

      2. Occasion and Contents

      3. Apologetic Testimony

      4. Doctrinal Testimony

      5. Office-Bearers and Organization (i. Ritual

      II. THE Di lnrhe

      1. Disappearance and Recovery

      2. Date

      3. Standpoint, Authorship and Object

      4. Testimony to NT Writings

      5. Contents and Notabilia


      1. Author and Dato

      2. Genuineness

      3. Leading Ideas

      4. Other Notabilia


      1. Date and Genuineness

      2. Occasion and Contents

      3. Notabilia


      1. Author and Dato

      2. Testimony to St. Matthew and St. Mark 15. Other Notabilia


      1. Authorship

      2. Date

      3. Object and Contents

      4. Notabilia


      1. Authorship and Date

      2. Object and Contents

      3. Notabilia


      1. Nature and Document

      2. Date and Authorship

      3. Contents

      4. Notabilia


      1. Recovery and Date

      2. Contents :5. Notabilia


      1 . Incidents of Life

      2. First Apology

      3. Second Apology

      4. Dialogue with Trypho the Jew

      5. Notabilia


      1. Date and Authorship

      2. Contents LITERATURE

      The Sub-apostolic Age is usually held to extend from the death of St. John, the last surviving apostle, about 100 AD, to the death of Polycarp, St. John s aged disciple (155-56 AD). The Chris tian literature of this period, although as a whole of only moderate intrinsic value, is of historical interest and importance. This is owing to the light which it throws back on apostolic times, and the testimony borne to Christian life, thought, worship, work and organization during an age when the church was under the guidance, mainly, of men who had been associated with the apostles and who might be supposed, therefore, to know their mind. Some writings are omitted from this review, having been dealt with in previous articles. For the Protevangelium of James and the Gospel and Apocalypse of Peter see APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS; APOCRYPHAL ACTS. For an account of extant fragments of Basilides and Valentinus, see GNOSTI CISM. For pseudo-Clementine writings see PETER, EPISTLES OF; SIMON MAGUS.




      Lit., Sub-apostol.

      /. Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. Only

      the larger part had previously been extant, when

      the complete ep. was recovered in

      1. Author- 1875 by Bryennios, bishop of Nieome- ship and dia. The high honor in which it was Date held by early Christendom is attested

      (1) by its position in Codex A, at the end of the NT, and in an ancient Syr MS, between the Catholic and Pauline Epp.; (2) by its being publicly read in many churches down to the 4th cent. (HE, III, 16). The work is anonymous, but sent in the name of the Rom church. Dkmysius of Corinth (170 AD) refers to it- as written by the agency of (did) Clement (HE, IV, 2)}); Clement of Alexandria states distinctly the Clementine author ship (Strom., iv.17). The writer is evidently a leading office-bearer of his church, and is identi fied with the Clement whom Eusebius designates as third "bishop" (or chief presbyter) of Home after St. Peter, and as holding office between 92 and 101 AD (HE, III, 34). Clement is further identified by Origen (Contnt. on <S/. .fnh/i) and in HE, III, 15 with the Clement of Phil 4 3; but the name is too common and the interval too long to render this identity more than possible. Some conjecture the writer to be the consul, Flavins Clemens, whom Domitian (his cousin) put to death in 95 AD for alleged "atheism," i.e. probably, profession of Chris tianity (see Harnack, ( Lit., I, 253, note 1). But Clement the "bishop" is never otherwise re ferred to as a martyr, and a member of the imperial family would hardly have been head of the Rom church without so signal a fact being noted by some contemporary or later writer. Light foot., with some probability, supposes (Apostolic Fdllurs, I, 01) that Clement was a "freedman or the son of a freedman, belonging to the household of Flavins Clemens." From St. Paul s time (Phil 4 22) the imperial household included Christians; and many slaves were men of culture. To such a Christian freedman s influence the consul s conversion may have been due. Internal evidence points to Clem ent having been a Hellenist Jew or proselyte of Judaism; for he writes with some classical culture and with knowledge of OT history and of the LXX ; his style, moreover, has a "strong Hebraistic tinge" (Light foot, p. 59). The date of the ep. is fixed approximately by a reference to a persecution at Rome in progress or very recent; this persecution (during Clement s "episcopate") was doubtless that by Domitian in 95 AD. Clement s Ep. is thus not strictly within the Sub-apostolic- Age, but it- is uni formly included in sub-apostolic literature.

      The occasion was a church feud at Corinth, and the expulsion of some faithful presbyters. The writer

      seeks to procure their restoration and

      2. Occasion to heal the dissension. Ho quotes OT and examples of the evil issue of envy and Contents strife, and of the blessedness of humility,

      submission and concord. He adduces as a pattern the peace and harmony of Nature. In this connection occurs an anticipation of geographi cal discovery, when the author writes (ch xx) of "the impassable ocean and the worlds beyond it" (cf Seneca, Medea ii. 375; Straboi.4; Pint . Mor. ix.41). St. Paul s warnings in 1 Cor about party spirit are recalled; a not unworthy echo of 1 Cor 13 is em bodied; and the erring community is solemnly ad monished.

      In the coursn of the letter, with obvious reference to 1 Cor 15, Clement introduces the resurrection, for which he argues from the OT and from natural analogies. Ho refers to the phoenix which lives 500 years, and, when dissolution approaches, builds a nest of spices into which it enters to die. As the flesh decays, however, a " worm is generated, which is nurtured from the dead bird s moisture and putteth forth wings." The, fablo is men tioned by Herodotus and Pliny.

      A lengthy prayer of intercession for "all sorts and conditions of men" is abruptly introduced near the end, in order, presumably, to imbue Corinthian Christians with that charity which they needed and which is the chief incentive to intercession. The op. closes with a hopeful anticipation of restored concord and peace.

      Apologetic testimony is found to (1) books of the NT, viz. to the Pauline authorship of 1 Cor; to St. Mark s (lospel, through which (eh xv) he quotes Isa 29 13, repro ducing St. Mark s variations from the LXX; to Acts, through which he simi larly quotes (ch xviii) 1 S 13 14; to Rom, Eph, 1 Tim, Tit, Jas, 1 Pet (chs xxxv, xlvi,

      3. Apolo getic Testi mony

      xxi, 11, xlvi, xlix, respectively). The Clement and He are so numerous that the latter work has from early times boon ascribed to him by some (HE, VI, 25). But the; general type both of thought and of diction is dissimilar; (2) against the Tubingen theory of essential divergence between the doctrine of St. Peter and of St. Paul. The chief presbyter of Rome could not have been ignorant of such divergence; yet he refers the partisanship of which the two apostles were victims entirely to the Corinthians, not at all to the apostles (ch xlix).

      Doctrinal testimony is found: (1) to the; Trinity,

      "As C.od livoth and the Lord Jesus Christ liveth,

      and the Holy Spirit" (ch Iviii); (2) to

      4. Doctrinal the personality of Christ, "The Lord Testimony Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory

      and the majesty forever." In union and communion with Christ wo have life, are sanc- lifiod, possess love, manifest godliness (ch i, xxxvi); (3) to the atonement : Clement ascribes to Christ s death not merely subjective moral influence, but objective vicarious efficacy in securing our salvation, without any attempt, however, to explain the mys tery. Christ hath "given his flesh for our flesh, his life for our lives" (ch xlix); (4) to justification which is distinctly enunciated as before God through faith (Ch xxxii). But this faith (as in St . Paul s writings) is a "faith which worketh" (ch xxxv), and such just ificat ion is consistent with our being just ified by works before men; (5) to the inspiration of Scrip ture, which is real ("the Holy Spirit sail h"), but not verbal; for quotations are often inexact. Apocry phal books are quoted, but not with a formula indicating Divine authority.

      (1) The basis of authority is not sacerdotal, but

      a combination of official succession and popular

      call; office-bearers are appointed "by

      5. Office- the apostles or afterward by men of Bearers and repute with consent of the whole Organiza- ecclesia." (2) Clement indicates no tion distinction between presbyter and

      bishop. Office-bearers designated as presbyters (chs xU ii, liv) are referred to (chs xlii, xliv) as filling the office of bishop. Addressing a church on congregat ional st rife and insubordination, he refers to no single bishop in authority over the church. Had the episcopate, in the post-NT sense of mono-episcopate, been apostolically enjoined, surely the injunction would have been obeyed or enforced in Corinth. (3) None: the less we discern in Clement s own position and action the anticipa tion of the later episcopate. Clement is an example of how, through the personal qualities and ecclesi astical services of the man, the status of presiding presbyter developed out of seniority into superiority, out of representativeness into official authority. (4) The early germ of the papacy is disclosed in the passage: "If certain persons should be disobedient unto the words spoken by C.od through us, let them understand that they will entangle themselves in no slight transgression and peril" (ch lix).



      Such assumption l>y a revered man like Clement might give no olfeiice. and (lie Corinthians plainly needed cor rection. Still we have here the first, stage in t lie process which ultimately issued in the Kom claim to universal spiritual supremacy. The assumption, however, is not. grounded on Clement s own ollicial position (he speaks always in the 1st person pi.). >u t on the superior dignity of the Kom church. The later theory of supremacy builds Kom authority on the primacy of St. Peter and his successors; hut here the authority of the leading presbyter, in dealing with a provincial church, rests on the suggested primacy of the ecclesia in which he presides.

      (1) The long prayer (chs lix-lxi) hours internal evidence of liturgical character, through its balanced :uul rhythmical style, its somewhat re- 6. Ritual mote relevance to the special object, of the op., and greater suitability for con gregational worship, than as part of a counsel to a sister church. This internal testimony is confirmed by the correspondence of the prayer in certain verbal details with the earliest extant liturgies, part icularly those of St. Mark and St . James, point ing to the early use in the Horn church of forms of prayer afterward incorporated into these liturgies. While t here is evidence that down at. least to the time (14S AD) of Justin s 1st .l/Wo /v (ch Ixvii) a minister offered up prayers of his own composition, this prayer of Clement s Ep. indicates that before the close of the Apostolic Ago, forms of supplication had begun to be introduced, not to the exclusion of "free prayer," but simply as a, mode of congre gational devotion countenanced by a venerated leader of the church at Rome. (2) In ch Ivi Clem ent writes about "compassionate remembrance of them [i.e. the erring brethren] before God and the saints." By the saints, however, are most probably meant , not t he beat ified dead, but the living Christian brotherhood, as in 1 Cor 1 2; 2 Cor 8 4.

      This ep. leaves on readers minds two different yet mutually compatible impressions impressions both apparently mad;: on the early church, by which the letter was widely read at public worship and yet excluded from the Canon of Scriptures. We realize, on the one hand, tin inferiority of this writing to epp. of apostles. Clem ent s mind is receptive, not creative; and the freshness of thought characteristic of NT writers is absent. What NT book, moreover, contains such a foolish legend as fliat of the phoenix ? On the other hand, this ep. breathes much of the spirit, as it adopts in considerable measure the phraseology and style of apostolic -writings. It is as if. although the sun of special inspiration had sunk b"low the horizon, there remained to the church for a while a spiritual afterglow.

      77. The "Dldache" or Teaching (longer title,

      "The Teaching of the Lord, by [ilia] the XII Apostles,

      to the Gentiles"). This work is quoted

      1. Disap- as "Scripture," without being named, pearance by Clement of Alexandria (c 170 AD, in and Re- Strom., i.20). It is mentioned in HE, covery III, 25 as the "Teachings so-called

      of the Apostles," "recognized by most ecclesiastical writers," although "not a genuine" composition of apostles. Athanasius (Fest. Ep., 39) denies its canomcity, but acknowledges its utility. The lat.est ancient reference to the work from per sonal knowledge is by Nicephoros (9th cent.) who includes it among apocryphal writings. Thence forth it disappears until its recent recovery in 1875 by Bryennios.

      There is no reliable external testimony to date. Re semblances too considerable to be accidental exist be tween the Didache and the Ep. of Barna-

      2. Date bas; but opinion is divided as to priority

      of composition. Lightfoot and others favor a common lost source. As to internal evidence the simplicity of the Eucharist and of baptism as here described, with no formal admission to the catechumenate (ch vii); the use of "bishop" to de note the same office-bearer as presbyter; and the expectation of an impending Second Advent point to an early date. On the other hand it is unlikely that a writing which professes to give the

      Teaching of the Twelve would be issued until all or most apostles had passed away; and the writer seems to be acquainted with writings of St. John (Did., ix.2; x.2; x.5; see Schaff, Old,:*!, Church Manual, 90). Probably the document, went through a series of recensions (Harnack in Sch-Hrrz; Bart let in DH, V), and the date or of composition may be put between 80 and 120 AD.

      The work does not profess to be written by apostles; but the author seems to bo a Jewish Chris tian, for lie calls Friday "Prepara-

      3. Stand- tion Day," and the style and diction point, are Hebraic. The work is neither Authorship Judaistic nor Ebionite: circumcision, and Object the Sabbath, and special Mosaic ob servances, are ignored. From t lie book

      in whole or in part being addressed specially, al though not exclusively, to Gentiles, we infer that the community among whom it was composed, while mainly Jewish Christian, made special provision for conversion and instruction of Gentiles. The doctrinal standpoint is neither Pauline nor anti- Pauline, but resembles that of Jas. Canon Spence (Teaching) conjectures plausibly that the author may be Simeon, cousin of James the Lord s brother, who became chief presbyter of the Jewish Christian community, first at Jerus, afterward at Pella, until his martyrdom in 107 AD.

      Mt was certainly in the writer s hands; for the Didache contains 22 quotations from, or reminis cences of, that Gospel, extending over

      4. Testi- ten chs of it. Particularly notable is mony to Did., viii.2, "Neither pray ye as the NT hypocrites, but as the Lord corn- Writings manded in His Gospel; after this

      manner pray ye, Our Father," etc (see also vii. 1; ix.5; xvi.G). There are also refer ences to the Gospel of Lk (Did., hi. 5, 1(5); St. John s writings (see above); Acts (Did., iv.S), Kom (Did., iv.o), 2 Thess (Did., xiv.l), 1 Pot (Did., i.4). No extra-canonical saying of Our Lord is recorded.

      The contents and notabilia may be examined as follows: (1) Didactic (chs i-vi), intended for cate chumens in preparation for baptism.

      5. Contents This catechetical manual (the earliest and of its kind) opens with the words: Notabilia "There are two ways: one of life and

      one of (loath" (suggested probably by Jer 21 8). From this text the writer gives a sum mary of Christian duty esp. toward our neighbor, based on the Decalogue, the Golden Rule, and the Sermon on the Mount, which is frequently quoted.

      Among notable precepts is a command to fast as well as pray for enemies; a warning against infanticide which, in the case of sickly infants, heathenism approved, and against augury and astrology as generating idolatry; an admonition not to "stretch out one s hands for receiv ing and to draw them in for giving"; an injunction to "share all things with thy brethren, and not to say that they are thine own"; a command to "love some above thine own life"; and a quaint corrective against indis criminate and ill-informed beneficence: "Let thine alms sweat into thy hands until thou know to whom thou shonldest give." A precept to "give with thy hands a ransom for sin" may not mean more than that sinful habits are subdued by good works, but it suggests and paves the way for the error of the atoning efficacy of almsgiving. The summary of duty relates chiefly to the second Table of the Law; duty toward (Sod is after ward (so far) dealt with under "worship." This may account for obedience to parents being strangely omitted; for among the Jews the Fifth Commandment was in cluded in the First Table.

      (2) Devotional: worship and rites (chs rii-x, xir}. The Lord s Prayer is to be used thrice a (lay. "Heaven" and "debt" are found instead of "heav ens" and "debts." The Doxology is added (with "kingdom" omitted) its earliest recorded use in this connection. Christians are to fast on Wed nesday and Friday, the days of the betrayal and crucifixion. Fasting is enjoined for a day or two



      before baptism, both on baptizer and on baptized; it is recommended to "others who can." There is no mention of oil, salt, or exorcism. The baptismal formula, "In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost," is commanded, confirming the historical trustworthiness of Mt 28 19. Triple im mersion in "living water" is assumed to be normal; but where this is impracticable, other water and affusion are permitted (see TRINE IMMERSION). The Lord s Supper is dealt with only on its euchar- istic side, the writer s object being not to expound the nature of the rite, but to give models of thanks giving.

      The phrase, "after being filled give thanks," suggests that the Agape was still associated with the sacrament: the dissociation had begun when Pliny wrote to Trajan in 1 12 .VI). A liturgical element in sacramental worship is indicated by the prescription of forms of thanksgiving for the cup, the broken bread, and spiritual mercies. "( iive thanks thus." The thanksgiving for the cup is as follows: "We give thanks to thce our Father, for the holy vine; of David, thy servant, which thou hast made known to us through Jesus Christ." But nothing sug gests that the entire service is liturgical, and the forms supplied are not rigidly imposed; for prophets are to olfer thanks in such terms as they choose. On the Lord s Day congregational worship and eucharistic bread- breaking, after confession to God and reconciliation with men, are distinctly enjoined.

      (3) Ecclesiastical (chs xi-xiii, xv). Of church office-bearers, two classes are mentioned, ordinary and extraordinary. Of the former (essential to con gregational organization) only bishops and deacons are mentioned, i.e. those intrusted with rule and over night, with their assistants. Presbyter and bishop appear to be still identical, as the former is not specified (ef Phil 1 1). Popular election of these functionaries is indicated: "Elect for yourselves"; without denial, however, of those already in office having a share in the settlement. In the second class, apostles, prophets and teachers are included. "Apostle" is used, not in the narrower sense of men called to the office personally by Christ, but in the wider sense which embraces all whose call to be His ambassadors has been signalized by Divine gifts specially accredited evangelists unconnected with any particular community. (Among Jewish Chris tians the designation survived to the 4th cent., for the Theodosian Code of that period refers to Jew ish presbyters and to those "quos ipsi apostoloa vocant.") These apostles were to be received "as the Lord," and hospitably entertained; but, unlike apostles in the special sense, they were not to remain anywhere longer than "one or two days." Their function was to scatter the seed widely, and any expression of desire to remain longer was to be discouraged, while a demand for salary from a par ticular community would be evidence of false apostlcship. The special function of prophets and teachers, on the other hand, was the instruction and comfort of church members. They accordingly might be encouraged to settle in a community and receive "first-fruits" for their support. These prophets and teachers, however, were 1 not to super sede the "bishops" or presbyters in ruling, but were to undertake only those functions for which they were specially qualified. On the other hand, bishops and deacons were not to be excluded from preaching and teaching by the settlement of prophet s and official teachers in particular communities; and in the Did. may be traced the transition, then being gradually accomplished, of the preaching and teaching functions from extraordinary to ordinary office-bearers. "They also [the bishops and dea cons] minister to you the ministry of prophets and teachers: therefore despise them not." Even before the close of St. Paul s ministry, the episkopos, whose essential function was rule and oversight, was expected, if not required, also to be didaktikds, "qualified to teach," i.e. along with teachers specially

      set apart for the purpose (1 Tim 3 2; 6 17). By the middle of the 2d cent., the prophets had dis appeared, and their preaching function had been vested in the office of bishop or presbyter, assisted by the diaconate.

      (4) Eschatological (ch xvi). This concluding sec tion consists chiefly of exhortations to watchfulness in view of the Second Advent. The premonitory signs of that Coming are given, with reminiscences from Christ s eschatological discourses, viz. rise of false prophets, decline of love, persecution, lawless ness, and the appearance of Antichrist, who is designated the World-deceiver. Without definitely stating chiliastic doctrine, the writer suggests it; for in referring to the immediate signals of Christ s advent (opening in heaven, voice of trumpet, resur rection of dead) he is careful to add "Not of all the dead; but the Lord shall come, and all the saints with Him" implying that the general resurrection would take place at an after-stage, presumably, as Millennialistsheld, after the 1,000 years had expired. Without dogmatic authority, and with only moder ate spiritual value, the Did. is important historically as a witness to the church s beliefs, usages and con dition during the transition between the Apostolic and the Post-apostolic Age. During that transi tion period, we see much of the freedom of primi tive Christianity mingled with rudiments of ecclesi astical regulations and formularies; and while we cannot assume that every belief and usage recorded in the Did. were sanctioned by apostles, we may reasonably ascribe them to apostolic times, and regard them as not opposed by those apostles within whose view they must have come.

      ///. Epistles of Ignatius. Ignatius was bishop

      of Antioch early in the 2d cent. Origen (Horn, vi

      on Lk) refers to him as "second after

      1. Author St. Peter"; Euodius came between and Date (HE, 111, 22). As he calls himself

      ektroma, "untimely born" (cf 1 Cor 15 8), he was probably converted in mature life: the legend of his being the "child" of Mt 18 3 rests on misinterpretation of his designation "Theo- phoros." Traditions current in the 4th cent, repre sent him as a disciple of St. John (Eus., Chron.) and ordained by St. Paul (Apos Const, vii.46).

      The Martyrium of Ignatius (Oth cent.) dates his trial at Antioch in the Oth year of Trajan s reign (107-8 AD) and represents it as conducted before the emperor. Only one visit, however, of Trajan to Antioch is known, in 114-15; neither any Ignatian letter nor Eusebius, nor any other early writer refers to so memorable a circum stance as the presidency of an emperor over a Christian s trial, and Ignatius speaks of a proposed attempt by Kom friends to secure a reversal of the sentence, which would have been impossible had Trajan personally pronounced it. His alleged presence, therefore, must be rejected as a later embellishment.

      The epp., so far as genuine, were written after Ignatius condemnation, on his way to martyrdom at Rome.

      The epp. are extant in 3 edd: (1) the longer Gr,

      of 15 letters now admitted to be largely spurious;

      (2) a Syr recension of three letters, now

      2. Gen- generally held to be a mere epitome; uineness (3) the shorter Gr ed, containing 7

      letters of intermediate length, to the Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, Philadelphians, Smyrnaeans, Romans, and Polycarp. Light foot, Zahn, and most recent critics accept the substantial genuineness of these seven. The chief external evidence is that of Polycarp (Phil., xiii), who, soon after Ignatius death, writes of a letter addressee! to himself, of another to the Smyrnaeans, and of "all the rest which we have by us." Now 2 Ignatian epp. are addressed to Polycarp and the Christians of Smyrna, while 4 profess to be written by Ignatius at Smyrna, harmonizing well with copies of these being in Polycarp s possession.



      Further external evidence is supplied by Irenaeus (v.2 .H wlio quotes a saying from Ignat., l{<n., iv. as tliat, of a martyr, and who uses s notable phrases borrowed apparently from Ignatius. This external testimony (only got- rid of by an arbitrary assumption of I olycarp s Kp. being wholly or partly spurious) is supported by strong internal and cumulative evidence :

      (1) Frequent- ,/,;immiiti,-nl dislocation, natural in letters written on a journey but unaccountable on the suppo sition of a later forgery (Runt., i; Mmj., ii; E i>h., i).

      (2) Geographical particular.-:: e.g. [gnat ins goes by land from Antioch to Smyrna an unusual route which a forger would hardly invent.

      (3) Ilixtorirul. illiixtratiinis: e.g. conveyance of prisoners from distant provinces to Rome harmonizes with the account by Dion Cassius (Ixviii. 15) of the magnitude of amphitheatrical exhibitions under Trajan causing extensive orders for human victims from all parts.

      (4) Tlii-i>li>i/irril evidence: e.g. these epp. refer to .luda- istic error combined with a type of doctrine denying any real incarnation a combination which ceased after Ig natius time.

      (5) Ecclesiastical usaije: thus, the Agape still includes the Kucharist (.Sm. /r., viii), whereas soon after Ignatius death these were separated (I liny, E(>. .Hi; Just., 1 AIL, 65,67).

      ((i) Personal references. The writer shows an excess and affectation of self-depreciation-- "last of Antiochene Christians" (Trull., xiii) "not worthy to be counted one of the brotherhood" (Km., i.x) such as a later forger would hardly have introduced.

      (1) Joy and (/lor// of martyr/loin. Heroic courage and loyalty to Christ arc united with fanatical

      craving after a martyr s death: "1 3. Leading would rather die for Christ than reign Ideas over the whole earth" (Rom., vi);

      "He who is near the sword is near to God" (Smyr., iv). This is noble; hut when he writes, "Entice wild beasts to become my sepulchre" (Rom., iv); " May I have joy of the wild beasts and find them prompt"; "Though they be unwilling I will force them" (Rom., iv.")), we realize how Aure- lius (recalling perhaps some such case) was moved to write that "death was to be encountered, not as by the Christians like a military display, but solemnly, and not as if one acted in a tragedy" (Med.xi.3).

      (2) Evil and peril of heresy and scldsm. "Ab stain from heresy"; "These heretics mix up Jesus Christ with their own poison" (Trull., vi) ; "Flee those evil outshoots, which produce death-bearing fruit" (Trail., xi); "Avoid all divisions as the be ginning of evils"; "Nothing is better than unity" (To Polyc..,\\; Phil., in).

      (3) Submission to office-bearers, esp. to the bishop. -"Do nothing without your bishop, and be subject

      to the presbyters" (Mag., vii); "Be on your guard against heresy: and this will be, if ye continue in intimate union with Christ and with the bishop"; "He who does anything without the bishop s knowl edge Kerveth the devil" (tiinyr., ix). The bishop here is higher than "primus inter pares"; he is a new and separate office-bearer. Yet, without going beyond these epp., we discern that such an episcopate was not an express apostolic institution. For had Ignatius been able to magnify the office as apostolically enjoined, so zealous a champion of episcopal authority would have adduced such in junction as the most cogent reason for submission. His zeal for the episcopate apparently sprang only from its high ecclesiastical expediency as the most effective agency for maintaining the church s unity against heresy and schism.

      (1) The (In* pel of Jn is never quoted, but numerous phrases suggest that it was in the; writer s hands. He

      speaks of Christ "proceeding from the

      4 Other Father," "doing nothing without the

      Nntahilia Father," "in all things pleasing Him

      na who sent Him." Christ is the "Door of

      the Father" and "Living water." Satan is the "Prince of this world." " The Holy Spirit knoweth whence He comet h and whither He goeth."

      (2) Doctrine. Ignatius asserts emphatically Christ s true Divinity: "Our God" (Eph., xvii\\; Trail, vii). The Trinity is frequently suggested, although not expressly affirmed. Christians are "established in the Son, tho Father, and tho Spirit"; "subject to Christ and the

      Father, and the Spirit." With strong support of episco pal authority no sacerdotalism is united. "Priest" occurs only once, "The priests are good: but Christ, the High I riest, is better." Here, as the context shows, the imperfect Levitical priesthood is contrasted with the perfect high-priesthood of Christ.

      (:i) Ecrl, .^in.^ticnl ii.-<ii<if. Ignatius contains one of the latest references to the Agape as still conjoined with the Kueharist. The letter to 1 olycarp (eh iv) contains the earliest allusion to the practice; of redeeming Christian slaves at the cost of the congregation. Slaves are not to "long to be set free," thus implying that such eman cipation, while not required as a duty, was often con ferred as a privilege.

      (4) General rli(irnrtrri.-<tirn. Ignatius presents a striking contrast, as a writer, to Clement. Clement is calm, cultured, chaste in diction, but somewhat common place and deficient in originality; his best passages are echoes of Scripture. The diction and style of Ignatius are impassioned, rugged, turgid, but pithy, fresh and individualistic.

      IV. Epistle of Polycarp. Polvcarp was born

      not later, perhaps considerably earlier, than 70 AD;

      for at his martyrdom, of which the

      1. Date and now accepted date is 155 or 156 Genuine- (Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers, II, i, ness 62 .)), he declared, when invited to

      abjure his faith, that he had "served Christ for S(> years" (Mart. Pol., ix). He was a disciple of St. John, who ordained him as bishop or leading presbyter of Smyrna before 100 AD (Iren., iii.3, 4). Of several letters by Polycarp, only this ep. remains: it professes (ch xiii) to have been written soon after the martyrdom of Ignatius. The genuineness of the letter is attested by Irenaeus, Polycarp .-; own disciple (I.e.), whose evidence cannot be set aside on the ground of its testimony to the Ignatian letters without an obvious begging of the question. The supposition that the Ignatian letters and Polycarp s Ep. are parts of one great forger} is otherwise negatived by the very marked differ ence of style and standpoint between those writings (Lightfoot, I.e., 577).

      The cp. replies to a letter from the Philippian church inviting his counsel, and asking for epp. of

      the recently martyred Ignatius. He

      2. Occasion acknowledges their kind ministry to and Con- that martyr and to others, "entwined tents with saintly fetters," who had "set

      a pattern of all patience." He sends what he has of the letters of Ignatius and asks in return for any information which they might pos sess. He commends to their careful study St. Paul s ep. to themselves, acknowledging his in ability to attain to the apostle s wisdom. With much Scripture language, interwoven with his own matter, and giving to his letter the semblance of an apostolic echo, he exhorts his readers to righteous ness and godliness, charity and mercy, and warns them against covetousness, evil-speaking and revenge. He dwells on the mutual relations and obligations of presbyters and deacons, on the one hand, and of the congregation on the other. He repeats St. John s admonition against teachers who denied the reality of the incarnation: "Every spirit that confesseth not," etc (1 Jn 4 3). He grieves over the lapse of a Philippian presbyter, Valens, who, along with his wife had flagrantly sinned; but he bids his readers not count such as enemies, but seek to recall them from their wander ings.

      (1) Polycarp mentions only one book of the NT. viz. Phil, but within the brief compass of 200 lines he quotes

      verses or reproduces phrases from 12 XT Q IMVitatM li a writings. Mt, 1 Pet, 1 .In. and 9 Pauline O. 1NO a Epp including three whose early date

      has been disputed in modern times (1 and 2 Tim and Eph). The absence of any quotation from the Gospel of .In is notable, considering his relation to the apostle; but the shortness of the letter prevents any conclusion being drawn against the authenticity of that Gospel; and he (motes (as we have seen) from 1 Jn, which is a kind of appendix to the Gospel (Lightfoot).

      (2) At a time when Ignatius had been emphasizing



      the paramount duty of submission to tho bishop, Poly- carp, even when enjoining subjection to presbyters, does not mention a bishop. These two inferences are irre sistible: (a) there was then no episkopos, in the post-NT, sense, at Philippi; (6) Polycarp did not consider the defect (?) sufficiently important to ask the Philippians to supply it. Had St. John instituted the mono-episcopate as the one proper form of church government, surely his disciple Polycarp would have embraced the opportunity, when the Philippians invited his counsel, to inform them of tho apostolic ordinance, and to enjoin its adoption.

      V. Papias Fragments. Papias is called by his younger contemporary Irenaeus (v.33) a "disciple

      of John and friend of Polycarp " 1. Author Eusebius writes (HP], III, 36) that he and Date was episkopos of Hierapolis in Phrygia.

      The Chronicon Paschale (7th cent., but embodying materials from older documents) states that he was martyred about the same time as Poly carp (155-5(5). His work, Exposition of Our Lord s Sayings, was extant in the 13th cent., but only frag ments quoted by Irenaeus, Eusebius, etc, remain. These bear out the twofold description of Papias by Eusebius, as a "man of little judgment" yet "most learned arid well acquainted with the Scriptures" (HE, III, 39, 36). (But the words of praise in ver 36 may be a gloss.) Papias states that he subjoins to his expositions "whatsoever I learned carefully from the elders and treasured up in my memory .... I was wont to put questions regarding the words of the elders [i.e. presumably men of an earlier gen eration], what Andrew or Peter said, or what Philip or Thomas, or James, or what John or Matthew, or any other of the Lord s disciples said, as well as regarding what Aristion, and the presbyter John, the disciple of the Lord, have to say."

      It is disputed whether Papias here refers to two Johns, the apostle and another disciple of the same name; or to John the apostle in two different relations, i.e. first as one about whose testimony Papias heard from others, and second, as one with whom, also, he held personal communication. In favor of the first view is, (1) Euse bius own opinion (I.e.); (2) the alleged unlikelihood of the same John being twice mentioned in one sentence- (3) a statement by Eusebius (HE, lil, :?< that in his day two monuments (mnemata) of "John" existed at Ephesus. For the latter view is, (1) no other writer until Eusebius hints the existence; of a presbyter John distinct from the apostle; (2) the change in the quota tion from "said" to "say" seems to give a reason for John being twice mentioned; some things stated by John having been heard by Papias through "elders" others having been told him by the apostle himself. The fact that John is called presbyter, instead of apostle, is no insuperable objection, since John so designates him self in 2 and 3 .In; and Jerome denies that the two mnfmata were both tombs. See Light foot. Exxa;/ on Pa/tiax, and Nicol, Four Gospel*, 187 If, who come to divergent conclusions.

      2 Testi- ~

      3 Other

      ) Si . Matthew

      nonv to anc * ^" ^ ar ^ see MATTHEW, GOSPEL St. Matthew OF MARK > GOSPEL OF. and St. (1) According to Eusebius, Papias relates

      ffiarlr * ne story of "a woman accused before

      Our Lord" the story, presumably, which eventually crept into .In 8; so that to him, in part, is due the preservation of a narrative, which, whether historical or not, finely illustrates the union in Our Lord of holy purity and merciful charity.

      (2) Papias is quoted by tho Chronicler Georgius Hamartolos (in a MS of the 9th cent.) as declaring in his Ejcpositon that St. John "was put to death by the Jews," and a similar quotation is made by Philip of Side (Epitome MS of the 7th-8th cent). On the bearing of this upon the question of the apostle s residence at Ephesus see JOHN, THE APOSTLE. (3) Irenaeus (v.32) quotes Papias as writing about a Post-resurrection millennium, and as reporting, on St. John s authority, how the Lord said, "The days will come when vines shall grow having each 10,000 branches, and on each branch 10,000 twigs, and on each twig 10,000 shoots," etc. This may be an exaggerated record (mis understood by Papias) of some parabolic utterance of Christ, indicating prophetically the wonderful extension of the church.

      VI. Epistle of Barnabas. This book is first ex pressly quoted by Clement of Alexandria (c 190 AD) as the composition of Barnabas, companion of St.

      Paul (Strom., ii.6). Origen concurs, and calls it a "Catholic ep." (Con. Cdsum,_ i.63), thus suggest ing canonical position; Eusebius (HE 1. Author- III, 25) testifies to the widespread ship ascription of it to this Barnabas,

      although he himself regards it as spurious." Cod. Sin places it immediately after the NT, as being read in churches, and thus sug gests its composition by a companion at least of apostles. Against this external testimony, how ever, to authorship by the Barnabas of "Acts, is strong internal evidence : (1) apostolic sinfulness prior to discipleship is spoken of in exaggerated terms hardly credible in a writer who knew the Twelve "exceedingly lawless beyond all [ordi nary] sin" (ch v) an echo apparently of St. Paul s "sinners of whom I am chief"; (2) ignorance of Jewish rites incomprehensible in a Levite who had lived in Jems, e.g. the priests are said to eat goat s flesh on the great Day of Atonement; (3) extreme anti-Judaism (see below), inconsistent with the representation of Barnabas in Acts and Gal. The writer may have been some other Barnabas, a converted Alexandrine Jew, or, more probably, a converted gentile proselyte, trained in Philo s school, but ignorant of Jewish rites as practised at Jems, and possessing little real sympathy with Judaism.

      The ep. must be dated after 70 AD, as the de struction of Jems is referred to (ch xvi); also after the publication of the Gospel of Jn,

      2. Date of which there are several reminis

      cences. But the absence of any refer ence to the rebuilding of Jems under Hadrian, in 120 AD, in a passage (ch xvi) where such allusion might have been expected, suggests a date prior to that year. We may place the writing between 90 and 120 AD.

      The object is to deter both Jewish and gentile

      Christians from Judaistic lapse by a bold application

      of the allegorizing method to the OT,

      3. Object far beyond what Philo would have and sanctioned. Jewish sacrifices, festi- Contents vals, Sabbath enactments, temple- worship, distinction of clean and un clean food, are not only not of perpetual obligation, but never were binding at all, even on Jews. Be lief in their obligatoriness rests on a slavishly liberal exegesis of the OT, which, properly interpreted, is not a preparation for Christ but Christianity itsdf in allegorical disguise.

      Ceremonies are simply allegorical enforcements of spiritual worship; distinctions of clean and unclean are merely pictorial representations of the necessity of sepa ration from vice and vicious men; interdict of swine s flesh means no more than "associate not with swinish men." The only circumcision really commanded by (iod is circumcision of the heart. Barnabas ignores what St. Paul realized, that Jewish laws and rites, even lit. interpreted, are a Divine discipline of wholesome self- restraint, neighborly consideration and obedience to God. Barnabas not only explains away OT enactments, but finds in trivial OT statements Christian fact and truth. Thus, in Abraham s circumcision of the 318 men of his house, the 10 and <S are significantly denoted by the Gr letters I and H, the initial letters of Icsoux (Jesus) ; while the 300 represented by the Gr T, points to the cross. The writer self-complacently intimates that "no one has been admitted by me to a more genuine piece of knowledge than this ! (ch ix) .

      When Barnabas, however, leaves obscure allegory for plain exhortation, he writes effectively of the "two ways" of light and darkness. Among edify ing admonitions the following are outstanding: "Thou shalt not go to prayer with an evil con science"; "Thou shalt not let the word of God issue from lips stained with impurity"; "Be not ready to stretch forth thine hands to take, while thou contractest them to give"; "Thou shalt not issue orders with bitterness to thy servant, lest



      tliou f;i,il in reverence to Clod \\vlio is above you both"; "Thou, not, make a schism, but. shall bring together them \\vho contend"; "The way of darkness is crooked"; "In this way are [among others mentioned! those who labor not to aid him who is overdone with toil" (chs xix, xx).

      (1) The Divinity of Christ is emphasized: "Lord of all the world"; "Joint Creator, with the Father, of mankind" (ch v). (- ) The writer, while A AT * u-r following the Alexandrian method of alle- 4. JNotanma goi-j.-ai interpretation, is free from (.lie Alexandrian doctrine of the essential evil of matter; the necessity of a real incarnation is af- tirmed (ch vK (X) In ch xi, he writes, "We go down into the water full of sins and filth, and come up bear ing fruit in our heart, having the fear of God and trust in .lesus in our spirit ." This has been interpreted as involving the doctrine of baptismal regeneration; but the reference may be rather to the regeneration which baptism symbolizes. (4) In ch xv, the words, "We keep the. s th day with joy, the day on which Jesus rose again " are the earliest express testimony that the ob servance of the Lord s Day was a memorial of Our Lord s resurrection. This observance, is distinguished from Jewish Sabbath-keeping which is called an error; the Sabbath really intended to be kept being a period of 1 000 years after the 0,000 years in which all things will be finished (ch xv). ( >) Testimony to NT Books, () the existence and canonical authority of the Gospel of Mt are attested (ch iv) by the quotation of Mt 22 14, "Many are called, but few chosen." introduced by the formula, "it is written"; (6) various passages taken together testify to the writer having the Gospel of Jn in his hands- "Whoso eatethof these shall live for ever " (ch xi and Jn 6 5S); "Abraham looking before in Spirit to Jesus" (ch ix and Jn 8 58); "the new law of our Lord Jesus Christ" (ch ii and Jn 13 34); a reference to the brazen serpent as a type of Christ s suffering, glory and healing power (ch xii and Jn 3 14); (c) "Thou shalt not say that anything is thine own" (ch xix) appears to be a reminiscence of Acts 4 32; (</) the pas sage in xv, "The day of the Lord shall be as a thousand years." seems to be an echo of 2 Pet 3 8, and, if so, is the earliest testimony to the existence of that writing, and thus proves its great antiquity, although not its canonicity.

      VII. Pastor (Shepherd] of Hermas. This work is the earliest example, on a, large scale, of Christian allegory, and was hardly less popular 1. Author- in the early church than the Pilgrim s ship and Progress in later times. It was reek- Date oned by many almost, by some al together, as "Scripture." Irenaeus quotes it as "Scripture" (iv.20); Clement of Alex andria refers to it as "containing revelations Di vinely imparted" (Strom., i. 29); Origen regards it as "Divinely inspired" (Comm. on Rom 16 14). It is placed with the Ep. of Barnabas in the Cod. Sin at the elose of the XT, and was read in many churches down to Jerome s time (Works, II, 846). The writer represents himself as a slave sold to a Rom Christian lady. He afterward obtained free dom, lived with his family in Rome, became earnest ly religious, and saw visions which he imparted to the community in this book with a view to repent ance and spiritual well-being.

      Origen (followed by Eusebitis, Jerome, etc) ascribes the work to the Hermes of Rom 16 14; but his opinion is pure conjecture (/>itto}. The Canon Muratori (170 AD) of Italian authorship describes the work as "recently composed at Rome by the brother of Pins during the hitter s episcopate" (137- 54). This distinct local testimony has been widely accepted (Hefele, Lightfoot, Charteris, Cruttwell, etc). Yet the writer represents himself (Vision, ii.4) as enjoined to send his book to Clement as a man in authority in the church, whom it is natural to identify with the chief presbyter of Rome be tween 92 and 101. This reference, along with the absence of any allusion to (inosticisrn or to the mono-episcopate, has led Schaff, Zahn, and others to fix the date of the work at about 100 AD. The external and internal evidence, thus apparently divergent, may be reconciled by supposing (with Kriigor and Harnack) that the book was not "written in a single draft"; that portions were

      issued successively during Clement s episcopate; and that, under Pius (c 140) the separate issues were gathered into a volume under the title of 77/c Pus- tor. In Home, where the author was known, the Canon Muratori attested at once its religious use fulness as a "book to be read" and the absence of any claim to canonical authority.

      The purpose of the book is not doctrinal but ethical; it is an allegorical manual of Christian

      duty with earnest calls to individual 2. Object repentance and church revival in view and of 1 he near Advent.

      Contents The book consists of (1) Five

      Visions, (2) Twelve Mandates, (3) Ten Similitudes or Parables. In (1) the church appears to the writer as a venerable matron, then as a tower near completion, thereafter as a Holy Virgin. In the last vision, the Angel of Repent ance, in pastoral garb, delivers to him the Man dates and Similitudes. The Mandates deal with chastity, truth, patience, meekness, reverence, prayer, penitence, and warn against grieving the Spirit. In the Similitudes the church is again a tower whose stones are examined for appro bation or reprobation. Similitudes are also drawn from trees. The vine clinging to the elm signifies union of rich and poor in the church; a large willow from which a multitude receive branches or twigs, some of these blossoming or fruit-bearing, others dry or rotten, symbolizes the diverse effect of law and gospel on different souls. The author, although a Gentile, writes from the standpoint of James rather than of Paul. The closing words summarize his combined ethical and eschatological purpose: "Ye who have received good from the Lord, do good works, lest while ye delay, the tower be completed, and you be rejected."

      (1) Montanistic affinity. Hermas, indeed, differs from Montanists in permitting, though not encouraging,

      second marriage, and recognizing one o -NT +0^-1 o possible repentance after post-baptismal J. iNOTaonid Dopant S in; but he is also their fore runner, through his disallowance of read- mission after si mml lapse, through emphatic expecta tion of an impending Advent, and through his rigorous view of fasting: "On the fast day taste nothing but bread and water."

      (2) Fasting, however, is regarded not as an end but as a means a discipline toward humility, purity, charity. Fasting for charity is illustrated by the in junction (Sim., v.3) to "reckon up the price of what you meant to eat, and give that to one in want."

      (3) of names "Jesus" and "Christ." The names "Jesus" and "Christ" never occur. He is "Son of God" and " Lord of His people." whom "God made to dwell in flesh," by whom "the whole world is sustained," who "endured great sufferings that Ho might do away with the sins of His people" (Sim., v.6; ix.14).

      (4) Church organization. Hermas is charged (T is., ii.4) to "read his writings to [or along with] the pres byters who preside over the church" in Rome. It is reasonable to conclude that no one in that community could then be called "bishop" in the later sense of the holder of an office distinct from and superior to the pres- byterate. Episkopoi ("bishops") are mentioned (Sim.., ix 27) as "given to hospitality," the description of the eplskopos in 1 Tim 3 2, where admittedly bishop = presbyter.

      VIII. Second Epistle of Clement. This writing is doubly miscalled: it is neither an op. nor a com position of Clement. Style, thought, 1. Nature and standpoint differ from those of of Docu- the accepted Ep., and HE, III, 38, ment suggests that the Clementine author

      ship was not generally recognized. The recent recovery by Bryennios of the _ previously lost conclusion proves that the writing is a sermon (ch xix).

      Antiquity is indicated by (1) the use, as an authority, of the lost heretical Gospel of the Egyp : tians, which by the time of the Canon Muratori (175 AD) had ceased to be regarded as Scripture by Catholics; (2) the adoption, without gnostic intention, of phrases which became notably asso-



      ciated, after 150 AD with Gnosticism: "God made

      male and female: the male is Christ, the female, the

      church" (ch xiv). The date usually

      2. Date and assigned is 120-50 AD (Lightfoot, Part Authorship I, vol II, 201). The author is a gen tile presbyter; he had "worshipped

      stocks and stones." The sermon was probably preached at Corinth, for the preacher describes many arriving by sea for the race-course, without mentioning a port, which would be appropriate in a sermon preached to Corinthians.

      No text is given, but the sermon starts from Isa 64 1, without express quotation; this chap ter had probably been read at the

      3. Contents service. The discourse, without great

      literary merit, is earnest and prac tical. There are exhortations to repentance and good works, to purity, charity, prayer and fast ing, with special reference to coming judgment. The standpoint is that of St. James. "Be not troubled [so the sermon concludes] because we see the unrighteous with abundance, and God s servants in straits. Let us have faith, brethren and sisters. Had God recompensed the righteous speedily, we should have had training not in piety but in bargaining; and our uprightness would be a mere semblance, since our pursuit would be not of godliness but of gain."

      (1) The sermon is the oldest extant in post-NT times,

      and appears to have been rend (ch xix) to a congregation.

      (2) Sayings of Christ not in our Gospels

      4. Nntahilia aro Q U(> f L d : (") "The Lord, being asked * L uiauiiia when His kingdom would come, answered:

      When the two shall be one [i.e. when har mony shall prevail?], and when the outside shall be as the inside [i.e. when men shall be as they seem?]; and the male with the female, neither male nor female" (in terpreted by this preacher ascetieally as discountenancing marriage, presumably because "the time is short," but explained mystically by Clement of Alexandria in Strain., iii.13, as indicating the abolition of all distinctions in God s kingdom). Clement assigns the passage to the lost Gospel of the Egyptians. (6) "The Lord saith, ye shall be as lambs among wolves. Peter answered : What if the wolves tear the lambs? Jesus said: Let not the lambs fear the wolves: and ye, also, fear not them which kill you, and can do nothing more to you." (3) No episcopate, apparently, in the post-NT sense, existed in the church where this sermon was delivered. Unfaithful men are represented as confessing, "We obeyed not the presbyters when they told us of salvation." Had a bishop in the later sense been head of the community, obedience to his admonitions would surely have been inculcated. (4) The Christology is high; "We ought to think of Christ as of God"; "When we think mean things of Christ, we expect to receive mean things" (ch i).

      IX. Apology of Aristides. Aristides was an

      Athenian philosopher, who (according to HE, IV, 3)

      presented an Apology to Hadrian, pre-

      1. Recovery sumably when the emperor was at and Date Athens (125 AD). After disappear ance in the 17th cent., a fragment in

      an Armenian version was discovered in 1878, and the entire Apology in Syr was found in 1889. It was then found that almost the whole treatise was imbedded anonymously in a Gr mediaeval romance, Barlaam and Josaphat. The Apology in the Syr is inscribed to Antoninus ; it may have been addressed to both emperors successively, or the real date may be 137, when they were colleagues in the empire.

      The treatise refers to oppression, imprisonment,

      and other maltreatment endured by Christians, and

      pleads for their protection against

      2. Contents persecution, because of their true and

      noble creed, and their pure and benevo lent lives. The writer compares the Christian doctrine of Godhead with that of barbarians, Greeks, Egyptians, Jews, and dwells on the ele vating influence of Christian belief in Jesus Christ and in a future life. He refers to the abstention of Christians from unchastity, dishonesty and other vices; to their abounding charity and brotherliness which are shown particularly to the widow, the

      orphan, the poor, the stranger, the oppressed, and even their oppressors. All who become Christians, of however low a station, are brethren. This bright picture has, however, its shadows: "If Chris tians see that one of their number has died in his sins, over him they weep bitterly as over one about to go into punishment." This frank acknowledg ment of some black sheep gives point to his general testimony, "Blessed is the race of Christians above all men."

      (1) A distinct reference to a collection of Christian writings, and esp. of Gospels, designated the Gospel, and indicating the existence of a kind of rudi- q TJotaKilia mentary NT Canon. (2) Similar indica- 3. iNoidumd ti()n ot a ru cii men tary Apostles Creed. Christians are said to believe in God, " the Maker of Heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ who was born of a Heb virgin, who was transfixed by the Jews; he died and was buried; and Christians state that after three days he rose again and ascended into heaven." In this early time the virgin birth was apparently a settled matter part of the Creed. (3) Aristides describes a familiar custom among poor Christians of fasting two or three days, so as to supply with needful food Chris tians poorer still (Com p. Hrrmax). (4) The Apology is interesting as the earliest known literary tribute of a philosopher to Christianity, and probably the earliest extant defence of the faith, if the Ep. to Diognctus^ be not ancient. It is notable also as a treatise on Christian evi dence drawn not from miraculous credentials, but from the self-evidencing excellence and effect of Christianity. Finally , it is interesting as the earliest detailed record of harvest reaped at Athens from seed sown by St. Paul 80 or 90 years before. Athens appeared at. first a barren soil; but by and by this church in a university city took the lead, as this treatise and another lost apology by Quadratus show, in the literary defence of the Christian faith. Quadratus is stated in HE, IV, 3, to have pre sented his Apology to Hadrian, and is described by Jerome as " a disciple of the apostles." In a fragment preserved in HE, he attests the survival ("to our own day") of some whom Christ had healed.

      X. Justin Martyr. Born of pagan parents at

      Flavia Neapolis (Nablous), in Samaria about 100

      AD a seeker for truth, who, after

      1. Incidents trying Stoic, Peripatetic, Pythagorean of Life and Platonic philosophies, found in

      Christ and Christianity the satisfaction of philosophic cravings and spiritual needs. Ho became a Christian apostle and apologist, wearing still the philosopher s mantle in token of continued quest after wisdom, but making it now his life- work, not as presbyter, but as itinerating Christian teacher, to impart to pagan, to Jew and also to heretic the truth which he himself had found an:l prized. After long Christian service, he suffered martyrdom under Aurelius in 166 AD.

      It is addressed to Antoninus and dated 138-48. He approaches the emperor without flattery, and

      asks judgment after searching inquiry.

      2. First He answers three charges against Apology Christians: (1) atheism: Justin replies

      that Christians were atheists only as Socrates was; they disbelieved in so-called gods who were wicked demons or humanly fashioned images; but they worshipped the Father of Righteousness;

      (2) immorality: Justin admits the existence of pre tended Christians who are evil-doers; but Chris tianity makes the evil good, the licentious chaste, the covetous generous, the revengeful forgiving;

      (3) disloyalty: trn s is calumny based on the preach ing of Christ s kingdom which is spiritual, not temporal. Christians are taught and are wont to pay tribute promptly and to pray for rulers regu larly. Justin then sets forth the credibility and excellence of Christianity, adducing, (1) its pure morality as contrasted with vices condoned by heathens, (2) its noble doctrines immortality, resurrection, future judgment, incarnation, (3) OT prophecy regarding the Divinity and sufferings of the Christ. His reference to the prediction of a virgin bringing forth Emmanuel (ch xxxiii) shows that in his day the virgin birth was accepted, al though Jews understood by virgin (in Isa) merely a

      Lit., Sub-apostol. Liver



      young woman, ( 4) foreshadowings of Christian truth by philosophy, referring esp. to Plato s teach ing about the Divine 1 Logos and judgment to come. To refute prevalent calumny Jus1 in describes Sum lay service and administration of sacraments in his 1 hue. On the Lord s Day Christians assembled for worship ; prophet ic Script urns and "memoirs" by apost les and their followers were read; prayers and thanksgivings were offered and an address delivered by t he "presi dent "; bread and wine wen; distributed and sent by deacons to those absent; and an offering for chari table purposes was made. "As many as believe what is taught, and undertake to live accordingly, are, after prayer and fast, baptized" (chs Ixv, Ixvii).

      This is probably a postscript to the first; Euse-

      bius quotes from both as from one work. After

      a protest against a recent, summary

      3. "Second execution of three Christians without Apology" proper trial, Justin deals with two popu

      lar taunts: (1) "If at death they went to heaven, why did they not commit, suicide?": "We do not shrink from death but from opposing God s will." (2) "If God is really on the Christians side, why does He allow them to be persecuted?": "The world by Divine decree is meanwhile under the dominion of angels who have become demons." Justin here contrasts Christ with Socrates, whom yet he describes as a preacher of the "true but then unknown God" (ch x) : "Xo one put such faith in Socrates as to die for his convictions." Christ hath won the faith, "not only of philosophers, but of simple folk who through faith can despise death." Justin, however, testifies clearly and warmly to the Christian element by anticipation, in the higher teachings and aspirations of heathen philosophy through an implanted seed of the Divine Logos; and he recognizes thus a pro-advent ministry of the Son of God, not only in the sheltered fold of Juda ism, but in the broad open of heathendom.

      This Dialogue indicates the attitude of some cultured Jews of that day to Christianity, and the

      mode in which their objections to it

      4. Dialogue were met. Tryplio argued that Jesus with Trypho did not fulfil OT prophecy which repre- the Jew sented the Messiah as establishing

      a glorious and even-lasting kingdom; whereas Jesus was a humble peasant who died an ignominious death; Justin pleads Isa 53. Trypho charges Christianity with treason to the theocracy through exalting Jesus to Godhead, thus trenching on the Divine unity, and also through repudiating the perpetual obligation of the Law. Justin, in reply, quotes Genesis, "Let us make man," and also Pss 45, 72, 110, with Isa 7 about Emmanuel. The Mosaic Law was intended to be temporary, and was now superseded by the Law of Christ; more over, the destruction of Jems rendered complete fulfilment of the Jewish Law impracticable. The disputants part on friendly terms, "I have been particularly pleased with this conference," says Trypho. "If we could confer oftener we should be much helped in reading the Scriptures." "For my part," replies Justin, "I would have wished to repeat our conference daily; but since I am about to set sail, I bid you give all diligence in this struggle after salvation." Of other works ascribed to Justin, two (On, (lie Resurrection and Appeal to the Greeks ) may or may not be genuine; the others are spurious.

      (1) Bearing of Justin s quotations from "memoirs"

      on the Aye of Our (1 us pi-Is (sec ( i OSPKI.S).

      ( L 2) Testimony to harmony of apostolic

      K TOntaViJIia doctrine. Justin is a disciple of St. Paul, o. nuu

      iumt and a strong anti-.Tudaist; yet he recog nizes thoroughly the Twelve as the true source of Christian teaching, "sent by Christ to leach to all the Word of God" (I A p., 39,49; Dial., 42, 109).

      (3) From personal knowledge as a traveler, Justin testifies to the wide. diffusion of Christianity: "No race of men exists among whom prayers are not offered up to

      the Father through the name of the crucified Jesus (Dial., 117).

      (4) Authorship of Revelation: "John, one of the apos tles, prophesied, by a revelation made to him, that be lievers would dwell 1,000 years in .Jerus" (Dial.. 81) the earliest direct witness to Johannino authorship, by one who had resided at Kphesus.

      (;">) Belief of (lie primitive church in Our Lord s true Diciniti/: Writing in the name of Christians as a body, lie declares, "Both Him [the Father] and the Son who came forth from Him we adore" (1 A p., 5). He speaks also of some "who held that Jesus was a mere man" as a small and heretical minority (Dial., 48). He writes elsewhere (1 .1 />., 13) of the Son as the object of worship "in the second place"; but this statement, made long before the Arian Controversy necessitated precision of language, does not invalidate his other testimonies.

      (6) As to the Holy Spirit, Justin refers to baptism as administered in "the name of Father, Son, and Spirit" (1 Ap., til), implying the Divinity of the Third Person; although elsewhere he appears to subordinate Him to the Son, as the Son to the Father. He is to be "worshipped in the third order" (1 Ap., 13).

      (7) Millenarianism: "I and others are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead and 1.000 years in Jerus which will be built, adorned and enlarged" (Dial., 80). He admits, however, that many pure and pious Christians think otherwise.

      (8) Future punishment: On this subject Justin speaks with two voices. In 1 Ap., S, he writes of "condemned souls suffering eternal punishment, not for a millennial period only." But in Dial., 5, he introduces an old man who was the immediate means of his conversion as say ing that "the wicked shall be punished as long as God shall will them to exist."

      (9) Angel-worship: In 1 Ap., 6, Justin, when refuting the charge of atheism, writes: " We reverence and wor ship the Father, and the Son, and the host of other good messengers (or angels), and the Prophetic Spirit." The context, however, shows that this cultus does not neces sarily amount to what is usually meant by worship, but simply to veneration and homage. The (ir words here, sebomai and proxkuneo, are often used in this lower sense; and the train of thought seems to be this: "You call us atheists; the charge is not true, for wo not only be lieve in one God and Father of all, but in one who is preeminently the Son of God, who was sent by God. We believe further in other heavenly messengers from God, a host of angelic spirits; yea we believe in one who is preeminently God s Spirit, by whom prophets were inspired. All these are the object in different degrees of our veneration and homage." Undoubtedly, however, the statement is at best unguarded and misleading.

      (10) Doctrine of the sacraments: Justin uses " regener ate" as the synonym of "baptized" (1 Ap., 61), but he identifies the two, not as essentially inseparable, but as uniformly associated. As regards the Lord s Supper, while emphasizing the ideas of commemoration, com munion, and thanksgiving, he in one place speaks of the bread and wine being the flesh and blood of the Incarnate Jesus, "from which, by a transmutation, our flesh and blood are nourished" (1 Ap., 06). These words tend to transubstantiation; but, in the absence of any con troversy at the time, may be no more than a strongly figurative representation of a spiritual participation.

      XL Epistle to Dtognetus. This short apologetic work is mentioned by no ancient writer, and was

      unknown until its discovery in 1592 1. Date and by Henry Stephens in a MS which Authorship perished in the Strassburg fire of 1870.

      The MS appears to ascribe it to the author of another work (To the Greeks) ^ and this, again, is attributed with some probability on the

      genuinely ancient, the ep. probably belongs to the Sub-apostolic Age, for it refers to Christianity as "having only now entered the world, not long ago" ; and in ch xi (written, however, by a different hand or at a different time) the author calls himself a "disciple of the apostles." Diognetus was a very common Gr name, so that his identification with the tutor of Marcus Aurelius (130-40 AD) is a mere conjecture. Donaldson (Chr. Lit., II, 142) in clines to the belief that the work was composed by one of the many Greeks who came westward in the 14th cent, and that the author intended merely to write a "good declamation in the old style." The smart but superficial way in which heathenism and Judaism are dealt with is more befitting a mediaeval rhetorical exercise than the serious treatment, by a cultured writer, of prevalent religions.



      Lit., Sub-apostol. Liver

      The author, after welcoming the- inquiry of Diog- netus about Christianity, pours contempt on the pagan worship of gods of wood, stone 2. Con- and metal, without any apparent real- tents ization that for cultured heathens of that time such images were not ob jects, but only symbolic media of worship; and he ridicules Mosaic observances without any recog nition of their significance as a Divine educative discipline, lint when he proceeds (chs vii-xii) to describe Christianity, the work merits Hefele s des ignation, praestantissima Epixtola. Into a world, yea, into human hearts, which had become degen erate and wicked, (.!od sent no mere servant or angel, but His own Son," and Him, not as a con demning Judge, or fear-inspiring Tyrant, but as a gracious Saviour. To the inquiry, "If Christianity is so precious, why was Christ sent so late?" the author replies: "In order first to bring home to mankind their unworthiness to attain eternal life through their own works" and their incapacity for salvation apart from Him "who is able to save even what it was impossible 1 (formerly) to save." Hut faith in the Son of (lod now revealed, would lead to knowledge of the Father"; knowledge of (!od to "love of Him who hath first so loved us"; and love of (lod to "imitation of Him and of His loving- kindness." And wherein consists such imitation? Not in "seeking lordship over those weaker," or in "showing violence toward those Ir.-low us"; but in taking on oneself the burden of one s neighbor," even as "God took on Himself the burden of our iniquities, and gave His own Son as a ransom for us." "He who in whatsoever he may be superior is ready to benefit another who is deficient; lie who, by distributing to the needy what he has received from (lod, becomes a god to those who receive his benefits: he is an imitator of (lod."

      LITERATURE. Lightfoot, Aynxtolia Fathers, larger and smaller edd; in Clark s " Ante-Nicene Libary," Aiwstniir Father*, Justin Mart;/,-, and R-<>ntlu Discovered Addi tions to Earlu Christian Literature. (American <<!. Tin- A nls-Xir, in Fulfil rs) , Eusebius, HE, particularly Mc(iif- fert s tr with excellent notes; James Donaldson . Critical Hisi,,ru of Christian Literature; ( rut t well. Literary His tory <>f En,-!// Christianity; Kriiger, History of Knrh, Christian Lih-raturr. tr by Gillett; Harnack. Geschichie ilrr ultchr. Litt.; Zsihn., Geschichte des NT Kunmis: / <//- schuniien zur (;<-sch. di x XT Kaimits nnd /In- ullr/ir. I. ill.: Robinson, Texts and Studies. Arixtidrx; SchafT, Old, si Christian Manual; H. D. M. Spence, Teaching of the Twelve Apostles; IJartlet, art. on "Didaclie" in HDB; Cunningham, Epistle of St. Barnabas; arts, in UCli (Smith and \\Vace).


      LITTER, lit er pS, fo6/0: (1) Used upon backs of camels for easy riding, made of a wooden frame


      with light mattress and pillows, also a covering above, supported by upright pieces, sometimes hav ing also side awnings for protection from the sun s

      rays. Mule litters were made with pairs of shafts projecting before and behind, between which the animals were yoked (Isa 36 20). Litter-wagons Pi "*-"", cgJdulh o/;/0 are mentioned in Nu 7 3; the horse litter (<f>6piov, plu irion) is mentioned in 2 Mace 9 8; cf 3 27. (2) STO 1 ? , mittah, "palan quin" or "litter of Solomon" (Cant 3 7; cf ver 9). See PALANQUIN.


      LIVELY, llv li, LIVING, liv ing pn , hay; ?d<o, zdu): "Living," sometimes "lively," is the tr of hay (often also tr d "life"); it denotes all beings possessed of life (den 1 21.24; 2 7.1!); Ex 21 35, "live"); we have frequently t lie phrase, "the land of the living" (as contrasted with .s/r o/, the abode of the dead), e.g. Job 23 13; Ps 27 13; 62 5; Isa 38 11; the characteristically Bib. expression, "the living Clod," also frequently occurs (Josh 3 10; 1 S 17 20.36; 2 K 19 4; "Ps 84 2); also fre quently in the NT as the tr of zno (Mt 16 16; 26 63; Jn 6 57, "the living Father"; Acts 14 15); "lively" in Ex 1 19 (fnli/cfi] and Ps 38 19 denotes fulness of life, vigor; hdijyah, "a living being," is mostly confined to E/k, tr 1 "living creatures" (1 5.13.14, etc), _also (Jen 1 2S; 8 17, "living thing"; "living" is sometimes applied fig. to that which is not actually alive; thus we have the phrase "living waters" (Jer 2 13; 17 13; Zee 14 S, "Liv ing waters shall go out from Jems") in contrast with stagnant waters waters that can give life; so Jn 4 10.11 (bubbling up from t he spring at bot torn of the well); 7 3S; Rev 7 17 AV; "living bread" (Jn 6 51); "anew and living way" (lie 10 20), perhaps equivalent to "ever-living" in Christ; "living stones" (1 Pet 2 4.5) are those made alive in Christ; a "living hope" (a hope full of life),

      1 Pet 1 3; "living" (zau) is sometimes also "man ner of life" (Lk 15 13; Col 2 20); dingo, "to lead or go through," is also so tr 1 (Tit 3 3); bios is "means of life," tr d "living" (Mk 12 44; Lk 8 43); "living," in this sense, occurs in Apoc as the tr of zoe, "Defraud not the poor of his living" (Ecclus 4 1).

      TJV lias "living" for "alive" (Lev 14 4), for "the lively" (Acts 7 38) , for " quick " (He 4 12), for " lively" (1 Pet 1 S; 2 5), for "conversation" (1 Pet 1 15;

      2 Pet 3 11): "living creatures "for "beasts" (Rev 4 6; 5 <>. etc); "every living thing" for " all the substance " (Dt 11 0); "living things" for "beasts" (Lev 11 2.47 liis); for "living" (Ps 58 !). "the green" (thorns under the pots), m " Wrath. shall take them away while living as with a whirlwind "; for "the book of the living" (I s 69 28), "the book of life"; for "|I am] lie that liyeth" (Rev 1 18), "the Living one"; for " living fountains of waters" (Rev 7 1"), "fountains of waters of life"; for "trade" (Rev 18 17), "gain their living," m "work the sea"; for " Son of the living God " ( Jn 6 69) , " the Holy One of (iod" (emended text).

      W. L. WALKER

      LIVER, liv er ("32, kalthcdh, derived from a root meaning "to be heavy," being the heaviest of the viscera; LNX rjirap, htpnr): The word is usually joined with the Heb yothereth (see CAUL) (Ex 29 13.22; Lev 9 10.10) as a special portion set aside for the burnt offering.

      This represents the large lobe or flap of the liver, Ao36s roO TjTraTos, lubus toil litpatos (thus LXX and Jos, Ant, III, ix, 2, [228]). Others, however, interpret it as the membrane which covers the upper part of the liver, sometimes called the "lesser onientum." Thus the Vulg: retirulum ieciirix. It extends from the fissures of the liver to the curve of the stomach. Still others consider it to be the "fatty mass at the opening of the liver, which reaches to the kidneys and becomes visible upon the removal of the lesser oiiientum or membrane" (Driver and White, Lcriticus, 05).

      As in the scholastic psychology of the Middle Ages, the liver played an important part in the science of Sem peoples. It was the seat of feeling, and thus became synonymous with temper, dis-

      Living Creature Locust


      position, character (cf Assyr kabitlu, "livei," "temper," "character," and Aral). tXxj, kdbiil, vulgar kibili). Thus Jeremiah expresses his pro found grief with the words: "My liver is poured upon UK; earth, because of the destruction of the daughter of my people" (Lain 211). The liver is also considered one of the most important and vital parts of the body (cf Virgil, cerebrum, iecur dotnicilid, i. itdc}. A hurl in it is equivalent to death. So we find the fate of a man ent iced by the flat tering of a loose woman compared to that of the ox that "goeth to the slaughter .... till an arrow strike; through his liver; as a bird hasteth to the snare, and knoweth not that it is for his life" ( Prov 7 22. 23; tin; rest of the verse; is obscure as to it.s mean ing).

      In a few passages of the OT, kilbliTilh ("liver ) and kdbhudh ("glory") have; been confounded, and we are in uncertainty as to the right tr. Several authors, to give but one example, would read kd- bhnlh m Ts 16 0, for reasons of Hob poetical paral lelism: "Therefore my heart is glad and my liver [EV "glory"] rejoiceth." While this is quite possible, it is not easy to decide, as according to Jewish interpretation "my glory" is synonymous with "my soul," which would present as proper a parallelism.

      The liver has always played an important role in heathen divination, of which we have many ex amples in old and modern times among the Greeks, Etrurians, Romans and now among African tribes. The prophet Ezekiel gives us a Bib. instance. The king of Babylon, who had been seeking to find out whether lie should attack Jerus, inquired by shaking "arrows to and fro, he consulted the teraphim, he looked in the liver" (Ezk 21 21 [Heb ver 2dj ; cf Tob 6 4 ff; 8 2). See ASTKOLOCJY, 3; DIVINA TION. 11. L. E. LUEKINO

      LIVING CREATURE, liv ing kre tQr: (1) (tJS: rrn , ncphexh hayyah, or <~Pnn TUEjj , nephesh fm- hayijah [ne/>li(8h, "breath" or "living things";

      hayydh, "living"; cf Arab. /w*AJ , ncfs, "breath," , haiij, "living"]): In the account of the crea

      tion this term is used of aquatic animals (Gen 1 21), of mammals (Gen 1 24) and of any animals what soever (Gen 2 19).

      (2) (irPri, hayyoth, pi. of rPn, hayydh): The name of the "living creatures" of Ezk 1 5-2"), which had wings and tho faces of a man, a lion, an ox, and an eagle; cf Ezk. 10 1-22. (3) (<P OI> , zfion, "living thing," "animal"): The four "living creatures" (AV "beasts") of Rev 4 <>. etc, the first like a lion, tho second like a calf, the third having a face as of a man, and the fourth like an eagle, having eaeh six wings. See CREATURE, LIVING.


      LIZARD, liz ard: The list of unclean "creeping things" in Lev 11 29.30 contains eight names, as follows:

      (1) T;n, iiolcdh, EV "weasel" (q.v.); (2) akhbdr, EV "mouse" (q.v.); (3) ^~ , fdbh, AV "tor

      toise," RV "great lizard" (q.v.); (4) 1. Names ^K-^ ^ndkah, AV "ferret," RV "gecko"

      (q.v.); (5) J~I2 , ko"h, AV "chameleon." RV "land-crocodile" (q.v.); (G) nXt^b , Ma ah, EV

      "lizard"; cf Aral). r LbJ , lot a , "to cling to the ground"; (~) 12T2H l,i<j>n<{, AV "snail," RY "sand-lizard" (((.v.); ( s ) r > . G"fl"r\\. tinshemeth, AV "mole," RV " chameleon " (q.v.). in Prov 30 2S, we find (<J) P.I C ETIJ . s -mdmitli, AV "spider," RV "lizard."

      Since; (1), (3), (4), (o), (G) anel (7) occur as nan.e-s of animals emly in this passage 1 , and as the philo logical evidence available is in most cases not very

      convincing, their determination is eliflicult anel uncertain. RVm 1e) "gecko" (Lev 11 30j lias "\\\\ ords of uncertain meaning, but probably de noting four kinds of lizards."

      Among the many lizards of Pal, the monitor and

      thorny-tailed lizurel are remarkable for their size, and

      the chameleon for its striking appearance

      and liabits. On etymological grounds,

      2. Lizards /,-,-, /,, AV "chameleon." KV " land-croco-

      of Palestine clilo," I>XX chnmniU-fni, has be>en taken

      to be the; monitor; rnlih, AV "tortoise,"

      KV "great lizard." LXX krokodcilos

      chersatos, to be the; theirny-tailed lizard; and tiiixhr-

      nn-th, AV "mole." KV "chameleon," l.XX a* pains, to

      be> the chameleon. On the same- grounds, [ifjlulh,

      EV "wcase l," L.\\X (/"/ , might be the mole-rat. See

      CHAMELEON; T<>irmi>i-:; \\\\ I:\\>KI..

      The; commonest lizard of Pal is the- rough-lailed agama, AI/II//KI ulillin, Arab. In rillm mi e)r Inrilnun, which is every where, in e-videne e, running about on the- ground, roe ks e>r walls, fre(|uently lying still basking in the sun, e>r bobbing its head up and down in the peculiar manner that it has.


      Gecko (Ptyodactylus lohatus).

      The gecko, Ptyodactylus lobatus, is common in houses. By means e>f adhesive disks on the under side s of its toes, it clings with ease to smooth walls which other lizards cannot scale. Although perfectly harmless, it is be lieved to be poisonous, and is much feared. It is calleel ahu-brais, "father of leprosy," either on account of its supposed poisonous finalities or because^ it has a semi- transparent anel sickly appearance, being of a whitish- yellow color with darker spots. It utters a little cry, which may be the reason why RV has "gecko" for dnakah, AV "fcnvt."

      Various species of the genus Larerta and it.s allie-s. the true lizards, may always be found searching for insects on trees anel walls. They are scaly, like all lizarels, but are relatively smooth and are prettily colored, and are the most attractive members of the group which are found in the country. They are called by the Arabs sakkaiyeh or shammiiseh.

      The skinks include Scincus officinalis, and allied species. Arab, sakqnkur = Gr a-KiyKo^, skigkos (nklrikon). They are smooth, light-colored lizards, and are found in sanely places. They cannot climb, but they run and burrow in the sand with remarkable rapidity. The dried body e>f .sYi /ir x officinalis is an important feature of the primitive oriental tnutcria mrdicn, and may be found in the shops (officinae) of the old-style apothecaries.

      S mamlth (Prov 30 28, AV "spider," RV "liz ard") is one of the "four things which are little . . . . but .... exceeding wise." RV reads:

      " The lizard taketh hold with her hands. Yet is she in kings palaces. "

      LXX has Ka\\al3uTTjs, kalabolcs, which according to Liddell and Scott = dfr/caXa/Siiri/s, fixkdlubotes, "a

      spotted lizard." There is no other 3. Identifi- lizard which fits this passage as does cations the gecko. If Gesenius is correct in

      deriving s mannlh from the ^/ samam (cf Arab, sannna, "to poison"), we have another reason for making this identification, in which case we; must rule out the rendering of RVm, "Thou canst seize with thy hands."



      Living Creature Locust

      For none of the names in Lev 11 29.30 have we as many data for identification as for scgidmlth. For I fa ah, EV "lizard," LXX has x aAa / 3u J TI )?, chalabfites, which is another variant of askalabntes. If we follow the LXX, therefore, we should render Ma ah "gecko." Tristram quotes Bochart as drawing an argument that I td dh is "gecko" from the Arab. V Intn , "to cling to the ground." This view is at least in accordance with LXX. It is of course untenable if dnakah is "gecko," but (see FERRET) the writer thinks it quite possible that dndkdh may mean the shrew or field-mouse, which is also in agreement with LXX. It will not do to follow LXX in all cases, but it is certainly safe to do so in the absence of a clear indication to the contrary.

      There seems to be little evidence available for deciding the identity of h<~,,,i,t, AY "snail." KV "sand-li/.ard." LXX has aa.vpa, saur a, and Vulg Inccrta, both words for lizard. Gesenius refers the word to an obsolete |/ hitniiit, "to bow down," "to lie upon the ground." Tris tram, N II R, cites Bochart, as referring to a word mean ing "sand." Hence perhaps the KV "sand-lizard." If by this is meant the skink, there is no inherent im probability in the identification.

      Wo have thus moro or less tentatively assigned various words of the list tot ho monitor, the 1 horny- tailod lizard, the chameleon, the gecko and the skink, hut we have done; nothing with the rough- tailed agama and the Laccrtae, or true lizards, which are the commonest lizards of Pal, and this fact must be reckoned against the correctness of the assignment. The t r of 11 V has this to commend it, that it gives two small mammals followed by six lizards, and is therefore to that extent system atic. .It is, however, neither guided in all cases by etymological considerations, nor does it follow LXX.

      As none of the etymological arguments is very cogent, the writer can see no harm in consistently following LXX, understanding for (1 ), gal<~, weasel or pole-cat; for (2), 7H x, mouse; for (:{), krukodi ilos clirrxniux, some lar^e lizard, either the monitor or the thorny-tailed lizard; for (4), miir/alf, shrew or field-mouse; for (5), rliamailro/t. chameleon; for (<>), chaluhfitix, gecko; for (7), saura, a I. nr, rid or true lizard; for (S), uimlnx, mole-rat. On the other hand, if etymological considerations are to be taken into account and LXX abandoned when it con flicts with them we might have (1) lifilerlh, mole-rat; (2) nkhbdr, mouse; (:{) <;dhli, thorny-failed lizard; (4) iindkdh, field-mouse; (">) 1,-i i h. monitor; ((5) I td dh, gecko; (7) hornet, skink; (8) ti nshemeth, chameleon.

      Neither of these lists has the systematic arrange ment of that of RV, but we must remember that 1 lie Bib. writers were not zoologists, as is seen in Ilie inclusion of the bat among birds (Lev 11 19; l)t 14 IS), and of the hare and coney among ruminants (Lev 11 ~>.0; I)t 14 7).


      LOAF, Idf. See BREAD.

      LO-AMMI, ld-am I pBy~S"b , lo- ammi, "not my people"): The 2d son and 3d child of Gomer bath-Diblaim, wife of the prophet Hosea (Hos 1 9). An earlier child, a daughter, had been named Lo-ruhamah (rT)2n"V"5C3, lo -ruhamah, "uncompas- sionated"). The names, like those given by Isaiah to his children, are symbolic, and set forth Ilosea s conviction that Israel has, through sin, forfeited Jeh s compassion, and can no longer claim His pro tection. Of the bearers of these names nothing further is known; but their symbolism is alluded to in Hos 2 1.23. This latter passage is quoted by Paul (Rom 9 25 f). See HOSEA; JEZREEL.

      JOHN A. LEES

      LOCKS, loks ([1] rrX, Sl&h, [2] r?E, pera\\ [3] nEblTn, mahluphah, [4] H^p , k wuqqah): See in general the article on HAIR. (1) The first word, $ir;lth, means really a tassel, such as is worn by the Jews on the four corners of the prayer-shawl or tallith and on the nrba* kan plwth (Dt 22 12), tr 4 in the NT by KpacnreSov, krt txpcdon (Mt 9 20; 14 30; 23 f>; Mk 6 ,5o; Lk 8 44). Once it is applied to a forelock of hair. The prophet Ezekiel, de scribing his sensations which accompanied his vision of Jerus, says: "He put forth the form of a

      hand, and took me by a lock of my head; and the Spirit lifted me up between earth and heaven, and brought me in the visions of God to Jerus" (Ezk 8 3). (2) The word pcra~ signifies the unshorn and disheveled locks of the Nazirite (Nu 6 5) or of the priests, the sons of Zadok (Ezk 44 20). (3) The Book of Jgs employs the word mahldphCih when speaking of the "seven locks" of Samson (Jgs 16 13.19), which really represent the plaited (cty- mologically, "interwoven") strands of hair still worn in our days by youthful Bedouin warriors. (4) K r wuqqah (Cant 5 2.11) means the luxuriant hair of the Heb youth, who was careful of his ex terior. It is called bushy (RVm "curling") and black as a raven. AV tr s also the word qammah with "locks" (Cant 41; 67; Isa 47 2), but RV has corrected this into "veil," leaving the word "locks" in Cant 4 1 in. H. L. E. LUKRING

      LOCUST, lo kust: The tr of a large number of Heb and Gr words:

      (!) "3"^ . arbch, from ^ 7"Q""1 rdbhiih, " to increase" (cf Arab. Lj , raba , " to increase"). (2) 2"bo . sdl am,

      from obsolete \\ / 22?bD> sal am, "to swallow 1. iNames ,, ..

      down, to consume. (3) 53^n , har-

      t/ol (cf Arab. (J^^Z* , harjul, "to run to the right or s s u / f

      left," 2uLs. _>., harjalat, "a company of horses" or "a swarm of locusts," ,. I > *_2- > harjawdn, a kind of

      locust). (4) 23)1. Ijdi/lidbh (cf Arab. v_> i hajab, "to hide," "to cover"). (5) 273. gazdm (cf Arab. yS- , jn:inn, "to cut off"). (6) p^ , yi lek, from -j/ ppb ,

      Idknk, "to lick" (cf Arab. OiXCJ , laklak, "to dart out the tongue" [used of a serpent]). (7) b^DH , hdsil,

      from ^ bell . hdxul, "to devour" (cf Arab. ^O^>. , liniixnl, "crop" [of a bird]). (S) ^3, u<~>l>h, from obso lete -j/ PQ3 afibhdh (cf Arab. ^-jL^a- , jdbi, "locust,"

      from t / rx^-, jubn , "to come out of a hole"). (9) 23. gcbh, from same -j/. (10) *^*^ , <; ldc<U, from y bxi . sdlal (onomatopoctic) , "to tinkle," "to ring" (cf

      Arab. (^ , sail, "to give a ringing sound" [used of a horse s bit]; cf also Arab. <->-^ > tann, used of the sound

      of a drum or piece of metal, also of the humming of flies). (11) axpis, akrla (gen. axpido?, akrl<lo.t; dim. a/cpi6ioi , a^- rldion, whence, a genus of locusts).

      (1), (2), (3) and (4) constitute the list of clean insects in Lev 11 21 f, characterized as "winged creeping things that go upon all fours, 2. Identi- which have legs above their feet, fications wherewith to leap upon the earth." This manifestly refers to jumping insects of the order Ortlwptcra, such as locusts, grass hoppers and crickets, and is in contrast to the un clean "winged creeping things that go upon all fours," which may be taken to denote running Orthoptcra, such as cockroaches, mole-crickets and ear-wigs, as well as insects of other orders.

      Arbeh (1) is uniformly tr d "locust" in RV. AV has usually "locust," but "grasshopper" in Jgs 6 5; 7 12; Job 39 20; Jer 46 23. LXX has usually dicpls, akris, "locust"; but has /SpoOxos, bmiichos, "wingless locust," in Lev 11 22; 1 K 8 37 (akris in the j| passage, 2 Ch 6 2S); Nah 3 15; and drrAe/Sos, allck bos, "wingless locust," in Nah

      Locust Lo-debar



      3 17. Arlirh occurs (Ex 10 -1-10) in the account, of the plague of locusts; in the phrase "as locusts for multitude" (Jgs 6 5; 7 12); "inoro than the locusts .... innumerable" (Jer 46 23);

      "The locusts ha v<> no king, Yet go they forth all of l hem by bands" ( Prov 30 21).

      Arbcli is referred to as a plague iti Dt 28 3S; 1 K 8 37; 2 Ch 6 2S; I>s 78 40; in .loci and in Xah. These references, together with the fact that it- is

      the most, used word, occurring 24 t, warrant, us in assuming it to be one of the swarming .species, i.e. Pachtylus ti/it/ra/arins or Scliix/oct-mi ptrajrina, which from time to time devastate large regions in the countries bordering on the Mediterranean.

      $d.ram (2), EV "bald locust," occurs only in Lev 11 22. According to Tristram, Nttll, the name "bald locust" was given because it, is said in the Talm to have a smooth head. It has been thought to be one of the genus 7V//.m//.s (7 . unguiculata or T. nasuta), in which the head is greatly elongated.

      llimjol (3), AV "beetle," l\\\\ "cricket," being one of the leaping insects, cannot be a beetle. It might be a cricket, but comparison with the Aral), (see supra) favors a locust of some sort. The word occurs only in Lev 11 22. See BEETLE.

      Hdyhdbk (4) is one of the clean leaping insects of Lev 11 22 (EV "grasshopper"). The word occurs in four other places, nowhere coupled with the name of another insect. In the report of the spies (Xu 13 33i, we have the expression, "We were in our own sight as grasshoppers"; in Eccl 12 5, The grasshopper shall be a burden"; in Isa 40 22, "It is he that sitteth above the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers." These three passages distinctly favor the rendering "grasshopper" of EV. In the remaining passage (2 Ch 7 13), ". . . . if I command the locust [EV] to devour the land," the migratory locust seems to be referred to. Doubtless this as well as other words was loosely used. In Eng. there is no sharp distinction between the words "grasshopper" and "locust ."

      The migratory locusts belong to the family Acridiidae, listinguished by short, thick antennae, and by having the organs of hearing at the base of the abdomen. Tho insects of the family Loruxtidar are commonly called

      grasshoppers," but the same name is applied to those Acridiidae which are not found in swarms. The Lo- custidae have long, thin antennae, organs of hearing on

      the tibiae of 1 he front legs, and the females have long ovipositors. It may be noted that the insect known in America as the seventeen-year locust, which occasion ally does extensive damage to trees by laying its eggs in the twigs, is a totally different insect, being a Cicada of the order Rhynrhota. Species of Cicada are found in Pal, but are not considered harmful.

      The Book of Joel is largely occupied with the description of a plague of locusts. Commentators differ as to whether it should be interpreted liter ally or^ allegorieally (sec; JOEL). Four names arbch (1), gnzani (5), ijclt k (0) and basil (7), are found in Joel 1 4 and again in 2 25.

      For the etymology of these names, see 1 above. <;n:iim (Am 4 .; .Joel 1 4; 2 25) is in KV uniformly trd " palmer-worm " (LXX /ca^-,,, k<imi>f, "caterpillar"). IJnxil in KV (I K 8 -^ : 2 Ch 6 2X; Ps 78 4<>; Isa 33 4; Joel 1 4; 2 25) is uniformly tr "caterpillar." LXX has indifferently limni-knx, "wingless locust." and tp. u-.tfrj, erustbe, "rust" (of wheat). Yrlck (Ps 105 34; Jer 51 14.27; Joel 1 -lh; 2 25; Nah 3 156.10) is every where "canker-worm" in KV, except in Ps 105 84. where ARV lias "grasshopper." AV has "caterpillar" in J .s and Jer and "canker-worm" in Joel and Nah. LXX has indifferently dkris and brnuclmx. "Palmer- worm" and "canker-worm" are both Old Kng. terms for caterpillars, which are strictly the larvae of lepidop- terons insects, i.e. butterflies arid moths.

      While these four words occur in Joel 1 4 and 2 25, a consideration of the book as a whole does not show that the ravages of four different, insect pests are referred to, but rather a single one, and that the locust. These words may therefore be regarded as different names of the locust, referring to different, stage s of development of the insect. It is true that the words do not occur in quite the same order in 1 4 and in 2 25, but while the former verse indicates a definite succession, the latter does not. If, therefore, all four words refer to the locust, "palmer-worm," "canker-worm," "caterpillar" and the LXX erusibc, "rust," are obviously inappro priate.

      (, obh (8) is found in the difficult passage (Am 7 1), ". . . . He formed locusts [AV "grasshoppers," AVm "green worms," LXX akris] in the beginning of the shooting up of the latter growth"; and (Xah 3 17) in ". . . . thy marshals [are] as the swarms of grasshoppers [Heb yobh gobhay; AV "great grasshoppers ], which encamp in the hedges in the cold day, but when the sun ariseth they flee away, and their place is not known where they are." The related gcbh (9) occurs but once, in Isa 33 4, also a disputed passage, "And your spoil shall be gathered as the caterpillar f/m.s7/] gathereth: as locusts [gcbhlin] leap shall men leap upon it." It is impossible to determine what species is meant, but some kind of locust or grasshopper fits any of these passages. In Dt 28 42, " All thy trees and the fruit of thy ground shall the locust [EV] possess," we have (10) C ldral (LXX cruxibc ). The same word is tr d in 2 S 6 5 and Ps 160 5 bis "cymbals," in Job 41 7 "fish- spears," and in Isa 18 1 "rustling." As stated in 1, above, it is an ono- , mat. .poetic word, and in Dt 28 42 St Locu S ?s on may well refer to the noise of the wings of a flight of locusts.

      In the NT we have (11) ttlcrix, "locust," the food of John the Bap tist (Alt 3 4; Mk 1 6); the same word fig. in Rev 9 3.7; and also in Apoo (Jth 2 20; Wisd 16 9; and see 2 Esd 4 24).

      The swarms of locusts are composed of countless individuals. The statements sometimes made that they darken the sky must not be taken too literally.

      the Sculp- t ures from Kouyunjik

      (Hrit. Mils.).





      Locust Lo-debar

      They do not produce darkness, but their effect may

      be like that of a thick cloud. Their movements

      are largely determined by the wind,

      3. Habits and while fields that are in their path

      may be laid waste, others at one side may not be affected. It is possible by vigorous waving to keep a given tract, clear of them, but usually enough men cannot be found to protect the fields from their ravages.

      Large birds have been known to pass through a flight of locusts with open mouths, filling their crops with the insects. Tristram, NUB, relates how he saw the fishes in the Jordan enjoying a similar feast, as the locusts fell into the stream. The female locust, by means of the ovipositor at the end of her abdomen, digs a hole in the ground, and deposits in it a mass of eggs, which are cemented together with a glandular _ secretion. An effective way of dealing with the locusts is to gather and destroy these egg-masses, and it is customary for the local governments to offer a substantial reward for a measure of eggs. The young before they can fly are frequently swept into pits or ditches dug for the purpose and are burned.

      The young are of the same general shape as the adult insects, differing in being small, black and wingless. The three distinct stages in the metamorphosis of butter flies and others of the higher insects are not to be dis tinguished in locusts. They molt about six times, emerging from each molt larger than before. At first there are no wings. After several molts, small and use less wings are found, but it is only after the last molt that the insects are able to fly. In the early molts fhe tiny black nymphs are found in patches on the ground, hopping out of the way when disturbed. Later they run. until they are able to fly.

      In all stages they are destructive to vegetation. Some remarkable pictures of their ravage s are found in Joel 1 6.7, "For a nation is come up upon my land, strong, and without number; his teeth are the teeth of a lion, and he hath the jaw-teeth of a lioness. He hath laid my vine waste, and barked my fig- tree: he hath made it clean bare, and cast it away; the branches thereof are made white" (see also 2 2-9.20).

      Locusts are instruments of the wrath of God

      (Ex 10 4-1!); Dt, 28 3S.42; 2 Ch 7 13; Ps 78

      46; 105 34; Nah 3 15-17; Wisd

      4. Figura- 16 9; Rev 9 3); they typify an tive invading army (Jer 51 14.27); they

      are compared with horses (Joel 2 4; Rev 97); in Job 39 20, Jeh says of the horse: "Hast thou made him to leap as a locust?" AV "Canst thou make him afraid as a grasshopper?" Locusts are among the "four things which are little upon the earth, but .... are exceeding wise" (Prov 30 27). Like the stars and sands of the sea, locusts are a type of that which cannot be numbered (Jgs 6 5; 7 12; Jer 46 23; Jth 2 20). Grass hoppers are a symbol of insignificance (Nti 13 33; Eccl 12 5; Lsa 40 22; 2 Esd 4 24J.

      The Arabs prepare for food the thorax of the locust, which contains the great wing muscles. They pull off the head, which as it comes away brings K Tr>nicfre with it a mass of the viscera, and they ~ OC remove the abdomen (or "tail"), the legs

      as rood anx i the wings. The thoraxes, if not at

      once eaten, are dried and put away as a store of food for a lean season. The idea of feeding upon locusts when prepared in this way should not be so repellent as the thought of eating the whole insect. In the light of this it is not incredible that the food of John the Baptist should have been "locusts and wild honey" (Mt 3 4). See INSECTS.


      LOD, LYDDA ("Tib , Iddti; AvSSo, LAdda): Ono and Lod and the towns thereof are said to have been built, by Shemed, a Benjamite 1. Scriptural (1 Ch 8 12). The children of Lod, Notices Hadid and Ono, to the number of 725, returned from Babylon with Zerub- babel (Ezr 2 33; Neh 7 37 [721]). The town lay in the Shephelah, perhaps in ge hd-hurushim, "the valley of craftsmen" (Neh 11 35). In the NT it appears as Lydda. Here the apostle Peter visited the saints and healed the palsied Aeneas

      (Acts 9 32). Hence lie was summoned by mes sengers from Joppa on the death of Dorcas.

      The three governments of Aphaerema, Lydda and Ramathaim were added to Judaea from the

      country of Samaria by King Deme- 2. History trius II (1 Mace 11 34). Lydda pre- from Mac- sided over one of the toparchics under cabean Jerus, into which Judaea was divided

      Times (BJ, 111, iii, 5). After the death of

      Julius Caesar the inhabitants of Lydda and certain other towns, having failed to pay the contributions Cassius demanded, were by him sold into slavery. They were freed by Antony (Ant, XIV, xi, 2; xii, 2). Lydda suffered severely under Cestius Callus (HJ, II, xix, 1). Along with Jam- nia it surrendered to Vespasian (H.l , IV, viii, 1). After the fall of Jerus it, was noted as a seat of rab binical learning. The classical name of the city was Diospolis. In the 4th cent, it was connected with the trade in purple. It became the seat of a bishopric, and the bishop of Lydda was present at the Council of Nicaea. At Lydda, in 415 AD, took place the trial of Pelagius for heresy.

      Under the Moslems it became capital of the province of Filuxtln, but later it. was superseded by rr-Iftnnli h, founded by Khalif Suleiman, whither its inhabitants were removed (IVA-uhi. c Sl AD). Mukaddasi (c 985) says that in Lydda "there is a great mosque in which are wont to assemble large numbers of people from the capital \\< r-Rnmti h\\ and from the villages around. In Lydda. too. is that wonderful church [of St. (ieorge] at tlie gate of which Christ will slay the antichrist" (quoted by (!uy Ie Strange, I al under //!> Musi, ,*, 4 .i:5). It was rebuilt by the Crusaders; but was destroyed by Saladin after th(^ bat tie of IJottni. ll .M AD. It was again restored ; but in 1271 it was sacked by the Mongols, and from this blow it has never recovered.

      The ancient Lod or Lydda is represented by the modern village of Litil l. on the road to Jerus. about 11 miles S.E. of Yi ifa. It is a station on the Jall a- 3 Identifi- Jerus Railway. It occupies a picturesque j hollow in the plain of Sharon, and is sur- Cation ana r()UM( i t . ( i by gardens and orchards, the Description beauty of "which intensifies by contrast the squalor of the village. It was the re puted birthplace of St. ( ieorge. and here he is said to have been buried. The one ruin of importance in the place is that of the church which perpetuates his name.

      The town stood on the great, caravan road be tween Babylon and Egypt, near its intersection with that from Joppa to Jerus and the East. Its position on these great arteries of commerce meant trade for the inhabitants. "The manufacture and repair of such requisites for the journey as sacks, saddles and strappings would create the skilled labor in cloth, leather, wood and metal that made the neighborhood once the valley of crafts men" (Mackie, llDtt, s.v.). Like many other once prosperous cities on these and similar caravan routes, Lydda suffered from diversion of traffic to the sea; and it may be that for none of them is any great revival now possible. U EWING

      LODDEUS, lod-e us (Ao88evs, Loddiu*: Swete reads Ln<idu n>x with DoZdaCos as variant in A; AV Daddeus, Saddeus) : The captain, who was in the place of the treasury. Ezra sent to him foremen who "might execute the priests office" (I Esd 8 46); called "Iddo" in Ezr 8 17.

      LO-DEBAR, lo dr-bar, loi-de bar ( 15, Id dh bhar): A place in Gilead where dwelt Machir, son of Ammiel, who sheltered Mephibosheth, son of Saul, after that monarch s death (2 S 9 4), until he was sent for by David. This same Machir met David with supplies when he fled to Gilead from Absalom (17 27 f). Possibly it is the same place as Lidebir in Josh 13 26 (RVm). No cer tain identification is possible; but Schumacher (Northern Ajltln, 101) found a site with the name Ibdar about 6| miles E. of Unim Kcis, N. of the great aqueduct, which may possibly represent the


      Lodge Logos

      ancient city. Lidebir, at least, sccnis to he placed on the northern boundary of (lilead. Tlie modern village stands on t.he. southern shoulder of Wfuly Sdtntir. There is a good spring to the E., a little lower down, while ancient remains are found in the neighborhood. \\V. Ewix<;

      LODGE, loj (l^b , lin; KaTao-KT|v6a>, kataskenfid,

      (Me): To st ay or dwell, temporarily, as for t he night (Cen 32 13.LM; Nu 22 S; Josh 2 1AV; 4 3; Lk 13 I 1 .); Alt. 21 17, aul izonun), or permanently (Ruth 1 Hi). In Isa 1 S, "a lodge [m lilndh] in a garden of cucumbers," the meaning is "hut," cot tage." "Evil thoughts" are said to "lodge" in the wicked (Jer 4 14).

      LOFT: In 1 K 17 2:5, changed in RV to "chamber."

      LOFTILY, lof ti-li, LOFTINESS, lof ti-nes, LOFTY: The first form is only in J s 73 8, where it. means "haughtily," as if from on high. The second is found only in Jer 48 29, where the loftiness of Moab also means his haughtiness, his groundless self-conceit.

      Lofty likewise means haughty," "lifted up" (cf Ps 131 1; Isa 2 11; Prov 30 13). In Isa 26 o it refers to a self-secure and boastful city. In 67 15 it is used in a good sense of CJod who really is high and supreme. Isaiah uses the word more than all the other sacred writers put together.

      LOG, log, log ($1 , Idfjh, "deepened," "hollowed out" [Lev 14 10-24]): The smallest liquid or dry measure of the Hebrews, equal to about 1 pint. See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.

      LOGIA, log i-a, THE (Ad-yia, Logia): The word logion, which is a dimin. of logos, was regu larly used of Divine ut terances. There

      1. The are examples in the classics, the LXX, Word the writ ings of Josephus and Philo and "Logia" and in four passages in the NT (Acts 7 38; Its History Rom 32; I To 6 12; 1 Pet 4 11)

      where it is uniformly rendered both in AV and RV "oracles." It is not, therefore, sur prising that early Christian writers, who thought of Christ as Divine, applied this term to His sayings also. We find this use, according to the usual inter pretation, in the title of the lost work of Papias as preserved by Eusebius, Logion kuriakdn extgcsis, "Exposition of the Lord s Logia" (UK, III, 39), in that writer s obscure reference to a Heb or Aram. writing by the apostle Matthew (ib), and in Poly- carp s Ep. (7), "the logia of the Lord." The modern use of the word is twofold: (a) as the name of the document referred to by Papias which may or may not be the Q of recent inquirers; (b) as the name of recently discovered sayings ascribed to Jesus. For the former cf GOSPELS. The latter is the theme of this article.

      About 9., miles from the railway station of Beni Mazur, 121 miles from Cairo, a place now

      called Behncsa marks the site of an

      2. The Dis- ancient city named by the Greeks covery of Oxyrhynchus, from the name of a the Logia sacred fish, the modern binni, which

      had long been known as a great Chris tian center in early times and was therefore selected by Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt for exploration in behalf of the Egyp Exploration Fund. They began work on the ruins of the town, January 11, 1897, and on the following day discovered a papyrus leaf inscribed with a number of sayings introduced by the formula li gci /rwiJ.s, "saith Jesus," some of. which were at once; seen to be quite new. When excavation was resumed in February, 1903, a


      second fragment, was discovered, which must have belonged to the same or a similar collection, as the formula "saith Jesus" is employed in exactly the same way, and the sayings exhibit the same mixed character. The first of these two fragments was named by the discoverers lot/in, but the short preface to the second fragment suggests that the word used in the original title may have been logoi, which is found in Acts 20 o"> as the title perhaps of a col lection of sayings of Jesus used by the apostle Paul. It is convenient, however, to retain lot/id, at any rate for the present. Other remains of early Chris- tian texts have been found on the same site (cf AC.RAPUA) but none of precisely the same character.

      The first, fragment, found and published in 1897, after ward referred to as A, is a leaf from a papyrus book measuring in its present slate . r >J XH}

      3. Descrip- inches and having 42 lines on the two firm nf thA P< g ( s. As it is broken at the, bottom it " un is impossible, in the absence of another Texts leaf, to ascertain or even conjecture; how

      much has been lost. At the top right- hand corner of one page are (he letters ifitu, dliilm. used as numerals, that is 11, and it. has been suggested that this, with other characteristics, marks the page as the tirst of the two. The uncial writing is assigned to the Ml cent., perhaps to the early part of it. The text is fairly complete except at the end of the third logion, for the five following lines, and at the bottom. The second fragment., henceforth referred to as 15, found in 190:5 and published in 190-1, has also 42 lines, or rather parts of lines, but on only one page or column, the Christian text being written on the back of a roll the recto of which contained a survey list. The characters of this, too, are uncial, and the date, like that of A, seems to be, also the Ml cent., but perhaps a little later. 15 is unfortunately very defective, the bit of papyrus being broken vertically throughout, so that seyeral letters are lost at the end of each line, and also horizontally for parts of several lines at the bottom.

      Seven of these sayings, or logia, inclusive of the preface of B, have or contain canonical parallels, namely :

      (1) Al, which coincides with the usual text of Lk 6 -12;

      (2) Aou (according to the editin pri/ireps, <>n), which comes

      very close to Lk 4 24; (:?) A6 (or 7), a

      4. Logia variant of Alt 5 14; (41 the saying con- ITM+VI rannnl tained in the preface of B which resembles

      iV> i I Jn 8 52 : < 5 > B2 - n - 7 f > " Tlu> kingdom of Cal Parallels heaven is within you," which reminds us of Lk 17 21; (G) B:5, 11. 4 f , "Many that are first shall be last; and the last first." which corresponds to Mk 10 31; cf Mt 19 30; Lk 13 30; (7) 154, 11. 2-5, "That which is hidden from thec shall lie revealed to thee: for there is nothing hidden that shall not be made manifest." which is like Mk 4 22 (cf Mt 10 26; Lk 12 2). These parallels or partial parallels for some of them exhibit interesting variations are, with one exception, of synoptic character.

      The other seven or eight logia, although not without possible echoes of the canonical Gospels in thought and diction, are all non-canonical and with one exception new.

      Three of them, namely B2 and 3 (apart from the canonical sayings given above) and 5, may be set aside

      as too uncertain to be of any value. What 5 New i s preserved of the first ("\\Vlio are they

      X that draw you [MS, us] to the kingdom?"

      bayings e tc) is indeed very tempting, but the

      restoration of the lost matter is too pre carious for any suggestion to be more than an ingenious conjecture. This is seen by comparing the restoration of this logion by the discoverers, Dr. Swete and Dr. C. Taylor, with that proposed by Deissmann (Licht vom Oxteni, 329). While the Eng. scholars take hflko in the sense of "draw," the German takes it in the sense which it has in the XT, "drag," with the result of utter diver gence as to the meaning and even the subject of the logion. The logia which remain are undeniably of great interest, although the significance of at least one is ex ceedingly obscure. The number of the sayings is not certain. Dr. Taylor has shown that in A2/ "and" may couple two distinct utterances brought together by the compiler. If this suggestion is adopted, and if the words after A3 in the cditio pri nrepx are regarded as belonging to it and not as the remains of a separate logion, we get the following eight sayings:

      (1) "Except ye fast to the world [or "from the world"], ye shall in no wise find the kingdom of God" (A2a); (2) "Except ye keep the sabbath



      Lodge Logos

      [Taylor "sabbati/e tin- sabbath"], ye shall not, see the Father" (A2M; (3) "1 stood in the midst of the world, and in flesh was I seen of them, ami I found all men drunken, and none found I athirst among them" (A3u); (4) "My soul grieveth over the sons of men, because they are blind in their heart and see not their wretchedness and their poverty" (the last, clause restored by conjecture) (A36); (5) Wherever there are two they are not, without God, and where there is one alone I say I am with him [after Blass]. Raise the stone and [there] thou shalt find me: cleave the wood [Taylor, "the tree"] and then; am I" (A4) ; (6) "A physician does not work cures on them that know him" (A. r >/>); (7) "Thou hearest with one ear but the other thou hast, closed" (largely conjectural but almost certain) (Ab); (8) "[There is nothing] buried which shall not be raised" (or "known") (B4, 1. 5).

      Attempts have been made to trace the collec tion represented by these fragments (assuming that they belong to the same work) to 6. Origin some lost gospel the Gospel accord- and Char- ing to the Egyptians (Harnack, YU:I acter of the Manen), the Gospel of the Ebionites Logia or the Gospel of the Twelve Apostles

      (Zahn), or the Gospel according to the Hebrews (Batiffol), but without decisive re sult. That there is a connection of some kind with the last-mentioned apocryphal work is evi dent from the fact that Bl ("Jesus saith, Let not him who seeks .... cease until he find Him; and having found Him, let him be amazed; and being amazed he shall reign, and reigning shall rest") is ascribed by Clement of Alexandria to this writing, but that cannot have been the only source. It was probably one of a number drawn on by the compiler. The latter, so far as B is concerned, represents the sayings as spoken by Jesus to ". . . . and Thomas." In whatever way the gap is supplied whether by "Philip," or "Judas" or "the other disciples" one of the Twelve known as Thomas is clearly referred to as the me dium or one of the media of transmission. It, is possible that the short preface in which this state ment is made belongs not to the whole collection but to a part of it. The whole work may, as Swete suggests (E.rpos T, XV, 494), have been entitled "Words of Jesus to the Twelve," and this may have been the portion addressed to Thomas. The other fragment, A, might belong to a section associated with the name of another apostle. In any case the Logia must have formed part of a collection of considerable extent, as we know of material for 24 pages or columns of about 21 or 22 lines each. 80 far as can be judged the writ ing was not a gospel in the ordinary sense of that term, but a collection of sayings perhaps bearing considerable resemblance as to the form to the Logia of Matthew mentioned by Papias.

      The remains of B5. however, show that a saying might be prefaced with introductory matter. Perhaps a short narrative was sometimes appended. The relation to the canonical Gospels cannot be determined with present evidence. The sayings preserved generally exhibit the synoptic type, perhaps more specifically the Lukan type, but Johannine echoes, that is, possible traces of the thought and diction represented in the Fourth Gospel, are not absent (cf A, logia 2/, and preface to B). It seems not improbable that the compiler had our four Gospels before him, but nothing can be proved. There is no distinct sign of heretical influence. The much- debated saying about the wood and the stone (A4ft) undoubtedly lends itself to pantheistic teaching, but can be otherwise understood.

      T T nder these circumstances the date of the com- pilat ion cannot at present be fixed except in a very general way. If our papyri which represent two copies were written, as the discoverers think, in the 3d cent., that fact and the indubitably archaic character of the sayings make it all but certain that

      the text as arranged is not later than the 2d cent. To what part of the cent, it is to be assigned is at present undiscoverable. Sanday inclines to about 120 AD, the finders suggest about 140 AD as the tern/ in us ad quern, Zahn elates 1(50-70 AD, and Dr. Taylor 150-200 AD. Further research may solve these problems, but, with the resources now avail able, all that can be said is that we have in the Logia of Oxyrhynchus a few glimpses of an early collection of sayings ascribed to Jesus which cir culated in Egypt in the 3d cent,, of great interest and possibly of considerable value, but of com pletely unknown origin.

      LITERATURE. Of the extensive literature which has gathered round the Logia as many as fifty publications relating to A only in the first few months only a few can be mentioned here. A was first published in 1897 as a pamphlet and afterward as No. 1 of Oxyrhynchus Papyri. Valuable articles by Cross and Harnack ap peared in Expos, ser. V, vol VI, 257 ff, 1521 If, 401 if, an important lecture by Swete in Expos T, VIII, 544 ff, 5(58, and a very useful pamphlet by Sanday and Lock in the same year . B appeared in 1904 in pamphlet form and as No. 654 of the Oxyrhynchus 1 npyri, with a fuller comm. Dr. C. Taylor s pamphlets on A and B issued respectively in is 1 .) .) and 1905, and Swete s lecture on B, Expos T, XV, 4SMf. are of exceptional significance for the study of the subject. Of also ( iriffin- hoofe, The L nirrittt-n Siu/iny* of Christ (A only), 55-07; Klostermann, Klrine T<xte, Nos. 8, pp. 11 f and 11, pp. 17 IT; Resch, Ai/raplm\\ 6S-73, 35:5 f; JJDIi, art. "Agrapha," extra vol; also arts, on "Unwritten Say ings" in HDB, 1909, and l)C(l.


      LOGOS, log os (Xo^os, logos) :


      1. Heraclitus

      2. Anaxagoras

      3. Plato

      4. Aristotle

      5. Stoics


      1. Word as Revelation of God

      2. Suggestions of Personal Distinctions in Deity

      3. Theophanies

      4. Wisdom

      5. T argu ms



      1 . Pauline Doctrine

      2. Doctrine in Hebrews

      3. Doctrine in Fourth Gospel

      (1) Content of Doctrine

      (a) Relation of Logos to God (6) Relation of Logos to World

      (2) Origin of Terminology (a) Hebrew Source (6) Hellenic Source

      (c) Contrast between Philo and John


      The doctrine of the Logos has exerted a decisive and far-reaching influence upon speculative and Christian thought. The word has a long history, and the evolution of the idea it embodies is really the unfolding of man s conception of Cod. To comprehend the relation of the Deity to the world has been the aim of all religious philosophy. While widely divergent views as to the Divine manifesta tion have been conceived, from the dawn of West ern speculation, the Gr word logos has been em ployed with a certain degree of uniformity by a series of thinkers to express and define the nature and mode of God s revelation.

      Logos signifies in classical Gr both "reason and "word." Though in Bib. Gr the term is mostly employed in the sense of "word," we; cannot proper ly dissociate the two significations. Every word implies a thought. It is impossible to imagine a time w T hen God was without thought. Hence thought must be eternal as the Deity. The tr "thought" is probably the best equivalent for the Gr term, since it denotes, on the one hand, the faculty of reason, or the thought inwardly con ceived in the mind; and, on the other hand, the thought outwardly expressed through the vehicle of language. The two ideas, thought and speech,




      arc indubitably blended in (lie term lai/os; and in every employment of the word, in philosophy ;m<l Scripture, both notions of thought ;uid its outward expression are intimately connected.

      In this art. it will be our aim to trace the evo lution of the doctrine from its earliest appearance in (!r philosophy through its Heb and Alexandrian phases till it attained its richest expression in the writ ings of the XT, and esp. in the Fourth Gospel.

      The doctrine may be said to have two stages: a Hellenistic and a Heb; or, more correctly, a pre- Christian and a Christian. The theory of Philo and of the Alexandrian thinkers generally may bo regarded as the connecting link between the ( !r and the Christian forms of the doctrine. The dr or pre-Christian speculation on the subject is marked by the names of Heraclitus, Plato and the Stoics. Philo paves the way for the Christian doctrine of Paul, Hebrews and the Johannine Gospel.

      /. Greek Speculation. The earliest speculations of the Creeks were occupied with the world of Nature, and the first attempts at philosophy take the shape of a search for some unitary principle to explain the diversity of the universe 1 .

      ITcracliius was practically the first who sought to account for the order which existed in a world of change by a law or ruling principle. This pro- 1. Heraclitus foundest of Gr philosophers saw every thing in a condition of flux. Everything is forever passing into something else and has an existence only in relation to this process. We cannot say tilings are: they come into being and pass away. To account for this state of perpetual 6eco?ni/i{/, Heraclitus was led to seek out a new and primary element from which all things take their ris,\\ This substance he conceived to be, not water or air as previous thinkers had conjectured, but something more subtle, mysterious and potent fire. This restless, all-consuming and yet all-transform ing activity now darting upward as a flame, now sink ing to an ember and now vanishing as smoke is for him at once the symbol and essence of life. But it is no arbitrary or lawlesselement . If there is flux everywhere, all c hamre must take place according to "measure." Reality is an "att unenient" of opposites, a tension or harmony of conflicting elements. Heraclitus saw all the mutations of being governed toy a rational and un alterable law. This law he calls sometimes "Justice," sometimes " Harmony " ; more frequently "Logos" or "Reason." and in two passages at least, "God." _ Fire, Logos, (iod are fundamentally the same. It is the eternal energy of the universe pervading all its substance; and preserving in unity and harmony the perpetual drift and evolution of phenomenal existence. Though Heraclitus sometimes calls this rational principle God, it is not probable that he attached to it any definite idea of consciousness. The Logos is not above the world or even prior to it. It is in. it, its inner pervasive energy sustaining, relating and harmonizing its endless variety.

      Little was done by the immediate successors of Her aclitus to develop the doctrine of the Logos, and as the distinction between mind and matter

      2 Anax- became more defined, the term nous

      superseded that of Logos as the rational agoras force, of the world. Anaxagoras was the

      first thinker who introduced the idea of a supreme intcllii-tual principle which, while independent of the world, governed it. His conception of the nous or "mind " is. however, vague and confused, hardly dis tinguishable from corporeal matter . By the artificial introduction of a power acting externally upon the world, a dualism, which continued throughout Gr phi losophy, was created. At the same time it is to the merit of Anaxagoras that he was the first to perceive some kind of distinction between mind and matter and to suggest a teleological explanation of the universe.

      In I lato the idea of a regulative principle reappears. But though the word is frequently used, it is nmifi and

      not Logos which determines his concep-

      3 Plato t ion of the relation of God and the world.

      The special doctrine of the Logos does not find definite expression, except perhaps in the Timaeus, where the word is employed as descrip tive of the Divine force from which the world has arisen. Hut if the word does not frequently occur in the dialogues, there is not wanting a basis upon which a Logos-doctrine might be framed; and the conception of archetypal ideas affords a philosophical expression of the relation of (iod and the world. The idea of a dominating principle of reason was lifted to a higher plane by the distinction which Plato made between the world of sense and the world of thought, to the latter of which God belonged. According to I lato, true reality or absolute being con sisted of the "Ideas" which he conceived as thoughts residing in the Divine mind before the creation of the

      world. To these abstract concepts was ascribed the character of supersensible realities of which in someway the concrete visible things of the world were copies or images. Compared with the "Ideas," the world of things was a world of shadows. This was the aspect of the Platonic doctrine of ideas which, as we shall see, Philo afterward seized upon, because it best fitted in with his general conception of the transcendence of God and His relation to the visible world. Three; features of Plato s view ought to be remembered as having a special significance for e>ur subject: (1) While 1 God is regarded by Plate) as the intelligent power toy which the world is formed, matter itself is conceived toy him as in some 1 sense 1 eternal and partly intractable. (2) While in the I lnhlxis Plate) employs the expression, "the regal principle e>f intelligence in the 1 nature; of God" (> oC? /3a- criAiKo? (=> Trj TOU Aio? <f>vut(., noiix baxiliktiH en tf tou Diox phiififi), it is doubtful if reason was endowed with personality or was anything me>re; than an attribute 1 of the 1 Divine: mind. Ci) The 1 ieleas are 1 merely models or archetypes after which creation is fashioned.

      The; doctrine of the Logos cannot be saiel to occupy a distinctive place; in the teaching e>f Aristotle 1 , though the 1 word eleu s oce-ur in a variety of 4 Arictntlp senses (e.g. 6p0o? Ao-yos, orttn is lo<j*, right insight," the faculty toy which the will is trained to proper action). Aristotle; sought to solve the 1 fundamental problem e>f Gr phi losophy as to how behind the changing multiplicity ot appearances an abiding Being is te> be thought toy means of the concept of (lfvel>>i>/neit/. Plato had re-garele d the "ideas" as the cause s of phenomena cause s different from the objects themselves. Aristotle onde-avored to overcome; the duality of Plato by representing reality as the 1 esse-nco which contains within itse lf potentially the phenomena, anel unfolds into the; particular mani festations e>f the sensible world. This conception has exerte-d a poweTful influence 1 upon subsequent thought, and particularly upon the monotheistic view e>f the 1 worhl. At the same; time; in working it out, the ultimate "pritne- mem r" of Aristotle; was ne>t materially different from the 1 iele>a e>f "the Good" of Plate). And inasmuch as Ge>el was conevive d as pure thought existing apart from the; world in eternal blessedness, Aristotle eliel not suc ceed in re>se>lving the 1 duality of God and the universe which exercised the Gr mind.

      It is to the Stoics we must look for the first system atic exposition of the doctrine of the Logos. It is the key to their interpretation of life, 5. Stoics betth in the realms of Nature and of duty. Interested meire in ethical than physical problems, they wore compelled to seek a general metaphysical basis fe>r a rational moral life. Some unitary idea must be found which will over come the duality between God anel the world and remove the oppositiem between the sensuous and suporsonsuous which Plato and Aristotle had failed to reconcile. For this end the Logos-doctrine of Heraclitus seemed to present itself as the most satisfactory solution of the problem. The funda mental thought of the Stoics consequently is that the entire universe forms a single living connected whole anel that all particulars are the determinate forms assumed by the primitive power which they conceived as never-resting, all-pervading fire. This eternal activity or Divine world-power which contains within itself the conditions anel processes of all things, they call Logos or God. More par ticularly as the productive power, the Deity is named the Xo7os crTrep^ariK-is, logos spermatikds, the Seminal Logos or generative principle of the world. This vital energy not only pervades the universe, but unfolds itself into innumerable logoi spermatikoi e>r formative forces which energize the manifold phenomena of Nature and life. This subordination of all particulars to the Logos not only constitutes the rational oreler of the universe but supplies a norm of duty for the regulation of the activities of life. Hence in the moral sphere "to live according to Nature" is the all-determining law of conduct.

      //. Hebrew Anticipation of Doctrine. So far we have traced the 1 development of the Logos-doctrine; in Gr philosophy. We have now to note a parallel movement in Heb thought. Though strictly speaking it is incorrect to separate the inner Reason from the outer expression in the term Logos, still in the Hellenistic usage the doctrine was sub-




      stantially a doctrine of Reason, while in Jewish lit. it was more esp. the outward expression or word that was emphasized.

      The sources of this conception are to be found in

      the OT and in the post-canonical literature. The

      (!od who is made known in Scripture

      1. Word as is regarded as one who actively reveals Revelation Himself. He is exhibited therefore of God as making His will known in and by

      His spoken utterances. The Word of God" is presented as the creative principle (Gen 1 3; Ps 33 6); as instrument of judgment (Hos 6 5); as agent of healing (Ps 107 20); and gen erally as possessor of personal qualities (Isa 65 2; Ps 147 1")). Revelation is frequently called the "Word of the Lord," signifying the spoken as dis tinct, from the written word.

      In particular, we may note certain adumbra tions of distinction of persons within the Being

      of God. It, is contended that the

      2. Sugges- phrase "Let us make" in Gen points tions of to a plurality of persons in the God- Personal head. This indefinite language of Distinctions Gen is more fully explained by the in Deity priestly ritual in Nu (6 23-26) and

      in the Psalter. In Jer, E/r and the vision of Isa (6 2-X) the same idea of Divine plurality is implied, showing that, the OT presents a doctrine of God far removed from the sterile monotheism of the Koran (cf Liddon, Dirinity of Our Lord, and Ivonig).

      Passing from these indefinite intimations of personal

      distinction in the inner life of God, we may mention first,

      that series of remarkable apparitions

      3. Theopha- commonly known as the theophanies of nies th. () T. These representations are de scribed as the "Angel of .Jeh" or of "(he

      Covenant"; or as the "Angel of his presence." This angelic appearance is sometimes i/lndifml with .Jeh ((ien 16 11.13; 32 29-31; Ex 3 2; 13 21), sometimes dis tinguished trom Him (Gen 22 1">: 24 7; 28 I - i; some times presented in huth a*tipc(.i (Ex 3 0; /cc 1 11). We find (iod revealing Himself in this way to Abraham, Sarah, Lot, Ilagar,. Jacob, Moses,. Joshua. ( iideon. Manoah. Who was this angel? The earliest leathers reply with general unanimity that He was the "Word" or "Son of (iod." But while the earlier church teachers distin guished between the "Angel of the Lord" and the Father, the Arians sought to widen the distinction into a difference of natures, since an invisible Being must be higher than one cognizable by the senses. Augustine, insists upon the Scriptural truth of the Invisibility of (iod as (lod, the Son not less than the Father. He will not presume, however, to say which of the Divine persons manifested Himself in this or that instance; and his general doctrine, in which ho has been followed by most, of t he: later teachers of the church, is that the theophanies were, not direct appearances of a Person of the Godhead, but, self-manifestations of God through a created being. A further development of the conception of a personal medium of revelation is discernible in the description of Wisdom as given in some of t he later

      4. Wisdom books of the OT. The wisdom of Jewish

      Scripture is more than a human endow ment or even an attribute of God, and may be said to attain almost to a personal reflex of the Deity, remind ing us of the archetypal ideas of Plato. In .Job, wisdom is represented as existent in God and as communicated in its highest form to man. It is the eternal thought in which the Divine Architect ever beholds His future creation (Job 28 23-27). If in Job wisdom is revealed only as underlying the laws of the universe; and not as wholly personal, in the Book of Prov it is coeternal with Jeh and assists Him in creation (Prov 8 22 31). It may be doubtful whether this is the language of a real person or only of a poetic personification. But some thing more than a personified idea may J>e inferred from the contents of the sapiential books outside the (" anon. Sir represents Wisdom as existing from all eternity with God. In Bar and still more in Wisd the Sophia is dis tinctly personal "the very image of the goodness of (iod." In this pseudo-Solomonic book, supposed to bo the work of an Alexandrian writer before Philo, the influ ence of Gr thought is traceable. The writer speaks of God s Word (mc ruTd ) as His agent in creation and judgment. Finally in the Tgs, which were popular Interpretations or paraphrases of the OT Scripture, there was a tendency to avoid anthropomorphic terms or such

      5. Targums expressions as involved a too internal con

      ception of God s nature and manifestation. Hen; tho three doctrines of the Word, the Angel, and

      Wisdom are introduced as mediating factors between (iod and the world. In particular the chasm between the Divine and human is bridged over by the use of such terms as me HIT a ("word") and shekhinah ("glory") The mfin -ra proceeds from (iod, and is His messenger in Nature and history. But it is significant that though the use of this expression implied the felt need of a Me diator, the Word does not seem to have been actually identified with the Messiah.

      ///. Alexandrian Synthesis. We have seen that according to Gr thought the Logos was conceived as a rational principle or impersonal energy by means of which the world was fashioned and onlered, while according to Hob thought, the Logos was regarded rather as a mediating agent, or personal organ of the Divine Being. The Hellenistic doc trine, in other words, was chiefly a doctrine of the Logos as Reason; the Jewish, a doctrine of the Logos as Word.

      In the philosophy of Alexandria, of which Philo was an illustrious exponent, the two phases were combined, and Hellenistic speculation Philo was united with II eb tradition for

      the purpose of showing that the OT taught the true philosophy and embodied all that was highest in Or reflection. In Philo the two streams meet and flow henceforth in a common bed. The all-pervading Energy of Heraclitus, the arche typal Ideas of Plato, the purposive Reason of Aristotle, the immanent Order of tho Stoics are taken up and fused with the Jewish conception of Jeh who, while transcending all finite existences, is revealed through His intermediatory Word. As the result of this Philonic synthesis, an entirely new idea of God is formulated. While Philo ad mits the eternity of matter, he rejects tho Gr view that the world is eternal, since it denies the creative activity and providence of God. At the same time he separate s Divine energy from its manifestations in the world, and is therefore compelled to connect the one with the other by the interposition of sub ordinate Powers. These Divine forces are the embodiment of the Idtat, idem ., of Plato and the &yye\\oi, t njgcloi, of the OT. The double meaning of Logos thought and speech is made use of by Philo to explain the relation subsisting between the ideal world existing only in the mind of God and the sensible universe which is its visible embodi ment. He distinguishes, then-fore, between the Logos inherent in God (\\byos tvSidOeros, logos endidthetos), corresponding to reason in man, and the Logos which emanates from God (\\6yos Trpo- (popiKos, logos prophorikos) , corresponding to the spoken Word as the revelation of thought. Though in His inner essence God is incomprehensible by any but Himself, He has created the intelligible cosmos by His self-activity. The Word is therefore in Philo the rational order manifested in the visible world.

      Some special features of the Philonic Logos may be noted: (1) It is distinguished from God as tho instrument from the Cause. (2) As instrument by which God makes the world, it is in its nature inter mediate between God and man. (3) As the ex pressed thought of God and the rational principle of the visible world, the Logos is "1 he Eldest or First born Son of Cod." It, is the "bond" (5ecr/x6s, dcs- mos) holding together all things (Dc Afundi, i.592), the law which determines the order of the universe and guides the destinies of men and nations (ib). Sometimes Philo calls it the "Man of God": or the "Heavenly man," the immortal father of all noble men; sometimes he calls it "the Second God," "the Image of God." (4) From this it follows that the Logos must be the Mediator between God and man, the "Intercessor" (t/c^rijs, hikclcs) or "High Priest," who is the ambassador from heaven and interprets God to man. Philo almost exhausts the vocabulary of Heb metaphor in describing the



      Logos. It. is "manna," "bread from heaven," "the living stream," the "sword" of Paradise., the guiding "cloud," the "rock" in the wilderness.

      Those various expressions, closely resembling the NT descriptions of Christ, lead us to ask: Is I hilo s L:>gos a ]>ersonal being or a pure abstrac tion? Philo himself seems to waver in his answer, and the (Ireek and the .lew in him are hopelessly at, issue. That he personifies the Logos is implied in the figures lie uses; but, to maintain its person ality would have been inconsistent with Philo s whole view of God and the world. Ili.s Jewish faith inclines him to speak of the Logos as personal, while his Gr culture disposes him to an impersonal interpretation. Confronted with this alternative. the Alexandrian wavers in indecision. After all lias been said, his Logos really resolves itself into a group of Divine ideas, and is conceived, not as a distinct person, but as the thought of Cod which is expressed in the rational order of the visible uni verse.

      In the speculations of Philo, whose thought is so frequently couched in Bib. language 1 , we have the gropings of a sincere mind after a truth which was disclosed in its fulness only by the revelation of Pentecost. In Philo, Gr philosophy, as has been said, "stood almost at the door of the Christian church." But if the Alexandrian thinker could not create the Christian doctrine, he unconsciously prepared the soil for its acceptance. In this sense his Logos-doctrine has a real value in the evolution of Christian thought. Philo was not, indeed, the master of the apostles, but even if he did nothing more than call forth their antagonism, he helped indirect ly to determine the doctrine of Christendom.

      IV. Christian Realization. \\Ve pass now to consider the import of the term in the NT. Hero it signifies usually "utterance," "speech" or "nar rative." In reference to God it is used sometimes for a special utterance, or for revelation in general, and even for the medium of revelation Holy Scriptun;. In the prologue of the Fourth Gospel it is identified with the personal Christ; and it is this employment of the term in the light of its past history which creates the interest of the problem of the NT doctrine.

      The author of the Fourth Gospel is not, however, the first NT writer who represents Jesus as the Logos. Though Paul does not actu- 1. Pauline ally use the word in this connection, Doctrine he has anticipated the Johannine con ception. Christ is represented by St. Paul as before His advent living a life with God in heaven (Gal 4 4; Rom 10 (5). He is conceived as one in whose image earthly beings, and esp. men, were made (1 Cor 11 7; 15 4f>-49); and even as participating in the creation (1 COT 8 6). In virtue; e>f His distinct being He is called God s "own Son" (Rom 8 32).

      Whether Paul was actually conversant with the writ ings of Philo is disputed (cf Pfleiderer, Urchris- tentum), but already when he wrote to the Cole>s- sians and Ephesians the influence of Alexandrian speculat ion was being felt in the church. Incipient Gnostie ism, which was an attempt to correlate Christianity with the orde>r of the universe as a wh jle, was current. Most noticeable are the P )inte>d allusions to gnostic watchwords in Eph 3 19 ("fulness of God") and in Col 2 3 ("Christ, in whom are all the treasure s of wisele>m and knowl edge hidden"), where Paul shows that everything sought for in the doctrine of the Ple roma is really give-n in Christ. The chief obje;ct of these epp. is to assert the unique dignity and absolute power of the IVrson of Christ. He is ne>t merely one of the Aeons which make up the Pleroma, as gne>stic teachers affirm, but a real and personal Being in

      whom all the; fulness e>f the; Godhead dwells. lie- is not, me-rely an inlVrior workman glory for a highe-r Master. He> creates for Himself. He; is the; end as we ll as the; semrce; e>f all cre-atcd things (Ce>l 1 15- 20). Though throughout this ep. tlu; word "Logos" is never introduced, it is plain that the eiVc^i/, clkon, e)f Paul is equivalent in rank anel functiem to the; Logos of John. Each exists prior to civation, eae-h is equal to God, share s His life anel cooperates in His work.

      In the Ep. to the; He; we have an equally ex plicit, if not fulleT, eleclarat ion of the ete-rnal Deity e>f Christ. Whatever may be; said of

      2. Doctrine Paul there can be little doubt that the in He- author e>f He was familiar with the brews Philemic writings. Who this writer

      was we ele) not know; but his Philon- ism suggests that he may have been an Alexandrian Je-w, possibly even a disciple e)f Philo. In language; seemingly adapted from that source ("Son of God," "Firstborn," "above angels," "Image e>f Ge>el," "Agent in Creation," "Mediator," "Gmit High Priest," "Melehizedek") the author of He; speaks e>f Christ as a reflectiem e>f the majesty anel imprint e>f the nature of God, just as in a seal the impression resembles the si am]). The dignity of His title; indicates His essential rank. He is expressly ad dressed as God; and the expression "the effulgence of his glory" (RV diravyacr/jLa, apatigasma) implie-s that He is one with G.>d (He 1 3). By Him the worlds have been maele>, anel all things are uphelel by the fiat of His word (ve>r 3). In the name He bears, in the honors ascribed to Him, in His superiority to angels, in His relationship as Creditor both to heaven and earth (ver 10), we recognize (in language which in the le>tter e)f it strongly re- minels us of Phile), ye>t in its spirit is so different) the descriptiem of one who though clotheel with human nature is no mere subordinate being, but the; possessor of all Divine prerogatives and the sharer of the very nature of God Himself.

      In the Fourth Ge>spel the teaching of Paul and

      the author of He finds its completest expression.

      "The letter te) the He stands in a .sense;

      3. Doctrine half-way between Pauline anel Jo in the hannine teaching" (Weizsae-ker, Apos- Fourth tolic Age, V, 11). It is, however, toe> Gospel much to say that these three writers

      represent the; successive stages of a single line of development. While all agree in em phasizing the fact e>f Christ s Divine personality and eternal being, Paul represents rather the re-li- gious interest, the Ep. te> the He the phile>se)phi- cal. In the Johannine Christology the two ele ments are united.

      In discussing the Johannine eloctrine of the Logos we shall speak first of its content and secondly of its terminology.

      (1) Content of doctrine. The evangelist use>s "Logos" 6 t as a designation of the Divine preexist - ent person of Christ (.In 1 1.14; 1 Jn 1 1; Rev 19 13), but he never puts it into the mouth of Christ. The ielea which John sought to cemvey by this term was not essentially different from the conception of Christ as presented by Paul. Bvit the use of the word gave a precision and emphasis to the being of Christ which the writer must have felt was esp. needed by the class of reaelers fe>r whom his Gospel was intended. The Logos with whom the Fourth Gospel starts is a Person. Reael ers of the Synoptics had le>ng been familiar with the term "Word of God" as equivalent to the Gospel; but the essential purpe>rt of John s Wore! is Jesus Himself, His Person. We have here an essential change of meaning. The two applications are ineleed connecteel; but the conception of the per fect revelation of God in the Gospel passes into




      that of the perfect revelation of the Divine nature in general (of Weizsacker, Apostolic Age, V, ii, 320).

      In the prologue (which, however, must not be regarded as independent of, or having no integral connection with, the rest of the book) there is stated : (a) the relation of the Logos to God; and (6) the relation of the Logos to the world.

      (a) Relation of Logos to God : Here the author makes three distinct affirmations: (i) "In the be ginning was the Word." The evangelist carries back his history of Our Lord to a point prior to all temporal things^ Nothing is said of the origin of the world. As in Gen 1 1, so here there is only implied that the Logos was existent when the world began to be. When as yet nothing was, the Logos was. Though the eternal preexistence of the Word is not actually stated, it is implied, (ii) "The Word was with God." Here His personal existence is more specifically defined. He stands distinct from, yet in eternal fellowship with, God. The preposi tion pros (bei, Luther) expresses beyond the fact of coexistence that of perpetual intercommunion. John would guard against the idea of mere self- contemplation on the one hand, and entire inde pendence on the other. It is union, not fusion, (iii) "The Word was God." He is not merely re lated eternally, but actually identical in essence with God. The notion of inferiority is emphatically excluded and the true Deity of the Word affirmed. In these three propositions we ascend from His eternal existence to His distinct personality and thence to His_substantial Godhead. All that God is the Logos is. Identity, difference, communion are the three phases of the Divine relationship.

      (b) Relation of Logos to the world : The Logos is word as well as thought, and therefore there is sug gested the further idea of communicativeness. Of this self-communication the evangelist mentions two phases creation and revelation. The Word unveils Himself through the mediation of objects of sense and also manifests Himself directly. Hence in tin s section of the prologue (vs 3-5) a threefold division also occurs, (i) He is the Creator of the visible universe. "All things were made through him" a phrase which describes the Logos as the organ of the entire creative activity of God and ex cludes the idea favored by Plato and Philo that God was only the architect who molded into cosmos previously existing matter. The term tytvero, egeneto ("becomes, werdcn}, implies the successive evolution of the world, a statement not inconsistent with the modern theory of development, (ii) The Logos is also the source of the intellectual, moral and spiritual life of man. "In him was life; and the life was the light of men." He is the light as well as the life the fountain of all the manifold forms of being and thought in and by whom all created things subsist, and from whom all derive illumination (cf 1 Jn 1 1-3; also Col 1 17). But inasmuch as the higher phases of intelligent life involve freedom, the Divine Light, though perfect and undiminished in itself, was not comprehended by a world which chose darkness rather than light (vs 5.11). (iii) The climax of Divine revelation is expressed in the statement, "The Word became flesh," which implies on the one hand the reality of Christ s humanity, and, on the other, the volun- tariness of His incarnation, but excludes the notion that in becoming man the Logos ceased to be God. Though clothed in flesh, the Logos continues to be the self -manifesting God, and retains, even in human form, the character of the Eternal One.^ In this third phase is embodied the highest manifestation of the Godhead. In physical creation the power of God is revealed. In the bestowal of light to mankind His wisdom is chiefly manifested. But

      in the third esp. is His love unveiled. All the per fections of the Deity are focused and made visible in Christ the "glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth" (Jn 1 14).

      Thus the Word reveals the Divine essence. The incarnation makes the life, the light and the love which are eternally present in God manifest to men. _ As they meet in God, so they meet in Christ. This is the glory which the disciples beheld; the truth to which the Baptist bore witness (ver 7); the fulness whereof His apostles received (ver 16); the entire body of grace and truth by which the Word gives to men the power to become the sons of God.

      There is implied throughout that the Word is the Son. Each of these expressions taken separately have led and may lead to error. But combined they correct possible misuse. On the one hand, their union protects us from considering the Logos as a mere abstract imper sonal quality; and, on the other, saves us from imparting to the Son a lower state or more recent origin than the Father. Each term supplements and protects the other. Taken together they present Christ before His incarnation as at once personally distinct from, yet equal with, the Father as the eternal life which was with God and was manifested to us.

      (2) Origin of terminology. We have now to ask whence the author of the Fourth Gospel derived the phraseology employed to set forth his Christology. It will be well, however, to distinguish between the source of the doctrine itself and the source of the language. For it is possible that Alexandrian philosophy might have suggested the linguistic medium, while the doctrine itself had another origin. Writers like Reuss, Keim, Holtzmann, Weizsacker, Schmiedel, etc, who contend for the Alexandrian derivation of the prologue, are apt to overlook two considerations regarding the Johannine doctrine: (1) There is no essential difference between the teaching of John and that of the other apostolic writers; and even, when the word "Logos" is not used, as in Paul s case, the view of Christ s person is virtually that which we find in the Fourth Gospel. (2) The writer himself affirms that his knowledge of Christ was not borrowed from others, but was derived from personal fellowship with Jesus Himself. "We beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten." This is John s summary arid witness upon which he proceeds to base the vivid memories of Jesus which follow. The Johannine doc trine is not to be regarded merely as a philosophical account of the nature of God and His creation of the world, but rather as the statement of a belief which already existed in the Christian church and which re ceived fresh testimony and assurance from the evangel ist s own personal experience.

      But the question may still be asked: Even if it was no novel doctrine which John declared, what led him to adopt the language of the Logos, a word which had not been employed in this connection by previous Christian writers, but which was prevalent in the philosophical vocabulary of the age ? It would be inconceivable that the apostle lighted upon this word by chance or that he selected it without any previous knowledge of its his tory and value. It may be assumed that when he speaks of the "Word" in relation to God and the world, he em ploys a mode of speech which was already familiar to those for whom he wrote and of whose general import he himself was well aware.

      The truth that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ was borne in upon St. John. The problem which confronted him was how he could make that truth real to his con temporaries. This lie sought to do by using the language of the highest religious thought of his day.

      We have seen that the term "Logos" had under gone a twofold and to some extent parallel evolution. On the one hand, it had a Heb and, on the other, a Hellenic history. In which direction are we to look f for the immediate source of the Johannine terminology?

      (a) Hebrew source: As a Palestinian Jew familiar with current Jewish ideas and forms of devout expression, it would be natural for him to adopt a word, or its Gr equivalent, which played so important a part in shaping and expressing the religious beliefs of the OT people. Many scholars consider that we have here the probable source of Johannine language. In the OT, and particularly in the Targums or Jewish paraphrases, the "Word" is constantly spoken of as the efficient instrument of Divine action; and the "Word of God" had come to be used in a personal way as almost identical


      Logos Longevity

      with (iod Himself. In Rev 19 13, wo have ob viously an adoption of this Hob use of tlio phrase. Throughout tlio Gospel there is evinced a decided familiarity and sympathy with tlio OT teaching, and soino expressions would seem to indicate the evangelist s desire to show that Jesus is the fulfil ment of Jewish expectation (e.g. 1 1-1.20.31; 2 19; 3 1-1- 6 32 4S-f)0), and the living embodiment of Israelitish truth (1 10; 8 12; 11 2. ,; 14 G). But as against this it lias boon pointed out by \\\\eiz- saeker (Apostolisches Zeitaller) that the Word of Cod is not conceived in the OT as an independent Being, still less as equivalent for the Messiah, and that the rabbinical doctrine which identifies the nii-mra with God is of much later date.

      At the same time the Hob cast of thought of the Johannine Gospel and its affinities wit h Jewish rather than Hellenic modes of expression can hardly be gainsaid. Though John s knowledge of and sympathy with Palestinian religion may not actually account for his use of the term "Logos," it may have; largely colored and directed his special application of it. For, as Neander observes, that name may have been put forward at Ephesus in order to lead those Jews, who wore busying themselves with specula tions on the Logos as the center of all theophanies, to recognize in Christ the Supreme Revelation of God and the fulfilment of their Messianic hopes.

      (b) Hellenic source: Other writers trace the Johannine ideas and terms to Hellenic philosophy and particularly to Alexandrian influence as represented in Philo. No one can compare the Fourth Gospel with the writings of Philo without noting a remark able similarity in diction, esp. in the use of the word "Logos." It would be hazardous, however, on this ground alone to impute conscious borrowing to the evangelist. It is more probable that both the Alexandrian thinker and the NT writer were sub ject to common influences of thought and expression. Hellenism largely colors the views and diction of the early church. St. Paul takes over many words from Gr philosophy. "There is not a single NT writing," says Haruack (Dogmen-Geschickte, I, 47, n.), "which does not betray the influence of the mode of thought and general culture which resulted from the Hellenizing of the East." But, while that is true, it must not be forgotten, as Harnack himself points out, "that while the writers of the NT breathe an atmosphere created by Gr culture, the religious ideas in which they live and move come to them from the OT."

      It is hardly probable that St. John was directly acquainted with the writings of Philo. But it is more than likely that he was cognizant of the general tenor of his teaching and may have discovered in (he language which had floated over from Alexan dria to Ephesus a suitable vehicle for the utterance of his own beliefs, esp. welcome and intelligible to those who were familiar with Alexandrian modes of thought.

      But whatever superficial resemblances there may be between Philo and St. John (and they are not few or vague), it must be at once evident that the whole spirit and view of life is fundamentally different. So far from the apostle being a disciple of the Alexandrian or a borrower of his ideas, it would be more correct to say that there is clearly a conscious rejection of the Philonic conception, and that the Logos of John is a deliberate protest against what he must have regarded as the inade quate and misleading philosophy of Greece.

      (c) Contrast between Philo and John : The con trast between the two writers is much more striking than the resemblance. The distinction is not due merely to the acceptance by the Christian writer of Jesus as the Word, but extends to the whole con ception of God and His relation to the world which

      19 1G

      has made Christianity a new power among men. The Logos of Philo is metaphysical, that of John, religious. Philo moves entirely in the region of abstract thought, his idea of God is pure being; John s thought is concrete and active, moving in a region of life and history. Philo s Logos is inter mediate, the instrument which God employs in fashioning the world; John s Logos is not subsidiary but is Himself God, and as such is not a mere instru ment, but the prime Agent in creation. According to Philo the Deity is conceived as an architect who forms the world out of already existent matter. According to John the Logos is absolute Creator of all that is, the Source of all being, life and intelli gence. In Philo the Logos hovers between person ality and impersonality, and if it is sometimes per sonified it can hardly be said to have the value of an actual person; in John the personality of the Logos is affirmed from the first and it is of the very essence of his doctrine, the ground of His entire creative energy. The idea of an incarnation is alien to the thought of Philo and impossible in his scheme of the universe; the "Word that has be come flesh" is the pivot and crown of Johannine teaching. Philo affirms the absolute incompre hensibility of God; but it is the prime object of the evangelist to declare that God is revealed in Christ and that the Logos is the unveiling through the flesh of man of the self-manifesting Deity. Not withstanding the personal epithets employed by Philo, his Logos remains a pure abstraction or attribute of God, and it is never brought into rela tion with human history. John s Logos, on the other hand, is instinct with life and energy from the beginning, and it is the very heart of his Gospel to declare as the very center of ^ife and history the great historical event of the incarnation which is to recreate the world and reunite God and man.

      From whatever point of view we compare them, we find that Philo and St. John, while using the same language, give an entirely different value to it. The essential purport of the Johannine Logos is Jesus Christ. The adoption of the_ term involves its complete transformation. It is baptized with a new spirit and henceforth stands for a new concep tion. From whatsoever source it was originally derived from Heb tradition or Hellenic specula tion on Christian soil it is a new product. It is neither Gr nor Jewish, it is Christian. The philo sophical abstraction has become a religious con ception. Hellenism and Hebrewism have been taken up and fused into a higher unity, and Christ as the embodiment of the Logos has become the creative power and the world-wide possession of mankind.

      The most probable view is that Philo and John found the same term current in Jewish and gentile circles and used it to set forth their respective ideas; Philo, following his predilections for Gr philosophy, to give a Hellenic complexion to his theory of the relation of Divine Reason to the universe; John, true to his Heb instincts, seeing in the Logos the climax of that revelation of God to man of which t he earlier Jewish theophanies were but partial ex pressions.

      There is nothing improbable in the surmise that the teaching of Philo gave a fresh impulse to the study of the Logos as Divine Reason which was already shadowed forth in the Bib. doctrine of Wisdom (Westcott). Nor need we take offence that such an important idea should have come to the Bib. author from an extra-Bib, writer (cf Schmiedel, Johannine Writings), remembering only that the author of the Johannine Gospel was no mechani cal borrower, but an entirely independent and original thinker who gave to the Logos and the ideas associated with it a wholly new worth and Interpretation. Thus, as has been said, the treasures of Greece were made con tributory to the full unfolding of the Gospel.

      V Patristic Development. The Joliarmme Logos became the fruitful source of much speculation in gnostic



      circles and among the early Fathers regarding the nature of Christ. The positive truth presented by the Fourth Gospel was once more broken up. and the various elements of which it was the synthesis became the seeds of a number of partial and one-sided theories respecting the relation of the Father and the Son. The influence of (ir ideas, which had already begun in the Apostolic Age, became more pronounced and largely shaped the current

      to Basilides the "Logos" was an emanation from the nous as personified Wisdom, which again was directly derived from the Father. Valentinus, in whose teaching Gnos ticism culminated, taught that Wisdom was the last of a series of Aeons which emanated from the Primal Being and the Logos was an emanation of the first two princi ples which issued from God Reason, Faith. Justin Martyr, the first of the sub-apostolic Fathers, sought to unite the Scriptural idea of the Logos as Word with the Hellenic idea of Reason. According to him God pro duced in His own nature a rational power which was His agent in creation and took the form in history of the Divine Man. Christ is the organ of all revelations, and as the Aoyos <T7r<-p^aTtKo?, lot/us spermatikds. He SOWS the seeds of virtue and truth among the heathen. All that is true and beautiful in the pagan world is to be traced to the activity of the Logos before His incarna tion. Tatian and Theophilus taught essentially the same doctrine; though in Tatian there is a marked leaning toward Gnosticism, and consequently a tendency to separate the ideal from the historical Christ. Athenag- oras, who ascribes to the Logos the creation of all things regarding it in the double sense of the Reason of God and the creative energy of the world, has a firm grasp of the Bib. doctrine, which was still more clearly expressed bv Irenaeus, who held that the Son was the essential Word eternally begotten of the Father and at once the inter preter of God and the Creator of the world.

      The Alexandrian school was shaped by the threefold influence of Plato, Philo and the Johannine Gospel ( lenient of Alexandria views the Son as the Logos of the Father, the Fountain of all intelligence, the Revealer of the Divine Being and the Creator and Illuminator of mankind. He repudiates the idea of the inferiority of the Son, and regards the Logos not as the spoken but as the creative word. Origen seeks to reconcile the two ideas of the eternity and the subordination of the Logos and is in this sense a mediator between the Arian and more orthodox parties and was appealed to by both According to him the Son is equal in substance with the Father, but there is a difference in essence. While the Father is "the God" (6 0eo, A,, thr,;*) and "God Him- (au0eo<r, autdtheos), the Logos is "a second

      God (Seurepo; fled?, deutrros theos). In the Nicene

      Age, under the shaping influence of the powerful mind of Athanasius, and, to a lesser degree, of Basil and the two Gregories, the Logos-doctrine attained its final form in the triumphant statement of the Nicene ("reed which declared the essential unity, but, at, the same time the personal distinction of the Father and Son. The Council of Xicaea practically gathered up the divergent views of the past and established the teaching of the Fourth Gospel as the doctrine of the church.

      LITERATURE. (1) On Gr Logos: Schleiermacher, Herakleitos der Dunkle; Histories of Philosophy, Zeller, Ueberweg, Ritter; Heinze, Die Lehre vom Logos in der Gr Phil. (1872); Aall, desch. d. Logosidee, in d. Gr Phil (1890). (2) On Jewish doctrine: Oehler. OT Theol (1873); Schiirer, Lehrburh d. NT Zeitgesch; Schultz, OT Theol. (X) On Alexandrian doctrine: Gfrorer, Philo u. die alex. Theosophie (1S:U); Dahne, Gesch. Darxtell. der jiid.-alex. Religions-Philosophic (1843); Keferstein, Philos Lehre von den gottlichen Mitt el we sen (1840.); Dor- ner, Entwicklungsgesch. der Lehre v. d. Person f hriuti- Siegfried, Philo v. Alex. (1875); Drummond, Philo Ju- daeus (1888); Reville, La doctrine du Logos; Huber, Die Philosophic der Kirchenvttter; Grossmann, Questiones P/nloneae (1,841); Watson, Philos. Baxix of Religion (1907). (4) On Johannine Gospel: Relative comms. of Meyer, Godot, Westcott, Luthardt, E. Scott (1907); Lid- don, Divinity of Our Lord ("Bampton Lectures," I860); Watkins, Modern Criticism on the Fourth Gospel ("Bamp- ton Lectures," 1890); Gloag, Intro to Johannine Writing* (1891); Stevens, Johannine Theol. (1894); Drummond, Gospel of St. John; Bertling, Der Jnhan. Logos (1907)- Schmiedel, The Johannine Writings (1908); Weizsacker Apostolic Age, V, ii; Beyschlag and Weiss, Bib. Theol of NT; Drummond, Via, Veritas, Vita (1894); Hatch, Gr Ideas and Usages, Their Influence upon the Christian Church (Hibbert Lectures, 1888). (5) Patristic period- Harnack, Dogmen-desch.; Baur, Kirchen-Gesch.; Doriier, System d. chr. Glaubenslehre; Loofs, Leitfaden fur setne Vorlesunf/en uber Dogmengeschichte; Atzbergen Die Logoslehre d. heiligen Athanasius (1880).


      LOINS, loinz (ft?, halaf, Aram, p.n, haras, "rTC, mothcn, ^03, kc.^el, "ip?, yarekh; oo-<j>vs, oxphus) : This variety of Hob synonyms seems to be used

      Logos Longevity

      rather promiscuously for the loins, though there is no little difference in the secondary meanings of these words. They represent various modes of expressing the loins as the seat of strength and vigor (Job 40 16, Heb mothcn, here used of Behemoth), the center of procreative power, the portion of the body which is girded about, and is considered as specially needful of covering, even under primitive conditions of life (Job 31 20), and where painful disease most effectually unfits a man for work and warfare.

      Jacob receives the Divine promise that "kings shall come out of [his] loins" (/m/<7r, (I en 35 11), and we read of 66 souls "that came out of his loins" (yarekh} which went into Egypt (46 26). The Ep. to the He speaks of the Levites as having come out of the loins of Abraham (He 7 5).

      As the seat of strength (cf LEO; THIGH), the loins are girded with belts of leather (2 K 1 8; Mt 3 4), or cloth, often beautifully embroidered (Ex 28 39), or of costly material (39 29; Jer 13 If). Girded loins are a sign of readiness for service or endeavor (Ex 12 11; 1 K 18 46; 2 K 4 29 Job 38 3; Prov 31 17; Lk 12 35; 1 P<>t 1 13)! Of God it is said that "he looseth the bond of kings, and bindeth their loins with a girdle," i.e. strength ens them (Job 12 IS). On the loins the sword is worn (2 S 20 8). It is a sign of mourning to gird the loins with sackcloth (1 K 20 32; Isa 32 11; Jer 48 37; Am 8 10; see also the First Papyrus of Elephantine, 1. 20). A man whose strength is in his attachment to truth, in other words is faithful, is spoken of as having his loins girt about with truth (Eph 6 14). Thus the Messiah is described Righteousness shall be the girdle of his waist, and faithfulness the girdle of his loins" (Isa 11 5). One of the most primitive modes of clothing con sisted of a fleece tied around the loins (Job 31 20). The condition of unfitness for service; is described in that the loins ( are filled with a burning (1 s 38 7, AV "loathsome disease"), or that "a sore burden" is laid upon the "loins" (mdthcn, 66 1). Thus the loins are made "continually to shake" (69 23), "the joints of [the] loins" (htiraq) are loosed (Dnl 6 6), the "loins are filled with anguish" (Isa 21 3). It is very likely that originally a disa bling lumbago or the painful affections of the gall or the bladder (calculus, etc) are meant, but very soon the expression becomes merely metaphorical to express personal helplessness, esp. that which can but rely upon assistance and help from God.

      H. L. E. LUERING

      LOIS, Id is (Ats, Lots [2 Tim 1 5]): The grand mother of Timothy, and evidently the; mother of Eunice, Timothy s mother. The family lived at Lystra (Acts 16 1). It was on the occasion of Paul s first missionary journey (Acts 14) that Eunice and Timothy were converted to Christ, and it was, in all likelihood, on the same occasion that Lois also became a Christian. Paul speaks of the unfeigned faith that there was in Timothy, and he adds that this faith dwelt at the first in "thy grand mother Lois, and thy mother Eunice." This is the mly passage where Lois is mentioned; but by com paring 2 Tim 1 5 with 2 Tim 3 15 (AV), where Paul refers to Timothy s having "from a child cnown the holy scriptures," it would appear that Lois was associated with Eunice, both in a reverent r aith in God and in the careful instruction in the ")T which was given to Timothy. See EUNICE; TIMOTHY. JOHN RUTHERFURD

      LONGEVITY, lon-jev i-ti: In the part of Gen ascribed to P, the names and genealogies of the Kitnarchs are given (Gen 5, 11). In the three VSS vhich are our chief sources, MT, LXX and Sam, -he age-numbers given for these patriarchs are hope-

      Longsuffering Lord s Day



      lessly at variance. It is in accord \\villi what we find in the earliest, legend of most races thai in these chapters a. great length of life is ascribed to these; thus Berosus attributes to (lie first. 10 kings of Babvlonia u span of 430,000 years, and llesiod (Works and M/.y-s, I 1 -".*) says that, in the Silver Age childhood lasted 100 years, during which a boy was reared and grew up beside his mother. On the other hand the evidence of prehistoric archaeology shows that the rate of development of the individual in the early Stone Age differed very little from that of humanity at the present day. It, is possible that, in the case "of the Heb record, the names of certain prc-Abrahamic patriarchs were derived from an ancient tradition, and that in the desire to fill up the chronology of the period before the call of Abraham, these names were inserted and the time which was supposed to have elapsed was divided among them, on the basis of some such hypothesis as that which is said to have existed among the Jews, that the Messiah should come 4,000 years after Adam.

      We know from the archaeological evidence that the antiquity of primitive man extends to a date very much farther back than 4.000 years. Indeed, we can prove; that before 4000 BC there were settled nationalities both in the valley of the Nile and that of 1 he Euphrat es, and that among these the durat ion of individual life was much 1 he same as at the present day The first three dynasties in Egypt, starting at or about 4400 BC, consisted of 25 consecutive kings, the average length of whose several reigns was about 30 years. The biographic sketches of Bib. persons other than those in Gen showed that their longevity did not exceed that of our con temporaries. Eli was at 98 blind and feeble. David at 70 was bedridden and frail. Manasseh, the king of Judah whose reign was longest, died at 67; I z/iah at OS. The statement in 1 s 90 10 attributed to Moses is a correct esti mate of what has been the expectation of life at all time. , .

      At the present day among Palestinian fellahm very old men are uncommon. I have never seen anyone among them who could prove that he was 80 years of age; the rate of infant mortality is appallingly high. Maturity is earlier, and signs of senility appear among them sooner than among the same class in Great Britain.


      LONGSUFFERING, long-suf er-ing (O^ SpX. erckh appaijim; p.aKpo6vjiia, makrothumia) : The words erckh appayim, tr 1 longsuffcring, mean lit. "long of nose" (or "breathing"), and, as anger was indicated by rapid, violent breathing through the nostrils, "long of anger," or "slow to wrath." The adj. is applied to God (Ex 34 6 AV, in the name of Jeh as proclaimed to Moses; Nu 14 18 AV; Ps 86 15 AV; RV "slow to anger," which is also the tr in other places; AV and RV Neh 9 17; Ps 103 8; 145 8; Prov 16 18; 16 32; Joel 2 13; Jon 4 2; Nah 1 3); it is associated with "great kindness" and "plenteous in mercy." The subst. occurs in Jer 15 15: "Take me not away in thy long-suffering." In Eccl 7 8, we have erekh ru a h, AV and RV "patient in spirit."

      The word in the NT rendered "longsuffermg, makrothumia (once makrothumeo, "to be long- suffering"), which is the rendering of erekh appayim in the LXX, is lit. "long of mind or soul" (regarded as the seat of the emotions), opposed to shortness of mind or soul, irascibility, impatience, intolerance. It is attributed to God (Rom 24; 9 22; 2 Pet 3 9), of His bearing long with sinners and slowness to execute judgment on them. It is, therefore, one of "the fruits of the Spirit" in man (Gal 5 22) which Christians are frequently exhorted to cherish

      and sh >w one toward the other (Eph 4 2; Col 1 11; 3 12, etc); it belongs, Paul says, to the love, without, which all else is nothing: "Love suiTercth long [makrothumei], and is kind" (1 Cor 13 4). The vl). tiuikrotliumco is sometimes tr 1 by "patience" (Mt 18 20.29, "Have; patience with me"). Lk 18 7 has been variously rendered; AV has "And shall

      not God avenge his own elect though he bear

      long with them"; RV "and yet he is longsuffermg over them," AHVm "and is he slow to punish on their behalf?" \\Veymouth ( A : T in Modern Speech) has "although he seems slow in taking action on their behalf," which most probably gives the sense of the passage; in Jas 5 7.8 the vb. occurs thrice, AV "be patient," "hath long patience"; RV also tr 3 by "patient"; this, however, as in Mt 18 20.29, seems to lose the full force of the Gr word. Ac cording to Trench (Synonyms of the _NT, 189), the difference between hupomone ("patience") and makrothumia is that the latter word expresses pa tience in respect to persons, and the former in re spect to things; hence hupomone is never ascribed to God; where He is called "the God of patience," it is as lie (jirrs it to His servants and saints. But in Jas 5 7 it is used with reference to things, and in Col 1 11 it is associated with patience_ (cf He 6 12.15), suggesting patient endurance of trials and sufferings. In Coll 11 it is also associated with "joy," indicating that it is not a mere submissive- ness, but a joyful acceptance of the will of God, whatever it may be. In Wisd 15 1; Ecelus 5 4, we have "longsuffering" (makrdthumos) ascribed to God; also in Ecelus 2 11, RV "mercy."

      W. L. WALKER

      LOOK, look: (1) The uses of the simple vb. in EV are nearly all good modern Eng. In Isa 5 2, however, "He looked that it should bring forth grapes" "look" is used in the sense of "expect." Cf AV of Sir 20 14; Acts 28 0, "They looked when he should have swollen" (RV "They expected that he would have swollen"). In 1 Mace 4 54, AV has inserted "look" (omitted in RV) as a simple interjection, without a corresponding word in the Gr. (2) "Look upon" means "fix one s attention on," and is often so used in EV without further significance (Eccl 2 11; Lk 22 56, etc); but in 2 Ch 24 22 AV and RV, "Jeh look upon it" means "remember." However, continual attention given to an object usually denotes that pleasure is found in it, and from this fact such uses as those of Prov 23 31, "Look not thou upon the wine when it is red," are derived. In particular, God s "looking upon" a person becomes a synonym for "showing favor unto," as in Dt 26 7 AV; Ps 84 9 AV and RV; 119 132 AV; Lk 1 48 RV only, etc (RV usually re-words in such passages). On the other hand, "look on may be weakened, as in such phrases as "fair to look upon" (Gen 12 11, etc), where it means only "fair to the sight." Or, as in modern Eng., "look on may describe the attitude of the passive spectator, even when applied to God. So Ps 35 17, "Lord, how long wilt thou look on?" (3) "Look to" usually means "pay attention to," as in Prov 14 15; Jer 39 12; 2 Jn ver 8, etc, and RV occasionally uses this phrase in place of AV s "look upon" (Phil 2 4). The reverse change is made in AV s 1 S 16 12, "goodly to look to"; Ezk 23 15, "all of them princes to look to," but in the latter verse a more drastic revision was needed, for the meaning is all of them in appearance as princes." "Look out may mean "search for" (Gen 41 33; Acts 6 3), but may also be used lit, (Gen 26 8, etc). AV s "looking after those things" in Lk 21 26 has been changed by RV into "expectation of the things. "Look one another in the face" in 2 K 14 8.11 means "meet in battle."




      LOOKING-GLASS, look ing-glas (Ex 38 8 AV, m "brasen glasses"). See GLASS; MIRROR.

      LOOM, loom. See WEAVING.

      LOOP, loop (in pi. ni6b , Inladth [Ex 26 4 f . lOf; 36 llf.lTJ): A ring or fold made of blue thread to fasten into the corresponding golden clasps, or taches upon the curtains of the tabernacle, joining them in sets, or pairs. See TABERNACLE.

      LORD, lord, THE LORD: This Eng. word in our Bible represents one Aram., 3 Gr and 9 Heb words, two of them in two forms. It 1 hus expresses all grades of dignity, honor, and majesty. It is not always possible to be sure of the sense in which the term is to be taken. In Gen 18 3; 19 IS, the translators waver between interpreting of the Di vine Person and a finite angel (cf marginal readings ). It represents the most sacred Ileb name for God, as their covenant God, Yah, Yahwch, and the more usual designation of Deity, Adhondy, Adhon, a term which they adopted to avoid pronouncing the most, holy designation. They had placed on Lev 24 16 an interpretation that aroused such a dread that they seldom dared use the name at all. When two of the words usually tr d "Lord," both referring to God, occur together, AV renders Lord God," and ARV "Lord Jehovah." ARV lias adopted the rule of using the covenant name transliter ated, instead of the term "Lord," in which AV adopts the rule of the Hebrews to avoid the holy name.

      The Aram, designation, Marc 1 , occurs only in Did (e.g. 2 47; 5 23), and the same word refers to a man (4 24).

      ( )f 1 he Gr words, Kitrios is freely used of both the Deity and men. Dcspotcs, of men in classic usage, occurs only of God, including the ascended Jesus, and is employed only 5 t. Mcyixtiinrx (pi.) is found once, of men (Mk 6 21). Ifuhlionl (Ileb in Gr letters) is applied only to the Christ, and is simply transliterated in RV, but rendered "Lord" in AV (cf Mk 10 51).

      Our Eng. VSS distinguish the 3 main uses of the term thus: (1) "LORD" represents the Heb Ynlnn-h, LNX Kitrios, except, where Adhondy or Adhon is combined with Yahwch ( = "Lord God"); ARV has in these examples employed the name as it is found in the Heb, simply transliterated. (2) "Lord" cor responds to Adhondy, Adhon, Mare , also Gr Kitrios (see [1]), and Dcspotcs, for which ARV has always "Master" in cither the text or the margin. (3) "Lord" ("lord") translates all the remaining 8 Heb words and the Gr words except Dcspotcs. It is thus seen that Kurios corresponds to all three forms of writing the Eng. term. See JEHOVAH.


      LORD OF HOSTS: A name or title of God fre quently used in the OT, always tr d "Jeh of Hosts"

      (nixnx nirn, yhowak fbha oth) in ARV, since

      Y e howdh, never Adhondy, is used in this phrase. Evidently the meaning of the title is that all created agencies and forces are under the leadership or dominion of Jeh, who made and maintains them (Gen 2 1; Isa 45 12). It is used to express Jeh s great power. See GOD, NAMES OF, III, 8.

      Longsuffering Lord s Day

      LORD S DAY (TJ KvpiaKT] rifxtpa, he JcuriaM hetnera): Formerly it was supposed that the adj.

      kuriakos (tr d "the Lord s") was a 1. Linguis- purely Christian word, but recent dis- tic coveries have proved that it was in

      fairly common use in the Rom Empire before Christian influence had been felt. In secular use it signified "imperial," "belonging to the lord"-




      the emperor and so its adoption by Christianity in the sense "belonging to the Lord" to Christ- was perfectly easy. Indeed, there is reason to suppose that in the days of Domitian, when the issue had been sharply denned as "Who is Lord? Caesar or Christ?" the use of the adj. by the church was a part of the protest against Caesar-worship (see LORD). And it is even possible that the full phrase, "the Lord s day," was coined as a contrast to the phrase,^ "the Augustean day" (i) ae/3a<rTT) fj^pa, he sebastt hemera), a term that seems to have been used in _some parts of the Empire to denote days esp. dedicated in honor of Caesar-worship.

      "Lord s day" in the NT occurs only in Rev 1 10,

      but in the post-apostolic literature we have the

      following reference s: Ignatius, Ad

      2. Post- Mag., ix.l, "No longer keeping the Apostolic Sabbath but living according to the

      Lord s day, on which also our Light so"; Ev. Pet., ver 35, "The Lord s day began dawn" (cf Mt 28 1); ver 50, "early on the :-d s day" (cf Lk 24 1); Barn 15 9, "We keep the eighth day with gladness," on which Jesus arose from the dead." I.e. Sunday, as the day of Christ s resurrection, was kept as a Christian feast, and called "the Lord s day," a title fixed so definitely as to be introduced by the author of Er. Pet. info phrases from the canonical Gospels. Its appropriateness in Rev 1 10 is obvious, as St. John received his vision of the exalted Lord when all Christians had their minds directed toward His entrance into glory through the resurrection.

      This "first day of the week" appears again in

      Acts 20 7 as the day on which the worship of the

      "breaking of bread" took place, and

      3. In the the impression given by the context NT is that St. Paul and his companions

      prolonged their visit to Troas so as to join in the service. Again, 1 Cor 16 2 contains the command, "Upon the first day of the week let each one of you lay by him in store," where the force of the form of the imperative used (the; present for repeated action) would be better represented in Eng. by "lay by on the successive Sundays." \\Vorship_is here not explicitly mentioned (the Gr of "by him" is the usual phrase for "at home"), but that the appropriateness of the day for Christian acts involves an appropriateness for Christian wor ship is not to be doubted. Indeed, since the seven- day week was unknown to Gr thought, some regu lar observance of a hebdomadal cycle must have been settled at Corinth before St. Paul could write his command. Finally, the phrase, "first day in the week" is found elsewhere in the NT only in Mt 28 1; Mk 16 2; Lk 24 1; Jn 20 1.19. The word in all passages for "first" is poor Gr (pta, min, "one," for TrpwT?;, protc, a Hebraism), and the coincidence of the form of the phrase in Acts 20 7 and 1 Cor 16 2 with the form used by all four evangelists for the Resurrection Day is certainly not accidental; it was the fixed Christian base, just as "Lord s day" was to the writer of Ev. Pet.

      The hebdomadal observance of Sunday points

      back of Corinth to Jewish-Christian soil, but it is

      impossible to say when the custom

      4. Origin first began. Not, apparently, in the

      earliest days, for Acts 2 40 represents the special worship as daily. But this could not have continued very long, for waning of the first enthusiasm, necessity of pursuing ordinary avoca tions, and increasing numbers of converts must soon have made general daily gatherings impracti cable. A choice of a special day must have become necessary, and this clay would, of course, have been Sunday. Doubtless, however, certain individuals and communities continued the daily gatherings to a much later date, and the appearance of Sunday

      Lord s Day Lord s Supper



      as the one (list iii M ivc day for worship was almost certainly gradual.

      Sunday, however, was sharply distinguished from

      the Sabbath. One was the day on which worship

      was offered in a specifically Christian

      5. Sunday form, the other was a day of ritual and the rest to lie observed by all who were Sabbath subject, to the Law of Moses through

      circumcision (Gal 5 3; of Acts 21 20). Unc.ircumcised (lent lies, however, were free from any obligation of Sabbath observance, and it is quite certain that in apostolic times no renewal of any Sabbath rules or transfer of them to Sunday was made for gentile converts. No observance of a particular "day of rest" is contained among the "necessary things" of Acts 15 28.29, nor is any such precept found among all the varied moral directions given in the whole epistolary literature. Quite on the contrary, the observance of a given day as a matter of Divine obligation is denounced by St. Paul as a forsaking of Christ (Gal 4 10), and Sabbath-keeping is condemned explicitly in Col 2 10. As a matter of individual devotion, to be sure, a man might do as he pleased (Rom 14 5.0), but no general rule as necessary for salvation could be compatible with the liberty wherewith Christ, has made us free. Evidently, then, the fact that the Christian worship was held on Sunday did not sanctify Sunday any more than (say) a regular Wednesday service among us sanctifies Wednes day, noting esp. that the apostolic service was held in the evening. For it was felt that Christian en thusiasm would raise, cirri/ day to the highest reli gious plane, the decay of that enthusiasm through the long delay of the Parousia not being contem plated.

      The delay occurred, however, and for human beings in the ordinary routine of life there are neces sary, not only set periods of worship, but

      6. Later Bet periods of relaxation from routine History to make worship profitable. And the

      Christian fundamental doctrine of mercy demands that Christianity, where she has the power, shall give to men relief from the drain of continuous toil.

      Tho formulation of general rules to carry thcso prin ciples into effect, however, belongs to a period outside NT times, and so does not come; within the scope of this Encyclopaedia. It is enough to say that the ecclesias tical rules for Sunday were, felt to be quite distinct from the laws for Sabbath observance, and that Alcuin (733?- s()l) is tlie first to hold that the church had transferred (lie Sabbath rules as a whole to Sunday. This principle is still maintained in Roman Catholic theology, but at the Reformation was rejected uncompromisingly by both Lutherans ( A m/sh. Conf.. II, 7) and Calvinists (llilri t. Conf., XXIV, 1-2) in favor of a literally apostolic freedom (Calvin even proposed to adopt Thursday in place of Sunday). The appearance, of the opposite ex treme of a genuinely "legalistic" Sabbatarianism in the thoroughly Evangelical Scotch and English Puritanism is an anomaly that is explained by reaction from the extreme laxity of the surroundings.

      Sunday was fixed as the day for Christian worship by general apostolic practice, and the academic possi bility of an alteration hardly seems worth 7 Prartiral discussing. If a literal apostolicity is to dtuccti j )0 i ns i s t ( . ( i upon, however, the "breaking of bread" must be. made part of the Sun day service. Kest from labor for the sake of worship, public and private, is intensely desirable, since the regaining of t lie general apostolic enthusiasm seems unattainable, but the NT leaves vis quite free as to de tails. Rest from labor to secure physical and mental renewal rests on a still different basis, and the working put of details involves a knowledge of sociological and industrial conditions, as well as a knowledge of re ligious principles. It is the task of the pastor to com bine the various principles and to apply them to the particular conditions of his people in their locality, in accordance with the rules that his own church has indu bitably the right to lay down very special attention being given, however, to the highly important matter of the peculiar problem offered by children. In all cases the general principles underlying the rules should be made clear, so that they will not appear as arbitrary legalism. and it is probably best not to use the term

      "Sabbath" for Sunday. I nder certain conditions great freedom may be desirable, and such is certainly not in consistent with our liberty in Christ. Hut experience, and not least of all the experience of the first churches of the Reformation, has abundantly shown that much general laxness in Sunday rules invariably results dis astrously. See further, ETHICS OK JESUS, 1, 3, (1).

      LITKUATITKE. For the linguistic matters, Deissmann, Lit/ht from t/,,- Ancient Kaxt, I .HO, 3fil lili Hessey s ,S / lulu;/ (ed 1SSO) ("Hampton Lectures," 1S(\\0) contains a good summary of t he history of the problems. Stickler s "Sonntagsfeie r," I ltE, ed 3, XVIII, 1906, 521-29 is the best general survey. In Scli-Ilcrz this article ("Sunday") is harmed by abbreviation, but an exhaustive bibliography is added.

      BniTox SCOTT EASTON LORD S PRAYER, THE (Mt 6 9-i:i; Lk 11

      2-4): Prayer occupied an important place in the life and the teachings of Jesus. He was emphati cally a man of prayer, praying frequently in private and in public, and occasionally spending whole nights in communion with His heavenly Father. He often spoke to His disciples on the subject of prayer, cautioning them against ostentation, or urging perseverance, faith and large expectation, and He gave them a model of devotion in the Lord s prayer.

      This prayer is given by the evangelists in two different forms and in two entirely different con nections. In Mt s account the prayer

      1. Twofold is given as a part of the Sermon on the Form Mount and in connection with a criti cism of the ostentation usual in the

      prayers of the hypocrites and the heathen. Lk introduces the prayer after the Galilean ministry and represents it as given in response to a request, from one of His disciples, "Lord teach us to pray, as John taught his disciples." It gives us, however, no note of time or place, and it, is quite possible that the incident which it records took plaee much ear lier. The later form is much shorter than that of Mt and the common parts differ materially in lan guage.

      In view of the differences, the reader instinctively inquires whether the prayer was given on two differ ent occasions in these different connections, or the evangelists have presented the same incident in forms derived from different sources, or modified the common source to suit their immediate purposes.

      If the prayer was given only on one occasion, there is little doubt that Lk preserves the true his torical circumstances, though not necessarily the accurate point of time or place, or the exact form of language. Such a request, made at the close of the prayer of Jesus would be natural, and the inci dent bears every mark of reality. On the other hand, it would lie reasonable to assume that the author of Mt s source, remembering the incident, incorporated the prayer in the Sermon on the Mount as an illustration of the injunctions con cerning prayer.

      There are many reasons for regarding the Sermon as a collection of sayings spoken on different occasions and summarized for convenience in teaching and memorizing. There is, however, no proof that the prayer was given but once by Jesus. We need not suppose that His dis ciples were always the same, and we know that lie gave instruction in prayer on various occasions. He may have given the model prayer on one occasion sponta neously and at another time on the request of a disciple. It is probable that the two evangelists, using the same or different, sources, presented the prayer in such con nection as best suited the plan of their narratives. In any case, it is rather remarkable that the prayer is not quoted or directly mentioned anywhere else in the NT.

      In addition to the opening salutation, "Our Father who art in heaven," the Lord s Prayer con sists of six petitions. These are ar-

      2. Arrange- ranged in three equal parts. In the ment first part, the thought is directed

      toward God and His great purposes. In the second part, the attention is directed to our condition and wants. The two sets of petitions



      Loid s Day Lord s Supper

      are closely pointed, and a line of progress runs through the whole prayer. The petitions of the first part are inseparable, as each includes the one which follows. As the hallowing of God s name requires the coming of His kingdom, so the king dom comes through the doing of His will. Again, the first part calls for the second, for if His will is to he done by us, we must have sustenance, for giveness and deliverance from evil. If we seek first the glory of God, the end requires our good. While; we hallow His name we are sanctified in Him. The doxology of Mt and our rituals is not found in the, leading MSS and is generally regarded as an ancient liturgical addition. For this reason it is omitted by RV.

      The sources of the two accounts cannot be known

      with certainty. It is hardly correct to say that

      one account is more original than the

      3. Sources other. The original was spoken in

      Aram., while both of the reports are certainly based on Gr sources. The general agree ment in language, esp. in the use of the unique term eTrtoiVtos, cpiouisios, shows that they are not independent tr s of the Aram, original.

      Three expressions of the prayer deserve special notice. The words, "Our Father," an; new in the

      Bible and in the world. When God

      4. Special is called Father in the OT, He is re- Expressions garded as Father of the nation, not,

      of the individual. Even in the moving prayer of Isa 63 16 (AVj, Doubtless thou art, our father," the connection makes clear that the ref erence is to God in the capacity of Creator. The thought of God as the Father of the individual is first reached in the Apoc: "O Lord, Father and Master of my life" (Sir 23 1; cf Wisd 2 1(1; 14 3). Here also the notion is veiled in the thought, of God as Creator. It was left- for Jesus the Son to give; us the privilege, of calling God "Our Father."

      Of the adj. epionsion, "daily" or "needful," neither the origin nor the exact meaning is or is likdy to be known. Whether it is qualitative or temporal depends on its derivation from fTreivai, t jii nidi, or eTrteVcu, cpienni. Our translators usually follow the latter, translating "daily." ARV gives "needful" as a marginal rendering.

      The phrase d.7ro rou Trovr/pov, a/>o ton port emit, is equally ambiguous. Since the adj. may be either masc. or neut., it is impossible to decide whether "from the evil one" or "from the evil" was intended. The probability is in favor of the masc. The Oriental naturally thought of evil in the concrete, just, as we think of it in the abstract. For this reason the Authorized rendering "from evil" is more real to us. The evil deprecated is moral, not physical.

      The Lord s Prayer was given as a lesson in prayer.

      As such this simple model surpasses all precepts

      about prayer. It suggests to the

      5. Purpose child of God the proper objects of

      prayer. It supplies suitable forms of language and illustrates the simple and direct manner in which we may trustingly address our heavenly Father. It embraces the elements of all spiritual desire summed up in a few choice sen tences. For those who are not able to bring their struggling desires to birth in articulate language it provides an instructive form. To the mature disciple it ever unfolds with richer depths of meaning. Though we learn these words at our mother s knee, we need a lifetime to fill them with meaning and all eternity to realize, their answer.

      LITER \\TURE. The lit. of this subject is very exten sive. For brief treatment the student will consult the relative sections in the comms. on the Gospels of Mt and Lk and in the Lives of Christ and the arts, on the lx>rd s Prayer in the several Bible diets. A collection of patristic comment is given by <;. Tillmann in his Dun

      Gebet nach der Lehre dcr Ilciliycn dargestellt, 2 vols, Freiburg, 1870. The original comments may be found in any of the standard collections of the Church Fathers.

      Among historical studies may be mentioned, F. H. Chase, The Lord s Prayer in the Early Church, Cam bridge, 1891, and G. Dalman, Die Worte Jesu, I, Leip zig, 1898, ET, Edinburgh, 1902.

      Among the numerous interpretative treatments, the following are some of the more important: N. Hall, The Lord s Prayer, Edinburgh, 1SSO; II. .1. Van Dyke, The Lord s Prayer, New York, 1S91; ,J. Raskin, Letters to the Clergy on the Lord s l rai/er ami the Church, late ed, New York, 1896; E. Wordsworth, Thought* on tin- Lord s Prayer, New York, 1898; C. W. Stubbs, Social Teachings of the Lord * Prayer, London, 1900; A. B. Bruce, The Training of the Tn-e/ve, eh vi, 4th ed, New York, 1905; L. T. Chamberlain, The True Doctrine of Prayer, New York, 190(1; F. M. Williams, Spiritual Instructions on the Lord s J rayer, Xew York, 1907.




      1. Textual Considerations

      2. Narratives Compared

      (1) Mark

      (2) Matthew

      (3) Pauline

      (4) Luke

      3. Other Pauline Data


      1. Miracles of Loaves and Fishes

      2. Discourse at Capernaum


      1. Other Acts and Words of Christ on Eve of the Passion

      2. Sacrificial Language of the Institution

      3. Sacrificial System of Jewish Dispensation

      4. Paschal Background of the Institution of the Eucharist



      1. Heavenly Background

      (1) Christians a Priestly Uace

      (2) Christ the Eternal High Priest

      2. Celebrated Each Lord s Day

      3. Names of the Eucharist

      (1) Eucharist

      (2) Lord s Supper

      (3) Breaking of Bread

      (4) Communion

      (5) Oblation


      1. Guidance by the Holy Spirit

      2. Eucharist in

      (1) Ignatian Epistles

      (2) Justin Martyr

      (3) Irenaeus

      (4) Cyprian


      1. Outline of Eucharistic Prayer

      2. Significance of This for Unity LITERATURE

      /. Definition. Eucharist. -The distinctive rite of Christian worship, instituted by Our Lord Jesus Christ, upon the eve of His atoning death, being a religious partaking of bread and wine, which, having been presented before God the Father in thankful memorial of Christ s inexhaustible sacrifice, have become (through the sacramental blessing) the communion of the body and blood of Christ (cf Jn 6 54; Acts 2 42; 20 7.11; Rom 15 10; 1 Cor 10 16; 11 23-20).

      II. The NT Sources. The NT sources of our knowledge of the institution of the Eucharist are fourfold, a brief account thereof being found in each of the Synoptic Gospels and in St. Paul s First Ep. to the Cor (Mt 26 20-29; Mk 14 22-25; Lk 22 14-20; 1 Cor 11 23-20; cf 10 10.17).

      The text of these narratives has been found to need little amendment, save the dropping of a word or two,

      from each account, that had crept in 1 Textual through the tendency of copyists, con- ~ ., sciouslv or unconsciously, to assimilate

      Lonsidera- tho (l ;, ta n s O f parallel passages. The tions genuineness of Lk 22 19^.20 is absolutely

      beyond question. Their omission in whole or part, and the alterations in the order of two or three verses in the whole section (vs 14-20), character istic of a very small number of MSS, are due to confusion in the minds of a few scribes and translators, between the paschal cup (ver 17) and the eucharistic cup (ver 20),



      and to thrir well-meant, but mistaken, attempt to im prove upon the text before them.

      The briefest account of the institution of the Eucharist

      is found in Alk 14 22-24. In it the Eucharist is not

      sharply distinguished from its setting, the

      9 Ttfarra- paschal meal: "And as they were eating,

      he took bread, and when he had blessed,

      UVeS j u > brake it, and gave to them, and said,

      Compared Take ye: this is my body. And he took a

      cup, and when he had given thanks, he

      gave to them: and they all drank of it. And lie said

      unto them. This is my blood of the covenant, which is

      poured out for many." This represents a tradition

      settled within 20 years of the event described.

      Mt 26 26-2S gives a few touches by way of revision, apparently from one then present. He adds the ex hortation " eat " at the giving of the bread, and puts the personal command, " Drink ye all of it," in place of the mere statement, "and they all drank of it." lie adds also of the blood that, as "poured out for many," it is " unto remission of sins."

      The Pauline account, 1 Oor 11 23-26 (the earliest written down, c 55 AD), was called forth in rebuke of the scandalous profanation of the Eucharist at Corinth. It gives us another tradition independent of, and supple mentary to, that of Mk-Mt. It claims the authority of the Saviour as its source, and had been already made known to the Corinthians in the apostle s oral teaching.

      3. Other



      do in remembrance of me.

      The narrative given in Lk 22 14-20 is the latest (c 80 \\O) of our NT records. St. Luke had taken pains to follow up everything to its source, and had reedited the oral tradition in the light of his historical researches (1 " :}) and thus his account is of the highest value. Writing for a wider circle of readers, he carefully sepa rates and distinguishes the Eucharist from the paschal meal which preceded it, and puts the statement of Christ about not drinking "from henceforth of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come," in its proper place as referring to the paschal cup (cf Mt 26 29; Mk 14 25; and Uc 22 15-18). In describing the actual institution of the Eucharist, he gives us an almost verbal identity with the account given by St. Paul

      We should note the statement appended by St. Paul to his account of the Institution, wherein he empha sizes the memorial aspect and evidential value of the witness the eucharistic ob servance would give throughout the ages of the Christian dispensation (ver 26). We should also note the fact upon which the apostle bases his rebuke to the pro fane Corinthians, namely, the real, though undefined, identity of the bread and wine of the Eucharist witli the body and blood of Christ (vs 27-29); an identity estab lished through the blessing pronounced upon them, so that thi! bread and cup have come to be the "communion of the body of Christ" and the "communion of the blood of Christ/ respectively (10 15-17). To receive the Eucharist, and also to partake of sacrifices offered to idols, is utterly incompatible with Christian loyalty. To receive the Eucharist after a gluttonous, winebibbing agape, not recognizing the consecrated elements to be what the Lord Christ called them, is, likewise, a defiance of God. Both acts alike provoke the judgment of God s righteous anger (vs 21.22; 11 21.22.27-29).

      ///. Preparation for the Eucharist. The insti tution of the Eucharist had been prepared for by

      Christ through the object-lesson of 1. The the feeding of the five thousand (Mt

      Miracles 14 13-21; Mk 6 35-44; Lk 9 12-

      17; Jn 6 4-13), which was followed up by the discourse about Himself as the Bread of Life, and about eating His Flesh and drinking His Blood as the nourishment of eternal life. This again was clinched by the second object-lesson of the feeding of the four thousand afterward (Mt 15 32-39; Mk 8 1-9). The Lord Christ s thanks giving, and His blessing of the loaves and fishes acts not elsewhere recorded of Him, except at the institut ion of 1 he Eucharist, and at the self-revealing meal at Emmaus (Lk 24 30) deeply impressed those present, as indicating the source whence came His power to satisfv the hunger of the multitude (cf Mt 14 19; 15 36;" Mk 6 41; 8 6.7; Lk 9 16; Jn 6 11.23).

      In the discourse at Capernaum (Jn 6 26-58) Christ led the thought of His hearers from earthly to heavenly food, from food that perished to the true bread from heaven. He declared Himself to

      be the living bread, and, further, that it is through eating His ilesh and drinking His blood that the}

      shall possess true life in themselves, 2. The and be raised by Him at the last day.

      Discourse The difficulties raised by this discourse

      Christ did not solve at the time. His ascension would but add to them. He asked of His disciples acceptance of His words in faith. Under the administration of the Spirit would these t hings be realized (vs 60-69). The institution of t he Eucharist, later, gave the clue to these otherwise "hard" words. Today the Eucharist remains as the explanat ion of this discourse. A hardy moun- taineer, e.g. who had read Jn 6 many times, could form no notion of its purport. When first privileged to be present at the eucharistic service of the Book of Common Prayer, the meaning of feeding upon Christ s flesh and blood forthwith became apparent to him (see The Spirit of Missions, July, 1911, 572-73).

      IV. Historical Setting of the Eucharist. We should note the setting in which the institution of

      the Eucharist was placed. Though

      1. Acts and the Fourth Gospel does not record Words of this, it gives us many otherwise un- Christ known data of the words of Christ

      spoken upon the eve of His death, in which historically the institution of the Eucharist was set. The symbolic washing of the feet of the disciples (Jn 13 3-10), the "new" commandment (ver 34), Christ as the means of access to the Father (14 6), love for Christ to be shown by keep ing His commandments (vs, the send ing of the Paraclete Spirit (vs 16.17.26; 15 2(5; 16 13.14), the intimate fellowship of Christ and His disciples, shown in the metaphor of the vine and its branches (15 1-9.13-16) all these throw their illumination upon the commandment, "This do in remembrance of me" (Lk 22 19; 1 Cor 11 24.25). The efficacy of prayer in Christ s name (Jn 16 23. 24.26-28) after His final withdrawal from the midst of His disciples, and His great prayer of self-oblation and intercession for His church throughout time (Jn 17, esp. 9-26) must not be forgotten in considering, "This is my body which is given for you" (Lk 22 19), and, "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many unto remission of sins" (Mt 26 28).

      The sacrificial connotation of many of the words

      used in the narratives of institution should be noted :

      e.g. "body," "blood," "covenant,"

      2. Sacrifi- "given," "poured out," "for you," "for cial many" "unto remission of sins," "nie- Language modal" (cf Ex 24 6-8; Lev 2 2.9.16;

      4 5-7.16-18.34; 17 11.14; 24 7; Nu 10 10; He 9 11-28; 10 4-10.19.20). The very ele ments of bread and wine also suggested the idea of sacrifice to those accustomed to their use in the older system of worship (cf Ex 29 38-42; Nu 15 4-10; 28 and 29 passim).

      The general background, moreover, out of which the institution of the Eucharist stands forth, is the

      sacrificial system of the older dispen-

      3. Jewish sation. The chosen people of God, as System a priestly race, a holy nation (Ex 19

      5.6; Dt 7 6), worshipped God with a sequence of offerings, Divinely molded and in spired, which set forth the sovereign majesty and overlordship of God, His holiness, and the awe and penitence due from those who would draw nigh unto Him, and their desire for communion with Him.

      The more immediate background of the Euchar ist is the Passover, and that without prejudice as to whether the Lord Christ ate the paschal meal with His disciples before He instituted the Euchar ist, as seems most probable (cf Lk 22 7-18), or



      whether He died upon the day of its observance (see art. "Preparation," DCG, II, 409). The Pass over was at once a covenant-recalling 4. The and a covenant-renewing sacrifice, and

      Paschal the Eucharist, as corresponding to it, Background was instituted at the time of its yearly observance, and of the immolation of the true paschal lamb, of whose death it inter preted the value and significance (Ex 12 3-28; cf 13 3-10 ; Dt 16 1-8; 1 Cor 57; Jn 6 51; 10; 15 13; 17 19).

      V. Sequence of the Institution. Let us put before ourselves clearly the sequence of the Lord Christ s acts and words at the institution of the Eucharist ere we proceed to examine the church s mode of celebrating this ordinance.

      At the close of the paschal Supper, (1) the Lord Christ "took" the bread and cup, respectively, for use in His new rite; (2) He "gave thanks" over them, con stituting them a thank offering to God ; (3) He " blessed " them to their new and higher potency; (4) He "gave them to the apostles (the breaking being a requisite pre liminary to distribution of the bread); (5) He bade them "Take, eat," and " Drink ye all of it," respectively; (6) He declared, of the bread, "This is my body given for you," of the cup, "This is my blood of the covenant," or, "This is the new covenant in my blood while h is poured out for you." "unto remission of sins"; (7) He adds the reiterated command, "This do for my me morial."

      It is obvious that we are bidden to follow out the same series of acts, and statements, as those of Christ Him self. We should take bread and wine, set them apart by rendering thanks to God over them, presenting them to Him as symbols of Christ s body and blood, once for all " given " and "poured out " for us; bless them by asking God s blessing upon them (cf Gen 14 19; Nu 6 23-27; Mk 8 7; Lk 2 34; 9 16; 24 50); and receive and give them as the body and blood of Christ; for, "the cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion of the blood of Christ ? The bread which we break, is it not a communion of the body of Christ?" (1 Cor 10 16). It is obvious that we shall not forget, in this connection, the distinction between the natural body of Christ which Ho took of the Blessed Virgin, and the bread which He held in His hand, and blessed and made to function as His body for our participation and inherence in Him thereby His sacramental body. The church with her many members united to the Head, and thus to each other, is also called His body mystical (1 Cor 10 17; 12 27; Eph 1 22.23; Col 1 24).

      VI. The Church s Observance of the Eucharist.

      We should remember the priestly character of the church of Christ, whose sacrifices are

      1. Heavenly made under the dispensation of the Background Holy Spirit (1 Pet 2 5.9; Rev 1 G;

      cf Acts 1 2.8); and also the eternal priesthood in the heavens of our risen, ascended and ever-living Lord Christ. He laid down His life in order to take it again (Jn 10 17), and now in the perfection of His glorified human nature, by His very presence in heaven, He is forever the pro- pit iation inexhaustible for our sins (He 2 17 3 3; 4 145 10; 7 18 7; 9 11-28; 10 1-25; cf 1 Jn 2 1.2). As the Lamb slain once for all but alive for evermore, the Lord Christ is the focus of the worship of angels and the redeemed (Rev 1 17.18; 5 6-14; 7 9.10), and the Christian dis ciple has the privilege of feeding upon that eternal Priest and Victim (He 13 10; 1 Cor 10 16).

      The celebration of the Eucharist was character istic of the pentecostal church (Acts 2 42), esp.

      upon the Lord s. Day (20 7). Its

      2. Day of observance was preceded by the agape Celebration (1 Cor 11 20.34) on the eve (for the

      circumstances of the institution were closely imitated, and the day was reckoned as begin ning at sunset after the Jewish fashion), and thus the Eucharist proper came late into the night, or toward morning (Acts 20 11).

      It should be noted that the name, "Lord s Supper," belongs to the agape rather than to the Eucharist; its popular use is a misnomer of mediaeval and Reforma tion times.

      The name "Eucharist" is derived from the eucharistesas

      ("gave thanks") of the institution and was the most widely used term in primitive times, as applied to the whole service, to the consecration of the 3. Names bread and wine or to the consecrated ele- nf fhd ments themselves (cf 1 Cor 14 16).

      The term "breaking of bread" (Acts 2 Eucharist 42; 20 7.11) had little vogue after NT times.

      "Communion" obviously is derived from 1 Cor 10 16.

      In connection with the early and frequent use of the word "oblation" (prosjthora) and its cognates, wo should note St. Paul s description of his ministry in terms that suggest the rationale of the prayer of consecration, or eucharistic prayer, as wo know it in the earliest liturgical tradition: "that I should be a minister of Christ Jesus unto the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be made acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Spirit" (Horn 15 16).

      VII. Post -apostolic Church. The same Spirit

      who guided the church in the determination of the

      Canon of the NT Scriptures, the same

      1. Holy Spirit who guided the church in the Spirit s working out, of her explicit formulation Guidance of the Christian doctrine of the God head, and of the Christ that self same Spirit guided the church in the formation and fashioning of her great eucharistic prayer into its norm in the same 4th cent. The historic churches of the East, by their faithful adherence to this norm, have been almost, undisturbed by the dissensions and disputes of Western Christendom touching the Eucharist.

      The glimpses given us in the earlier Fathers of

      the Eucharist are in entire accord with the more

      articulate expression of the church s

      2. The corporate eucharistic worship, which Early we find in the liturgical documents Fathers and writings of the Nicene era.

      (1) The Ignatian Epp. show us the Eucharist as the focus of the church s life anil order, the source of unity and fellowship. The Eu charist consecrated by the prayer of the bishop and church is the Bread of God, the Flesh and Blood of Christ, the communication of love incorruptible and life eternal (cf E/>h< sians, 5.13.20; Trallians, 7.8; /tomans, 7; Philadelphians, 4; Smyrnaeans, 7.8; Magnesians, 7).

      (2) Justin Martyr tells ug that the Eucharist was celebrated on the Lord s Day, the day asso ciated with creation and with Christ s resurrection. To the celebrant were brought bread and wine mixed with water, who then put up to God, over them, solemn thanksgiving for His lovirigkindness in the gifts of food and health and for the redemp tion wrought by Christ. The oblations of bread and wine are presented to God in memorial of Christ s passion, and become Christ s body and blood through prayer. The Eucharist is a spiritual sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving commemorative of Christ s death; and the; consecrated elements the communion of Christ s body and blood, by reason of the sacramental character bestowed upon them by the invocation of the Divine blessing (cf 1 Apol., 13.65, 66, 67; Dial, with Trypho, 41.70, 117).

      (3) Irenacus, also, emphasizes the fact that Christ taught His disciples to offer the new oblation of the New Covenant, to present in thank offering the first-fruits of God s creatures bread and wine- the pure sacrifice prophesied before by Malachi. The Eucharist consecrated by the church, through the invocation of God s blessing, is the communion of the body and blood of Christ, just as He pro nounced the elements to be at the institution (cf Against Heresies, i.13.2; iv.17.5; 18.1-6; 33.2; v.22.3).

      (4) Cyprian, too, gives evidence of the same eucharistic belief, and alludes very plainly to the "Lift up your hearts," to the great thanksgiving, and to the prayer of consecration. This last in cluded the rehearsal of what Christ did and said



      at the institution, the commemoration of His pas sion, and the invocation of the Holy Spirit (cf Ep. to Caccilinx. 1,2, 4, <), 10, 14, 17; Ep. to Hp/cMits, 2, 4; On the Unity of the, Church, I, 17; On the Lor/l s Prayer, 31; I iriili<in. to ( i/jiritin, 10, IT).

      VIII. Liturgical Tradition. When we proeeecl

      to examine the early liturgical remains we find the

      articulate expression of the church s

      1. The sacrifice following along these lines. Eucharistic After an introductory summons to the Prayer worshippers to "lift up their hearts,"

      the great eucharistic prayer goes on to pour forth sublime praises to God for all the blessings of creation, and for the fruits of the earth; aligning the praises of the church with the worship of the heavenly host around the throne of God. The love of God in bringing about t he redemption of fallen man through the incarnation, and through the self-oblation of His only Son upon the cross is then recalled in deep thankfulness. The institu tion of the Eucharist in the night, of the betrayal is next, related, and then, taking up, and infilling the command of Christ ( Do this for my memorial ) therein recited, most solemn memorial is made before (rod, with the ant.itypical elements, of the death and of the victorious resurrection and ascen sion of the Lord Christ. Then, as still further carrying out this act of obedience, most humble prayer is made; to the Eternal Father for the hallow ing of the oblations, through the operation of the Holy Spirit, to be the body and blood of Christ, and to be to those who partake of them, for the imparting of remission of sins, and the bestowal of life eternal. To this great act of praise and prayer the solemn "Amen" of the assembled congregation asM iits, and thereafter the sacramental gifts are received by the faithful present, with another "Amen" from each recipient to whom they are administered.

      The great eucharistic prayer, as outlined, was the first part of the liturgy to crystallize into written form, and of its component parts the invocation of the Divine blessing upon the elements was probably the first to be written down.

      Around the simplicity and the depth of such a

      truly apostolic norm of eucharistic worship, alone,

      can be gathered into one the now dis-

      2. Its perscd and divided followers of the Unifying Christ , for therein subsist in perfect Significance harmony the Godward and the man- ward aspects of the memorial He com manded us to make as complementary, not contra dictory; and the identity of the consecrated bread and wine with the body and blood of Christ is manifested to be in the realm of their spiritual function and potency.

      LITERATURE. E. F. Willis, The Worship of the Old Core // n nt .... in Relation to That of the New; Fred eric Kendall, Sacrificial. Language of the NT; Maurice (io.Kuel, L eucharistie des origines a Justin Martyr, 10.5 If \\V. H. Frankland, The Earl*/ Eucharist (excellent); H. B. Swete. "Eucharistic Belief in the 2d and 3d Cents ." Journal of Theological Studies, June, 1902, 161 ft"; R. M. Woolley, Tin- Liluri/i/ of the Primitive. Church; M. Lepin, L idee /I n sacrifice darts la religion chrctienne; \\V. Milligan, Tin- Ascension anil Heavenly Priesthood of Our Lord; Thomas Brett. A True Scripture Account of Hi, Nature and benefits of the Hoi,/ Eucharist, 1736; id, .1 Discourse Concerni nn the Necessity of Discerninn the Lord s Hod,/ in the Holij Communion, 1720; J. R. Milne, Considerations on, Eucharistic Worship; id, The Doctrine and Practice of the Eucharist; H. R. (lummey, The Con secration of the Eucharist; A. J. Maclean, Recent Dis coveries Illustrating Early Christian Life and Worship; id. The Ancient Church Orders; L. Duchesne, Oriuines du eulte chretien; J. T. Levens, A spiels of the /foil/ Com munion; John Wordsworth. The Holy Communion; F. E. Brightman, Liturgies. Eastern and Western.



      1. Original Institution

      2. The Elements

      3. The Eucharist in the Apostolic Church

      4. The Eucharist in the Post-apostolic Church

      5. Rome and the Eucharist

      6. Luther and the Eucharist

      7. ZwinRli and the Eucharist

      8. Calvin and the Eucharist

      This name of the Lord s Supper is derived from eucharistid, the prayer of consecration, and this in turn points back to Alt 26 27, "And he took a cup, and gave thanks" (eucharist&sas ) . The most common name is "Lord s Supper" (deipnon kiiriou [1 Cor 11 20]). It is also called "Lord s table" (trdpeza kuriou [10 21 AV]); while the cup is called "the cup of blessing" (pottrion its eulogias [ver 16]) and "the cup of the Lord" (poterion ku riou [ver 21]). The word kninunia points both to the bread and the cup, whence our common term "communion." In post-apostolic days it became known as leitourgia. a sacred ministration, whence our word "liturgy." It was also named thusia, a sacrifice, and must&rian, from its mystic character and perhaps from the fact that it was celebrated only in the closed circle of believers. The Roman Catholic church calls it missa or "mass," from the words cotigrcgatio missa cst, whereby in post-apos tolic times the first part of worship, called the ?nissa cathechumenorum, was closed, and whereby the second part of worship was ushered in, known as the missa fidelium, the sacramental part of worship, only destined for believers.

      The origin of the Eucharist, is described in Mt 26; Mk 14, and Lk 22. Paul introduces his

      simple and comprehensive recital of 1. Original the origin of the institution the ear- Institution liest written record of it -with the

      words: "For I received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you ; (1 Cor 11 23). A comparison between the Gospels and Ex 12 indicates a considerable modification of the origi nal Passover ritual in the days of Jesus (see Smith s DB, art. "Lord s Supper"). The composite Gospel-picture of the institution of the Eucharist, shows us the Saviour in the deep consciousness of the catastrophe about to overwhelm Him, surround ed by treason on the part of Judas and a strange and total lack of appreciation of the true situation on the part of the other disciples. He had greatly desired to eat this passover with them before he suffered (Lk 22 15), and yet they are wholly unresponsive, the chief question apparently in their minds being the old contention of rank and pre eminence. Whether or not Judas was present at the eating of the Supper is a moot point, which we will not discuss here. Neither will we touch the ques tion whether or not this Passover-meal was the true Jewish festive meal or an anticipation of it, called pascha only, in allusion to the great feast, which had brought the hundreds of thousands of Jews to Jems (cf Mt 26; Mk 14 with Jn 12 1; 13 1.2. 29; 18 28; 19 14.31).

      Both Mt and Mk leave the exact place of the in stitution of the Supper in the festive meal indefinite, "as they were eating" (Mt 26 26; Mk 14 22); the words of Lk, "after supper" (22 20), may be a hint in regard to this matter (r,ee Jn 13 1 ; 1 Cor 11 25). But the custom of the early church of celebrating the Eucharist after the agape or "love feast" appears to be strong evidence that the original institution was separate from the paschal festival and followed it. The entire subject of the Euchar ist has been called in question by the radical Ger man critics, who point to the absence of the whole matter in Jn and to the omission of the words, "Do this in remembrance of me," in Mt and Mk. Its occurrence in Lk is ascribed to Paul s influence over



      him iinil to his familiarity with the story of the insti tution as described by the apostle. But this posi tion is utterly untenable in the light of the un questioned fact that the Lord s Supper as a fixed part of worship was firmly established from the earliest days of the Christian church. The doctrine of Christ s vicarious suffering is nowhere so clearly enunciated as in the words of the institution of the Supper, "This is my body which is given for you" (Lk 22 19); "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many unto remission of sins" (Mt 26 28). Small wonder that those who have utterly done away with the doctrine of the vicarious atonement or of substitution should attack the historicity of the Eucharist and should seek by all means to wipe it from the record.

      Jesus bids His followers to observe the new insti tution "in remembrance of" Him. As Dr. Bavinck says, "The Lord s Supper is instituted by Christ as a permanent benefit to His church; it is a blessing added to all other blessings to signifv and to seal them" (Gen-f. Dogm., IV, 310).

      As to the elements used in the original institu tion of the Supper, they were bread and wine. The bread of course was the unleavened

      2. The bread of the Passover, during which Elements feast every trace of leaven was removed

      (Ex 12 19). The Eastern church, perhaps influenced by the bitter Ebionite spirit of the Judaizers, later adopted the use of common bread (koinos nrtos) ; the Western church used unleavened bread. Protestantism left the matter among the adiaphom.

      As regards the wine, the matter has been in dis pute from the beginning (see Kitto s Cyclopaedia of Bib. Lit.}. The early church always used mixed wine, wine and water, following the Jewish custom. Whether the wine used at the institution of the Lord s Supper was fermented or unfermented wine, must of course be determined by the Jewish Pass over-customs prevailing at that time. The matter is in dispute and is not easily settled.

      Modern Jews quite generally use raisin-wine, made by steeping raisins over night in water and expressing the juice the next day for use at the Passover-meal. The ancient Jews, \\ve are told, used for this purpose a thick boiled wine, mixed with water (Mish, T-rurndth, xi). Whether (linos, the word used in the NT, stands literally, as the name indicates, for fermented wine, or figuratively for the mixed drinks, well known to ancient and modern Jews, is a debatable matter. As late as the Kith cent. tin; Nestorlan Christians celebrated communion with raisin-wine, and the same is said of the Indian Chris tians ("Si. Thomas Christians"). The word "new," used by Christ in Alt 26 ^9, is believed by some to indi cate the character of the wine used by Christ at the institution of the Eucharist, viz. the juice of grapes fresh pressed out (seo Clem. Alex., Pacd., xi). On the other hand the third Council of Braga explicitly forbade this practice as heretical. It is evident that the whole sub ject is shrouded in much mystery. Some ancient sects substituted an entirely different element, water and milk, for instance, being used (Epiph., liner., xlix; Aug., Harr., xxviii). Such customs were utterly condemned by the Council of Braga (< >7. r > AD). In general, however, the Christian church, almost from the beginning, seems to have used fermented red wine, either mixed or pure, in the administration of the Eucharist, in order to main tain the correspondence between the symbol and the thing symbolized.

      Originally the apostolic church celebrated com munion at every meeting for worship. They con tinued stedfastly in the apostle s

      3. The teaching and fellowship, in the break- Eucharist ing of bread and the prayers (Acts in the 2 42.46). Very soon, however, if we Apostolic may judge from the Acts and the Church Pauline Epp., its administration was

      confined to the meeting on the first day of the week. The agape always preceded com munion, and at some part of the service the be lievers, the sexes after the plan of the synagogue being separated, would salute each other with

      the "holy kiss" (phllcma hdgion) (1 Cor 16 20; 2 Cor 13 12). But the introduction of the sacra ment, with all its accessories, had evidently occa sioned grave abuses at Corinth (1 Cor 11 34). Paul corrects these in unmistakable language. Thus we received our first written record of the institution of the Supper. In Corinth it seems to have been restricted from the beginning to the first day of the week (Acts 20 7; 1 Cor 16 2). By a slow transition the deiptton was transferred from the midnight hour to the morning. At least we find that Paul kept it after midnight at Troas (Acts 20 11). It would appear as if the apostle had also partaken of the Lord s Supper, together with his Christian companions, on board the ship, toward the close of his fateful trip on the Adriatic (Acts 27 35).

      In the post-apostolic church the Eucharist continued

      to be celebrated every Lord s day. But it separated

      itself from the preaching of the Word and

      4. The from prayers, as in the previous period. F Vi =+ It was invested with a mystic meaning, i~ VT something too holy for the common eye. in the Post- and thus the w/ .-.- a catechumenorum, the apostolic open church-meeting, was separated from CVmrrVi tne """" fidelium, the gathering of be- ^nurcn Hovers only, in which the Eucharist was

      celebrated. Bread, wine, oil, milk, honey, all the ingredients for the nuape, from which the ele ments for the Supper were selected, were furnished by the free-will offerings of the believers. These were solemnly set apart by the officiating bishop with a con secrating prayer, nurhnristia, and thus the sacrament obtained the name " Kucharist." The gifts themselves were called proxphnrtti, "oblations," or thuxiai, "sac rifices." The sacrificial conception of the Supper was thus gradually created (Ign., I hil., iv; Smyrna, vii, viii; Justin, Apol., i.GO; Dial., xii.70; Irenaeus, Adv. Ilacr., iv. 18.5). The Eucharist once being conceived as a sacrifice, the conception of the officiating bishop as a priest became logically inevitable. The Apos Const, xliii (4) gives us a fair idea of the worship of the church, toward the close of the :?d cent. Even at that early day a well-developed ritual had replaced the sim plicity of the worship of the apostolic days. In the African and Eastern churches, baptized children were allowed to partake of communion, through the fear engendered by Jn 6 - r >-5. The regenerative conception of baptism largely influenced this custom. The rem nants of the consecrated elements were brought by the deacons to the sick and to imprisoned believers. We have not the space in a brief article like this to enter fully into the development of the doctrinal conception of the Supper as found in the Fathers. Suffice it to say that the symbolical and spiritual concept of the Euchar ist, usually defined as the "dynamic" view of the Supper, was advocated by such men as Origon, Eusebius of Caesarea, Basil the (ireat, Gregory of Nazianzcn and others. On the other hand Cyril, Gregory of Nyssa, Chrysostom and John Damascenus developed the "real istic" theory of the Eucharist, and this view again divided itself into the " diophysitic" theory, later called "consubstantiation," and the " monophysitic" theory, later known as " transubstantiation." Augustinus, the great Lat Father, knew nothing of the theory of tran substantiation. He taught that communion carries a blessing only for believers, while to the unbelieving it is a curse, and that the true eating of the body of Christ consists in believing (Scrm. Ad Infnnti .s-, Dt- Civ., x.6; xxii.10; Tract. 23 in Joann.). Paschasius Kadbert (d. 805 AD) was the first fully to formulate the realistic view as the doctrine of the Romish church, and although the dynamic view triumphed for a while, the condemna tion of Berengarius of Tours (d. loss AD) proved that by the middle of the llth cent, the realistic view of the Supper had become the generally accepted doctrine of the Eucharist.

      The Romish church couches its doctrine of the

      Eucharist in the word "transubstantiation," w r hich

      means the conversion of the substance

      5. Rome of the elements used in the Eucharist. and the The word was first used by Hildebert Eucharist of Tours (d. 1134 AD) in a sermon.

      The doctrine of the Supper was finally fixed, together with the new term, by Pope Inno cent III, at the Lateran Council 1215 AD. It was decided that the body and blood of Christ are truly contained in the sacrament of the altar, under the species of bread and wine, the bread being tran substantiated into the body and the wine into the blood of Christ, by the Divine power. This has



      been the Romish doctrine of the Supper ever since. The bread and wine are changed into the veritable body and blood of Christ, by the \\vords of the insti tution. By the 1 institution of the Supper, Christ made His disciples priests, wherefore the Eucharist may be administered only by an ordained priest. In the miracle of the sacrament, the "accidents" of the elements bread and wine remain, but they arc no longer inherent in a subject, the substance in which they inhered being replaced by another. This new substance is the body and blood of Christ, which is hidden from observation under the appear ance of the elements. The whole Christ is present in each of these elements, hence it is not necessary to commune under both forms (xi<l> ii/riiqnc). In the Romish conception of the Supper communion with Christ is a secondary idea. The main idea is that of the transubstantiation itself, for the Supper is more a sacrifice than a sacrament ; thus the mass becomes a sin offering. While it feeds faith, keeps us from mortal sin, wards off temporal punishment, unites believers, it also has a potency for those who are not present, and even for the dead in purgatory. Thus the mass became the very heart and center of the entire Romish cult us (Con/. Trid., XIII, 21, 22; Cat. KOIII., CXII, c. 4; Bellarm, De Sacr. Euch., I, iv; Moehler, Xi/mb., 34).

      The Reformers rejected the doctrine of transub stantiation, the sacrificial conception of the Euchar ist, the adoration of the "host," the

      6. Luther withholding of the cup, the efficiency and the of the Eucharist in behalf of the dead, Eucharist the entire Romish conception of the

      sacrament of the Supper. The origi nal position of Luther, that the elements in the Supper were signs and seals of the remission of sins, was soon replaced by the doctrine of "consub- stantiation." The bitter controversy with Carl- stadt, ami esp. the failure of the Marburg Con ference, drove Luther forever into the camp of the reidists. As early as 1524 he had outlined his doctrine against Carlstadt. lie placed himself squarely on the realistic conception of the words of the institution, and held that "the body of Christ in accordance with the will and omnipotence of God and its own ubiquity is really and substantially ] tresent in, with and under the Supper, even as His Divine nature is in the human as warmth is in the iron. Wherefore the Supper is physically par taken of by those who are unworthy, albeit to their own destruction" (Bavinck, Geref. Dogm., IV, 318). This doctrine has been fully developed by the Lutheran divines, and is till this day the view of the Lutheran church.

      Zwingli essentially sided with Carlstadt in his controversy with Luther, whom he thereby greatly

      embit tered. He interpreted the words

      7. Zwingli of the institution "this is" as_sig- and the nifying "this stands for," "this signi- Eucharist ties." This view was fully set forth

      in a letter to Matthew Alber at Reutlingen in 1524 and was given its final form in his dogmatic tract, Com. dc vera et falsa rel. (1525), where he characterizes Luther s doctrine as "an opinion not only rustic but even impious and frivolous." The breach was widened by the Mar burg Conference of 1529. Reduced to its last analysis, the eucharistic concept of Zwingli is that of a symbolical memorial of the suffering and death of Christ, although Zwingli does not deny that Christ is present to the eye of faith. On the con trary, He is enjoyed through the word and through faith, i.e. in a spiritual way. In the Supper we confess our faith, we express what that faith means to us, and we do it in memory of Christ s death (O t >ir., ii.l, 42(1; iii.239, 320, 459; iv.51, 68). The Zwinglian view has been consciously or uncon

      sciously adopted by a very large portion of the Protestant church.

      Calvin s position on the doctrine of the Eucharist tends rather to the Lutheran than to tin; Zwinglian

      view. With Zwingli the sacrament is 8. Calvin little more; than a sign, with Calvin and the it is both a sign and a seal. The real- Eucharist ity of communion with Christ and the

      benefits of His death, received by a living faith all this is common to the Lutheran and the Calvinistic views. The Lord s Supper is far more than a mere memorial service, it is a marvelous means of grace as well. Calvin sides with Zwingli in denying all physical, local or substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharist. But he differs from him in making the eucharistic act far more than a con fession of faith, and he lays far greater stress than Zwingli on the meaning of its true participation. With Luther he holds that Christ is truly present in the Supper, and he lays stress esp. on the mystic union of the believer with Christ. In the Supper both the benefits of Christ s death and His glorious person are touched. But Christ does not descend in the Supper to the believer, but the latter ascends to Him in heaven. The central thought of the Cal vinistic conception of the Supper is this, that the communicant, through the operation of the Holy Spirit, comes in spiritual contact with the entire person of Christ and that he is thus fed unto life eternal. Every close student of Calvin s works will have to admit that his ideas on the subject are somewhat involved and confusing. This is due no doubt to the mediating position he occupied between Luther and Zwingli. But his position as a whole is quite plain. All his followers agree in holding that (1) Christ is only spiritually present in the Supper; (2) that the participation in the benefits of the Supper must therefore be spiritual, although it is real, and (3) that only true communi cants, by a living faith, can communicate therein, and that this participation in the atoning death of the Saviour is sealed to us by the iise of the ordained signs of the sacrament. HENRY E. DOSKEU


      I. THE TERM

      1. The Derivation and Meaning

      2. Synonyms II. THE ORDINANCE

      1. Source and Norm of the Doctrine of the Eu charist

      2. Interpretation of the Eucharistic Texts

      3. Doctrinal Contents of the Eucharistic Passages III. DIFFICULTIES

      1. Question of Possibility

      2. The Place of Faith in the Sacrament

      3. The Words of the Institution

      /. The Term. "Eucharist" is the anglicized form of the Gr noun eucharistia, which signifies

      "gratitude," "thanks," or "praise 1. The offering." The noun is derived from

      Derivation the vb. eucharisted, which, with the and Mean- vb. eulogeo of kindred meaning in Mt ing 26 26.27; Mk 14 22.23, is used to

      describe the action of the Lord in blessing the bread and wine at the institution of the Lord s Supper (Lk 22 19; 1 Cor 11 23). When used absolutely, as in these places, it signi fies "the offering up of praise that is prompted by nothing else than God Himself and His revealed glory" (Cremer). The blessing of the physical elements was part of the sacramental action at subsequent celebrations of the ordinance (1 Cor 10 16), and thus eucharistia soon (2d cent.) came to mean the blessed elements and the entire ordi nance in which these were administered.

      Other Scriptural terms for the same ordinance are "Communion" (from koinonla, in the twofold sense indicated in 1 Cor 10 10.17), "Lord s Supper" (kuria- kon delpnon [1 Cor 11 20]), "Lord s Table" (trdpeza



      kuriou [1 Cor 10 21]), "Breaking of Bread" (kldsix ton drtou [Acts 2 42]). The lit. of the church developed a

      great many terms which emphasize one or 2 Svno the other feature of the ordinance. Luther,

      in his Small Catechism, adopts the name nyms "Sacrament of the Altar," because it is

      administered at the altar. The Lutheran Confessions occasionally employ the term "mass." however, in the original meaning which the early church, not in that which the Roman church, connects with the term ("mass" derived either from missa, "things sent," because the materials for communion were sent to the place of celebration, or from missio, "a sending [away]," because worshippers who were not members, or minors, were dismissed from the service before the cele bration of the Eucharist began; but see McClintock and Strong, Cyclop, of Bib., Theol., and Eccles. Lit., V, 863).

      //. The Ordinance. The "seats of doctrine,"

      i.e. the Scripture texts which must be employed for

      determining every essential part of

      1. Source the teaching of Scripture regarding the and Norm second sacrament of the Christian of the Doc- church, are the words of institution trine of the recorded in Mt 26 26-28; Mk 14 22- Eucharist 24; Lk 22 19.20; 1 Cor 11 23-25.

      Valuable statements, chiefly concern ing the proper use of the sacrament, are found in 1 Cor 10 15ff; 11 20 ff. That these texts are controverted is no reason why a doctrine should not be established from them. No doctrine of the Christian religion could be established, if every text of Scripture had to be withdrawn from the argument , so soon as it had become controverted. Jn 6 32- 59 does not treat of this ordinance, because (1) the ordinance must be dated from the night of the betrayal, which was considerably after the Lord s discourse at Capernaum; (2) because this passage speaks of "eating the flesh," not the body, of the Son of man, and of drinking "his blood," in such a manner that a person s eternal salvation is made 1 to depend upon this eating and drinking. If this passage were eucharistic, infants, children, persons in durance among pagans, or temporarily deprived of 1he ministration of the Christian church, hence, unable to commune, could not be saved.

      The exposition of the genuine eucharistic texts of Scripture is governed by the common law of

      Bible exegesis, viz. that every word

      2. Interpre- and statement of Scripture must be tation of the understood in its proper and native Eucharistic sense, unless a plain and urgent reason Texts compels the adoption of a figurative

      interpretation. The writers who have recorded the institution of the sacrament have given no hint that they wish to be understood fig uratively. The solemn occasion the Eucharist being the expression of the last will or testament of the Lord forbids the use of figurative language (Gal 3 15). The fact that a statement of Scrip ture transcends our natural powers of comprehen sion does not justify us in giving it a figurative meaning. If this rationalistic principle were to be applied in explaining Scripture, we could not retain a single revealed doctrine. Besides, those who have adopted a figurative interpretation are not agreed where to locate the figure in the words of institution. Some claim that the word touto, others that esli, others that to somd mou contain a figure, while still others would take the institutional words in their proper sense, but understand the entire ordinance figuratively.

      The eucharistic passages contain: (1) a statement

      fixing the time and occasion of the institution. It

      was "in the night in which he was

      3. Doctrinal betrayed," immediately before the Contents of beginning of the passio magna of the Euchar- Christ, and in connection with the istic celebration of the Jewish Passover Passages (Mt 26 17 ff). The ordinance which

      Christ instituted was to take the place of the ancient Passover (1 Cor 6 7, which text

      Luther aptly renders: "\\Ve, too, have a passover, which is Christ crucified for us"). Jewish custom at the time of Christ seems to have allowed some latitude as regards the time for eating the paschal lamb. Thus the difference between John (18 28; 19 42) and the synoptists is overcome. Our Lord was deeply stirred with thoughts of love and affec tion for His disciples at the time of the institution (13 1).

      (2) An authoritative declaration of Christ, the God-man, fixing the constituent parts of (lie sacra ment, and the essential feature s of. the sacramental act (speciem act us). This declaration names:

      (a) The elements of the sacrament, which are of two kinds: bread and wine (materia terrenn), and the body and blood of the Lord (materin cuelfxtix) (see Irenaeus, Adv. Hacr., iv.34.363, quoted in Farm. Com- Hid Deri., Art, VII, no. 14, 049). There is no law laid down as regards the quality, form, or quantity of the bread (leavened or unleavened, round or oblong, "in large loaves, cakes, or in wafer form ready for immediate distri bution). Likewise the color and quality of the wine is left undefined. The expression gtnnema tta ampelou "fruit of the vine" (Mt 26 29). sanctions the use of any substance that has grown oil the vine, has been pressed from grapes, and has the characteristics of the substance known as wine. That the wine used by the Lord at that season of the year and in accordance with Jewish custom was fermented wine, there can be no doubt (Hodge, Xystemtitir. Theol., Ill, 01(5). Tile use of unfermented wine is apt to introduce an element of uncertainty into the sacrament. The heavenly elements are defined thus: "My body, which is given for you," "my blood, which is shed for many." These terms signify the real, substantial, natural body of Christ, and His real, natural blood (Luther: "the true body and blood of our Lord"). Both the earthly and the heavenly elements are really present at the same time in every eucharistic act. To deny either the presence of real bread and wine at any stage during the eucharistic act, as the Roman doctrine of transubstantiation does (against 1 Cor 11 2<>.2S), or the real presence of the true body and blood of ( lirist , as reformed teaching does, is not doing justice to Scripture.

      (6) The relation of the elements to one another: In offering the physical elements to the disciples the Lord employs the locutio ex/iibitiva, common to every lan guage; of men: He names that which is not seen while giving that which is seen. ("Hern are your spices," says the grocer delivering the package containing them.) The locutio exhibitiva, except when used by a jester or dishonest person, always states a fact. The bread in the Kucliarist i .s the body of Christ, the wine, likewise, is the blood of Christ. The relation is expressed in 1 Cor 10 16.17 by koindnia, "communion." This term is not the same as metoche, "participation," which would refer to the communicants (Phimmer, HDB, III, 149). Koindnia declares a communion of the bread with the body, of the wine with the blood, of Christ. It is impossible to define the mode and manner of this communion of the earthly with the heavenly elements. Such terms as "consubstantiation," "impanation," " invination," are faulty attempts to define the unde- finable. All we can assert is, that in a manner incom prehensible to us the body and blood of the Lord are in a sacramental union with the eucharistic bread and wine.

      (<) Tho action required, viz. "take, cat"; "take, drink." These words refer to the distribution and reception of the sacramental elements. These are essential, the mode is not, unless one wishes to empha size, e.g. by the breaking of the bread, the merely sym bolical meaning of the entire ordinance. Accordingly, it is also immaterial whether the administrant place the elements into the hands of the communicant, who then conveys them to his mouth, or whether the administrant conveys the elements directly to the mouth of the com municant. The acts of distributing and receiving, however, extend to the entire sacramental substance, i.e. not the bread, or the wine, alone are distributed and received, but "in, with, and under the bread" the body, "in, with, and under the wine" the blood, of Christ. The eating and drinking in the Eucharist is of a peculiar kind. It differs from mere natural eating and drinking of common food, and from spiritual eating and drinking, which is a figurative expression signifying the believing appropriation of the Saviour s atoning work, and which can never be "for judgment." In natural eating and drinking there would be only bread and wine, not the body and blood of the Lord; in spiritual eating and drink ing there would be only the merits of the Redeemer, not bread and wine. In sacramental eating and drinking both the bread and the body, the wine and the blood, of Christ, are sacramentally received, the earthly ele ments in a natural, the heavenly in a supernatural, undeflnable manner, both, however, orally, and both by every communicant. For, according to 1 Cor H 29,

      Lord s Supper Lot


      I .rJS

      also tin- unworthy communicant receives the Lord s body, and that for his j IK Igmcrit . " not discerning" it ( A V).

      ((/) The end and aim of the ordinance: The Lord says: "This do in remembrance of me." Paul says: "As often as ye eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye proclaim the Lord s death till he come." These words make the Kucharist an cflicient means for strengthening the spiritual union of the disciples with the Lord until His second coming. They art 1 a call for faith on the part of the communicants, and restrict admission to communion to the believing followers of the Lord. Worthy communicants are those who understand the meaning of Christ s sacrifice and hope for His return in glory. (Luther: "The sacrament is instituted for us Christians.") The duty of self-exploration enjoined upon communicants further emphasizes the purpose of this ordinance. Self-exploration embraces knowledge and acknowledgment of our sinful state, confidence in the ever-present forgiveness of God for Christ s sake, and a sincere purpose to forsake sin and grow in holiness. Accordingly, non-believers, morally irresponsible per sons, and persons who lead offensive lives which they will not amend, cannot be admitted to communion (Mt 7 0). In 1 Cor 10 17 Paul names another purpose: the strengthening of the bonds of brotherly love and fellowship by means of communion. Hence, unity of faith and active Christian charity are required in those who are to commune together (Mt 5 2:5.24), and "close communion," not "open, or promiscuous communion" is iti accord with the teaching of Scripture. In the absence of any fixed rule as to the frequency of a Christ, tian s communing, the above reasons suffice to induce him to commune frequently ("as uftrn as").

      (3) An authoritative statement of Christ concern ing the continued use of the sacrament (exerciliitm act UK): "This do." This moans () that the action of Christ is to be repeated, i.e., bread and wine should be blessed, distributed and received. The blessing is called the consecration and consists in the reciting of a prayer and the words of the institution. Con secration has no magical effects, it does not produce the sacramental union. On the other hand, it is not a mere meaningless ceremony, but a solemn declaration that in accordance with the will of the Lord, bread and wine are now being separated from their common use, to be devoted to the use which the Lord commanded. It is also a prayer to the Lord to be present in (ho sacrament; (b) that whenever disciples do as (heir Lord did, He will connect His body and blood with the earthly sub stances as He did at the first communion; (c) that besides the blessing of the elements, only the giving, or distribution, and the taking, or reception, of the sacramental elements are proper and essential parts of a sacramental action. A true sacramental action is complete only where these three acts concur: consecration, distribution, reception, and outside of these acts nothing that may be done with the ele ments possesses the nature of a sacrament or a sac ramental action. Offering the consecrated wafer for adoration is no part of the sacrament, but is a form of idolatry (artolatry), because there is no sacramental union except in the act of distributing and receiving (he consecrated elements. The withdrawal of the cup from the lay communicants is an unwarranted mutilation of (he sacrament (Mt 26 27; Mk 14 23). But the grossest per version of the sacrament, and a standing reproach to the completeness of the atoning sacrifice of (he Lord is the offering up of the consecrated elements as an unbloody sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead, which is being done in the Rom mass (He 10 14.18).

      ///. Difficulties. "How can these things be?" This question might be raised against every doc trine of Scripture. The union of the 1. Question natures in the Clod-man, the imputa- of Possi- (ion of His merit to the believer, the bility quickening power of the word of Di

      vine grace, the resurrection of the dead, etc, can all be subjected to the same question ing.

      "Has faith no place in this sacrament?" Faith does not create, nor help to create the sacrament, neither the administrant s nor the communicant s

      faith. The sacrament is fully constituted in all its

      parts by the institutional act of (he Lord and by His command to continue the obsorv-

      2. Place ance of it. Man s faith cannot make, of Faith man s unbelief cannot unmake, an ordi nance of God. But faith is necessary

      in order that a communicant may receive the bless ings offered in the Eucharist, and testify to his be lieving relation to the Lord and to his Christian fellowship with the brethren. The sacrameni bestows no blessing r.r opcrr op< rato, i.e. by the mere mechanical performance of the physical act.

      "Are the words of the institution part of the

      sacred text?" Up to the age of Paulus, they were

      universally regarded so, and (he criti-

      3. The cal labors of Briggs, P. Gardner, Words of Grafe, Immer, Jiilicher, etc, which can the Insti- readily bo explained by the theological tution position of these men, lack unity of

      result and are offset by the labors of Scrivener, Schult/on, R. A. Hoffman, Blass, Beyschlag, etc. Christianity as yet sees no reason for discarding the words of the; institution and for discontinuing the Eucharist as a Divine ordinance.

      \\V. H. T. DAI:




      1. Date

      2. Doctrinal :*. Tradition



      The interest of this denomination in the Lord s Supper as related to the Passover consists in two points: (1) that the "Lord s Supper" was not the Jewish Passover, but was eaten the evening before the Jewish feast; and (2) that this "Last Supper" was intended to be perpetuated. This is perpetu ated by the Church of the Brethren under (he name of "Love Feast" (see AGAPE).

      /. The Last Supper Was Not the Jewish Passover.

      John gives five distinct intimations of the date:

      (1)) "Now before the feast of the pass-

      1 Tla+o Over" (Upb fie TJJ? eoprrj? TOV naa-\\a, J ro

      * L/ale tie IPS heortfs ton pdxrhn: .Tn 13 1). This

      shows that the washing of the disciples feet, and the discourses at the Last Supper were before the Passover.

      (2) " Buy what things wo have need of for the feast"

      (ayopaaov tav xpetar e^o/xty 6 s T ) > foprrji , agornmin hfin chrelan echo-men fix ten. heart? n; 13 29). This shows that the Supper (Stlirt ov, delpnon) was not the Passover feast (eopTjji , hearten).

      (3) "They lead Jesus therefore from Caiaphas into the Praetorium; and it was early; and they themselves entered not into the Praetorium, that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover" (iva. </>ay<uo-u TO Tt6.<r\\a, Itlna phd<i<~ixiii to pdxrhii; Jn 18 2S). This was after the Supper, early on the day of crucifixion, before the Passover.

      (4) "Now it was the Preparation of the passover: it

      Was about the sixth hour" (iji 6t- 77-apacr/cevrj roO Tta.a\\a, e?i <tt imraxki u? toil pdxcha; Jn 19 14). This again shows conclusively that the Passover was not yet eaten. Jesus is before 1 Pilate; it is the day of the crucifixion, and after the Last Supper.

      (5) "The Jews therefore, because it was the Prepa ration, that the bodies should not remain on the cross upon the sabbath (for the day of that sabbath was a high day)," ver 31, etc. Here we have again a reference

      to the Preparation (Trapao-Ktur; TOV Trauma, paras ke u? toll

      pdxcha), and also to the Sabbath which, in^ this case

      was a "high day" (rjf yap /ueyaAr; rj r;p.epa exfirov TOV <ra3/3aTou, en gAr mc(jdle he hemera ekelnou tou sahhdtou). This shows that the Passover was eaten on Friday even ing after sunset on the loth of Nisan at the beginning of the Jewish Sabbath. Whenever the Passover fell upon the Sabbath, that Sabbath was a "high day."

      Christ is our Passover: died at the time the Passover lamb was slain, hence after the Last Supper. (1) Christ died at the time the Passover



      Lord s Supper Lot

      lamb was slain on Friday afternoon, tho 14th of

      Nisan, and thus became Our Passover (1 Cor 5 7),

      For our passover also hath been sacri-

      2. Doctrinal ficed, even Christ." (2) Jesus, the

      "Lamb of Clod" (Jn 1 29) corresponds to the Passover lamb (Ex 12 3). "Without blem ish" (Ex 12 5)= Jesus, "who did no sin" (1 Pet 2 22-24). The blood of a lamb sprinkled upon houses (Ex 12 7.13) corresponds to salvation by the blood of Jesus (1 Jn 1 7-9). (3) Jesus arose the third day and became "the first-fruits of them that are asleep" (1 Cor 15 4.20.23). The resurrection was on the first day of the week. The sheaf, or first- fruits, was gathered on the Kith of Nisan. There fore Jesus must have died on Friday the 14th of Nisan, when the Passover lamb was slain; hence after the Last Supper.

      All the early traditions, both Jewish and Christian, agree that Jesus was crucified on the day of Prepa ration of the Passover, and they dis-

      3. Tradition tinguish between the Passover and the

      Last Supper which was eaten the evening before the Jewish feast.

      //. The Perpetuation of the Last Supper. (1) Since the Last Supper was a new institution, there is no more reason for perpetuating one part than another. It is a unit, and each event of that night has its meaning and place. (2) Jesus commanded the disciples to perpetuate feet-washing (see WASHINC OF FEET) (Jn 13 14. IT). 17), and likewise He commanded the Eucharist to be perpetuated as a memorial of Him (1 Cor 11 24.25). Why not the Agape? (3) The Agape was perpetuated by the apostles and disciples. They certainly understood Jesus to mean that the entire services of the Last Supper should be perpetuated, else they would not have done so.

      ///. Practice of the Church of the Brethren (Bankers).

      Tlic " Love Feast" commemorates Jesus Last (Supper with His disciples. These Love Feasts are held once or twice each year, always in the evening, by each local church or congregation. Preparatory services on "self- examination" (1 Cor 11 28) precede the ordinances. The church pews are converted into tables. The Supper (Selirvov, deipnon) is made ready beforehand by the deacons and deaconesses. The devotional exercise s aim to accomplish special consecration, confession, and reconciliation. Before the eating of the Supper, Jn 13 1-17 is read and explained, whereupon the brethren proceed to wash one another s feet, and the sisters like wise by themselves. All tarry one for another (1 Cor 11 W) until they are ready for the Supper. The offi ciating elder then calls upon someone to offer prayer for the meal, which is then eaten together. Another prayer of thanksgiving is offered at the close of the meal. After the meal, the officiating elder calls upon one to read the story of Christ s sufferings (Isa 53, or Jn 19). After a short explanation of the meaning of the symbol, the communicants rise while the officiating elder gives thanks for the bread. He then turns to his brother at his right and breaks a piece of the unleavened bread for him with the words, "My beloved brother, the bread which we break is the communion of the body of Christ" (see 1 Cor 10 10). The brethren then break the bread one to tho other, with these words. Likewise the sis ters in the same manner. Again the congregation rises while the officiating elder gives thanks for the cup, which is then passed by one to the other with the words " Be loved brother [or sister], the cup of the XT is the com munion of the blood of Christ" (1 Cor 10 10). This is followed by prayers of praise and thanksgiving, then a hymn (Mt 26 30) and a benediction.

      IV. The Meaning and Significance of the Love Feast. All these ordinances or symbols signify SOUK; fundamental virtue in the Christian life. We are commanded to follow our Master who is the Way and the Truth. But these symbols have a real significance, apart from merely "following" or "obeying" the Lord s command. (1) Feet-washing symbolized humility and service, and also the partial cleansing which all Christians need. (2) The Agape signifies the bread-and-water covenant of brother hood and peace. It is not only the symbol of true Christian fellowship, but is productive of such fel lowship. It is also symbolic of the "Marriage

      Supper of the Lamb," which is supremely a symbol of joy. (3) the Eucharist: (a) The broken bread represents the "body of Christ" (1 Cor 10 10) "which is broken for you" (1 Cor 11 24 AV); hence the symbol of sacrifice. It is a memorial of Christ s sufferings, and a consecration to suffer with Him. It means also feeding on Christ, whose flesh we must eat (Jn 6 (6) The cup represents the blood of Christ (1 Cor 10 10; Jn 6 53.54). It is the blood covenant that symbolizes the unity of man with (Jod (Jn 17 21). Jesus is the vine, we are the branches (Jn 15). The same mind, spirit, life and love which are in God and Christ are to be in us.

      LITERATURE. C. F. Yoder, God s Means of Grn<; : K. ti. .Miller, Doctrine of Brethren Defended; I) \\V Kurtz, Outline of the Fundamental Doctrinut (all of Elgin!


      LORDS OF THE PHILISTINES (^0 , ?t ren, same as Heb word for "axle," probably* a native designation): These "lords" (Josh 13 3; Jgs 3 3; 16 5, etc; 1 S 6 S.ll, etc), elsewhere called "princes" (gar, 1 S 18 30; 29 3.4.9), were the petty rulers or kings of the 5 Phili cities, Ga/a, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Ekron, Gath. See PHILISTINES.

      LO-RUHAMAH, lo-nTo-hii ma, lo-roo-ha rna. See LO-AMMI.

      LOSS: S? Tjpn , hatti , "to suffer as one erring, or as a sinner" (Gen 31 39, where Jacob assures Laban that he [Jacob] suffered the loss of all animals of the flock torn by beasts); blDTZJ , sh e khol, "bereave ment" (Isa 47 8f, where the prophet foretells the humiliation of proud Babylon who shall suffer the loss of her children, and widowhood); D^ttj, shik- kulun^ / bereavement" (Isa 49 20, tr d "bereave ment" in RV, where the prophet promises to the desolate Zion enlargement). In the XT the tr of three Gr words: (171-0^0X77, apobolt, "casting away" (Acts 27 22, where Paul assures the crew and pas sengers that there shall be no "loss" of life from the storm); frula, zemia, "loss" (Acts 27 21, referring to the harm sustained in the storm; Phil 3 7f, where Paul counts all his natural privileges and attainments as forfeited for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ); f>?/6w, zemiod, "to suffer loss" (1 Cor 3 15, where Paul says the man whose works are burned shall suffer "loss"; Phil 3 8, same context as above). CHARLES B. WILLIAMS

      LOT, lot:

      /. Personality. The man who bore the name Lot (1215, lot; AWT, Lot) is mentioned for the first time in Gen 11 27, at the beginning of that section of Gen which is entitled "the generations of Terah." After Terah s 3 sons are named, it is added that the third of these, Haran, begat Lot.

      The reason for thus singling out but one of the grandsons of Terah appears in the next verse, where we are told that "Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his nativity, in L T r of the Chal- dees." For that period in the life of this family, therefore, which begins with the migration from Ur, L. represents his father s branch of the family (ver 31). It is hardly probable that the relation between Abraham and L. would have been what it was, had not Haran died; but be this as it may, we read this introduction of L. into the genealogy of Terah as an anticipation of the story to which it furnishes an introduction, and in which L. is des tined to play an important part.

      The sections of that story in which L. appears are: in ch 11, the migration from Ur to Haran; in ch 12, Abraham s wanderings; in ch 13, the separa tion of Abraham and L.; in ch 14, the campaign

      Lot Love



      of the eastern kings against Sodom and Abraham * recovery of the captives; and in ch 19, the destruc tion of Sodom.

      In (Jen 14 14.10 L. is termed the "brother" of Abraham; but that, this does not represent a, var iant tradition is proved by reference to ver 12 ol the same chapter (ascribed to "an independent source") and to 13 8 (ascribed to J; cf 11 2SJ).

      //. Career. L. s life, as the scanty references

      to him permit us to reconstruct it, falls into four

      periods. Of the first period that

      1. First previous to the migration from Haran Period we know nothing save L. s birth

      in I r, the death of his father there, the marriage of his sister Milcali to his uncle Nahor (of another sister, Iscah, we learn only the name), and the journey to Haran in company with Terah, Abraham and Sarah. The fact that Sarah s child lessness and Haran s death are the only two cir cumstances related of the family history, may serve to explain why L. went with Abraham instead of staying with Nahor. A childless uncle and a fatherless nephew may well have remained together with the idea that, even if there was no formal adoption, the nephew might become his uncle s heir. Certainly, the promise of a numberless seed, so often repeated to the patriarchs, comes first to Abraham immediately after L. has separated from him (see Gen 13 0-18).

      In the second period of L. s life, we find him the companion of Abraham on his journeys from Meso potamia to Canaan, through Canaan

      2. Second to Egypt, and back again to the neigh- Period borhood of Beth-el. His position is

      subordinate 1 , for his uncle is head of the family, and oriental custom is uniform and rigorous in the matter of family rule. Hence the use of the singular number throughout the narrative. What Abraham did, his whole "clan" did. Yet L. s position was as nearly independent as these pa triarchal conditions admit. When the story reaches the point where it is necessary to mention this fact, the narrator explains, first, the generosity with which Abraham treated his nephew, in per mitting him to have "flocks, and herds, and tents" of his own, a quasi-independent economy, and second, that disproportion between their col lective possessions and the land s resources which made separation inevitable. Up to this point the only mention of L. during this period of wandering is contained in 13 1, in the words "and Lot with him." And even here the words are useless (be cause stating a fact perfectly presumable here as elsewhere), except as they prepare the, reader for the story of the separation that is immediately to follow.

      That story introduces the third period of Lot s career, that of his resilience in the Kikkdr (RV

      "Plain," RVm "Circle") and in Sodom.

      3. Third To the fundamental cause of separa- Period tion, as above stated, the author adds

      the two circumstances which contrib uted to produce the result, namely, first, the strife that arose between Abraham s herdsmen and L. s herdsmen, and, second, the presence in the same country of others -the Canaanites and Perizzites thus reminding his readers that it was no vacant land, through which they might spread themselves absolutely at will and so counteract the operation of the principal cause and the contributory cause already set forth.

      With a magnanimity that must have seemed even greater to minds accustomed to patriarchal authority than it seems to us, and that was in fact much more remarkable 1 than it would be here and now, Abraham offers to his nephew the choice of the land from the nomad s point of view. In the

      "we are brethren" (ver 8), the whole force of the scene is crystallized. L., who believes himself to have chosen the better part, is thereupon traced in his nomadic progress as far as Sodom, and the reader leaves him for a time face to face with a city whose men "were wicked and sinners against Jeh exceedingly," while the narrative moves on with Abraham through that fresh scene of revela tion which presented to this man of magnanimity a Divine deed to all the land, and to this man, now left without an heir from among his own kindred (cf 15 2.3), a Divine pledge of innumerable off spring.

      L. returns for a moment to our view as the main spring of Abraham s motions in the campaign of ch 14. We are expressly told that it, was "when A brain heard that his brother was taken captive," that he "led forth his trained men .... and pursued." On the one hand we hear that L. now "dwelt in Sodom," having abandoned the life in tents that he had led since Mesopotamia!! days, and on the other hand we find in him a foil to the ener- getic, decisive and successful figure of his uncle for L. plays a sorry role, bracketed always with "the women and the goods."

      This period of his life ends with the annihilation of his chosen home, his wealth, his companions, and all that was his save; two daughters, who, it would seem, might better have perished with the rest. Ch 19, coming immediately after the intercession of Abraham for Sodom that poignantly impresses on the reader s mind the wickedness of L. s environ ment, exhibits to us the man himself in his sur roundings, as they have affected him through well- nigh a score of years (cf 12 4; 17 1). What we see is a man who means well (courtesy, ver 1 ; hospitality, vs 2.3.0-8; natural shame, ver 7; loyalty, ver 14; and gratitude, ver 19), but who is hopelessly bound up with the moral life of the city through his family connections alliances that have pulled him down rather than elevated others (vs The language of 2 Pet 2 7.8 reminds us that L. was, even at this time of his life, a "righteous" man. Viewed as a part of his environment (the writer has been speaking of Sodom, ver 0), L. was certainly entitled to be called a "righteous" man, and the term fits the im plications of Gen 18 23-32. Moreover, Gen 19 itself shows L. "vexed .... with their lawless deeds" and "sore distressed by the lascivious life of the wicked" (cf vs Yet the contrast with Abraham is always present in the reader s mind, so that the most lasting impressions are made by L. s selfishness, worldliness, vacillation and cow ardice, not to mention the moral effect made by the closing scene of his life (vs 30-38).

      The fourth period of L. s career is of uncertain duration. Upon the destruction of Sodom he dwelt at first in Zoar, the "little" 4. Fourth city, spared as a convenient refuge for Period him and his; but at some time un

      specified, he "went up out of Zoar," for "he feared to dwell in Zoar" why, we cannot say. This fear was greater than even the evi dently great fear he entertained of dwelling in "the mountain" (ver 19). In this mountain- country of rocks and caves (Driver in IIDB, art. "Lot," cites Buckingham, Travels in Syria, 01- 63, 87, as authority for the statement that people still live in caves in this region), L. and his two remaining daughters dwell; and the biography of this companion of "the friend of God" ends in a scene of incest, which supplies the logical epilogue to a drama of progressive moral deterioration. This bestial cave-man of Gen 19 is the "brother" of Abraham, but he has reached this goal because his path had led down from Beth-el to Sodom.



      Lot Love

      The origin of the two neighboring and kindred nations, Moab and Ammon, is by the Heb tradition traced thus to Lot and his daughters.

      ///. Place in Later Literature. In the Bible, L. finds mention only as the father of Moab and Ammon (Dt 2 9.19; Ps 83 8), and in the passage in 2 Pet already noticed; and, besides these places, in Lk 17 28-32. Here L. represents the central figure in the destruction of Sodom, as Noah in the flood in the preceding context (cf the association of these two characters in 2 Pet and the Koran). His deliverance is mentioned, the haste and narrow ness of that escape is implied, and his wife s fate is recalled. In Jewish and Mohammedan lore (in cluding many passages in the Koran itself), L. is a personage of importance, about whom details are told which fancy has added to the sober traditions of old Israel. But particularly for Mohammed there was point of attachment in L. s career, offered in Gen 19 7.14. Like Mohammed to the men of wicked Mecca, L. becomes a preacher of righteous ness and a messenger of judgment to the men of wicked Sodom. He is one of the line of apostles, sent to reveal God s will and purpose to his con temporaries.

      IV. Critical Theories about the Figure of Lot. The

      common view of those who deny the historical reality of L. is that this name simply stands for the ethnic group. Moat) and Ammon. Wellhausen, e.g., expressly calls "Lot" a national name (Vulhunumf). As to what is told of him in Gen he remarks: " Were it not for the remarkable depression in which the Dead Sea lies, Sodom and Gomorrah would not have perished; were it not for the little flat tongue of land that reaches out into the swamp from the S.E., Lot would have lied at once to the mountains of his sons, Moab and Ammon, and not have made the detour by Zoar, which merely serves the purpose of explaining why this corner is excepted from the overthrow, to the territory of which it really belongs" (Prolegomena 6 , 323). Meyer confesses that nothing can be made of L., because "any characteristic feature that might furnish a point of attachment is entirely lacking." The first of the families of the Hor- ites of Seir was named Lotan (Gen 36 20.22), and this writer believes it "probable that this name is derived from Lot; but that Lot was ever a tribal name (Stamm- narne) follows neither from this fact (rather the con trary) nor from the designation of Moab and the b> n Amman as Sons of Lot " (Die Ixraelitr.n und ihre Nach- barstammc, 311; cf 2(51, 339). If "Ilorite" was under stood as "cave-dweller," the story in Gen 19 30 might be adduced in support of this combination. But the most recent line of reasoning concerning these patriarchal figures makes their names "neither Divine names nor tribal names, whether in actual use or regarded as such, but rather simple personal names like Tom, Dick and

      Harry Typical names they became .... so

      that .... Israel s story-tellers would connect the name of L. with the overthrow of the cities" (Gressmann, art. in Z.I T IF, 1910). These names were chosen just because "they were very common at the time when the narratives were stamped into types"; later they became unfashionable, but the story-tellers held fast to the old names. "One sees from this at once into how ancient a time the proper names Abraham and Lot must reach, and understands therefore the more easily how they could be changed into tribal ancestors." It does not require the cautions, uttered by writers of this way of thinking, against regarding their views as a return to the old historical view of the patriarchs, to remind us that, in spite of all that may be said to the contrary, the present trend of thought among the most radical critics of the Genesis-traditions is much more favorable to that conservative historical view than were the opinions which t hey have overthrown. So that it may just ly be asserted, as Gressmann writes: "Confidence in tradition is in any case on the rise."

      Lot s Wife: This woman, unknown by name, figures in the narrative of Lot that relates his escape from Sodom. She is mentioned in Gen 19 only in vs 15-17, where she is commanded to flee from the doomed city with her husband and daughters, and is laid hold upon by the angelic visitors in their effort to hasten the slow departure; and in ver 26, where she alone of the four fugitives disobeys the warning, looks back, and becomes a "pillar of salt." This disobedience, with the moral state it implied and the judgment it entailed, is held up as an ex ample by Christ in Lk 17 32. In the Scriptures

      this is all that is said of a person and event that furnished the basis for a great deal of speculation. Jos (Ant, I, xi, 4) adds to the statement derived from Gen, "She was changed into a pillar of salt," the words, "for I visited it, and it still remains even now" (see also Wisd 10 7).

      Among Christian writers contemporary with and sub sequent to Jos, as well as among the Jews themselves and other Orientals, the same assertion is found, and down to recent times travelers have reported the per sistence of such a "pillar of salt, " either on the testimony of natives or as eyewitnesses. The question of the origin and nature of these "pillars" is a part of the larger question of Sodom and its neighborhood (see SALT; SIDDIM; SLIME); for that no one particular "pillar" lias persisted through the centuries may be regarded as certain; nor if it had, would the identification of Lot s wife with it and with it alone be ascertainable. This is just an early, persistent and notable case of that "identi fication" of Bib. sites which prevails all over the Holy Land. It is to be classed with the myth- and legend- building turn of mind in simple peoples, which has e.g. embroidered upon this OT account of the destruction of Sodom such marvelous details and embellishments.

      The principal thing to observe is the vagueness and the simplicity of the story in Gen. For it does not necessarily imply the "metamorphosis" popu larly attributed to it, in the strict sense of that word. And it lacks, even in a narrative like this, where the temptation would be greatest, all indica tions of that "popular archaeology" or curiosity, which, according to some critics, is alleged to have furnished the original motive for the invention of the patriarchal narratives. "She became a pillar of salt," and "Remember Lot s wife": this is the extent of the Bib. allusions. All the rest is com ment, or legend, or guess, or "science."

      J. OSCAR Bo YD


      LOTAN, lo tan ("jib , Idtd/t): Son of Seir, a chief (AY "duke") of Edom (Gen 36 20.2229; 1 Ch 1 38 f).

      LOTHASUBUS, loth-a-su bus (Aa>0do-ov{3os, Lothdsoubos): One of those; who stood by Ezra at the reading of the law (1 Esd 9 44); called "Hashum" in Neh 8 4.


      LOTUS, lo tus, TREES (Z^SS , qe tllm; AV shady trees): The trees under which b e hemoth (the "hippopotamus") rests; "He lieth under the lotus- trees," "The lotus-trees cover him with their shade" (Job 40 21.22). The Arab, equivalent is the dom tree, Zizyphus lotus, a species of jujube tree (N.O. Rhamncae) , it has many spines and small globular fruit a little bigger than a pea. It is common in the Jordan valley. This plant has nothing to do with the Egyp lotus. See LILY.

      LOVE, luv pntf, ahcbh, ranX, ahabhah, noun; 4>i\\io, philed, d-yairdw, aijapdo, vb.; d-yd-irq, agape, noun) : Love to both God and man is fundamental to true religion, whether as expressed in the OT or the NT. Jesus Himself declared that all the law and the prophets hang upon love (Mt 22 40; Mk 12 28- 34). Paul, in his matchless ode on love (1 Cor 13), makes it the greatest of the graces of the Christian life greater than speaking with tongues, or the gift of prophecy, or the possession of a faith of superior excellence; for without love all these gifts and graces, desirable and useful as they arc; in themselves, are as nothing, certainly of no perma nent value in the sight of God. Not that either Jesus or Paul underestimates the faith from which all the graces proceed, for this grace is recognized




      :is fundamental in all Clod s dealings with man and man s dealings with Cod (.In 6 28 f; Ho 11 ( )) ; but both alike count that faith as but idle and worth less belief that does not manifest itself in love to both God and man. As love is Ihe highest expres sion of Clod ;uid His relation to mankind, so it, must, tie the highest, expression of man s relation to his Maker and to his fellow-man.

      /. Definition. While the Ileb and Gr words for "love" have various shades and intensities of mean ing, they may be summed up in some such defini tion as this: "Love, whether used of (Jod or man, is an earnest, and anxious desire 1 for, and an active and beneficent interest in, the well-being of the one loved. Different degrees and manifestations of this affection are recognized in the Scriptures accord ing to the circumstances and relations of life, e.g. the expression of love as between husband and wife, parent and child, brethren according to the flesh, and according to grace; between friend and enemy, and, finally, between God and man. It must not be overlooked, however, that the fundamental idea of love as expressed in the definition of it is never absent in any one of these relations of life, even though the manifestation thereof may differ accord ing to the circumstances and relations. Christ s interview with the apostle Peter on the shore of the Sea of Tiberias (Jn 21 15- IS) sets before us in a most beautiful way the different shades of meaning as found in the NT words q!>iX<?w, philco, and dja- jrdui, di//ij>iio. In the question of Christ, "Lovcst thou me more than these?" the Gr vb. dyair^s, ayaiHis, denotes the highest, most perfect kind of love (Lat dil/</crc), implying a clear determination of will and judgment, and belonging particularly to the sphere of Divine revelation. In his answer Peter substitutes the word <p<.\\w, philo, which means the natural human affection, with its strong feeling, or sentiment, and is never used in Scripture lan guage to designate man s love to God. While the answer of Peter, then, claims only an inferior kind of love, as compared to the one contained in Christ s question, he nevertheless is confident of possessing at least such love for his Lord.

      //. The Love of God. First in the consideration of the subject of "love" comes the love of God He who is love, and from whom all love is derived. The love of God is that part of His nature indeed His whole nature, for "God is love" which leads Him to express Himself in terms of endearment toward His creatures, and actively to manifest that interest and affection in acts of loving care and self- sacrifice in behalf of the objects of His love. God is "love" (1 Jn 4 8.16) just as truly as He is "light" (1 5), "truth" (1 6), and "spirit" (Jn 4 24). Spirit and light are expressions of His essential nature; love is the expression of His personality corresponding to His nature. God not merely loves, but is love; it is His very nature, and lie imparts this nature to be the sphere in which His children dwell, for "he that abideth in love abideth in God, and God abideth in him" (1 Jn 4 1(5). Christianity is the only religion that sets forth the Supreme Being as Love. In heathen religions He is set forth as an angry being and in constant need of appeasing.

      The object of God s love is first and foremost His own SVw, Jesus Christ (Mt 3 17; 17 5; Lk

      20 13; Jn 17 24). The Son shares 1. Objects the love of the Father in a unique of God s sense; He is "my chosen, in whom my Love soul delight eth" (Isa 42 1). There

      exists an eternal affection between the Son and the Father the Son is the original and eternal object of the Father s love (Jn 17 24). If God s love is eternal it must have an eternal object, hence Christ is an eternal being.

      God loves (In hilii i ir in His timi with a special love. Those who are united by faith and love to .Jesus Christ are, in a different sense from those who are not thus united, the special objects of God s love. Said Jesus, thou "lovedst them, even as thou lovedst me" (Jn 17 23). Christ is referring to the fact that, just as the disciples had received the same treatment from the world that He had re ceived, so they had received of the Father the same love that He Himself had received. They were not on the outskirts of God s love, but in the very center of it. "For the father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me" (Jn 16 27). Here philco is used for love, indicating the fatherly affection of God for the believer in Christ, His Son. This is love in a more intense form than that spoken of for the world (Jn 3 10).

      God loves the. world (Jn 3 10; cf 1 Tim 2 4; 2 Pet 3 9). This is a wonderful truth when we realize what a world this is a world of sin and cor ruption. This was a startling truth for Nicodemus to learn, who conceived of God as loving only_the Jewish nation. To him, in his narrow exclusive- ism, the announcement of the fact that God loved the whole world of men was startling. God loves the world of sinners lost and ruined by the fall. Yet it is this world, "weak," "ungodly," "without strength," "sinners" (Rom 5 6-8), "dead in tres passes and sins" (Eph 2 1 AV), and unrighteous, that God so loved that He gave His only begotten Son in order to redeem it. The genesis of man s salvation lies in the love and mercy of God (Eph 2 4 f ) . But love is more than mercy or compassion ; it is active and identifies itself with its object. The love of the heavenly Father over the return of His wandering children is beautifully set forth in the parable of the Prodigal Son (Lk 15). Nor should the fact be overlooked that God loves not only the whole world, but each individual in it; it is a special as well as a general love (Jn 3 10, "whosoever"; Gal 2 20, "loved me, and gave himself up forme").

      God s love is manifested by providing for the physical, mental, moral and spiritual needs of His people (Isa 48 14.20.21; 62 9-12; 2. Manifes- 63 3.12). In these Scriptures God is tations of seen manifesting His power in behalf God s Love of His people in the time of their wil< ler- ness journeying and their captivity. He led them, fed and clothed them, guided them and protected them from all their enemies. His love was again shown in feeling with His people, their sorrows and afflictions (Isa 63 9); He suffered in their affliction, their interests were His; He was not their adversary but their friend, even though it might have seemed to them as if He either had brought on them their suffering or did not care about it. Nor did He ever forget them for a mo ment during all their trials. They thought He did; they said, "God hath forgotten us," "He hath forgotten to be gracious"; but no; a mother might forget her child that she should not have compassion on it, but God would never forget His people. How could He? Had He not graven them upon the palms of His hands (Isa 49 15 f)? Rather than His love being absent in the chastisement of His people, the chastisement, itself was often a proof of the presence of the Divine love, "for whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receive) h" (Pie 12 6-11). Loving re proof and chastisement are necessary ofttimes for growth in holiness and righteousness. Our re demption from sin is -to be attributed to God s wondrous love; "Thou hast in love to my soul de livered it from the pit of corruption; for thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back" (Isa 38 17; cf Ps 60 21; 90 8). Eph 2 4 f sets forth in a wonder ful way how our entire salvation springs forth from




      the mercy and love of God; "But God, being rich in mercy, for his groat love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ," etc. It is because of the love of the Father that we are granted a place in the heavenly kingdom (Eph 2 6-S). But the supreme manifestation of the love of God, as set forth in the Scripture, is that expressed in the gift of His only-begotten Son to die for the sins of the world (Jn 3 16; Rom 6 6-S; 1 Jn 4 9f),and through whom the sinful and sinning but repentant sons of men are taken into the family of God, and receive the adoption of sons (1 Jn 3 1 f ; Gal 4 4-0). From this wonderful love of God in Christ Jesus nothing in heaven or earth or hell, created or uncreated or to be created, shall be able to sepa rate us (Rom 8 37 f).

      ///. The Love of Man. Whatever love there is in man, whether it be toward God or toward his fellow- man, lias its source in God "Love is 1. Source of God; and every one that loveth is be- of Man s gotten of God, and knoweth God. He Love that loveth not knoweth not God; for

      God is love" (1 Jn 4 7f); "We love, because he first loved us" (1 Jn 4 19). Trench, in speaking of agape, says it is a word born within the bosom of revealed religion. Heathen writers do not. use it at all, their nearest approach to it being philanthropia or Philadelphia the love between those of the same blood. Love in the heart of man is t he offspring of the love of God. Only the regen erated heart can truly love as God loves; to this higher form of love the unregenerate can lay no claim (1 Jn 4 7.19.21; 2 7-11; 3 10; 4 11 f). The regenerate man is able to see his fellow-man as God sees him, value him as God values him, not so much because of what he is by reason of his sin and unloveliness, but because of what, through Christ, he may become; he sees man s intrinsic worth and possibility in Christ (2 Cor 6 14-17). This love is also created in the heart of man by the Holy Ghost (Rom 6 5), and is a fruit of the Spirit (( ral 6 22). It is also stimulated by the example of the Lord Jesus Christ, who, more than anyone else, manifested to the world the spirit and nature of true love (Jn 13 34; 15 12; Gal 2 20; Eph 6 2.-, -27; 1 Jn 4 9f).

      God must be the first and supreme object of man s love; He must, be loved with all the heart, mind, soul and strength (Mt 22 37f; 2. Objects Alk 12 29-34). In this last passage of Man s the exhortation to supreme love to Love God is connected with the doctrine

      of the unity of God (Dt 6 4 f) inas much as the Divine Being is one and indivisible, so must our love to Him be undivided. Our love to God is shown in the keeping of His commandments (Ex 20 6; 1 Jn 5 3; 2 Jn ver 6). Love is here set forth as more than a mere affection or sentiment; it is something that manifests itself, not only in obedience to known Divine commands, but also in a protecting and defence of them, and a seeking to know more and more of the will of God in order to express love for God in further obedience (cf Dt 10 12). Those who love God will hate evil and all forms of worldliness, as expressed in the avoidance of the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life (Ps 9?" 10; 1 Jn 2 15-17). Whatever there may be in his surroundings that would draw the soul away from God and righteousness, that the child of God will avoid. Christ, being God, also claims the first place in our affections. He is to be chosen before father or mother, parent or child, brother or sister, or friend (Alt 10 35-38; Lk 14 2G). The word "hate" in these passages does not mean to hate in the sense in which we use the word today. It is used in the sense in which Jacob is

      said to have "hated" Leah (Gen 29 31), that is, he loved her less than Rachel; "He loved also Rachel more than Leah" (ver 30). To love Christ supreme ly is the test of true disciploship (Lk 14 26;, and is an unfailing mark of the elect (1 Pet, 1 S). We prove that we are really God s children by thus loving His Son (Jn 8 42). Absence of such love means, finally, eternal separation (1 Cor 16 22).

      Man must love his fellow-man also. Love for the brotherhood is a natural consequence of the love of the fatherhood; for "In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whoso ever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother" (1 Jn 3 10). For a man to say "I love God" and yet hate his fellow- man is to brand himself as "a liar" (4 20); "He that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, cannot love God whom he hath not seen" (ver 20); he that loveth God will love his brother also (ver21). The degree in which we are to love our fellow-man is "as thyself" (Mt 22 39), according to the strict observance of the law. Christ set before His followers a much higher example than that, however. According to the teaching of Jesus we are to super sede this standard: "A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another; even as I have loved you, that ye also love one another" (Jn 13 34). The exhibition of love of this character toward our fellow-man is the badge of true discipleship. It may be called the sum total of our duty toward our fellow-man, for "Love worketh no ill to his neighbor: love therefore is the fulfilment of the law"; "for he that loveth his neighbor hath fulfilled the law" (Horn 13 8.10). The qualities which should char acterize the love which we are to manifest toward our fellow-men are beautifully set for thin 1 Cor 13. It, is patient and without envy; it is not proud or self-elated, neither does it behave discourteously; it does not cherish evil, but keeps good account of the good; it rejoices not at the downfall of an enemy or competitor, but gladly hails his success ; it is hope ful, trustful and forbearing for such there is no law, for they need none; they have fulfilled the law.

      Nor should it be overlooked that Our Lord com manded His children to love their enemies, those who spoke evil of them, and despitefully used them (Alt 5 43-48). They were not to render evil for evil, but, contrariwise, blessing. The love of the disciple of Christ must manifest itself in supplying the necessities, not of our friends only (1 Jn 3 16-18), but also of our enemies (Rom 12 20 f).

      Our love should be "without hypocrisy" (Rom 12 9); there should be no pretence about it; it should not be a thing of mere word or tongue, but a real experience manifesting itself in deed and truth (1 Jn 3 18). True love will find its expres sion in service to man: "Through love be servants me to another" (Gal 6 13). What more wonderful llustration can be found of ministering love than that set forth by Our Lord in the ministry of foot- washing as found in Jn 13? Love bears the infirmi- t ies of the weak, does not please itself, but seeks the welfare of others (Rom 15 1-3; Phil 2 21; Gal 6 2; 1 Cor 10 24); it surrenders things which may je innocent in themselves but which nevertheless may become a stumbling-block to others (Rom 14 15.21); it gladly forgives injuries (Eph 4 32), and ;ives the place of honor to another (Rom 12 10). What, then, is more vital than to possess such love? It is the fulfilment of the royal law (Jas 2 8), and s to be put above everything else (Col 3 14); it is he binder that holds all the other graces of the Jhristian life in place (Col 3 14); by the posses sion of such love we know that we have passed from death unto life (1 Jn 3 14), and it is the supreme ,est of our abiding in God and God in us (1 Jn 4 12.16). WILLIAM EVANS

      Love, Brotherly Luke, Evangelist




      LOVELY, luv li (1HS, aJmbh, nflX, alichh; -rrpoo-- <|>iX.T|Si />/v>.s/)////r.s): "Lovely" occurs only 1 t. In 2 S 1 23 it. is the 1r of /"M, "to be loved" ("Saul and Jonathan were lovely and pleasant [AVin "sweet"] in their lives"), where it seems to mean "loving" or "lovable." Two other words are so tr (1 in the OT: icfiia<Ui, "desire," a "desirable thins" (Cant 5 10, "He is altogether lovely," that is, "lovable," "to be desired," lit, "all of him lova- hlcness," or "desirableness"); I (1i/lnlhli7t/i loves," or "charms" (Ezk 33 32, "Thou art unto them as a very lovely song," AVm "a song of loves," RVm "a love-song"; in ver 31 the same word is tr d "much love," AVm "They make loves or jests"); in Phil 4 S we have prox/>Iiilr*, "very lovely," or "lovable," "whatsoever things are lovely."

      \\V. L. WALKER

      LOVER, In v er pP& , ohcbh, ^HX, ahchh): In the OT olichti, from d/nhh, "to love," is sometimes "lover" in the sense, of "friend," in the older Eng. sense of the word (1 K 5 1, "Hiram was ever a lover of David"; Ps 38 11; 88 IS; Lam 12); more frequently it has the meaning of "lover" in the special sense, sometimes in the evil sense of the word (Jer 22 20.22; 30 14; Ezk 16 33.30 f, etc; Hos 2 5.7.10, etc); <lylt<i!ih, "to love" (Jer 4 30), rc"\\ "companion" (Jer 3 1), and ahahhlm, "loves" (Hos 8 9), are also tr d "lovers" in this sense.

      In the NT the simple word "lover" does not occur, but we have various compound words, phildtheos "lover of God" (2 Tim 3 4); phildgathos, "lover of good," and philuxaws, "lover of hospitality" (Tit 1 S); phi la iitos, "lover of self" (2 Tim 3 2); philt- donos, "lover of pleasure" (2 Tim 3 4).

      In HV we have, for "a lover of hospitality" (Tit

      1 S), "given to"; for "covetous" (Lk 16 14; 2 Tim 3 2), "lovers of money"; for "not covetous" (1 Tim 3 3), "no lover of money"; for "despisers of them that are good" (2 Tim 3 3), "no lovers of good." W. L. WALKER

      LOVES, luvz (Ps 45 1, title). See PSALMS.

      LOVINGKINDNESS, luv-ing-kind nes ("TOO* hcscdh) : "Lovingkindness" in AV always represents this word (30 t), but of hescdh there are many other renderings, e.g. "mercy" (frequently), "kindness" (3S), "goodness" (12). The word is derived from hdsadh, meaning, perhaps, "to bend or bow oneself," "to incline oneself"; hence "to be gracious or mer ciful." ERV has not many changes, but in ARV "lovingkindness" is invariably employed when hcwdh is used of God, and, as a rule, "kindness" when it is used of man, as in Gen 21 23; Jgs 1 24 (AV "mercy," RV "deal kindly"); Ruth 3 10;

      2 Ch 32 32; 35 20 (AV "goodness," m "Heb kindness," RV "good deeds"); Job 6 14, etc. Of the uses of the word as on man s part toward God, the only occurrences are: Jer 2 2, "I remember for thee the kindttcxs of thy youth, the love of thine espousals," etc; Hos 6 4.0, "Your goodness [RVm "or kindness"] is as a morning cloud," "I desire goodness [AV "mercy," RVm "kindness"], and not sacrifice," which last passage may denote kindness as toward man.

      When used of God hcscdh denotes, in general, "the Divine Love condescending to His creatures, more esp. to sinners, in unmerited kindness" (Delitzsch). It is frequently associated with forgiveness, and is practically equivalent to "mercy" or "mercifulness" (Ex 20 0), "showing lovingkindness [ERV "mercy"] unto thousands of them that love me"; 34 Of,

      "slow to anger, and abundant, in lovingkindness j KM V "plenteotisin mercy"j"; [ver7] "keeping loving- kindness [ERV "mercy"] for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin" (cf Nu 14 IS); Mic 7 IS, "He retaincth not his anger for ever, because he delighteth in lovingkindness" (ERV "mercy",). This quality in Jeh was one by which He sought to bind His people to Himself. It is greatly magnified in the OT, highly extolled and gloried in, in many of the psalms (Ps 136 has the constant refrain, "For his lovingkindness endureth forever"). In Dt 7 12 it is associated with the covenant, and in 287 15 with the covenant with David (cf Isa 55 3, etc). It was something that could always be relied on.

      Being such an essential and distinctive quality of God, the prophets taught that it should also characterize His people. It is part of the Divine requirement in Mic 6 8, "to love kindness" (cf Zee 7 9, "Show kindness and compassion every man to his brother"). The want of it in the nation was a cause of Jeh s controversy with them, e.g. IIos 4 1, "There is no truth, nor goodness [hrsedh] [AV and ERV "mercy"], nor knowledge of God in the land"; 12 0, "Therefore turn thou to thy God: keep kindness [AV and ERV "mercy"] and justice, and wait for thy God continually." Cheyne (EB) regards hesedh as denoting paternal affection on God s part, answered by filial and loyal affection and brotherly love on man s part (Philadelphia in the NT).

      The word "lovingkindness" does not occur in the NT, but as its equivalents we have such terms as "mercy" "goodness," "kindness," "brotherly love" (see special articles). W. L. WALKER


      LOWLAND, Id land (nbptj, sh phelah; cf Arab. s * >

      RJLiLv, snfalat, "the lowest part"): The western part of Pal, including the maritime plain and the foothills. There has been an attempt to restrict the term to the foothills, at least as far as the more ancient documents are concerned, but there can be little doubt that the maritime plain should be in cluded. RV has "lowland" throughout for .s//"/;/ie- lah, while AV has "low country" (2 Ch 26 10; 28 18), "low plains" (1 Ch 27 28; 2 Ch 9 27), "plain" (Jer 17 20; Ob ver 19; Zee 7 7), "vale" or "valley" (Dt 1 7; Josh 91; 1040). See COUNTRY; SHEPHELAH. ALFRED ELY DAY

      LOZON, Id /on (Ao<6v, Lozori): Head of a family of Solomon s servants (1 Esd 5 33); called "Darken" in Ezr 2 50; Neh 7 58.

      LUBIM, lu bim (D Hlb , liibhwi) : A people men- tioned in the OT (2 Ch 12 3; 16 8; Dnl 11 43; Nah 3 9). In all these cases the word is tr d in AV "Libyans"; in RV only in Dnl 11 43. The people so named had their seat in North Africa, W. of Egypt (cf Acts 2 10, "the parts of Libya about Gyrene"). See LIBYA. On three different occasions the Libyans invaded Egypt, and at length, in the 10th cent. BC, succeeded in founding an Egyp dynasty under SUISHAK (q.v.).

      LUCAS, lu kas, loo kas. In Philem ver 24 AV, for "Luke" (RV).

      LUCIFER, lu si-fer, loo si-fer: The morning star, an epithet of the planet Venus. See ASTROLOGY, 1 1 .

      LUCIUS, lu shi-us, lu shus (AovKios, Loukios, AtvKios, Leukios) : A Rom consul who is said (1 Mace 15 10 ff) to have written a letter to Ptolemy



      Euergetes securing to Simon the high priest and to the Jews the protection of Rome. As the praenomen only of the consul is given, there has been much discussion as to the person intended. The weight of probability has been assigned to Lucius Calpurnius Piso, who was one of the consuls in 139-138 BC, the fact of his praenomen being Cneius and not Lucius being explained by an error in transcription and the fragmentary character of the documents. The authority of trie Romans not being as yet thoroughly established in Asia, they were naturally anxious to form alliances with the kings of Egypt and with the Jews to keep Syria in check. The imperfections that are generally admitted in the transcription of the Rom letter are not such as in any serious degree to invalidate the authority of the narrative in 1 Mace.


      LUCIUS (AovKtos, Loukios) : This name is men tioned twice :

      (1) In the church at Antioch which sent out Barnabas and Saul as its missionaries were several prophets and teachers, among whom was Lucius of Gyrene (Acts 13 1). He was probably one of those "men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Greeks also" (Acts 11 20). It has been suggested that he is the same as St. Luke, but this is merely conjecture.

      (2) "Lucius and Jason and Sosipater, my kins men" were 1 among those who joined St. Paul in saluting the Christians in Rome (Rom 16 21). By "kinsmen" St. Paul means "Jews" (cf Rom 9 3; 16 11.21). This Lucius may have been the same person as (1), but, as we have no more information about either, we cannot determine this.

      S. F. HUNTER

      LUCRE, lii ker, loo kcr ("22 , &,< <; K ep8os, ktrdos): Lit, "gain" (1 S 8 3; Tit 1 7), hence in the NT always qualified by filthy" (1 Tim 3 8, "not greedy of filthy lucre" [at<rx/oo/cepS7jj, aixchroker- dex]; so Tit 1 7). The advb. is found in 1 Pet 5 2 (see also Tit 1 11). In 1 Tim 3 3, RV changes AV to "no lover of money" (d<f>i\\dpyvpos, aphildr- guros),

      LUD, hid, LUDIM, lu dim, lood im (Tb , UWi,

      Q" 1 "^, lud/nni, G-^Tlb, ladhiynn, "Ludites"; AovS,

      Loud, Aov8i6i(A, Loxdicnn; Tg Onk:

      1. Two WTD.Zi&ttrfg): In Gen 10 13 Ludim Different appears as the firstborn of Mizraim Nation- (Egypt), and in 10 22 Lud is the alities fourth son of Shem. We have there fore to do with two different national ities bearing the same name, and not always easy to distinguish. 1 Ch 1 11.17 simply repeat the statements of Gen 10 13.22. In Isa~66 19 Lud is mentioned with Tarshish and Pul (generally re garded as a mistake for Phut), Tubal, Javan~ and the isles. Accepting this emendation, the passage agrees with Jer 46 9, where the Ludim are spoken of with Kush and Phut as the allies of Egypt; and also with Ezk 27 10, where Lud is referred to with Persia and Put as soldiers of Tyre. Lud, again, is mentioned with Ethiopia (Gush), Put, all the mingled people, Cab, and the children of the land which is in league (or, m "the land of the covenant"), which were all to fall by the sword (Ezk 30 5).

      Coming to the Semitic Lud, it is to be noted that

      the Assyrians called Lydia Lu(d)du, and that the

      mythical ancestor of the Lydians,

      2. The according to Herodotus (i.7),wasLy- Semitic dos, and their first king, Agros, was Lud descended from Ninos and Belos, i.e.

      Assyria and Babylonia. The appar ently Assyr colony in Cappadocia about 2000 BC, who used the Bab script, may be regarded as sup

      porting this statement, and that there were other colonies of the same nationality in the neighbor hood is implied by the fact that Assyro-Bab was one of the official languages of the Hittite state whose capital was IJattu or Boghaz-keui. On the other hand when Gygcs sent an embassy to Assur- bani-aph of Assyria, Lu(d)du is described as a country whose name had never before been heard, and whose language was unknown. As, however, the earlier kings of Assyria certainly warred in that district, this statement has to be taken with caution. Perhaps the name had changed in the interval, owing to an immigration similar to that which brought the Hittites into Asia Minor, and caused a change in the language at the same time.

      Naturally Lydia was not recognizable as Sem

      in classical times. The existence of Lud in the

      neighborhood of Egypt as well as in

      3. Not Asia Minor finds parallels in the Syr- Recogniz- ian Musri of the Assyr inscriptions able as by the side of the Musur which stood Semitic for Egypt, and still more in the Cappa- Later docian Gush (Kusu) of certain Assyr

      letters relating to horses, by the side of the Gush (Ktisu likewise) which stands for Ethiopia.

      Everything points, therefore, to the Sem Lud and

      Ludim being Lydia, and the identification may be

      regarded as satisfactory. It is alto-

      4. Egyptian get her otherwise with the Egyp Lud Lud Not and Ludim, however, about which little Recogniz- can be said at present. The reference able to a city which seems to be Putu-yawan

      in an inscription mentioning the 37th year of Nebuchadrezzar, and apparently referring to an expedition against Amasis, though it may stand for "Grecian Phut," has very little bearing upon the position of the Egyp Lud, esp. as the text in which it occurs is very mutilated. One thing is certain, however: the Hebrews regarded this Lud and Ludim as being Hamitic, and not Semitic

      T. G. PINCHES

      LUHITH, lu hith, loo hith, ASCENT OF (Plbytt rnrnsri, ma aleh h<i-hlh~itli): A place named in Isa 16 ">; Jer 48 o. It is clearly identical with the way, or descent, of Horonaim. Onom places Luhith bet ween Areopolis and Zoar. Some way is intended by which fugitives from the Arabah could reach the uplands of the Moabite plateau. Guthe thinks it may be the road which leads from the district of the ancient Zoar on the eastern shore of the Dead Sea to the uplands through Wadij Bcnc Hamrnad. Along this track ran also a Rom road. If Horo naim were the higher of the two places, this might account for the way being called the "descent" of Horonaim as going down from that place, and the "ascent" of Luhith as going up thence. Neither place can as yet be identified with certainty.

      W. EwiNG

      LUKE, look, luk, THE EVANGELIST: The

      name Luke (AOVKO.S, Lou kits) is apparently an abbre viation for AovKav6s, Loukanos. Old

      1. Name Lat MSS frequently have the words CATA LUCAXUM as" the title of the

      Third Gospel. (But the form Aoy/aos, Loukios, is

      also found in inscriptions synonymous with Aou/cSs;

      cf Ramsay, Expos, December, 1912.)

      It was a common fashion in the koine to abbreviate

      proper names, as it is today, for that matter (cf Amphiai from Amphiatos, Antipas trom Antipatrox, A polios from

      Paul alone names Luke (Col 4 14; 2 Tim 4 11; Philein ver 24). He does not mention his own name in the Gospel or in the Acts. Cf the silence of the Fourth Gospel concerning the name of the

      Luke, Evangelist Luke, Gospel of



      apostle John. There \\v:is no particular occasion

      to mention Luke s name in the Gospel, except^as

      the author, if he had so wished. The

      2. Men- late legend that Luke was one of the tioned Seventy sent out by Jesus (Epiphanius, Three Haer., ii.&l, 11) is pure conjecture, Times by as is the story that Luke was one of Name the Greeks who came to Philip for

      an introduction to Jesus (Jn 12 20 f), or the companion of Cleopas in the walk to Em- rnaus (Lk 24 13). The clear implication of Lk 1 2 is that Luke himself was not an eyewitness of the ministry of Jesus.

      In Col 4" 14 Luke is distinguished by Paul from those "of the circumcision" (Aristarchus, Mark,

      Jesus Justus). Epaphras, Luke, De-

      3. A Gentile mas form the gentile group. He was

      believed by the early Christian writers to have come directly from heathendom to Chris tianity. He may or may not have been a Jewish proselyte. His first appearance with Paul at Troas (cf the "we"-sections, Acts 16 10-12) is in har mony with this idea. The classic, introduction to the Gospel (1 1-4) shows that he was a man of culture (cf Apollos and Paul). He was a man of the schools, and his Greek has a literary flavor only approached in the XT by Paul s writings and by the Ep. to the He.

      His home is very uncertain. The. text of D

      (Codex Bezae) and several Latin authorities have

      a "we-"passage in Acts 11 27. If

      4. Home this reading, the so-called B text of

      Blass, is the original, then Luke was at Antioch and may have been present at the great event recorded in Acts 13 1 f . But it is possible that the. Western text is an interpolation. At any rate, it is not likely that Luke is the same person as Lucius of Acts 13 1. Ramsay (St. Paul the Travel ler, 389 f) thinks that Eusebius (HE, III, iv, 6) does not mean to say that Luke was a native of Antioch, but only that IK; had Antiochian family connections. Jerome calls him Lucas medieus \\ntioclienxis. He certainly shows an interest in Antioch (cf Acts 11 19-27"; 13 1; 14 20; 15 22. 23.30. 3") ; 18 22). Antioch, of course, played a great part in the early work of Paul. Other stories make Luke live in Alexandria and Achaia and narrate that he died in Achaia or Bithynia. But we know that he lived in Philippi for a consider able period. He first meets Paul at Troas just before the vision of the Man from Macedonia (Acts 16 10-12), and a conversation with Paul about the work in Macedonia may well have been the human occasion of that vision arid call. Luke remains in Philippi when Paul and Silas leave (Acts 16 40, "They .... departed ). He is here when Paul comes back on his 3d tour bound for Jerus (Acts 20 3-5). He shows also a natural pride in the claims of Philippi to the primacy in the province as against Amphipolis and Thessa- lonica (Acts 16 12/"thefirst of the district"). On the whole, then, we may consider Philippi as the home of Luke, though he, was probably a man who had traveled a great deal, and may have been with Paul in Galatia before coming to Troas. He may have ministered to Paul in his sickness there (Gal 4 14). His later years were spent chiefly with Paul away from Philippi (cf Acts 20 3-28^31, on the way to Jerus, at Caesarea, the voyage to Rome and in Rome).

      Paul (Col 4 14) expressly calls him "the beloved physician." He was Paul s medical adviser, and doubtless prolonged his life and res- 5. Physician cued him from many a serious illness. He was a medical missionary, and prob ably kept up his general practice of medicine in connection with his work in Rome (cf Zahn, Intro,

      III, 1). He probably practised medicine in Malta (Acts 28 Of). He naturally shows his fondness for medical terms in his books (cf Hobart, The Medical Language of St. Luke; Harnack, A 7 1 Studies: Luke, the, Physician, 175-98). Harnack adds some examples to those given by Hobart, who has overdone the matter in reality. See, further, ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.

      It is possible, even probable (see Router s article

      in DCG), that in 2 Cor 8 18 "the brother" is

      equivalent to "the brother" of Titus

      6. Brother just mentioned, that is, "his brother." of Titus If so, we should know that Paul came

      into contact with I. like at Philippi on his way to Corinth during his 2d tour (cf also 2 Cor 12 18). It would thus be explained why in Acts the name of Titus does not occur, since he is the brother of Luke the author of the book.

      If the reading of D in Acts 11 27 f is correct,

      Luke met Paul at Antioch before the 1st missionary

      tour. Otherwise it may not have been

      7. Connec- till Troas on the, 2d tour. But he is tion with the more; or less constant companion Paul of Paul from Philippi on the return

      to Jerus on the 3d tour till the 2 years in Rome at the close of the Acts. He was appar ently not with Paul when Phil (2 20) was written, though, as we have seen, he was with Paul in Rome when he wrote Col and Philem. He was Paul s sole companion for a while during the 2d Rom imprisonment (2 Tim 4 11). His devotion to Paul in this time of peril is beautiful.

      For the proof of the Lukan authorship of the Acts

      see ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. For the discussion

      of the Lukan authorship of the Gospel

      8. Author with his name, see LUKE, GOSPEL OF. of Both Our interest in him is largely due to Gospel this fact and to his relations with Paul. and Acts The Christian world owes him a great

      debt for his literary productions in the interest of the gospel.

      One legenr 1 regarding Luke is that he was a painter. Plummer (Comm. on Luke, xxif) thinks that the

      legend is older than is sometimes sup-

      9. Legends posed and that it has a strong ele

      ment of truth. It is true that he has drawn vivid scenes with his pen. The early artists were esp. fond of painting scenes from the Gospel of Lk. The allegorical figure of the ox or calf in Ezk 1 and Rev 4 has been applied to Luke s Gospel.

      LITERATURE. Bihlo diets., romms., lives of Paul. intros. See also Harnack, "Lukas, cler Arzt, dor Vcr- fasscr" (100(5); NT Studies: Luke the Physician (1007); Ramsay, Luke the Physician (1008); Selwyn, St. Luke the Pro phet (1001); Hobart, The Medical Language of St. Luke (1882); Ramsay, Was Christ Born at Bethlehem? A Study in the Credibility of St. Luke (1S08); Mac- lachlan, St. John, Ecanyelist and Historian (1012).


      1. Text

      2. Canonicity :*. Authorship

      4. Sources

      5. Credibility

      0. Characteristics

      7. Date

      8. Analysis LITERATURE

      The five primary uncials (S , A, B, C, D) are the chief witnesses for the text of Luke s Gospel. This

      group is reinforced by L, A and the 1. Text Freer (Detroit) MS; ~R, T, X and S

      are also valuable in fragments. The other uncials are of secondary value. The Lat, Egyp and Syr VSS are also of great importance. There are 4 Lat VSS (African, European, Italian, Vulg), 3 Egyp (Memphitic, Sahidic, Bohairic), 5 Syr (Curetonian, Sinaitic, Peshitto, Harclean,



      Palestinian or Jerusalem). Many of the cursive (minuscule) MSS are also of considerable worth, as are some of the quotations from the Fathers.

      Blass. Philolony nf the Gospels (1S08), has advanced the theory of two recensions of this Gospel (a longer and a shorter), such as lie holds to be true of Acts. In the case of Acts, the theory has won some acceptance (see ACTS OF THH APOSTLES), but that is not true of the Gos pel to any extent. The Western text of the Gospel is the shorter text, while in Acts it is the longer text. In both instances Blass holds that the shorter text was issued after t he longer and original text. His idea is that Luke himself revised and issued the shorter text. In itself this is, of course, possible, since the books are both ad dressed to an individual, Theophilus. The other edition may have been meant for others. WH explain the omission in the Western text of t lie Gospel as "Western non-interpolations," and often hold them to be the true text.. As samples one may note Lk 10 41; 12 lit; 24 :5(>.40.42, where the Western text is t he shorter text. This is not always true, however, for in Q 2lf D has the. famous passage about the man working on the Sabbath, which the, other documents do not give. In Lk 3 --, I) has the reading of Ps 2 7 ("Thou art my Son; this day I have, begotten thee") for the, usual text. Zahn (Intro, III, MS) accepts this as the true text. There is no doubt of the interest and value of the Western readings in Lk, but it cannot be said that Blass has carried his point here. The peculiar mutilation of the Gospel by Marcion has an interest of its own.

      Plummor (Comm. on Lk, Ixxx) says: "In the second half of the 2d cent, this Gospel is recognized as authentic and authoritative; and 2. Canon- it is impossible to show that it had no1 icity been thus recognized at a very much

      earlier date." On the other hand, Schmiedel (EB) says: "This tradition, however, cannot be traced farther back than toward the end of the 2d cent. (Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria and the Muratorian Fragment); there is no sound basis for the contention of Zahn (II, 175) that the existence of the tradition can also be found as early as in Marcion, because that writer, from his aversion to the Third Gospel (which never theless was the only one he admitted into his col lection with alterations it is true) omitted the expression of honor applied to Luke in Col 4 14." Here the two views are well stated. Schmiedel shows dogmatic bias and prejudice against Lk. Jiilicher, however, frankly admits (Intro, 330) that the ancients were universally agreed that the writer was that Luke, disciple of Paul, who is mentioned in Philem ver 24; 2 Tim 4 11, and called the physician in Col 4 14; presumably a native of Airioch." This .statement, bears more directly on the question of authorship than of canonicity, but it is a good retort to the rather cavalier tone of Schmiedel, who is reluctant to admit the facts. The recognition of the Third Gospel in the Mura torian Canon (170 AD) is a fact of much signifi cance. It was used in Tatian s Diatessaron (c 170 AD) as one of the four recogni/ed Gospels (cf Hemphill, Diatessaron of Tatian, 3 ft). The fact that Marcion (140 AD) mutilated this Gospel to suit his theology and thus used it is even more sig nificant (cf Sunday, Gospels in the 2d Cent., App.). Other heretics like the Valentinians (cf Lightfoot, Bib. Essays, 5-7) made use of it, and Heracleon (cf Clem. Alex., Strom., iv.9) wrote a comm. on it. Irenaeus (end of 2d cent.) makes frequent quota tions from this Gospel. He argues that there could be only "four" Gospels because of the four points of the compass an absurd argument, to be sure, but a powerful testimony to the general acceptance of this Gospel along with the other three. It is needless to appeal to the presence of the Third Gospel in the Curetonian Syr, the Sinaitie Syr, the African Lat VSS that date to the 2d cent,, not to mention the probability of the early date of the Memphitic (Coptic) VSS. Examples of the early use of this Gospel occur in various writings of the 2d cent,, as in Justin Martyr (150 AD), the Test. XII P (c 140 AD), Celsus (c AD 160), the Gospel

      of Peter (2d cent.), the Ep. of the Church of Lyons and Vicnne (177 AD), probably also Did. (2d cent.) Clement of Alexandria (190-202 AD), Tertullian (190-220 AD). It is doubtful about Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp; and the Ep. of Barna bas seems to make no use of the Third Gospel. But Clement of Rome, Ignatius and Polycarp quote Acts. But surely the general use and ac ceptance of the Third Gospel in the early 2d cent, is beyond reasonable doubt. It is not easy to de cide when the actual use began, because we have so little data from the 1st cent, (cf Plummer, Comm.. Ixxiii).

      The fact that the author -was not an apostle affected the order of the book in some lists. Most MSS and \\ SS have the common order of today, but the Western order (Mt, .In, Lk, Mk) is given by I), many Old Lat MSS the Gothic Vs. the Apos Const. The object was prob ably to place the books by apostles together and first. The Old Lat k lias Lk second (Jn, Lk, Mk, Mt), while the Curetonian Syr lias Lk last of the four. The cur sives 90 and 399 also have Lk second.

      The first writers who definitely name; Luke as the author of the Third Gospel belong to the end of the 2d cent. They are the Cation of 3. Author- Muratori (possibly by Hippolytus), ship Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alex

      andria, We have already seen that Jiilicher (Intro. 330) admits that the ancients uni versally agreed that Luke wrote the Third Gospel. In the early part of the 2d cent, the writers did not, as a rule, give the names of the authors of the Gos pels quoted by them. It is not fair, therefore, to use their silence on this point as proof either of their ignorance of the author or of denial of Luke s authorship. Jiilicher, for instance, says (Intro, 330): "There is no tradition worthy of the name concerning Luke, whom Papias did not men tion, or at any rate did not know." But we owe to Eusebius all the fragments that we have pre served from the writings of Papias. Our ignorance of Papias can hardly be charged up to him. Plum mer (Comm., xii) says that nothing in Bib. criticism is more certain than the fact that Luke wrote the Third Gospel. On the other hand, Jiilicher (Intro, 331) is not willing to let it go as easily as that. He demands appeal to Acts, and there (ib, 447) he denies the Lukan authorship save as to the "we" sections. J. Weiss (Die Schriften dcs Ncuen Testaments; das Litkas Evang., 1906, 37S) admits that but for Acts no sufficient, reason would exist for denying the authorship of the Third Gospel to Luke, the disciple of Paul. A Pauline

      Koint of view in this Gospel is admitted generally, lany modern critics take it for granted that the Lukan authorship of Acts is disproved, and hence that of the Gospel likewise falls by the way. So argue Baur, Clemen, De Wette, Hausrath, Hilgen- feld, Holtzmann, Julicher, Pfleiderer, Schiirer, Spitta, von Soden, J. Weiss, Weizsacker, Zeller. Men like Blass, Credner, Harnack, Hawkins, Hobart, Klostermann, Plummer, Ramsay, Renan, Vogel, Zahn, stand by the tradition of Lukan authorship, but Harnack is almost irritated (Luke the Physician, 1907, 6), since "the indefensibility of the tradition is regarded as being so clearly estab lished that nowadays it is thought scarcely worth while to reprove this indefensibility, or even to notice the arguments of conservative opponents." Harnack proceeds to make a plea for a hearing. Jacobus (Standard Bible Diet.) admits that "Acts tells us nothing more of the author than does the Gospel." That is true so far as express mention is concerned, but not so far as natural implication goes. It is true that the place to begin the dis cussion of the Lukan authorship of the Gospel is Acts. For detailed discussion of the proof that Luke wrote Acts, see ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. It ia



      there shown that the line of argument which lias convinced Harnack, the leader of the liberal criti cism of Germany, ought to convince any open- minded critic. li means a good deal when Harnack

      (Luke the I liyxiciuii, 14) says: "I subscribe to the words of Zahn (Einl, 11, 427): Hobart has proved for everyone who can at all appreciate proof that, the author of the Lukan work was a man practised in the scientific language of (!r medicine -in short, a Gr /t/ii/xicimi. " It is here assumed that the line of argument pursued in the art. on ACTS OF THH ArosTLi:s is conclusive. If so, little remains to be done in the way of special proof for the (iospel. The author of Acts specifically refers (Acts 1 1) to a former treatise which was likewise addressed to Theophilus. This we find to be the case with the (iospel passing under the name of Luke (1 4). The critics who admit the Lukan authorship of Acts and deny the Lukan author ship of the Gospel are hardly worth considering.

      It is, therefore, largely a work of supererogation to give at length the proof from internal grounds that Luke wrote the Gospel, after being convinced about Acts. Still it may bo worth while to sketch in outline the line of argument, even though it is very simple. Plummer (Comm., x-xvii) argues three propositions: "(1) The author of the Third (iospel is the author of the Acts. (1>) The author of Acts was a companion of Paul. (3) This companion was St. Luke." Harnack (The Acts of the A pistil x, 1909) has argued with great minuteness and skill the theory that the same linguistic peculiarities occur in all portions of Acts, including the "we 1 - "sec tions. He accepts the facts set forth by Hawkins (florae Hyn<>]nii-ne) and adds others. He agrees, there fore, that the author of Acts was a companion of Paul. Harnack is convinced by the exhaustive labors of Hobart (Mfdictil Lniti/int jf. <>/ St. I. ukc) that this author was a physician, as we know Luke to have been (Col 4 14). He shows this to bo true of the author of Acts by the use of "us" in Acts 28 10, showing that the author of Acts received honors along with Paul, probably because he practised medicine and treated many (cf Harnack, Luke the Physician, 15 f). These medical terms occur in the Gospel of Lk also, and the same general linguistic style is found in both the Gospel and Acts. Hawkins has made a careful study of likenesses and variations in stylo in these two books (cf florae Synopticae, 15-25, 174-89). The argument is as conclusive as such a line of proof can be expected to be. For further discussion see Ramsay, Luke the Physician, 1908, 1-GS; Zahn, Intro, III, 100 ff. There are no phenomena in the Gospel hostile to this position save the Sem character of chs 1 and 2 (barring the classical introduction 1 1-4). Luke, though a Gentile, has in these chapters the most Sem narrative in the NT. But the explanation is obvious. He is hero using Sem material (either oral or written), and has with true artistic skill preserved the tone of the original. To a certain extent the same thing is true of the opening chapters of Acts.

      The synoptic problem (see GOSPELS, SYNOPTIC)

      remains the most difficult one in the realm of NT

      criticism. But the Gospel of Lk

      4. Sources yields on the whole more satisfactory

      results than is yet true of Mt.

      (1) Unity. If the Lukan authorship of the book is accepted, there remains no serious doubt concern ing the unity and integrity of the Gospel. The abridgment of Luke s Gospel used by Marcion does not discredit those portions of the Gospel omitted by him. They are omitted for doctrinal reasons (cf Sanday, Gospels in the 2d Cent., oh viii). His readings are of interest from the viewpoint of tex tual criticism, as are the quotations of other early writers, but his edition does not seriously challenge the value of Luke s work.

      (2) Luke s method. Luke has announced his methods of work in a most classic introduction (1 1-4). Here we catch a glimpse of the author s per sonality. That is not possible in Mk nor in Mt, and only indirectly in passing shadows in the Fourt h Gospel. But here the author frankly takes the reader into his confidence and discloses his stand point and qualifications for the great task. He writes as a contemporary about the recent past, always the most difficult history to interpret and often the most interesting. He speaks of "those

      matters which have been fulfilled among us," in our time. He does not himself claim to have been an eyewitness of "those matters." As we know already, Luke was a Gentile and apparently never saw Jesus in the flesh. He occupies thus a position outside of the great events which he is to record. He does not disguise; his intense interest in the narrative 1 , but he claims the historical spirit. He wishes to assure Theophilus of "the certainty con cerning the things wherein thou wast instructed." He claims to have investigated "the course of all things accurately from the first," just as the true historian would. He thus implies that some of the attempts made had been fragmentary at any rate, and to that extent inaccurate. He has also pro duced an "orderly" narrative by which Theophilus may gain a just conception of the historical progress of the events connected with the life of Jesus of Nazareth. The fact that "many have taken in hand to draw up a narrative concerning those matters" does not deter Luke from his task. The rather he is stirred thereby ("It seemed good to me also") to give his interpretation of the life and work of Jesus as the result of his researches. He stands not farther away than one generation from the death of Jesus. He has the keen interest natural to a cultured follower of Jesus in the origin of what had become a great world-movement. He is able to get at the facts because he has had intercourse with eyewitnesses of Jesus and His work, "even as they delivered them unto us, who from the begin ning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word." Luke had abundant opportunity during the two years at Caesarea with Paul (Acts 24-26) to make careful and extended investigations. Many of the personal followers of Jesus were still living (1 Cor 15 6). It was a golden opportunity for Luke s purpose. He had also the written narratives which others ("many") had already drawn up. We are, then, to expect in Luke s Gospel a book closely akin to Acts in style and plan, with the historian s love of accuracy and order, with the author s own con tribution in the assimilation and use of this oral and written material. One would not expect in such a writer slavish copying, but intelligent blending of the material into an artistic whole.

      (3) The Aramaic infancy narrative. The very first section in this Gospel (1 5 2 52) illustrates Luke s fidelity in the use of his material. Well- hausen drops these two chapters from his edition of Luke s Gospel as not worthy of consideration. That is conjectural criticism run mad and is not to be justified by the example of Marcion, who be gins with ch 4. Wright (Gospel ace. to St. Luke in Gr, 1900, viii f; s.v. "Luke s Gospel," DCG) holds that this section was the last to be added to the Gospel though he holds that it comes from Luke. It may be said in passing that Wright is a stout advocate for the oral source for all of Luke s Gospel. He still holds out against the "two-document" or any document theory. However, he claims rightly that Luke s information for these two chapters was private. This material did not form part of the current oral Gospel. In Mt the narrative of the birth of Jesus is given from the standpoint of Joseph, and Mary is kept in the background, according to Eastern feeling (Wright). But in Lk the story is told from Mary s point of view. Luke may, indeed, have seen Mary herself in the years 57-59 AD (or 58-60). He could easily have seen some of Mary s intimate friends who knew the real facts in the case. The facts were expressly said to have been kept in Mary s heart. She would tell only to sympathetic ears (cf Ramsay, Was Christ Born at Bethlehem? 74 f). It is not possible to discredit Luke s narra tive of the Virgin Birth on a priori grounds (cf Orr, The Virgin Birth of Christ, 1907; Sweet, Birth



      and Infancy of Jesus Christ, 1906). The curious Sem flavor of this narrative argues strongly for its genuineness, since Luke was a Greek. We do not know whether Luke knew Aram, or not. That was possible, since he spent these 2 years in Pal. We do not know whether this information came to him in written form (note esp. the hymns of Mary and of Zacharias) or in oral tradition. But it is hardly possible to credit a Greek with the invention of these birth-narratives and poems which ring so true to the soil and the Heb life. Immediately after Luke s statement about historical research comes the narrative of the birth of Jesus. It is the first illustration of his work on his sources.

      (4) Luke s relation to Mark s Gospel. Luke knew Mark in Rome (Col 4 10.14; Philem ver 24). He may have met him in Pal also. Had he seen Mark s Gospel when he wrote his own? Was it one of the "many" narratives that came under Luke s eye? Wright (cf DCG) denies that Luke had our Mk. He admits that he may have had an Urmarkus or proto-Mk which he heard in oral form, but not the present (written) Gospel of Mk. He thinks that this can best be accounted for by the fact that out of 223 sections in Mk there are 54 not in Lk. But most modern critics have come to the conclusion that both Matthew and Luke had Mk before them as well as other sources. Matthew, if he used Mk, in the early chapters, followed a topical arrangement of his material, combining Mk wit h 1 lie other source or sources. But Luke has followed the order of Mk very closely in this part and indeed throughout. Luke has a special problem in 9 51 19 27, but the broad general outline follows that of Mk. But it cannot be said that Luke made a slavish use of Mk, if he had this Gospel before him. He gives his own touch to each incident and selects what best suits his purpose. It is not possible for us to tell always that motive, but it is idle to sup pose that Luke blindly recorded every incident found in every document or every story that came to his ears. He implies in his introduction that he has made a selection out of the great mass of ma terial and has woven it into a coherent and pro gressive narrative. We may admit with Harnack (New Testament Studies: Sayings of Jesus, xiii) that the Markan problem "has been treated with scientific thoroughness" and that Luke had Mk as one of his sources. The parallel between Lk and Mk in the narrative portion is easily seen in any Harmony of the Gospels, like Broadus or Stevens and Burton.

      (5) Q (Quelle) or the Logia. It is a matter of more uncertainty when we come to the mass of mate rial common to Mt and Lk, but absent from Mk. This is usually found in the discourses of Jesus. The more generally accepted theory today is that both Matthew and Luke made use of Mk and also this collection of Logia called Q for short (Ger. Quelle, "source"). But, while this theory may be adopted as a working hypothesis, it cannot be claimed that it is an established fact. Zahn (cf Intro) stoutly stands up for the real authorship of the First Gospel of Matthew. Rev. Arthur Carr ("Further Notes on the Synoptic Problem," Expos, January, 1911, 543-553) argues strongly for the early date and Matthaean authorship of the First Gospel. He says on the whole subject: "The synoptic problem which has of late engaged the speculation of some of our keenest and most labo rious students is still unsolved." He even doubts the priority of Mark s Gospel. Wellhausen (Einleitung in die drei erslen Evangelien, 73-89) advocates the priority of Mark to Q. But Harnack balances the problem of "Q and St. Mark" (Sayings of Jesus, 193-233) and decides in favor of Q. In any case, it is to be noted that the result of critical

      research into the value of Q is to put it quite on a par with Mk. Harnack is quite, impressed with the originality and vivid reality of the matter in Q. The material present in Q cannot be gauged so accurately as that in Mk, since we have the Gospel of Mk in our hands. Where both Mt and Lk give material not found in Mk, it is concluded that this is drawn from Q. But it cannot be shown that Mat thew may not have used Q at some points and Lk at still others independently. Besides Q may have contained material not preserved either in Mt or Lk. A careful and detailed comparison of the material common to both Mt and Lk and absent from Mk may be found in Hawkins, Horac Synopticne, 107- 13; Harnack, Sayinys of Jesus, 127-82; Well hausen, EinJeituny, <>(>; Robertson, "Matthew" in Bible for Home and School, 14-19. But, if it is true that Luke made use of Q as of Mk, he was no mere copyist. No solution of the synoptic, prob lem can ever be obtained on the idea that the Gos pels are mere reproductions of previous documents. There was freedom in the use of all the material, both oral and written, and the writer gave his own interpretation to the result. It was often a re statement in the author s own language, not formal quotation. Wright (DCG) calls this editorial element "editorial notes"; that is, of course, often true when the author makes comments on the matters presented, but "ancient authors took im mense pains to reduce the rude chronicles which they used, into literary form" (ib). The point of all this is that a great-deal of criticism of the Gospels is attempting the impossible, for many of the vari ations cannot possibly be traced to any "source." Wright (ib) puts it tersely again: "And if in St. John s Gospel it is more and more recognized that the mind of the evangelist east the utterances of Our Lord into the peculiar form which they there hold, the same process of redaction may be ob served in St. Luke, who comes nearest of the synop- tists to the methods of St. John." As a matter of fact, this is as it should be expected. The frank recognition of this point of view marks progress in synoptic criticism.

      ((>) Other sources. There is a large block of ma terial in Lk (9 51 18 14) which is given by him alone. There are various sayings like some re ported by Matthew (or Mark) in other connections. Some of the incidents are similar to some given elsewhere by Matthew and Mark. There are various theories concerning this position of Lk. Some critics hold that Luke has here put a mass of material which he had left over, so to speak, and which he did not know where to locate, without any notion of order. Against this theory is the express statement of Luke that he wrote an orderly narra tive (1 3 f). One is disposed to credit Luke s own interpretation unless the facts oppose it. It is common for traveling preachers, as was Jesus, to have similar experiences in different parts of the country and to repeat their favorite sayings. So teachers repeat many of their sayings each year to different classes. Indeed, it is just in this section of Lk that the best parts of his Gospel are found (the parables of the Good Samaritan, the Prodigal Son, the Pharisee and the Publican, etc). "The more we consider this collection, the more we are entranced with it. It is the very cream of the Gospel, and yet (strange to say) it is peculiar to Luke" (Wright, DCG). Wright calls this "a Paul ine collection," not because Paul is responsible for the material, but because the chapters breathe the cosmopolitan spirit of Paul. That is true, but Jesus loved the whole world. This side of the teach ing of Jesus may have appealed to Luke powerfully because of its reflection in Paul. Matthew s Gos pel was more narrowly Jewish in its outlook, and

      Luke, Gospel of Lust



      Mark s had fewer of the 1 sayings of Christ. But it is to be noted that this special material in Lk ex tends more or less all through the Gospel. Burton (Some I ri.itciplcs of Literary Criticism and Their Application to the Synoptic Problem, 49) calls this special material in Lk 9 51 18 14 "the Peraean document." We do not know, of course, anything of the actual source of this material. Whether Luke has hero followed one or more documents, he has, as elsewhere, given his own stamp to t he- whole, while preserving in a marvelous way Hie spirit of Jesus. (For the possible parallel between this section of Lk and .In see Robertson s "Notes" to Broadus, Harmony of the Gospels, 24Q-52.) For the earlier material in Lk not found elsewhere (3 7-1"). 17. IS; 4 26-13 [14.1f>].U)-oO; 5 1-11; 6 21- 49; 7 1 8 3) Burton suggests "the Galilean docu ment" as the source. Wright, on the other hand, proposes "anonymous fragments as the source; of Luke s material not in the infancy narrative-, nor in Mk, nor in Q, nor in the "Pauline" or Peraean document. At any rate, it is certain that Luke s own words of explanation should warn us against drawing too narrow a line around the "sources" used by him. His "many" may well have included a dozen sources, or even more. But it may be said, in a word, that all that criticism has been able to learn on the subject has confirmed the statement of Luke himself concerning his method of research and his use of the material.

      More fault has been found with Luke as a his torian in Acts than in the Gospel. Harnack (Acts

      of the Apostles) is not disposed to give 5. Credi- Luke full credit as a reliable historian, bility But Ramsay (Luke the Physician, 5)

      champions the reliability of Luke (cf alsoS7. I d ul I fir. Trareller; The Church in the Roman Empire) against the skepticism of Harnack, which is growing less, since in the Theol. Literaturzeitung (July 7, 1906, S. 4) he speaks well of Luke s ability to secure correct information. So in Luke the I lii/sicidn (121-45) Harnack urges that the possible "instances of incredibility have been much exag gerated by critics." He adds about Acts 6 3(5: "It is also possible that there is a mistake in Jos" (cf Chase, Credibility of the Book of the Acts of the A potties; see also ACTS OF THE APOSTLES).

      But the Gospel is not free from attack. The chief matter in the. (iospol of Lk which is challenged on his torical grounds, apart from the birth-narratives, which some critics treat as legendary, is the census in Lk 2 1 ff. Critics, who in general have accepted Luke s veracity, have some-times admitted that here he fell into e rror and confused the ce-nsus under Quirinius in 67 AD when Quirinius came, after the banishment of Archelaus, to take a census and to collect taxes, much to the indignation of the Jews (cf Acts 5 37; Jos, Ant, XVIII, i). It was not known that Quirinius had he-en governor of Syria before this time, nor was there any other knowledge of a census under Augustus. The case against Luke seemed stremg. But Ramsay (Was Christ Horn at Bt thli-liftn . 227 ff) shows that the inscription at Tibur, as agreed by Mommsen and like authorities, shows that Quirinius "twice governed Syria as legatus of the divine Augustus." He was consul in 12 BC, so that the first mission was after that date. Ramsay shows also from the papyri that the 14-year cycle wa s used for the Rom census (many census papers are known from 20 AD on). He argtu>s that the first one was insti tuted by Augustus in 8 BO. Herod, as a vassal king, would naturally be allowed to conduct it in the Jewish fashion, not the Rom, and it was probably delayed se-ve-ral years in the provinces. Thus once more Luke is vindicated in a remarkable way (see CHRONOLOGY OF XT, I, 1, [2]).

      The Acts of the Apostles has come out of the critical ore leal in a wonderful manner, so that Luke s cre-elit as a historical writer is now very high among those qualified to know the facts. He has been tested and found correct on so many points that the presumption is in his favor where he cannot as yet be verified. Moffatt (Intro to the Lit. of the NT, 265) finels Luke "more graphic than historical."

      He was the- most versatile of the Gospel writers. He was a Greek, a Christian, a physician, a man of travel, a man of world-outlook, syin- 6. Charac- pathetic, cultured, poe-tie-, spiritual, teristics artistic, high-minded. His Prologue is the most classic pie-e-e of Gr in the NT, but the rest of eh 1 and all of ch 2 are the most He-iii in tone. The bre-adth of his literary equip ment is thereby shown. He not only uses many medical terms common to technical circles, but he- has the physician s interest, in the sie k and afflicted, as shown in the- large number of miracles of healing narrate *!. His interest in the- poor is not due te> Ebioni tic prejudice against the rich, but to human compassion for the- distressed. His emphasis on t he- human side of t he- work of Jesus is not due te> Kbion- itie^ denial of the Divinity of Jesus, but to his keen appreciation of the richness of the human life of the Son of God. His rich and varied vocabulary re veals a man who read and mingled with the best life of his time-. He wrote his books in the ver nacular, but the elevated vernacular of an educated man touched with a distinct literary flavor. His poetic temperament is shown in the- preservatiem of the beautiful hymns of the nativity and in t he- wonderful parables of Jesus in chs 10, 16-18. They are reported with rare grace and skill. Luke is fond of showing Christ s sympathy with women and children, and he has more- to say about prayer than the authors of the other Gospels. His interest in individuals is shown by the dedication of both his books to Theophilus. His cosmopolitan sym pathies are natural in view of his training and in heritance, but part of it is doubtless due to his asso- ciation with the- apostle Paid. He comes to the interpretation of Jesus from a world-standpoint and does not have to overcome the Pharisaic limi tations incident to one reared in Pal. It is a matter of rejoicing that we have this be>ok, called by Re-nan the most beautiful book in the- world, as a cultured Greek s interpretation of the origin of Christianity. He thus stands outside of the pale of Judaism and can see more clearly the world- relations and world-destiny of the new movement. With Luke, Jesus is distinctly the world s Saviour. The accent on sin is human sin, not specifically Jewish sin. John in his Gospel came in his old age to look back upon the events in Judaea from a non- Jewish standpoint. But he- rose to the essentially spiritual and eternal apprehension of Christ, rather than extended his vision, as Luke did, to the cos mopolitan mission and message of Jesus, though this did not escape John. The Gospel of Lk thus has points of affinity with Paul, John and the author of He in style and general stanelpoint. But while Luke s own style is manifest throughout, it is not obtrusive. He hides himself behind the wonderful portrait of Jesus which he has here drawn in undying colors.

      The extreme position of Baur and Zeller may be dismissed at once. There is no reason for dating the Gospel of Lk in the 2d cent, on the- 7. Date ground that he used Marc-ion s Gospel, since it is now admitted all round that Marcion made use of Lk. The supposed use of Jos by Luke (see ACTS OF THE APOSTLES for discussion and refutation) leads a goodly number of radical scholars (Hilgenfeld, Holsten, Holtzmann, Jiilicher, Krenkel, Weizsiicker, Wernle) to date the book at the end of the 1st cent. This is still extreme, as Harnack had alreaely shown in his Chronologic der altchristl. Lilt., I, 1897, 246-50. Any use of Jos by Luke is highly improbable (see Plummer on Lk, xxix). The Gospel was certainly written be-fore Acts (Acts 1 1) and while Paul was alive, if 1 Tim 5 18 bo taken as a quotation from Lk 10 7, which is by no means certain, however. But it is true that the most



      Luke, Gospel of Lust

      natural way to interpret the sudden close of Acts, after 2 years in Rome (Acts 28 31), is the fact that Luke finished the book at that time (Maclean, 1- vol HDB). Moffatt (Historical NT, 273) calls this early date reactionary" and "extravagant." But it is supported by Alford, Blass, Ebrard, Far- rar, Gloag, Godet, Grau, Guericke, Halm, Head- lam, Hitzig, Hofmann, Hug, Keil, Lange, Lumby, Marshall, Nosgen, Oosterzee, Resell, Riehm, Schaff, Schanz, Thicrsch, Tholuck, Wieseler, and Harnaek himself is now ready to join this goodly company. He warns critics against loo hasty a closing of the chronological question (Ads of the Apostles, 291), and admits that Acts was written "perhaps so early as the beginning of the 7th decade of the 1st cent." [ib, 297], "the Acts (and therefore; also the Gospel)." In the Dateofthe Acts and the Synoptic Gospels (1911, 124) Harnack says : "It seems now to be established beyond question that both books of this great his torical order were written while St. Paul was still alive." There is an intermediate date about 80 AD, assigned by Adeney, Bar t let t, Plummer, Sanday, Weiss, Wright, on the ground that the investiga tions mentioned in Lk 1 1-4 describe the use of narratives which could have been written only after a long period of reflection. But that is not a valid objection. There is no sound critical reason why the Gospel of Mk, Q, the infancy narratives, and all the other sources alluded to by this preface could not have been in circulation in Pal by 55 AD. Indeed, Allen writes in Expos T (July, 1910): "I see no reason why such an original [Mark s Gospel in Aram.] should not have appeared before the year 50 AD." The other objection to the early date comes out of Lk 21 20, "Jerus compassed with armies" as compared with "the abomination of desolation" in Mk 13 14. The change is so specific that it is held by some critics to be due to the fact that Luke is writing after the destruction of Jerus. But it is just as likely (Maclean) that Luke has here interpreted the Hebraism of Mk for his gentile readers. Besides, as Plummer (p. xxxi) shows, Luke in 21 5-36 does not record the fact that Jerus was destroyed, nor does he change Christ s "flee to the mountains" to "Pella in North Peraea," whither the Christians actually fled. Besides, the fact that Acts shows no acquaintance with Paul s Epp. is best explained on the assumption of the early date. The question is thus practically settled in favor of the early date. The place of the writing is not known. The early date naturally falls in with Caesarea (Blass, Michaelis, Thiersch), but there is little to guide one.

      (1) Prologue, 1 1-4.

      (2) Infancy and childhood of John and Jesus, 1 5

      2 52. 8 Analysis (3) . Be g innin S of Christ s Ministry, 3 1

      (4) Galilean Campaign, 4 14 9 6. (5) Retirement from Galilee, 9 7-50. ((>) Later Judaean and Peraean Ministry, 9 51 19 2,8.

      (7) Close of the Public Ministry in Jerusalem, 19 29 21 37.

      (8) The Dreadful End. chs 21-23-

      (9) Resurrection of Christ, ch 24-

      LITERATURE. See extended list of books at close of art. on ACTS OF THE APOSTLES; the extensive list of Comms. Plummer s Comm. on Lk can also he consulted. After Plummer the best comms. on Luke s Gospel are Bruce, Expositor s Gr Test.; Weiss s Meyer Krit.-exeget. Kiimm.; Godet; Holtzmann, Hand-Comm. Of the many Intros to the NT, Zahn s is the ablest and most ex haustive (conservative) and Jiilicher s is the fairest of the radical school. The best of the briefer ones is Gregory s Canon and Text (1907). Special treatises de serving mention here are Blass, Philology of the Gospels (1898); Er. srcundum Lukam (1897); Wellhausen, Das Ev. Lukne (1904); Sense, Origin of the Third Gospel (1901)- Friedrieh, Das Lukasevangelium und die Apostel- gnxchichte, Wcrke desselben Verfassers (1890); Harnack, Luke the Physician (1907), and Sayings of Jesiis (1908); The Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels (1911); Hawkins Home Kijnopticae (2d eel, 1909); Horvey, Authenticity of Luke (1892); Hobart, Medical Language of

      St. Luke (1882); Litzinger, Die Entstehung ties Lukasevan gelium und der Apostelgeschichte (1883); Ramsay, Was Christ Born at Bethlehem ? (1898) and Luke the Physician (1908); Resell, Das Kindheit-Evangeliurn nach Lukas und Matthdus; Selwyn, St. Luke the Prophet (1901); Vogel, Zur Characteristik des Lukas nach Sprache und Stil (1897) ; Weiss, Quellen des Lukasevangelium (1907); Wright, Syn opsis of the Gospels and his Gospel ace. to St. Luke in Gr (1900).

      A. T. ROBERTSON LUNATIC (K), lu na-tik:

      /. Epilepsy. The Eng. word "lunatic," which in

      popular speech signifies a sufferer from any mental de

      rangement, whether periodic or chronic,

      1. Incorrect other than congenital idiocy, appears Translation in AV as a tr of the Gr \\\\ord o-e\\rjvid-

      fo/uat, selenidzomai, in the two pas sages where it occurs. In RV the word has very properly been displaced by the strictly accurate term "epileptic." This change is justified not only by the extra-Bib, usage (see Liddell and Scott, s.v.), but clearly enough by Mt 17 15 (cf 4 24), where epilepsy is circumstantially described.

      The original meaning of the term selenlazomai, "moon-struck," is connected with the popular

      belief, widespread and of strange per-

      2. Original sistency, that the moon, in certain of Meaning its phases, is injurious to human beings,

      esp. in the case of diseases of a periodic or remittent character. There are no data by which to determine whether, in the NT times, this particular word represented a living and active belief or had passed into the state of usage in which the original metaphor disappears, and the word simply indicates the fact signified without reference to the idea embodied in the etymology. We still use the word "lunatic" to signify a person mentally diseased, although we have long since ceased to believe in the moon s influence in such cases.

      //. Madness. The Bible designates "madness," or alienation of mind, by various terms, all of which seem to be onomatopoetic. These various words seem to be derived from the strange and fierce or mournful cries uttered by the unfortunate victims of this dread malady. In Dt 28 34 the word maddened" is 7$, m r shi<</r/a\\ part, of

      shagha" (cf also 1 S 21 15). With this corresponds the word /xcuVo/icu, mainomai, in the NT. In 1 S 21 13 (Heb 14) the word is a form of the vb. bb~ , halal, which is also a derivative from the sound indicated.

      In certain cases, though by no means uniformly, madness is ascribed to demon-possession (Lk 8 26 f) . One is struck by the fact that mental derangement occupies a very small place in Scripture.


      LURK, lurk, LURKING-PLACE, lurk ing-plas: "To lurk" means "to lie in wait," usually with intent to do harm (see Ps 17 12; Prov 1 11.18).

      Lurking-place, a place of hiding, usually for the purpose of murder. See 1 S 23 23; Ps 10 8.

      LUST (5 Heb and 5 Gr words are so rendered, viz. : [1] TED:, nephesh, [2] PVYHttf, sh nruth, [3] niSn , ta &wah, [4] TCH, hamadh, [5] rPX, awah; [1] l-rri- eujjUa, epithmma, [2] f]8ovr|, hedone, [3] iriiro9ea>, epipothed, [4] op^s, orcxis, [o] ir-aBos, pathos): The word both as vb. and as subst, has a good and a bad meaning. It probably meant at first a strong de sire, a craving, abnormal appetite, not only for physi cal but for spiritual satisfaction. It has come, however, to be confined in its use almost entirely to the bad sense. Some old tr 3 are not accepted now, the word being used in connections which at present seem almost irreverent. Shades of mean ing are learned from an examination of the Heb and Gr originals.





      The suhst. and vbs. arc: (1) Xcphcsh, in Ex 15 9 and I s 78 IS tr 1 "desire"; "My desire shall he satisfied"; "by asking food according 1. The OT to (heir desire." A strong but not Use sensual sense. (2) Sh e rlruth, meaning

      "obstinacy," evil imagination. Jeh said (I s 81 12), "I let them go after the stub bornness of their heart," a wilful self-satisfaction. (3) TaCurdh, "a delight." "a longing satisfaction," ami so it came to mean "sinful pleasure." Tr ri in I s 78 30, "that which they desired," intensely longed for, referring to Jeh s provision of food in the wilderness. Also in Nu 11 4 concerning "flesh to eat," it is said the multitude "lusted exceedingly," i.e. "craved eagerly." (4) Hamadh, the vb. mean ing "to delight in," "greatly belove," "covet," probably for evil purposes. The young man is warned against the evil woman (Prov 6 25): "Lust not after her beauty." Here the bad sense is evident, for in the same connection are used such expressions as "harlot," "adulteress," "evil woman." (5) Airdh, meaning "greatly to desire," long after, with undue emphasis, with evil spirit though not perhaps with impure thought. In Nu 11 34 refer ence is made to a place called kibhroth ha-ta awdh, "the graves of lust, where "they buried the people that lusted." Ps 106 14 also refers to the Israelites who "lusted exceedingly." Tr 1 in Dt 12 15.21 "de sire of thy soul"; 12 20; 14 26, "thy soul desireth." These Dt passages evidently mean lust only in the good sense.

      As in the OT, so in the NT we find both mean ings of the word. (1) Epithumia is used most fre quently, and means a longing for the 2. The NT unlawful, hence concupiscence, de- Use sire, lust. The following references hold the idea, not only of sinful desire known as "fleshly," "worldly," as opposed to "spiritual," "heavenly," "the will of man" as opposed to "the will of God," but also the sensual desire connected with adultery, fornication; vb. in Alt 5 28; Mk 4 19; Jn 8 44; Rom 1 24; 1 Cor 10 6; Gal 6 16.17.24; Tit 2 12; 1 Pet 1 14; 1 Jn 2 10 f; Jude vs 16.18; Rev 18 14. (2) Hcdonc, delight in sensuality, hence wicked pleas ures; tr 1 in Jas 4 1.3 "pleasures": "Your pleasures that war in your members"; "Ye ask amiss, that ye may spend it in your pleasures" (AV "lusts"). (3) Epipothed means to crave intensely the wrong possession; tr d in Jas 4 5 "long [AV "lusteth"] unto envying." (4) Orcxis, used in Rom 1 27, from context evidently meaning "lust" in the worst sense; tr 1 "lust." (5) Pathos, meaning "passion," inordinate affection, with the idea in it of suffer ing; tr d in 1 Thess 4 5 "passion of lust."

      , WILLIAM EDWARD RAFFETY LUTE, lut pn:, nebhel; thus RV; AV viol [Isa 6 12]): Ncbhcl is rendered elsewhere by "psaltery" or "viol." The lute was originally an Arab, instrument. It resembled a guitar, though with a longer and more slender neck. The name is derived from Arab. aVood, with a of art. elided; hence Italian liuto; Fr. luth. See Music.

      LUZ CP5 , 72): The Heb word means "almond tree" or "almond wood" (OHL, s.v.). It may also mean "bone," particularly a bone of the spine, and might be applied to a rocky height supposed to resemble a backbone (Lagarde, Uebersicht., 157 f). Winckler explains it by Aram, laudh, "asylum," which might be suitably applied to a sanctuary (C,V- schichte /.srr/r/s) . Cheyne (En, s.v.) would derive it by corruption from HSbn, hdlugah, "strong [city]."

      (1) This was the ancient name of Bethel (Gen

      19; Jgs 1 23; cf Gen 35 6; 48 3; Josh 16 2;

      18 13). It has been thought that Josh 16 2 con

      tradicts this, and that the two places were distinct. Referring to Gen 28 19, we find that the name Bethel was given to "the place," ha-mdkom, i.e. "the sanctuary," probably "the place" (ver 11, Heb) associated with the sacrifice of Abraham (12 8), which lay to the E. of Bethel. The name of the city as distinguished from "the place" was Luz. As the fame of the sanctuary grew, we may suppose, its name overshadowed, and finally superseded, that of the neighboring town. The memory of the ancient nomenclature persisting among the people sufficiently explains the allusions in the passages cited.

      (2) A Bethelite, the man who betrayed the city into the hands of the children of Joseph, went into the land of the Hittites, and there founded a city which he called Luz, after the ancient name of his native place (Jgs 1 20). No satisfactory identifi cation has been suggested. W. EWIXG

      LYCAONIA, lik-a-d ni-a, iT-ka-o ni-a (AvKaovCa, Lukaoida [Acts 14 6], AvKaovurrt, Lukaonitti, [Acts 14 11, "in the speech of Lycaonia"]; Ly- caonia is meant, according to the South Galatian view, by the expression rrjv Ta.\\a.TiK7ji> x^P ai> , tf n Galatiktn choran, in Acts 18 23, and the incidents in Acts 16 1-4 belong to L.) : Was a country in the central and southern part of Asia Minor whose boundaries and extent varied at different periods. In the time of Paul, it was bounded on the N. by Galatia proper (but lay in the Rom province Gala- tia), on the E. by Cappadocia, on the 8. by Cilicia Tracheia, and on the W. by Pisidia and Phrygia. The boundary of Phrygia and L. passed between Iconium and Lystra (see ICONIUM). L. consists of a level plain, waterless and treeless, rising at its southern fringe for some distance into the foothills of Taurus, and broken on its eastern side by the volcanic mass of Kara-Dagh and by many smaller hills. Strabo informs us that King Amyntas of Galatia fed many flocks of sheep on the Lycaonian plain. Much of the northern portion of L. has been proved by recent discovery to have belonged to the Rom emperors, who inherited the crown lands of Amyntas.

      In Acts 14 6 L. is summed up as consisting of the cities of Lystra and Derbe and the district (including many villages) lying around them. This description refers to a particular division of L., which alone is mentioned in the Bible. In the time of Paul, L. consisted of two parts, a western and an eastern. The western part was a "region" or subdivision of the Rom province Galatia; the eastern was called Lycaonia Antiochiana, after Antiochus of Commagene under whom it had been placed in 37 AD. This non-Rom portion was traversed by Paul; but nothing is recorded of his journey through it (see DERBE). It included the important city of Laranda; and when L. is described as consisting of the cities of Lystra and Derbe and the surrounding district, the writer is clearly think ing only of the western portion of L., which lay in, and formed a "region" of, the province Galatia. This is the tract of country which is meant in Acts 18 23, where it is called the "region" of Galatia, and placed side by side with Phrygia, another region of Galatia. The province Galatia was divided into districts technically known as "regions," and Rom L. is called the "region of Galatia" in implied con trast with Antiochian L., which lay outside the Rom province. Of the language of L. (see LYSTRA) nothing survives except some personal and place- names, which are discussed in Kretschmar s Ein- U itnng in die Gcsch. dcr griech. Sprache.

      LITERATURE. Ramsay, Hist. Comm. on Galatians (Intro); Sterrett, Wolfe Expedition (inscriptions).

      W. M. C ALDER



      Lute Lysias

      LYCIA, lish i-a (Awta., Lukia) : An ancient country forming the southeast portion of Asia Minor. The surface of Lycia is exceedingly rugged, and its lofty mountains rise almost directly from the sea. Over them several trade routes or passes lead from the coast to the interior. Down the mountain sides rush many small rivers, of which the Xanthus is the chief. The history of L., like that of the neighboring countries, forms a part of the history of Asia Minor. Successively it was in the pos session of the Persians, of Alexander the Great, of the Seleucid kings and of the Ptolemies. In 188 BC it fell into the hands of the Romans, who gave it to the island of Rhodes; 20 years later, because of its lovalty to Rome, it became free and inde pendent (1 Mace 15 23). In 53 AD, during the reign of the emperor Claudius, it became a Rom province, and in 74 AD it was united with Pam- phylia to form a double province over which a Rom governor presided.

      At different times during the history of L., there were about 100 places which issued coins of their own. Pliny speaks of 70 cities which had existed there, but in his age there were but 36. Of these, Patara, Myra and Phaselis are of interest to Bible students. From the coast city of Patara, accord ing to Acts 21 1 f, Paul took ship for Phoenicia. It was a place celebrated not only as a trading- center, and a port of entry to the interior, but as the seat of the oracle of Apollo, and the birthplace of St. Nicholas. Myra, t hough over 2 miles from t he coast, possessed a harbor, and was also a trading- center. Here, according to Acts 27 5-38, Paul found a corn ship from Alexandria. For some time Myra was the capital of the Rom province; to Christendom it is esp. known as the home of St. Nicholas, who was its bishop and the patron saint of the sailors along the coast. Phaselis, on the border of Pamphylia, was also the home of the bishop.

      L. was a stopping-place, rather than the scene of the active work of Paul, and therefore it figures little in the earliest history of Christianity. For a long time the people strongly opposed the intro duction of a strange religion, and in 312 AD they even petitioned the Rom emperor Maximin against. it. A portion of the petition has been discovered at. Arykander. E. J. BANKS

      LYDDA, lid a. See LOD.

      LYDIA, lid i-a (Au8ia, Ludia): An important country in the western part of Asia Minor bounded on the N. by Mysia, on the E. by Phrygia, on the S. by Caria, and on the W. by the Aegean Sea. Its surface is rugged, but along the valleys between its mountain ranges ran some of the most important highways from the coast cities to the dist ant interior. Of its many rivers the chief are the Cayster, the Lower Hermus, the Cogamos, the Caicus and, during a part of its course, the Maeander.

      Lydia was an exceedingly ancient and powerful kingdom whose history is composed chiefly of that of its individual cities. In 546 BC it fell into the hands of the Persians, and in 334 BC it became a part of Alexander s empire. After the death of Alexander its possession was claimed by the kings both of Pergamos and of Seleucia, but in 190 BC it became the undisputed possession of the former (1 Mace 8 8). With the death of Attains III, 133 BC, it was transferred by the will of that king to Rome, and L., which then became but a name, formed, along with Caria, Mysia and Phrygia, a part of the Rom province of Asia (see ASIA). Chief among its cities were Smyrna and Ephesus, two of the most important in Asia Minor, and Smyrna is still the largest and wealthiest city of that part of

      Turkey. At Ephesus, the seat of the goddess Diana, Paul remained longer than elsewhere in Asia, and there his most important missionary work was done (Acts 19). Hence L. figures promi nently in the early history of the church; it became Christianized during the residence of the apostle at Ephesus, or soon afterward (see also LUD).

      E. J. BANKS

      LYDIA, lid i-a (AvSCa, Ludia): The fern, of Lydian, a native of Lydia, a large country on the W. of Asia Minor, anil the name of St. Paul s first convert in Europe. This name was a popular one for women (cf Horace Odes i.8; iii.9; vi.20), but Ramsay thinks she "was familiarly known in the town by the ethnic that showed her origin" (II DB, s.v. "Lydia"; cf St. Paid the Traveller, 214). It has always been and is still a common custom in the Orient to refer to one living in a foreign land by employing the adj. which desig nates the nationality. Renan thinks it means "the Lydian"; Thyatira is a city of Lydia. Lydia was (1) living in Philippi, (2) of the city of Thya tira, (3) a seller of the purple-dyed garments from her native town, (4) and "one that worshipped God." Her occupation shows her to have been a woman of some capital. The phrase which describes her religion (sebomene tun Thcun) is the usual designa tion for a proselyte. She was in the habit of fre quenting a place of prayer by a riverside, a situation convenient for the necessary ablutions required by the Jewish worship, and there Paul and his com panions met her. After she had been listening to St. Paul (Gr impf.), the Lord opened her heart to give heed to his teaching ("To open is the part of God, to pay attention that of the woman, Chry- sostom). Her baptism and that of her household followed. To prove her sincerity she besought the missionaries to accept the hospitality of her home. Her house probably became the center for the church in Philippi (Acts 16 14.15.40). L. is not mentioned in St. Paul s letter to the Philippians, but, if Ramsay be correct, she may have been Euodias or Syntyche (Phil 42). S. F. HUNTEK

      LYDIAN, lid i-an. See LYDIA. LYE, li. See NITHE. LYING, H ing. See LIE.

      LYSANIAS, ll-sa ni-as (Av<ravias, Lusanias): Mentioned in Lk 3 1 as tetrarch of Abilene in the loth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, and thus fixing the date of the preaching of John the Baptist in t he wilderness at about 26 or 28 AD. A Lysanias is mentioned by Jos as having ruled over Chalcis and Abilene, and as having been slain by Mark Antony at the instigation of Cleopatra. As this happened about 36 BC, Luke has been charged with inaccuracy. Inscriptions, however, corroborate the view that the L. of Luke was probably a de scendant of the L. mentioned by Jos (cf Schiirer, IMP, div I, vol II, App. 1, p. 338). C. M. KERH

      LYSIAS, lis i-as (Avo-ias, Lusias):

      (1) "A noble man, and one of the blood royal" whom Antiochus Epiphanes (c 166 BC) left with the government of Southern Syria and the guardian ship of his son, while he went in person into Persia to collect the revenues which were not coming in satisfactorily (1 Mace 3 32; 2 Mace 10 11). According to Jos ( Ant, XII, vii, 2), the instructions of Lysias were "to conquer Judaea, enslave its in habitants, utterly destroy Jerus and abolish the whole nation." L., accordingly, armed against Judas Maccabaeus a large force under Ptolemy, son of Dorymenes, Nicanor and Gorgias. Of this force

      Lysimachus Maaseiah



      .ludas defeated the two divisions under Nicanor and Gorgias near Ernmaus (166 BC), and in the following year L. himself at, Bethsura (1 Mace 4), after which lie proceeded to the purification of the temple. In the narration of these campaigns there are considerable differences between the writers of 1 Mace and 2 Mace which scholars have not found easy to explain. Antiochus died at, Babylon on his Pers expedition (164 BC), and L. assumed the office of regent, during the minority of his son, who was yet a child (1 Mace 6 17). He collected another army at Ant ioch, and after the recaptureof Bethsura was besieging Jerus when he learned of the approach of Philip to whom Antiochus, on his deathbed, had intrusted the guardianship of the prince _(1 Mace 6 15; 2 Mace 13). He defeated Philip in 103 BC and was supported at Home, but in the following year he fell with his ward Antiochus into the hands of Demetrius I (Soter), who put both of them to death (I Mace 7 1-23).

      (2) See CLAUDIUS LYSIAS (Acts 23 26).


      LYSIMACHUS, li-sim a-kus (Avo-ifxa^osj Lust- machos ) :

      (1) The son of Ptolemy, of Jerus, is named (Ad Est 11 1) as the interpreter (translator of the Rest of Esther into Or). See ESTHER, THE REST OF.

      (2) Brother of Menelaus, a Gr name said by Jos (Ant, XII, v, 1) to have been assumed by Onias, t he high priest in the hellenizing days of Antiochus Epiphanes, as the Jewish name Jesus was changed to Jason. When Menelaus was summoned to Antioch (2 Mace 4 29) on a charge of malversa tion, he left L. as his deputy in the priesthood at Jerus. _ L. robbed the temple and caused an in surrection in which he met his death beside the treasury (2 Mace 4 42). The name of L. does not appear in 1 he narrative of these events given by J ri - J. HUT