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 "V"



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 "V"

    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 "V"


    Letter "V"

    VAGABOND, vag'a-bond
      "to wander") : The word is used in the curse pronounced on Cain ((Jen 4 12.14). RV substitutes in each case "wanderer," but in Ps 109 10 it retains "vagabonds." "Vagabond Jews" mai; RV "strolling Jews") were persons who traveled about as professional exorcists (Acts 19 13).

    VAHEB, va'heb
      The name occurs in a quotation from the book of the Wars of Jah in Xu 21 14. See SUPUAII. It was apparently in Amorite territory. It is not identified.

    VAIL, val.
      See VEIL.

    VAIN, van:
      The; adj. of "vanity," and representing the same Heb and (Jr words as does the latter, with a few additions (chiefly Kec6s, koios, "empty," and its compounds in the XT).

      And "vain" can always be replaced by its synonym "empty," often with advantage in modern Eng. (Job 15 2; 1 Cor 15 14, etc).

      The exception is the phrase "in vain," and even there the interchange can be made if some (understood) noun such as "ways" be added.

      So "to take God's name in vain" (Ex 20 7; Dt 5 11) means simply to take it for an "empty"("not good") purpose.

    VAINGLORY, van-gld'ri
      "Vainglory" is the tr of kcnodoxia, "empty glory" or "pride," nearly akin to vanity in the modern sense (Phil 2 3). Kctiodoxos is "vainglorious" (Gal 6 2(>, "Let us not be desirous of vainglory," RV "Let us not become vainglorious"). In 1 Jn 2 16 RV has "the vainglory of life" (alazoneia tou biou) for "the pride of life"; cf Jas 4 16, "Ye glory in your vauntings" (alazoneia). Kcnodoxia is tr d "vainglory" (Wiscl 14 14, "For by the vain glory of men they [idols] entered into the world," RV "vain- glorionsness"); alazoneia occurs in Wiscl 5 X, tr d "vaunting." "Pride is applicable to every object, good or bad, high or low, small or great; vanity is applicable only to small objects; pride is therefore good or had; vanity is always bad; it is always emptiness or nothingness" (Crabb, English 8yno- nymes). W. L. WALKER

    VAIZATHA, yl'za-tha,
      va-iz'a-tha, VAJEZATHA, va-jez'a-tha, vaj-6-za'tha (XPPI , ivayzathd'): One


      of the sons of Hainan (Est 9 9). Tho form has boon held to he corrupt, (lie "I (ir) being exception- ally long, and the T (z) exceptionally short- (Herifey, Die pcrsischen Keilinschriftcn [1847], XVI11, 93), and points to Vahynzilntn, "(liven of the Best-One" (OHL, 255).

    VALE, vfd,
      VALLEY, val'i:

      (1) X?3 , yny ; either absolute: "from Bamoth to the valley that is in the field of Moab" (Nu 21 20) ; or with a proper name:

      "valley of Hinnom," also

      "valley of the son of Hinnom" (Josh 16 8) ;

      "vallev of Slaughter" (Jer 7 32);

      "valley of Zeboim" (1 S 13 18);

      "valley of Zephathah"(2 Ch 14 10);

      "valley of Hamon-gog" (Ezk 39 11);

      "valley of Iphtah-el" (Josh 19 14) ;

      "valley of the mountains" (Zee 14 5j;

      "Valley of Salt" (2 S 8 13);

      "valley of vision" (Isa 22 1); once (in RV) as a place-name:

      "until thou comest to Gai" (AV "the valley") (1 S 17 52);

      also (RV) "Ge-harashim" (1 Ch 4 14); ef

      "valley of craftsmen" (in "Ge-haharashim") (Neh 11 35).

      (2) 'amok, "to be deep"; cf

      "to be deep"; "depth" ; -_q^t^ ,

      *Ammik, a village in the valley of Coele-Syria; absolute: "He could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley" (Jgs 1 19); often with place-names:

      "valley of Achor" (Josh 7 24);

      "valley of Aijalon" (Josh 10 12);

      "valley of Gibeon" (Isa 28 21);

      "vale of Hebron" (Gen 37 14);

      "valley of Jehoshaphat" (Joel 3 2);

      "vale of Rephaim," AV

      "valley of the giants" (Josh 15 8);

      "vale of Shaveh" (Gen 14 17);

      "vale of Siddim" (Gen 14 3);

      "valley of Suecoth (Ps 60 6);

      "valley of Weeping" (AV "Baca") (Ps 84 0);

      "valley of Beracah" (m "Blessing") (2 Ch 20 2(5);

      "valley of decision" (Joel 3 14);

      "vale of Elah" (m "terebinth") (1 S 17 2);

      "the King's Vale" (Gen 14 17);

      but "the king's dale" (2 S 18 18); "Emek- keziz,"

      AV "valley of Keziz" (Josh 18 21).

      (3)713x3, bik'dh, V^'p?, baku\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ "to cleave," hence "valley," esp. "broad valley" or "plain"; cf Arab.

      kxJij , bak'at, "wet meadow," cUb , Bikd

      Coele-Syria; absolute: "a land of hills and valleys" (Dt 11 11); with place-names:

      "valley of Jericho" (Dt 34 3);

      "valley of Lebanon" (Josh 11 17);

      "valley of Megiddo" (2 Ch 35 22);

      "valley of Mizpah" (Josh 11 8).

      (4) bn: , nahnl, also "river" or "stream"; ab- solute: "Isaac's servants digged in the valley" (Gen 26 19); with place-names: "valley [AV "river"] of the Arnon" (Dt 2 24); "valley of Eshcol" (Nu 32 9); "valley of Gerar" (Gen 26 17); "valley of Shittim" (Joel 3 18); "valley of Sorek" (Jgs 16 4); "valley of Zered" (Nu 21^12).

      (5) nbETE, sh'pheliih, V bETS , shaphcl, "to be

      low"; ef Arab. JuL* , snfnl, "to be low"; AV "vallev" or "vale," RV "lowland," the coast and foothills of Western Pal.

      (6) av, a ulon, "valley" (Jth 4 4; 7 3; 10 10).

      (7) (/>dpay, phdragx: "Every vallev shall be filled" (Lk 3 5).

      The valley gate (Neh 2 13, etc) may have had about the location of the present Jaffa gate, if by "valley" is meant the valley of Hinnom. If the Tyropceon is meant, it would have been near the southwestern corner of the liar am area. See JERUSALEM.

      The valleys of the mountainous part of Pal are mostly dry, rocky wadies with occasional torrents in the winter season. Those which descend to the W. widen out as they approach the plain and contain broad fields and meadows which in the winter and

      spring at least are fresh and green. The valley of the Jordan, the valley of Megiddo and the valley of Lebanon (i.e. Coele-Syria) contain much cultivable land: "the herds that were in tin- valleys" (1 Ch 27 29): "They of Beth-shemesh were; reaping their wheat harvest in the valley" (1 S 6 13); "The valleys also are covered over with grain" (Ps 65 13). See BROOK; CHAMPAIGN; LOWLAND; RIVER; SiiEi'HELAii. ALFRED ELY DAY

    VALIANTLY, val'yant-li

      , val'yant, P" 1 ^ , tt'iyil; Icrx^pos, /.sr/nm'.s- 1 : "Valiant" in the ()T is for the most part the tr of hnyil, "power," or "might," and is applied to the courageous and to men of war ("mighty men of valor"), as in 1 S 14 52; 31 12; 2 S ll 10, etc; in some passages ben hnyil, "a- son of might" (Jgs 21 10; IS 18 17; 2 S 2 7, etc). A few other Heb words (

      VALLEY, val'i. See VALE, VALLEY.

      VALLEY GATE (X^n -|?C, sha'ar ha-gay\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ "Gate of the Gai"): Is placed (Neh 3 13) between the "tower of the furnaces" and the "dung gate"; from here Nehemiah (2 13) set out on his ride down the "Gai" (Hinnom) to Siloam, and, too (12 31.38), from here the Levites commenced their compass of the city in two directions. It must have been an ancient gate, for Uzziah added towers to it (2 Ch 26 9). It was probably near the S.W. corner of the city and near to, if not identical with, the gate found by Bliss near (now in) the Protestant Ceme- tery. See JERUSALEM, VI, 13.

      E. W. G. MASTERMAN





      VALLEY OF VISION Q^-TH fcT3 , gc' hizzayon): A symbolic name generally understood to signify Jerus as being the home of prophetic vision (Isa 22 1.5).

      VAMPIRE, vam'plr (Hp^b? , ^ulukah) : RVm for "horseleach" (Prov 30 15) has "vampire." See HoRSELEACH.

      VANIAH, va-nl'a 0"P:i , wanydli, meaning un- known): A son of Bani, who had married a foreign wife (Ezr 10 30). The text is, however, doubtful. LXX B h;is Quiexwd, Ouiechod, X , OvLfpexu, Onicre- cho, A, Ovowid, Ouounid, Luc., Owicia, Ouanid.

      VANITY, van'i-ti, VANITIES, van'i-tiz (ban, hebhel, "J1X , 'awen, NTO , shdw' ; Ktvos, kends, (iarai- 6n\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\9 t matai6tes): The words "vain," "vanity," "vani- ties" are frequent in the Bible. Their idea is almost exclusively that of "evanescence," "emptiness,"

      Vapor Verily, Verity


      including "idolatry" and "wickedness" as being not only evil but vain and empty things. They also signify falseness. The chief word tr d "vanity," "vanities" is hcbhd, a "breath of air, or of the mouth," often applied to idolatry (Dt 32 21; 1 K 16 13; Ps 31 G; Jer 8 19, etc); to man's days and to man himself (Job 7 10; Ps 39 5.11, etc); to man's thoughts ( Ps 94 11); to wealth and treasures (Prov 13 11; 21 G); to everything, in Eccl, where the word occurs frequently in various applications: "Vanity of vanities, all is vanity" (Keel 1 2; 12 H). Hcbhd 'is_also the name of Adam's second son (Gen 4 2). 'Awctt, meaning also "breath," is likewise tr' 1 "vanity" in similar connections, but it inclines more to "iniquity" (so often rendered); it is joined with mischief and iniquity (Isa 41 29; 68 9; Zee 10 2;; another frequent word is xt/atr', having also the idea of "falsity," "wickedness" (Ex 20 7; Dt 5 11; Ps 31 G, etc).

      "Vanity" does not often occur in the NT; but see VAIN, VAINGLORY. In Acts 14 15 we have mdtaios, "empty," tr d "vanities" (of idols); viataiotcs, "empti- ness," ' "transitorincss" (Rom 8 20, "The creation was subjected to vanity," frailty, transitoriness); "emptiness," "folly" (Eph 4 17; 2 Pet 2 IS).

      Among oilier changes for "vanity" KV has "iniquity" (Job 15 :*">: Ps 10 7); "falsehood" (Ps 12 2: 41 6); "deceit" (144 x.ll); "vapor" (Prov 21 (>>; "calamity" (22s m " vanity") ; "a breath" (Isa 57 IS); "wick- edly" (58 !>). Conversely, for "Wherefore hast thou made all men in vain?" (Ps 89 47), " Kor what vanity hast thou created all the children of men!"; for "Be- hold, they are all vanity; their works are nothing" (Isa 41 29), " Behold, all of them, their works are vanity and nought," m as AV. with "nought" for "nothing."

      W. L. WALKER VAPOR, va'per: (1) "X , 'c

      up the drops of water, which distil in rain from his vapor" (Job 36 27); "There went up a mist [edh] from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground" ((Jen 2 G). (2) fcTTp: , nasi', "vapor," i.e. that which rises, from V ^"*y ; ,', "to lift": "Who causeth the vapors to ascend from the ends of the earth" (Ps 135 7; cf Jer 10 13; 51 16); also tr' 1 "clouds": "us clouds and wind without rain" (Prov 25 14). (3) In Job 36 33,_ AV has "vapour" ("concerning the vapour") for ^2 , *alali, V nby, *aldh, "to go up," where RV reads "con- cerning the storm that comet h up." (-1) "Ht^p , kltor: "fire and hail, snow and vapor" (Ps 148 S); elsewhere, "smoke": "The smoke of the land went up as the smoke of a furnace" (Gen 19 28); "I am become like 1 a wineskin in the smoke" (Ps 119 83). (5), nlnris: "blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke" (Acts 2 19); "For ye are a vapor that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away" (Jas 4 14). The first two of t lie preceding quotations are interesting as indicating the knowl- edge that vapor of water from the earth or sea is the source of the rain. Visible vapor, i.e. mist or fog, is much less common in Pal than in many other countries. In the mountains, however, esp. in Lebanon, mists are of frequent occurrence, ap- pearing to those below as elouds clinging to the mountains. ALFRED ELY DAY

      VASHNI, vash'ni 0?Tpl , washnl, see below; LXX B, SaveC, ,SVmd,, A, Savt, Sani): Read in 1 Ch 6 28 AV (Heb 13) as the name of the firstborn son of Samuel. According to ver 33 (Heb 18) and 1 S 8 2, Samuel's eldest son was Joel, and the second Abijah. The explanation of this is that in 1 Ch 6 28 the word taken then as a proper name is really "and second"; so following LXX, Luc. and Syr we read (as RV), "And the sons of Samuel: the first-born, Joel, and the second Abijah."


      VASHTI, vash'tl Otftpl , washtl; 'Ao-rCv, Astin; Old Pers "beautiful woman"): The former queen of Xerxes, whom he divorced. On the 7th day of a great feast which the king was giving to the as- sembled nobles of the empire and others, he com- manded the seven chamberlains who served in his presence to bring the queen into the assembly. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\Ve are told (Est 1 11) that his purpose was "to show the peoples and the princes her beauty; for she was fair to look on." The king's command was met by Vashti with a mortifying refusal to obey. The reason which is sometimes assigned for her dis- obedience that no man but the king was permitted to look upon the queen is without foundation. Esther invites Hainan on two occasions to accom- pany tin 1 king to a banquet at which she was present. Nor can it be said that there was any lack of recog- nition of Vashti's high dignity; the seven highest officials of the palace were sent to escort her. The refusal had to be visited with a punishment severe enough to reestablish the supremacy which it threat- ened to overthrow. She was, accordingly, divorced and dethroned.

      There is no known reference to Vashti outside of Est. The suggestion has been made that Vashti was an inferior wife, or one of the royal concubines. There is nothing, however, to support it; and it is, besides, directly opposed to several statements in the narrative. She is always named "queen" (Est 1 It is only (ver 19) when the decree is proposed to repudiate and degrade her that she is called merely "Vashti." She also (ver 9j presides at the banquet for the women. It is evident, there- fore, that in the palace of the women there was no higher personage than Vashti. JOHN URQUHART

      VAT. See WINEVAT.

      VAULT, volt H?: , nd^nr, "to guard," "protest"): Isaiah's charge against Israel as "a people that .... lodge in the secret places" (Isa 65 4, in "vaults," AV "monuments") probably refers to the custom of sleeping in sacred tombs or vaults of idol temples to learn the future through dreams by the method known as incubation. See DIVINATION, G, (ii); 7, 1; FAMILIAR SPIRIT; WITCHCRAFT; and Expos T, IX, 157 if.

      VAULT OF EARTH. See ASTRONOMY, III, 1. VAV, viiv. Sec WAW.

      VEDAN, ve'dan ("Tl , iv'clhan'): A place-name occurring only in E/k 27 19, "Vcdan and Javan traded with yarn for thy wares." AV, taking the syllable iv e iis the Heb conjunction, renders "and Dan also." The text is in bad condition. Some read "Dedan," but Dedan is spoken of separately in the following verse. Assuming that Vedan is the correct reading, an identification may be conjectured with Waddan, also called al-*Abwa\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ between Mecca and Medina. It was the object of Mohammed's first expedition (Ili I/ix/iani, 415). The name contains that of the god Wadd who was worshipped chiefly by the Arab tribe Kalb. A. S. FULTON

      VEHEMENT, ve'he-ment, VEHEMENTLY, ve'- he"-ment-li (" 1 'ttJ" l "in , harishi; imr60T]cri,s, epipothesis) : "Vehement" (from Lat rchcrt-., "to carry," or ve, "out of," and mcns, "mind"), carried away by the mind or force of passion, occurs twice in the OT (Cant 8 G, AV "a most vehement flame" [jealousy]) as the tr of shalhebheth-ydh, "the flame of Jeh," which perhaps means lightning (RV "a very flame of Jeh," m "a most vehement flame, Heb Jah"); and as the tr of AV harishi, "silent," "still," hence "sultry"



      Vapor Verily, Verity

      (Jon 4 X, AV "a vehement east wind," RV "sul- try"'). In the NT, "vehement desire" is (AV) the tr of epipothesis, "earnest desire" (2 Cor 7 11, RV "longing").

      "Vehemently" is the

      W. L. WALKER

      VEIL, val: The following words are so tr d in EV (sometimes AV vail): (1) nnEIp 1 )? , mit./tahatli, Ruth 3 15 AV, RV "mantle." As the material was strong enough to serve as a bag for a large quantity of grain RV is certainly right; ef Isa 3 22. (2)rnC'2, HHixurti, Ex 34 33-3.1. Si. Paul in his ((notation of the passage in 2 Cor 3 13-1(5 uses Kd\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\vfjifj,a, kdlumma, following LXN. The covering worn by Moses to conceal the miraculous brightness of his face, although, according to MT, he seems to have worn it only in private. (3) npG 1 )?, masekhah, Isa 25 7; in' 28 20 tr (1 "cover- ing." The use in 25 7 is figurative and the form of (he "veil" a matter of indifference. (4) !T? , fammdfi, RV Cant 4 1.3 (in "locks" [of hair);; 6 7; Isa 47 2, AV "locks." The meaning of the word is uncertain and AV may very well be right. If, however, RV's tr is correct, a light ornamental veil is meant. (5) C" 1 ^ , c'Z/>/(, Gen 24 (>5; 38 14.19. A large wrap is meant, which at times was used to cover the face also. In 24 Go Rebekah con- formed to the etiquette which required the veiling of brides (see MAKIUAGI-;). In eh 38 one motive for Tamar's use of the veil was certainly to avoid recognition, but it seems clear from the passage that veils were used by courtesans. Why is unknown, perhaps partly to conceal their identity, perhaps partly in parody of the marriage custom. ((>) -P~n, rd hid h, Cunt 5 7 (RV "mantle," m "veil"); Isa 3 23. A light mantle is certainly meant. In Cant 5 7 it is torn from the maiden in the watch- men's endeavor to detain her. (7) TrapaKaXv/jLua, parakdlumma, Wisd 17 3 AV, RV "curtain." (8) Vb. KaraKaXv-n-ru, katakallipto, 1 Cor 11 (> f, with dKaTdKaXv-rrTu, akatakalupto, "unveil" in ver f>; AV has "cover" and "uncover"; /caXuTrrw, kalii]>lo, 2 Cor 4 3 (hi*}, uvaKoKvirTu, anakaliipto, 2 Cor 3 IS; AV "hid" and "open."

      It will be seen that there is a certain reference to what in modern times would be termed a "veil" only in (2) above. For a possible additional refer- ence see MUKKI, KR.

      The use of the face veil as a regular article of dress was unknown to the II eb women, and if "veil" is to be understood in Cant 4 1, etc, it was worn as an ornament only. The modern oriental cus- tom of veiling is due to Mohammedan influence and has not been universally adopted by Jewesses in the Orient. In NT times, however, among both Greeks and Romans, reputable women wore a veil in public (Plutarch Qtiacnl. Itom. xiv) and to appear without it was an act of bravado (or worse); Tarsus, St. Paul's home city, was especially noted for strictness in this regard (Dio of Prusa, Tarsica prior, 48). Hence St. Paul's indignant directions in 1 Cor 11 2-1(1, which have their basis in the social proprieties of the time. The bearing of these directions, however, on the compulsory use of the fiat by modern women in public worship would appear to be very remote.

      For the Veil of the Tabernacle and the Temple see next article. BURTON SCOTT EASTON

      VEIL: (1) (PDHS , pdrokheth; Kara-ire'rao-p-a, ku- tapetasma; AV vail): In Ex, Lev, Nu, the veil that hung between the two holy chambers of the

      tabernacle is mentioned 23 t (Ex 26 31, etc). In several places it is termed "the veil of the screen," and it is distinguished from "the screen for the door of the tabernacle" (Ex 35 12.15; 39 34.38). By the latter is meant the curtain that hung outside the holy place, i.e. at the tabernacle entrance. Ex 26 31 informs us that the veil was made of fine-twined linen, and that its colors were blue and purple and scarlet. It was embroidered with cherubim. At each removal of the tabernacle the veil was used to enwrap the ark of the testimony (Nu 4 5). I'Yom its proximity to this central object of the Ileb ceremonial system, the veil is termed "the veil of the testimony" (Lev 24 3), "the veil which is before the testimony" (Ex 27 21,), etc. In Solo- mon's Temple the veil is mentioned but once (2 Ch 3 14). It was protected by doors of olive wood (1. K 6 31). In the later temple it is alluded to in 1 Mace 1 22. Its presence 1 in Herod's temple is attested by the statement in each of the Synop- tists that at the time of Christ's death the veil of the temple was rent from top to bottom, or in the midst (Mt 27 51; Mk 15 38; Lk 23 45; cf in Mish, Mid. ii. 1; iv.7). This fact is the basis of the profound truth expressed by the writer to the Hebrews that Jesus, by His sacrificial death, opened for all believers a way into the holiest "through the veil, that is to say, his flesh" (He 10 20). See TABERNACLE; TEMPLE. (2) See preceding art. and DRESS, V. W. SHAW CALDECOTT

      VEIN, van: Only in Job 28 1, AV "a vein for the

      silver," or S^172 , ///or', "going forth," "source." Both AV "vein" and RV "mine" are more special- ized than )nw;d', but 11 V doubtless conveys the original meaning.


      VENISON, ven'i-z'n, venVn: Is derived (through the Fr. venaixon) from the Lat roiari, "to hunt," and means properly "the spoils of the chase." As, however, the object of the chase, par excellence, was the deer, venison came to mean usually (as it in- variably does in modern Eng.) "deer's flesh." But in EV this technical force seems not to be implied, for "venison" is used onlv for the two Ileb words P? , cai/idh (Gen 25 2S; " 27 5ff), and iTr? , cedhdh (Gen 27 3), and both these words (from "P , fiZd/i, "to hunt") mean simply "game" of any kind.

      VERDIGRIS, vur'di-gres. See SCUM.

      VERILY, ver'i-li, VERITY, ver'i-ti (33X , 'dbhal, etc; d.fiT|v, ainPii): "Verily," as confirmatory advb., represents various Ileb and Gr words and particles ("ah/idl, "truly," in Gen 42 21, etc; 'akh, "only," "surely," in Ps 66 19; Isa 45 15, etc). For AV "verily thou shalt be fed" (Ps 37 3, where 'emunah), ARV has "feed on his faithfulness" and ERV "follow after faithfulness," in in both "feed se- curely." The Gr amen (Ileb 'amen) is used very frequently in the Gospels as an emphatic confirma- tion of Christ's sayings (Mt 5 18.26; 6 2; Mk 3 28, etc), and in John's Gospel is repeated to give additional emphasis (Jn 1 51; 3 3.5.11, etc). RV makes various changes, as "wholly" for "verily" (Job 19 13), "surely" (Ps 39 5; 73 13), "indeed" (Mk 9 12; Rom 2 25; He 3 5; 7 5), etc, and sometimes puts "verily" where AV has other words, as "also" (Mt 13 23)', "doubtless" (Phil 3 8), etc.

      Verity is the tr of 'cmcth, "truth," "stedfastness" (Ps 111 7, "The works of his hands are verity and judgment," ARV "truth and justice 1 ," ERV "truth and judgment"); and of altthcia, "truth," "reality,"

      Vermilion Vine



      "certainty" (1 Tim 2 7), "faith and verity," RV "faith and truth." W. L. WALKER

      VERMILION, ver-mil'yun. See COLORS, (3).


      VERSIONS, GEORGIAN, jor'ji-an, GOTHIC,

      goth'ik, SLAVONIC, sla-von'ik: Georgia is the

      name given to the territory extending

      1. The to the I 1 ], of the Black Sea, a country Georgian that has had an independent national Version existence of 12,000 years hut is now

      (under the name CJrusinia) a part of the trans-Caucasian domain of Russia. The lan- guage has no affinities with any of the recognized groups, but is becoming obsolete under Russian pressure. Christianity was introduced into Georgia in the 4th cent., and a national conversion followed. A well-supported tradition makes the first tr of the Bible almost contemporaneous with this conver- sion and refers it to St. Mesrop (d. 441; see ARME- NIAN VERSIONS), but the fact is not quite certain and the beginnings of a native VS may really be as much as two centuries later. The oldest MS extant is a Psalter of the 7th-Sth cent., and the earliest copy of the Gospels is perhaps a century later; in all, Gregory (TextkritiJc, 57375) enumerates 17 Geor- gian MSS of the NT, but his list is not exhaustive. The first printed Bible was produced in the ancient alphabet in Moscow in 174:] and has never been reprinted, but other edd, perhaps only of the NT, were issued at least in 1S1G and ISIS, using the non- ecclesiastical alphabet. According to Conybeare (Z\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\T\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\V, XI, 161 -66, 232-39 [1910]) the Georgian VS was first made from the Old Syr and then later (llth cent.) revised from the Gr. In 1910 a new edition, bused on two MSS dated respectively 913 and 99">, was begun (Quattuor Ei\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ rcrxio d'eon/iti wins, St. Petersburg). The Georgian VS was used by S. C. Malan, The (HIS pel (iccordhuj to St. John fr* from the 11 Old< xt VSS, London, 1862.

      I'lfilas, the Arian bishop of the West Goths and

      the chief agent in their conversion to Christianity,

      was also the first translator of the Bible 1

      2. The into Gothic, a work for which he had Gothic even to invent an alphabet. Accord- Version ing to tradition, his tr included the

      entire Bible with the exception of K (which he thought unadapted to the already too warlike character of his converts), but there is doubt whether his work actually included more than the NT. Too little of the OT has survived to enable a settling of this question, nor is it possible to tell how much revision the NT tr has undergone since I'lfilas' work.

      A list of the six Gothic, MSS is given in HDtt, IV, 862, to which is to be added a bilingual Lat-Gothic MS containing portions of Lk 24, known as the Arsinoe Fragment (published in ZNTW, XL 1-38 [1910] and separately [Gicssen, 1910J). In all there have been preserved in the OT Gen 6 (in part ) ; Ps 52 2 f; Neh 5-7 (in part), and in the NT the Gos- pels and Pauline Epp. (all incomplete), with quo- tations from He. The best complete ed is that of Stamm-Heyne 9 (Paderborn, 1S96), but as the VS is of basic importance for the history of the Germanic languages there are many edd of various portions prepared for philological purposes.

      The OT fragments are a tr of a text very closely allied to the Lucianic Gr (see SEPTUAGINT) and are certainly not from the Heb. The NT undoubtedly

      was made from a text of the type used in Antioch (Constantinople) in the 4th cent., with very slight variations, none of which are "neutral" (von Soden classes them as of the /-type). Either in making the tr or (more probably) in a subsequent revision an Old-Lat text was used, of the type of Codex Brixi- anus (f), and certain Old-Lat readings are well marked. For brief lists of these peculiarities see Burkitt in Jour. Thcol. Studies, I, 129-34 (1900), or von Soden, Xchriflen ilex NT, I, 1469 f (1906).

      It is definitely known that the first Slavonic tr of the Bible was commenced in 8(54 or earlier by the two brothers Cyril (d. 869) and 3. The Methodius (d. 885), and that the latter

      Slavonic worked on it after the former's death. Version Their work was undertaken for the benefit of the Balkan Slavs, and at first only the liturgical portions (Gospels, Acts, Epp. and Ps) were tr' 1 , but, after the completion of this, Methodius carried the tr farther to include larger portions of the OT. How much of this he accomplished is obscure, but he seems not to have finished the OT entirely, while almost certainly he did not translate; Rev. Uncertain also is the exact dialect used for this work; although this dialect was the basis of the present liturgical language of the Russian church, it has undergone much transforma- tion before arriving at its final stage. At different times the tr of the Bible was revised to conform to the changes of the language, in addition to other revisional changes, and, as a result, the MSS (some of which go back to the 10th cent.) exhibit very varying types of text that have not been satisfac- torily classified.

      An attempt to bring the discrepant material into order was made about 1495 by Archbishop Gi-nnadius, but he was unable to find Slavonic MSS that included the entire Bible and was forced to supply the deficiencies (Ch, Ezr, Neh, Est and most of Jer and the Apoc) by a new tr made from the Vulg. This Bible of Gennadius was the basis of the first printed edition, made at Ostrog in 1581, although the liturgical portions had been printed earlier (Acts and Epp. first of all in 1564). The Ostrog ed followed Gennadius fairly closely, but Est, Cant and \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\isd were new tr s made from the LXX. The next revision was undertaken by order of Peter the Great and was performed by using the Gr (OT and NT), although the resulting text was not printed until 1751. A slightly emended ed of 1756 is still the official Bible of the Russian church.

      This Slavonic VS is to be distinguished from the VS in the true Russian language, begun first in 1517, revised or remade at various times, with an excellent modern tr first published complete in 1876. See, on the whole subject, esp. Bebb in Church Quart. /err., XLI, 203-25, 1895.

      LITF.RATI-RK. On all throe VSS sec HDB, IV, 861-04, 1902, and the art. " Bibellibersetzung " in f'RPl 3 , III (1897), with the important supplement in XXIII (1913). BURTON SCOTT EASTON

      VERY, ver'i: As adj. (from verus, "true"), "true," "real," "actual," etc ((Jen 27 21.24, "my very son Esau"; Josh 10 27, "this very day"; Jn 7 2(5, "the very Christ," etc); chiefly as advb., "in a high degree," "extremely." As advb. it is commonly in the OT the tr of "IK'S , m e 'odh, and in the NT represents, as adj. and advb., several Gr words, as alethos, "truly" (Jn 7 26, above), autos (Jn 14 11, "the very works' sake"; Rom 13 6), sphodra (Mt 18 31, "very sorry," RV "exceeding sorry"; Mk 16 4, "very great," RV "exceeding"), huper- (in composition 1 Thess 5 13), etc. RV frequently omits "very," and also substitutes other words for it, as "exceeding" (2 Ch 16 8; Mt 26 7; cf above), "sore" (Zee 9 5), etc.

      W. L. WALKER



      Vermilion Vine

      VESSEL, ves'el: Is used frooly in EV to translate y3 , k'll, the Aram. "jS^C , ma'n, and o-KeOos, fikciioa, words all meaning "an implement or utensil" of any kind, when the context shows that a hollow utensil is meant. In 1 S 21 5, however, the tr of the pi. of k''ll by "vessels" is dubious. EV evidently intended something in the nature of provision wallets, and the "holiness'' of such objects finds partial parallels in Nu 19 15; Lev 11 32-34, etc. But in 1 S 21 8, in the immediate context of the verse above, k"ll certainly means "weapons," and this tr is quite intelligible in ver 5 also. For war among the Hebrews was a holy function, calling for extreme ceremonial purity (Dt 23 9 L 14). See the comnis. and esp. RW, 455-50. In addition, "vessel" appears in Isa 30 14 for 511?. , nebhcl, "jar"; in Mt 13 4S for dyyos, dggos, "vessels"; and in Sir 21 14; Mt 25 4 for ayyetov, aggeion, a dimin. form of aggos. A difTerent use is that of Wisd 14 1, where "vessel" represents TT\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\OIOV, ploion, "a boat," while Wisd 14 5.0 AV has "weak vessel" for o-xfSia, sclicd'ia, "raft" (so RV). Vessels of all sorts and kinds and for all sorts of uses were so familiar as to make them natural illustrations for difTerent sorts of human beings (Hos 8 8; Isa 22 24; Jer 22 2-!, etc; see POTTER), and throng' i Acts 9 15 the word "vessel" has passed into Chris- tian theology as signifying simply a human being. But the figure of such "vessels" as (passively) filled with difTerent contents is not Bib. In 1 Thcss 4 4 "vessel" may be taken as a figure for either the man's own body or for his wife. Between these possibilities the comms. are almost equally divided.


      VESTRY, ves'tri (Hnpc , mdtahah): Once, in 2 K 10 '22, as a place for vestments.

      VEX, voks, VEXATION, vek-sa's'iun: "Vex," meaning originally to shake or toss in carrying, has a much more intensive meaning in Scripture than in common modern usage. It represents over a score of Heb and Gr words, most of them tr' 1 by this word only once, and many of them changed in RV into other forms. Thus bahel in Ps 6 2.3.10 is in ARV "troubled" (in Ps 2 5,RVm "trouble"); frcrar in Neh 9 27 is in RV "distressed"; pdscho in Mt 17 15 is "suffereth grievously"; kakoo in Acts 12 1 is "afflict, " etc. So "vexation only" in Isa 28 1!) is in RV "nought but terror," and there are other changes of this word (cf Dt 28 20, "discom- fiture"; Isa 9 1, "in anguish"). On the other hand, RV has "vex" for "distress" (Dt 2 9.19); "they that vex" for "the adversaries of" (Isa 11 13j; "vexeth himself" for "meddleth" (Prov 26 17), etc.

      W. L. WALKER

      VIAL, vl'al: In modern Kng. means "a tiny flask." The word appears in EV 1 S 10 1 and RV 2 K 9 1.3 (AV "box") for TfS , pakh, a word found nowhere else and from a root meaning "to pour." The shape and size of the pakh are quite uncertain. In 1 Esd 2 13; and AV Rev 5 8, etc, "vial" translates 0(dA?7, phidlc. The phiale was a flat, shallow bowl (Lat patera), shaped much like a saucer. Hence RV's change to "bowl" in Rev, a change that should have been made in 1 Esd also.


      VILE, vll, VILLANY, vil'an-i: The original words for "vile" and "villany" are used in about 10 difTer- ent senses, e.g. despised (1 S 15 9), despicable

      (Dnl 11 21 AV), lightly esteemed (Dt. 25 3). empty (.[K.S 19 24 AV;, foolish (Isa 32 0, AV and ERV), dishonorable (Rom 1 20), filthy or dirty (.las 2 2), humiliation (Phil 3 21).

      Villany occurs but twice in AV (Isa 32 0; Jer 29 23j, and signifies emptiness or folly (so RV;. From the foregoing meanings it, will be seen that the word "vile" does not always bear the meaning which has come to be invariably given it in our present-day speech. Anything common or ordi- nary or humble might, in the Scriptural sense, be termed "vile." So Job 40 4, RV "Behold, 1 am of small account"; also "the low estate of his hand- maid" (Lk 1 48). Ordinarily, however, the idea of contemptible, despicable 1 , is read into the word


      VILLAGE, vil'iij (122 , kaphur, P^H , hainrdth, 3"H^n t har s f',rlin, ffuS , bdnolh, P.'TIS , p'm-.otli, Kcofju], koine): (1) The general term for a village, in common with Aram, and Aral)., is kd/ihdr (Cant 711; 1 Ch 27 25; kophcr, 1 S 6 IS; k'pltlr, Neh 6 2). This designation is derived from the idea of its offering "cover" or shelter. It is used in com- bination, and place-names of this formation became prominent in post-Bib, times, probably because the villages so named had then grown into towns. A well-known Bib. instance of such names is Caper- naum. (2) Hawwoth (always "town" in EV; see HAVVOTH-JAIR) m-'ans originally a group of tents (Arab. hiwa). These in settled life soon became more permanent dwellings, or what we understand by a village. The term, however, is applied only to the villages of Jair in the tribe of Manasseh (Xu 32 41; 1 K 4 13). (3) llaqcrlin likewise came from nomadic life. They were originally enclosures specially for cattle, alongside of which dwellings for the herdsmen and peasantry naturally grew up (see HAZAR-ADDAR; HAZOR). They were unwalled (Lev 25 31) and lay around the cities (Josh 19 8). (4) Bdnoth is lit. "daughters." The word is applied to the dependent villages lying around the larger cities, and to which they looked as to a kind of metropolis (Nu 21 25, etc); RV "towns" except in Nu 32 42. (5) P'Tdzoth means "the open coun- try," but it soon came to mean the villages scat- tered in the open (Ezk 38 11; Zee 2 4; Est 9 19). Some 1 have sought to connect the Perizzite.s with this word and to regard them, not as a distinct people, but as the peasant class. Attempts have also been made to connect p''razon in Jgs 5 7.11 with the same root, and AV rendered it "inhabit- ants of the villages." RV , on the contrary, gives it the meaning of "rulers." The VSS indicate a word meaning authority, and probably the text should be emended to read roz'nim, "rulers." A similar emendation is required in I lab 3 14. "Village" in RV of the NT invariably represents the Greek kdme, but in 2 Mace 8 the RV Apoc has "village" for chora, lit. "country." See CITY; Towx. W. M. CHRISTIE

      VILLANY. See VILE.

      VINE, vln:

      (1) "23, gcphcH, usually the cultivated grape vine. In Nu 6 4; Jgs 13 14 we have T^H 'E-J,

      geplicn, ha-i/ai/ln, lit. "vine of wine," 1. Hebrew tr<1 "grape vine" (Nu) and "vine," Words m "grape vine" (Jgs); 2 K 4 39,

      rnip -D3 , gcphcti sculhch, EV "wild vine"; Dt 32 32,210 "?"> , gcphcn s''

      (2) p"VttJ , sorck, in Isa 5 2, "choicest vine"; P"" , sfirck, in Jer 2 21, "noble vine"; H^TT , sorckah, in Gen 49 11, "choice vine"; cf VALLEY


      Virgin, Virginity



      OF SOHICK (q.v.). The Hob is supposed to indicate dark grapes and, according to rabbinical tradition, they were unusually sweet and almost, if not quite, stoneless.

      (3) "T^T: , ttdzlr, in Lev 25 5.11, ''undressed vine," AV "vine undressed," m "separation." This may mean an unpruned vine and be a reference to the unshorn locks of a Nazirite, but it is equally probable that TT: should be "P?3 , ba<;lr, "vint- age."

      For the blossom we have PHE , perah (Isa 18 5), "blossom"; PIS! , ni(,\\\\\\\\\\\\'

      2~13.15;"7 12).

      For grapes we have commonly: 3-?, *enabh (a word common to all Sem languages) (den 40 H); IK 32 14; Isa 6 2, (Me); D" 1 ?;? C , dam 'finabluin, lit. "blood of grapes," i.e. wine (den 49 11); "C2 , hour, "the unripe grape" (Isa 18 5, "ripening grape," AV "sour grape"; Job 15 33, "unripe grapes"; Jer 31 29 f; Fzk 18 2, "sour grapes";; 2 v u^3 , b''/iKlnn>, "wild grapes" (Isa 6 2.4; see duAPKS, WILD); xSlJJS , 'cxhkol, a "cluster" of ripe grapes (den 40 10;" Cant 7 8 f; Hal) 3 17, etc; cf EsiiroL [q.v.]); uP3")n , harqanmm, usually supposed to be the kernels of grapes (Nu 6 4).

      In dr we have ,u7reXos. dmpelos, "vine" (Ml 26

      29, etc), ffTa

      grapes"; Mt 7 1(5, "grapes," etc),

      2. Greek and Corpus, Minis (Rev 14 18), "cluster and Latin of the vine." In the Lat of 2 Esd

      rhica is "vine" in 5 2:5 ("vineyard" in 16 30.43); bnlnix (9 21) and raccniHS (16 30) are "cluster"; uci-nium (9 21) and um (16 2(5) are "a grape."

      Pal appears to have been a vine-growing country from the earliest historic; times. _ The countless

      wine presses found in and around

      3. Antiquity centers of early civilization witness to and Im- this. It is probable that the grape portance was largely cult ivated as a source of

      sugar: the juice expressed in the "wine press" was reduced by boiling to a liquid of treacle-like consistency known as "grape honey," or in II eb d''bhnsh (Arab. dib*). This is doubtless the "honey" of many OT references, and before the days of cane sugar was the chief source of sugar. The whole OT witnesses to how greatly Pal de- pended upon the vine and its products. Men re- joiced in wine also as one of dod's best gifts (Jgs 9 13; Ps 104 15). Hut the Nazirite might eat nothing of the vine "from the kernels even to the husk" (Nu 6 4; Jgs 13 14).

      The land promised to the children of Israel was one of "vines and fig trees and pomegranates" (IK 8 S); they inherited vineyards which they had not planted (IK 611; Josh 24 13; Neh 9 25). Jacob's blessing on Judah had much reference to the suitability of his special part of the land to the vine (den 49 11). When the leading people were carried captive the poor were left as vine dressers (2 K 25 12; Jer 52 10), lest the whole land should lapse into uncultivated wilderness. On the prom- ised return this humble duty was, however, to fall to the "sons of the alien" (Isa 61 5 AV).

      The mountain regions of Judaea and Samaria,

      often little suited to cereals, have always proved

      highly adapted to vine culture. The

      4. Its Cul- stones must first be gathered out and tivation utilized for the construction of a pro- tecting wall or of terraces or as the

      bases of towers (Isa 52; Mt 21 33). Every an- cient vineyard had its wine press cut in a sheet of

      rock appearing at the surface. As a rule the vine- stocks lie along the ground, many of the fruit-bearing branches falling over the terraces (cf den 49 22); in some districts the end of the vine-stock is raised by means of a cleft stick a foot or more above the surface; exceptionally the vine branches climb into

      Large Vine at Jericho, Age .'5:53 Years. Length of Trunk,

      '. ft. 7 in.; (iirtli of Trunk at r>:5 in.; (Jirtu of Trunk Half-Way I'p, 3S in.

      trees, and before a dwelling-house they are some- times supported upon poles to form a bower (cf 1 K 4 25, etc).

      The cultivation of the vine requires constant care or the fruit will very soon degenerate. After the rains the loosely made walls require to have breaches repaired; the ground must be ploughed or harrowed and cleared of weeds contrast with this the vine- yard of the sluggard (Prov 24 30-31); in the early spring the plants must be pruned by cutting off dead and fruitless branches (Lev 25 3.4; Isa 5 (5) which are gathered and burned (Jn 15 (5). As the grapes ripen they must be watched to keep ofT jackals and foxes (Cant 2 15), and in some districts even wild boars (Ps 80 13). The watchman is stationed in one of the towers and overlooks a considerable area. When the grape season comes, the whole family of the owner frequently take their residence in a booth constructed upon one of the larger towers and remain there until the grapes are practically finished. It is a time of special happiness (cf Isa 16 10). The gleanings are left to the poor of the village or town (Lev 19 10; IK 24 21; Jgs 8 2; Isa 17 (5; 24 13; Jer 49 <); Mic 7 1). In the late summer the vineyards are a beautiful mass of green, as con- trasted with the dried-up parched land around, but in the autumn the leaves are sere and yellow (Isa 34 4), and the place desolate.

      The expression "vine of Sodom" (Dt 32 '.}'2) has been supposed, esp. because of the description in Jos (BJ,

      IV, viii, 4), to refer to the colocynth K Vinp of (Citrullus coloci/iithix), but it is far more

      probable that it means "a vine whose bodom juices and fruits were not fresh and

      healthy, but tainted by the corruption of which Sodom was the type" (Driver, Ctnnm. on Dt). See SODOM. VINE OF.




      Virgin, Virginity

      Figurative: Every man "under his vine and under his fig-tree" (I K 4 IT); Mir 4 I; /ec 3 10) was a sign of nalional peace and prosperity. To plant vinevards and eat the fruit, thereof implied long and settled habitation (2 K 19 29; I's 107 .'57; Isa 37 30; 65 21; Jer 31 5; E/k 28 2

      Three of Our Lord's parables are connected with vineyards (Mt 20 Iff; 21 2S.33 ff), and He has made the vine ever sacred in Christian symbolism by His teaching regarding the true vine (.In 15). E. .W. C. MASTKKMAN

      VINEGAR, vin'e-ger (fUh , hdtncc,; 6os, o.n) : Vinegar, whose use as a condiment (Ruth 2 14) needs no comment, is formed when a saccharine fluid passes through a fermentation that produces acetic acid. In the ancient, world vinegar was usually made of wine, although any fruit juice can be utilized in its manufacture, and "vinegar of strong drink" (palm juice?) is mentioned in Nu 6 3. I'n- diluted vinegar is of course undrinkable, and to offer it to a thirsty man is mockery (Ps 69 21), but a mixture of water and vinegar makes a bever- age that was very popular among the poor (Or oxos, oxukraton, Lat ponca names applied also to diluted sour wine) . It is mentioned in Nu 6 3 (for- bidden to the Nazirite) and again in the Oospels in the account of the Crucifixion. The executioners had brought it in a vessel (Jn 19 29) for their own use and at first "offered" it to Christ, while keeping it, out of reach (Lk 23 3(5). But at the end the drink was given Him on a sponge (Mk 15 36; Mt 27 -IS; Jn 19 20.30). In addition, AV, following 7'/2, has "vinegar .... mingled with gall" in Alt 27 34, but this rests on a false reading, probably due to Ps 69 21, and RV rightly has "wine." Vine- gar, like all acids, is injurious to the teeth (Prov 10 2(5); and when it is combined with niter an effervescence is produced (Prov 25 20). The ap- propriateness of the last figure, however, is obscure, and LXX reads "as vinegar on a wound," causing pain. BURTON SCOTT EASTON

      VINEYARD, vin'yard. See VI.VK.


      (Jgs 11 33). See AKKL-CHKKAMI.M; MKADOW.

      VINTAGE, vin'tftj. See VINK.

      VIOL, vl'ol (bn:, nfbhd, 33: , ncbhd): AV and RVinlsa 14 11;' Am 5 23; 6*5; AV alone in Isa 5 12, RV "lute." "Viol" is derived from Lat rile/Id, a doublet of vitida, a "viol"; hence Fr. rirlli', doublet of viole. The viol was a bowed in- strument, the parent of the violin tribe, and is not a true equivalent for ttcbhcl. See Mrsic.

      VIOLENCE, vi'o-lens, VIOLENT, vl'6-lont:

      Chiefly for -M3 , gdzal, C^2H , hdmas; f3ia, Iria, and their derivatives. Difficulty is offered only by the

      very obscure passage Mt 11 12 Lk 16 l<. Both Ml and Lk contain the vb. f-iidpTai. /mi:;i Ini, but I his form may be either a middle, "presses violent ly," "storms," or a passive;, "is forced." Mt, in addi- tion, contains the adj. hiuxtui, but whether this is a term ol praise, "heroic enthusiasts," or of blame, "hot-headed revolutionaries," is again a problem. Nor can it be determined whether the words "from the days of John the Baptist until no\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\v" are meant to include or exclude the work of the Baptist him- self. The difference in wording in Mt, and Lk further complicates the problem, and, in conse- quence, scholars are widely at variance as to the proper interpretation. "The Baptist has fanned a new Messianic storm of ill-advised insurrection," "the Pharisees have; shamefully used forcible sup- pression of Cod's teachers," "the Kingdom of Cod comes like a storm and is received by those who have used drastic self-discipline," are instances of the differing explanations proposed.

      Britro.v SCOTT EASTO.X

      VIPER, vi'per (rtfSX, Y/,//Y/ t (Job 20 1(5; Isa 30 (5; 59 5]; t\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\i$v*, Ichidna [Mt 3 7 = Lk 3 7; Mt 12 34; 23 33; Acts 28 3]): Several vipers are found in Pal, but it is not certain that, 'c/th'cli referred definitely to any of them. See SiciU'K.vr.

      VIRGIN, vur'jin, VIRGINITY, vur-jin'i-ti: (1) !"U?r3 , b''th iildh, from a root meaning "separated," is "a woman living apart," i.e. "in her father's house," and hence "a virgin." B'Hifdah seems to have been the technical term for "virgin," as ap- pears from such a combination as -ntfardh bfi e tttululi, "a damsel, a virgin," in Dt 22 23. 2S, etc. An apparent, exception is Joel 1 8, "Lament like a virgin [b'thulah] .... for the husband of her youth," but the word is probably due to a wisli to allude to the title "virgin daughter of Zion" (the tr "a betrothed maiden" is untrue to Heb senti- ment). And the use of "virgin" for a city (Isa 37 22, etc; cf Isa 23 12; 47 1) probably means "un- subdued," though, as often, a title may persist after its meaning is gone (Jer 31 4). AV and ERV frequently render b e lhflldh by "maiden" or "maid" (Jgs 19 24, etc), but ARV has used "virgin" throughout, despite the awkwardness of such a phrase as "young men and virgins" (Ps 148 12). For "tokens of virginity" ("proofs of chastity") see the comm. on Dt 22 15 ff. (2) rvcby ,

      The OT lays extreme emphasis on chastity before marriage (Dt 22 21), but childlessness was so great a misfortune that death before marriage was to be bewailed (Jgs 11 37.38). St. Paul's preference for the unmarried state (1 Cor 7 29 ff) is based



      I. II.


      on the greater freedom for service (cf Mt 19 12), and (he (!r estimuto of virginity us possessing a religious quality per KK is foreign to true Jewish thought (such a passage as Philo Muixl. opff., ~>3, is due to direct (Ir influence). Some have thought to find a trace of the (!r doctrine in Rev 14 4. But 141,000 Ist-cent. Christian ascetics are out of the question, and the figure must he interpreted like that of Jas 4 4 (reversed).


      Di: FI MTION-


      Till-; HISTORICAL (.) rKSTION-

      1. Statement Not Dogmatic but Vital as History

      2. Its Importance to Leaders of the Karly Church !{. Hypothesis of Invention Discredits tlie Cliurch

      IV. THF, ('lUTH'Ai. QUESTION

      1. Basis of Virgin-Birth Statement

      2. Interrelationship of Narratives

      3. Sources. Origin and Age of Documents V. TUB DOCTRINAL QUESTION

      1. In the NT

      2. Portrait of Jesus in Synoptic Gospels :?. In Rest of the NT

      4. Oppositions to the Doctrine

      />. Its Importance to Modern Thought LITER ATUKE

      /. Definition. "Virgin-birth" is the correct and only correct designation of the birth statement contained in the (iospels of Mt and Lk. ''immacu- late conception" is of course manifestly a blunder due to the confusion of one idea with another. "Supernatural or miraculous birth" will not do, because there is no intimation that the process of birth was in any way exceptional. "Supernatural or miraculous conception" is equally unsatisfactory as it involves a question-begging comparison be- tween the birth of Christ and the exceptional births of the Sons of Promise (e.g. Isaac, John the Bap- tist, etc). The only statement which is sufficiently specific is "virgin-birth," inasmuch as according to the NT statement Mary was at the time of this birth virgo intact/i.

      II. The Textual Question. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ e may deal with this division of our subject verv briefly, because if we are to allow any weight at all to textual evidence there is no question as to the infancy narratives, either in whole or in part. Their position is flaw- less and unassailable. There is a voluminous lit- erature devoted to the discussion of the subject, but it is notably jejune even for critical writing, and much more impressive for ingenuity and dialectic skill in arguing a poor case than for anything in the way of results. We do not hesitate to refer the reader who is interested in discussions of this sort to entirely satisfactory reviews of them found else- where (see Maehen, Princeton Jfericiv, October, 190o; January, 190(5; and Orr, The Virgin Birth of Chrixt). We may summarize the entire dis- cussion in the words of Johannes Weiss (Theolo- (jische Rundschau, 190.'}, 20S, quoted by Maehen, ut sup.): ''There never were forms of Alt and Lk without the infancy narratives." One point only we shall consider in this connection; namely, the disputed reading of Mt 1 1(5. The Ferrar group of MSS (nos. 34(5, o/>(5, X2(i, 828) interpose a second "begat" between the names Joseph and Jesus. It is affirmed that this reading with the variants represents an original form of the genealogy pre- served in the (iospels which affirms the literal son- ship of Jesus to Joseph. The first and most obvious remark to be made upon this question is, granting what is extremely uncertain that this reading is original, it does not prove nor begin to prove the point alleged. This is now widely conceded. For one thing, the word "begat" is used elsewhere for legal or putative fatherhood (cf ver 12 and see GKXKALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST). Allen's statement of the case indicates clearly enough that the radical

      use of this variation has broken down (see ICC, ''Matthew," 8). This writer holds that the read- ing of S 1 ("Jacob begat Joseph. Joseph, to whom was betrothed Mary the Virgin, begat Jesus, called the Messiah," Mt 1 16) is nearest the original form. By four steps, which he enumerates in order, he; con- ceives that the original text, which was intended to convey the idea of a lc(/) that he used the word "begat" in the legal sense throughout (vs s. 12; cf 1 Ch 3 11.12.19); (c) that he believed in the virgin-birth as evinced by the connection and the use of names of women in- cluding Mary's. Then 1 is therefore no ba^is for the idea that the genealogy, even without the strongly attested relative 1 clause of 1 1(5, ever meant anything but an attestation of the virgin- birth.

      ///. The Historical Question. The twofold birth announcement of Mt and Lk is a statement of his- torical or, more strictly speaking, 1. State- biographical fact. The accounts, as ment Not we; shall sec 1 , are very rigidly confined Dogmatic to the matter of fact concerned. It is but Vital not a dogma and receives very little as History doctrinal elaboration even in the in- fancy narratives themselves. It is an event, wholly real or wholly imaginary. The statement of it is wholly true or entirely false. But as a historical statement this narrative is of pecul- iar quality and significance 1 . (1) It touches upon the most delicate matters, at a place where the line between that which is most sacred and that which is most degraded in human life is closely drawn. To discredit it leaves the most intimate mystery of Our Lord's earthly life 1 under the shadow of sus- picion. It is therefore a statement of the greatest personal moment in the evangelic; record. (2) It involves the secret history and public honor of a family most dear and sacred to the entire 1 Christian body. It records the inner and outer experiences of the mother of the Lord and of His brethren, themselves honored leaders in the church. (3) It touches_ upon the central mystery of the Lord's person in such a way as to involve either a very important contribution to the doctrine of the incar- nation or a very serious mutilation of the truth. We may dismiss altogether the contention of many, that whether true or not the fact is of no great im- portance. It must be of importance. No fact in which the relationship of Jesus to His ancestors according to the flesh, to His mother, to the laws of life in the race- at large, are so evidently and so deeply involved can possibly be a matter of in- difference. The nature of His experience in the world, the quality and significance of His manhood, the fundamental constitution of His person, the nature and limits of the incarnation are necessarily and vitally concerned in the discussion. It is im- possible to begin with the acceptance or rejection of the fact and arrive by logical processes at like convictions on any fundamental matter in the region of Christology.


      All this must have been as patent to the earliest believers as to ourselves. The men who incorpo- rated this incident into the gospel nar- 2. Its Im- rative could not possibly have been portance to blind to the importance of what they Leaders of were doing (cf Lk 1 .']). In view of the Early these facts it would be well for the Church serious student to ask himself this

      question: "On the hypothesis of in- vention, what manner of men were they who fab- ricated these narratives and succeeded in foisting them upon the church so early as to dominate its earliest: official records and control 1 IK; very making of all its creeds?" It is clear that deliberate inven- tion is the only alternative to historical credit. We may throw out of court as altogether inad- missible the hypothesis that the church as a whole, by a naive and semi-unconscious process, came to believe these stories and to accept them without criticism. Rumors always grow in the absence of known facts, esp. where curiosity is keen. Absurd rumors multiply among the credulous. But no statement contrary to natural expectation was ever yet promulgated among people of even average intelligence without meeting the resistance of in- credulity on the part of some individuals who wish to inquire, esp. if means of verification are within reach. In this particular instance, the issue may be stated much more sharply. At no period reason- ably to be assigned for the origin and incorporation of these documents could they have been honestly accepted by any member of the Christian commu- nity, sufficiently taught to occupy a position of authority. If the story was invented, there must have been a time when Jesus was universally ac- cepted as the son by natural generation of Joseph and Mary. The story surely was not invented be- fore His birth nor for some time after. The first person, therefore, who spoke contrary to the prev- alent and natural belief must have had it from the family, which alone knew the truth, or else have been a wanton and lying gossip. Such a story is recognizable on the face of it as authoritative or pure invention. There is no middle ground. It could not have been recounted without being challenged for its strangeness and for its contra- vention of the accepted belief. It could not have been challenged without the exposure of its ground- less and fraudulent character, for the simple reason that the lack of positive and authoritative cer- tification would be its immediate and sufficient condemnation. It is not difficult to draw the por- trait of the inventor of this story. He must have been lacking, not only in the sense of truthfulness, but also in the elementary instinct of delicacy, to have invaded the privacy of the most sacred home known to him and deliberately invented a narrative which included the statement that Mary had come under suspicion of wrongdoing in such a way as to shadow the life of her Son. He must also have been doct finally lax in the extreme, as well as tempera- mentally presumptuous, to have risked a mutila- tion of the truth by an invention dealing with such essential matters.

      Moreover, this hypothesis demands that this fabrication must have met with instantaneous and universal success. It passed the scru- 3. Hypothe- tiny of the church at large and of its sis of In- authorized teachers, and was never vention challenged save by a small group of

      Discredits heretics who disliked it on purely the Church dogmatic grounds.

      To whatever origin in the way of suggestion from without one may attribute the story whether one may ascribe it to the influence of OT prophecy, or Jewish Messianic expectations in general, or to ethnic analogies. Bab. Kgyp or C!r the fact remains that the story had

      to be invented and published by those who ought to have known better and could easily have; known better had they possessed sufTlcicnt interest in the cause of truth to have made even casual inquiries into the cre- dentials of such an important statement offered for their acceptance. It is fairly true to say that ethnic anal- ogies for the birth of Christ fail (see art. on "Heathen Wonder-Births and the Birth of Christ," 1'nncHon Rrrirw, January, 1UOS). Jt is also true that the rooted Sera conviction shared by the Hebrews, that family descent is to be traced through the male line only, so persistent even among the N'T writers that both evan- gelists, on the face of them, trace the lineage of Joseph, would have acted as an effectual barrier against this particular legendary development. It is further true that no passage of the OT, including Isa 7 11, can be adduced as convincing evidence that the story was invented under the motive of finding fulfilment for Messianic predictions (see I MM ANCKU. But far more satisfactory is the elementary conviction that the founders of the Christian church and the writers of its documents were not the kind of men to accept or cir- culate stories which they knew perfectly well would be used by unbelief in a malignant way to the discredit of their Master and His family. The hypothesis of invention not only leaves an ugly cloud of mystery over the birth of Jesus, but it discredits beyond repair every man who had to do with the writing and circulation o'f the Gospels, down to and including the man who pro- fesses to have "traced the course of all things accu- rately from the beginning," according to the testimony of those who were "eyewitnesses and ministers of the word" (Lk 1 2 f). It is simply impossible to save the credit, in any matter involving honesty or common- sense, of one who uses words like these and yet incor- porates unauthenticated legends into the narrative to which he has thus pledged himself.

      _ One may venture at the close of this section of the discussion to point out that everything which the inventor of this story must have been, the narrators of it are not. Both narratives exhibit a profound reverence, a chaste and gracious reserve; in the presence of a holy mystery, a simplicity, dignity and self-contained nobility of expression which are the visible marks of truth, if such there are any- where in human writing.

      IV. The Critical Question. The infancy narra- tives evidently stand somewhat apart from the main

      body of apostolic testimony. The per- 1. Basis of sonal contact of the disciples with Virgin-Birth Jesus, upon which their testimony pri- Statement marily rests, extended from the call of

      the disciples, near the opening of the ministry, to the resurrection and post-resurrection appearances. It is hyper-skepticism to deny that the substance of the gospel narrative rests upon the basis of actual experience. But all four evangelists show a disposition to supplement the immediate testimony of the disciples by the use of other well- attested materials. Luke's introductory paragraph, if it was written by an honest man, indicates that he at least was satisfied with nothing less than a careful scrutiny of original sources, viz. the testi- mony, written or oral, of eyewitnesses. It may reasonably be surmised that this was the general attitude of the entire group of apostles, evangelists and catechists who are responsible for the author- ship and circulation of the Gospels.

      But, to say nothing of the infancy narratives, for one of which Luke himself is responsible, these writers have embodied in the narrative the ministry of John the Baptist, the baptism and temptation of Jesus, all of which events happened before their fellowship with Jesus, strictly speaking, began. In particular, assuredly no disciple was an eyewitness of the; temptation. None the less the narrative stands, simply because imaginative invention of such an incident in the absence of accred- ited facts cannot reasonably be considered. The fact that the birth narratives do not rest upon the testimony of the same eyewitnesses who stand for the ministry of Jesus does not discredit them as embodying reliable tradition, unless it can be proved that they contradict the rest of the apostolic testimony or that no reliable witness to the events in question was within reach at the time when the documents were composed. In the present instance such a contention is absurd. The very nature of the event points out the inevitable first- hand witnesses. There could be no others. In the absence of their decisive word, bald invention would be necessary. To charge the entire church of the time (for this is what the hypothesis amounts to) as particeps




      rriinim'x in its o\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\vn oflicial and documentary deception is an extreme position as unwarranted as it is cruel.

      The internal harmony of (he facts as recorded points in the same direction. The silence or com- parative lack of emphasis with reference to the birth of Christ on the part, of the other XT writers is to be explained partly on the basis of doctrinal view- point, (sco V, below) and partly because an ingrained sense of delicacy would naturally lend to reticence on this point, at least during the lifetime of Mary and the Lord's brethren. The following intimately corresponding facts are sufficiently significant in this connection: (1) that the fact of Jesus' unique birth could not be proclaimed as a part of His own teaching or as the basis of Jlis incarnate life; (-) that. He was popularly known as the son of Joseph; (3) that the foster-fatherhood of Joseph, as embodied in the genealogy (see ( IK\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\K.VL

      This general conclusion is confirmed when we come to consider the relationship of the two narra- tives to each other. To begin with, we 2. Inter- have two narratives, differing greatly relation- in method of treatment, grouping of ship of details, order and motive of narration,

      Narratives and general atmosphere. It is evi- dent that we have two documents which have had quite a different history.

      In two points, at any rate, what might be considered serious discrepancies are discoverable (see DISCREPAN- CIES, ItniLic'Ai.). These two points are: (I) the rela- tionship of the Massacre of the Innocents and the jour- ney to Kgypt, as related by Matthew, to Luke's account, which carries the holy family directly back to Nazareth from Hethlehem after tin; presentation in the, temple; (2) the discrepancy as to the previous residence at, Nazareth (Lk) and the reason given for the return thither (Mt). As to (1) il is quite clear that Mat- thew's account centers about an episode interpolated, so to say, into the natural order of events (see 1 NMICKNTS, MASSACRE OF THK). It is also clear that the order of Luke's narrative, which is in the highest degree condensed and synoptic, does not forbid the introduction of even a lengthy train of events into the, midst of ver 3!) (ef condensation in ys 40-42.51.52). It may easily be that the lacunae in each account are duo to a lack of knowledge on the part of either writer as to the point supplied by the other. Matthew may not have known that the family had resided formerly in Nazareth, and Luke may not' have known that a return to Galilee as a permanent residence was not contemplated in the original plan. Tho difficulty here is not serious. We consider tho discrepancy as 'it stands as of more value to the account as indicating the independence of tho two accounts and the honesty of those who incorporated them into tho Gospels without attempting to harmo- nize them, than any hypothetical harmonization however satisfactory. We introduce this caveat, however, that Matthew had an especial reason for introducing tho episode connected with Herod and for explaining the residence at Nazareth during Our Lord's early years

      \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\Ve are now free to consider the remarkable con- vergence of these two documents. The following particulars may be urged: (1) tho synchronism in tho Ilerodian era; (2) the name "Jesus" given by Divine authority before birth; (3) Davidic kinship; (4) tho virgin-birth; (">) the birth at Bethlehem; ((>) residence at Nazareth. In addition we may urge the essential and peculiar harmony of descrip- tive expressions (see V, below) and the correspond- ence of the inner and outer experiences of Mary (sec MAKV, II).

      Wo have now reached the final and crucial point of this phase of our discussion when wo take up the question as to the, origin and 3. Sources, date of these narratives. Our method Origin and of approach to the general question of Age of their credibility delivers tis from the

      Documents necessity of arguing in cxtcnxo the theories which have been framed to account for the narrative' in the absence of historical fact. We resort to the simple and convincing prin- ciple that tho story could not have been honestly composed nor honestly published as derived from any source other than tho persons who could have guar- anteed its trustworthiness. Every indication, of which the narratives are full, of honesty and intelli- gence on the part of the narrators is an argument against any and all theories which presuppose a fictitious origin for the central statement. Nega- tively, we may with confidence assert that wide excursions into ethnic mythology and folklore have failed to produce a single; authentic parallel either in fact or in form to the infancy narratives. In addition to this, tho attempt to deduce the story from Messianic prophecy also fails to justify itself. In addition, there are two considerations which may justly be urged as pointing to trustworthy sources for the narrative: First, the strongly Hebraic nature of both narratives. It has often been pointed out that nowhere in the XT do we find documents so deeply tinged with the Hebraic spirit (see Adeney, /.' fur the Titncx, no. XI, 2 1- f ; and Briggs, New Li

      It is still asserted, in the face of tho most convincing evidence to the contrary, that the infancy narratives are late addenda to the gospel tradition as a whole. This idea is due, primarily, to a confusion of thought between origin and publication. The latter must have been coincident with the original issue of the Gospels in their present form. The textual evidence here is convincing. On the other hand, the main body of testi- mony incorporated into the Gospels at the time of their publication had boon in tho hands of the apostles and their helpers for some years, as evidenced by the Pauline letters and the Book of Acts. In all probability the sources upon which the infancy narratives rest, which had their origin and received the impress which characterizes them in the period antecedent to the




      public ministry of .Irsiis, came; into tho hands of the Gospel writers toward the end of the formative- period at the, close of which t lie ( iospels were issued. In other words, thi! story of the Lord's birth was withheld until the time was ripe for its publication. Two occasions may have served to release; it: the death of Mary may have made it possible to use her private memoirs, or tin 1 , rise of anti-Christian calumny may have made tin; publication of (hi; trim history 'imperative. At any rate, the narratives show every indication of being contemporary documents of the period with which they deal. This fact puts an additional burden of proof, already heavier than they can bear, upon those who would antagonize the documents. We may reasonably atlirm that the narratives will bear triumphantly any fair critical test.

      V. The Doctrinal Question. The discussion of tin- doctrinal significance of t he virgin-birth state- ment, falls naturally into three purls: 1. In (1) its doctrinal elaboration in the NT;

      the NT (2) its historic function in the develop-

      ment of Christian doctrine; 0$) its per- manent value to Christ ian thought. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" ( > begin wit h the narratives themselves. As has just, been said, they were incorporated into the (lospels at a time when the NT Christ ology had reached maturity in the Pauline and Johannine writings and the Ep. to the He. The doctrine of the incarnation was fully unfolded. It had been unequivocally asserted that in Jesus all the fulness of the Godhead was his- torically and personally manifested (Jn 1 14; Phil 2 5-8; Col 1 IS; 29; He 2 14). In contrast with these statements the infancy narratives not only, as adverted to above 1 , exhibit on the surface a rudimentary Christ ology, but in several items, of profound hit (Test and most surprising tenor, show that the birth notice was not apprehended or stated in view of the doctrine of the incarnation at all.

      Tho detailed justification of this statement follows: (1) Matthew (see 1 1S-25) does not list; the term "Son of God." The only expression implying a unique rela- tionship to God, other than in the "of Holy Spirit" phrase, twice, used, is in the word " Immanuel" quoted from Isa, which does not necessarily involve incarnation. At the beginning of the- genealogy Jesus is introduced as the son of David, the son of Abraham. (2) The assertion as to His conception by Holy Spirit is condi- tioned by three striking facts: (a) His conception is interpreted in terms of conception by the power of Holy Spirit, not of begetting by the Father. The OT expression " This day have I begotten thee," used twice, occurs in quite a diirerent connection (He 15; 5 r >). (/)) The term "Holy Spirit" is used without the article. (<) The phrase descriptive of the being conceived is expressed in the neuter, ' the thing conceived in her is of

      Holy Spirit' (TO yap ev avrfj yevvyOev eK Tri-eii/ma-rds ' corn' ayiov, to ijdr I'll ant': yen n fttien el; jincitmati'm extin hayiou). The implication of these three facts is (i) that the sonship of Jesus through His exceptional birth is interpreted in terms of Divine power working upon humanity, not as the correlative of Divine and essential fatherhood; it is the historical sonship that is in view (contrast with this the two passages in He referred to above); (ii) the writer is speaking in the OT sense of " Holy Spirit" as the forthgonig of creative power from God, not as personal hypostasis; (iii) lie, is also emphasiz- ing (in the use of the neuter) the reality of the physical birth. These three facts, all the more remarkable because they are attributed to a heavenly messenger who might be expected to speak more fully concerning tho mystery, exclude, tin; supposition that we have one historic; form of the doctrine of incarnation. On tin; contrary, had we no other statements than those found here we should be unable logically to postulate an in- carnation. Kvery statement made concerning Jesus, apart from the virgin-birth statement itself, might be 'true were; He the son of Joseph and Mary.

      The case is far stronger when we turn to Luke's account, in spite of the fact that the terms "Son of the Most High" and "Son of God" ordinarily implying incarnation an; used. We notice (rf) that the anarthrous use of "Holy Spirit" reappears and that a poetic parallel- ism defines the term (yer 35), making "Holy Spirit" = " Power of the Most High"; (<) that the neuter phrase; is also found here, "the; holy thing which is be-gotten," etc (Sib Kal TO ytwiafievov iiyiov KA>)0>)<7eTai, dio kal to gennomenon hdr/ion ktfthfsetai)', (/) that future tense's are useel in connection with His career and tho title's which He bears: " He shall be [as the; outcome of a pre>c- ess] great," and " He shall be calle'd [as a matter of ulti- mate titular recognition] tho Son of tho Most High" (ver 32); "The holy thing .... shall be called tho Son of God" (ver 35). In these instances the title- is connected directly with the career rather than the birth.

      10 ven the "wherefore" e>f v er 35, in connection with the; future; vb., carries the- power of Goel manifested in the holy conception forward into the entire career e>f Jesus rather than bases (hi; career upon the' initial miracle. These; three fae'ts taken together exclude- the reference to any conception e>f t he incarnation. The in earn at ion is directly and inseparably e'onnee-led with Christ's eternal sonship te> the; Father. The: title "Son of Cod" includes that but does not specify it. It includes also the; ethical, historical, human sonship. The term " Holy Spirit" use-el without the article; alse> is a comprehensive expression cove-ring both a work eif Divine powe-r in any sphere and a work eif Divine- grace in the personal sphere only.

      These accounts are concerned with the historic fact rather than its metaphysical implications. '1'h is historic fact is interpreted in terms of a Divine power in and through the human career of Jesus (which is so stated as to include an impersonal, germinal lifej rather than a dogmatic definition of the Messiah's essential nature. The omission of all reference to preexistence is negatively conclusive on this point. The Divine power manifested in His exceptional origin is thought of as extending on and including His entire career. This leads us directly to a second phase in the interpretation of Christ and compels to a reconsideration at a new angle of the miracle of His origin.

      The narrators of the life and ministry of Jesus on the basis of ascertained fact and apostolic testi- mony were; confronted with a very 2. Portrait definite and delicate task. They had of Jesus in to tell with unexaggerating truthful- Synoptic ness the story of the human life of Gospels Jesus. Their ultimate aim was to justify the doctrine of incarnation, but they could not have been unaware that the genuine and sincere humanity of Christ was a pillar of the doe-trine quite as mue-h as His essential Deiiy. To portray the human experience of a being considered essentially Divine was the Herculean task at tempted and carried to a successful issue in the Synoptic, (lospels. These writers do not conceal for a moment their conviction that they are; depicting the career of the wonder-working Son of Clod, but they never forget that it is a career of self-limitation within the human sphere, the period of self-imposed and complete humiliation undertaken on behalf of the Father, "for us men and for our salvation." Hence the nature and limitations of the narrative. Mark omits reference to the virgin-birth. Matthew and Luke narrate it and forthwith drop it. These facts are exactly on a par. It is ne> more remarkable that Mark omits the story than that Matthew and Luke make so lit tie of it. To allege either fact as a motive to doubt is to misinterpret the whole 1 situal ion. By the terms of their task they could do nothing else'-. The Fourth Cospel and the Epp. announce that the human life of Jesus was due to the voluntary extra- temporal act of a preexist ent Divine being, but in the synoptic narrative four passages only hint at preexistence, and then as incidental flashes from (lie inner consciousness of Jesus. This omission is no more remarkable and no less so than the omis- sions noted above. By the terms of their task the synoptic writers could do nothing else. The fact of preexistence could be announced only when the earthly task had been triumphantly finished (sec; Mk 9 9.11). During the entire period of the earthly life as such Jesus was under trial (note Mt 3 17, correctly translating the aorist ; cf the re- markable words of Jn 10 17), performing a task, accomplishing a commission, achieving a victory as human son. The story of the Temptation ex- hibits the conditions under which Jesus performed His task. The temptations were one 1 and all ad- dressed to His consciousness as Clod's Son. They were resisted on the sole basis of self-humiliation and dependence. The entire synoptic narrative is consistent with this representation. Jesus is con-

      Virgin-Birth Vision



      sciously one hi will and spirit- with God, hut. that, oneness with Clod is consummated and conducted in the Spirit, through faith, hy prayer. They de- scrihe His entire career of holiness, wisdom and power, each unique, in the terms of the Spirit -filled, trustful, prayerful human life. Hero is the vital point. They disclose the eternal Sonship (in which beyond question they believe) on its ethical, not on its metaphysical .side, by prediction of His future triumph rather than by definition of His person. In such a narrative, consistently carried out, there can be no resort to the preexistent, eternal Sonship, nor to the miracle of His human origin in the story of His career under trial. In particular, the miracle, whereby His germinal connection with the race; was established could not extend to the personal and spiritual life in which His victory was His own through the; personal Holy Spirit. The argument from the virgin-birth to His sinlessness (see IMMA- CULATE COXCKPTION) was made by the church, not by the NT writers. The sinlessness of Christ was His own achievement in the flesh which He sacrificed through His holy will of obedience to the Father.

      This leads us to a third phase of development in the NT doctrine of incarnation. In the Fourth

      Gospel and the Epp. it is asserted that 3. In Rest the innermost moral significance of the of the NT earthly career of Jesus lay in the fact

      that it was the consistent carrying-out of an extra-temporal volition of Divine mercy and love whereby He became the Revealer of God and the Saviour of men. This doctrine is based upon the story of the human career completed in the glorification which, according to the testimony, ensued upon His death and disclosed His place in the Divine sphere of being. But it is also based upon the virgin-birth narrative and grounded in it. Attention has already been called to the fact that the virgin-birth is not (in the infancy narrative) connected with the metaphysical sonship of Jesus. All that is said then, doctrinally, concerning Jesus might be true were He the son of Joseph and Mary. On the contrary, what is said in Jn and the Epp. depends upon the virgin-birth narrative for its foundational basis. It, has often been asserted that Paul and John do not refer to the virgin-birth. This statement the present writer takes to be more than doubtful, but if it is true, all the more striking is the indirect and unconscious testimony to the virgin-birth involved in their doctrinal reliance upon it. According to these writers the incarnation was due to a Divine act of self-limitation whereby the Divine mode of existence was exchanged for the human (Phil 2 5^11 et al.). According to the infancy narrative, the birth of Jesus was due to a Divine cr/'/itire act whereby a human life began terminally and passed through the successive stages of growth to maturity. The synoptic, narrative outside the infancy narrative supplies a third point, that the entire conscious personal career of Jesus upon earth was lived in the power of the Holy Spirit. The infancy narrative is the keystone of an arch, one half resting upon the synoptic account, the other upon the doctrinal construction of Jn and the Epp. The virgin-birth statement by its adoption of OT terminology makes room for a Di- vine activity both in the impersonal and in the per- sonal spheres. The doctrine of incarnation implies that as in every new human being the creative Di- vine power manifests itself impersonally in germinal beginnings, so in the life of Christ the Divine power conditions itself within the impersonal forces of germinant life with this important and_ suggestive difference: In the career of Jesus there issues from the sphere of germinal beginnings not a new human person created from the life-stock of the race, but the personal human life, including all human powers,

      of a preexistent Divine person self-conditioned and self-implanted within the human sphere. The central conscious self, the agent of His activities and the subject of His experiences in the historic sphere was the eternal Son of God. His life in the human sphere was that of a true human being in the full actuality of a human life. Hence it follows, since ordinary generation involves necessarily (that is the intent of it) the origination of a new person not hitherto existing, that the birth of Jesus could not have been by ordinary generation. The birth of Christ, through ordinary generation would have involved a quite incomprehensible miracle, namely, the presence and action of the ordinary factors in human origins with a contrary and unique result. The virgin-birth is the only key that tits the vacant space in the arch. In addition it, may reasonably be urged that the relationship of human parents to each other, ordinarily a natural, necessary and sacred act, could have no part in this transaction, while the very fact that Mary's relationship was to God alone, in an act of submission involving com- plete self-renunciation and solitary enclosure within the Divine will, fulfils the spiritual conditions of this unique motherhood as no other imaginable expe- rience could.

      Historically the virgin-birth statement performed a function commensurate with the importance as- cribed to it in this discussion rather

      4. Opposi- than the current depreciation of it. tions to the The doctrine of Christ was menaced in Doctrine two opposite directions, which may be

      designated respectively by the terms "Ehionite" and ''Gnostic." According to the former teaching (the word "Ehionite" being used in a general sense only), Jesus was reduced tot he human category and interpreted as a Spirit-led man or prophet, in the OT meaning of the term. According to the opposite tendency, He was interpreted as Divine, while His human experience was reduced to mere appearance, or a temporary external union with the Logos. The virgin-birt h st at einent resist ed hot h t hese t endencies with equal effectiveness. On the one hand, it asserted with unequivocal definiteness a real hu- manity conditioned by true birth into an actual connection with the race. On the other hand, it asserted an exceptional birth, setting Jesus apart as one whose entrance into the world was due to a new, creative contact of God with the race. His- torically, it is difficult to see how the NT doctrine could have escaped mutilation apart from the state- ment, seemingly framed with express reference to conditions arising afterward, which so wonderfully guarded it. The holy mystery of the Lord's origin became the symbol of the holier mystery of His Divine nature. It thus appears in every one of the historic creeds, an assertion of fact around which the belief of the church crystallized into the faith which alone accounts for its history, a profound and immovable conviction that Jesus Christ was really incarnate Deity.

      The importance for modern thinking of the virgin- birth statement is threefold: (1) First, it involves

      in general the question, never more

      5. Its Im- vital than at the present time, of the portance to trustworthiness of the gospel tradition. Modern This particular fact, i.e. the virgin- Thought birth, has been a favorite, because

      apparently a vulnerable, point of attack. But the presuppositions of the attack and the method according to which it has been con- ducted involve a general and radical undermining of confidence in the testimony of the gospel wit- nesses. This process has finally met its nemesis in the Christ us-myth propaganda. The virgin-birth st atement (van be successfully assailed on no grounds which do not involve the whole witnessing body of



      Virgin-Birth Vision

      Christians in charges of blind credulity or wilful falsification, very unjust, indeed us respects their character and standing in general, hut verv difficult to repel in view of the results of denial at this point.

      (2) The virgin-birth is important for the simple historical reason that, it involves or is involved in a clear and consistent account of the Lord's birth and early years. Apart from the infancy narratives we are utterly without direct information as to His birth, ancestry or early years. Apart from those narrat ives we have no information as to t he marriage of Joseph and Mary; we are shut up to vague infer- ences as to this entire period. No biographer ever leaves these points obscure if he can avoid it. It is very earnestly suggested that those who cast dis- credit upon the infancy story do not clearly recog- nize the seriousness of the situation brought about in the absence of any narrat ive which can be 1 rust ed as to this vital point. Calumny there is and has been from an early day. If there is nowhere an authoritative answer to the calumny, in what sort of a position is the Christian believer placed? He can assert nothing, because apart from what he has too lightly thrown away he knows nothing.

      (3) Lastly, the more closely the statement as to the Lord's birth is studied, the more clearly it will be seen that it involves in a most vital and central way the entire doctrine of the incarnation. This doctrine is an interpretation of facts. Those facts stand together. In the midst of those facts, har- monizing with them, shedding light upon them and receiving light from them, resting upon the same consentient, testimony is the statement, which is thus worded in the oldest symbol of our historical faith: "Conceived by the Holy Chost, Born of the Virgin Mary" (see APOSTLES' CREED). There is no adequate reason why the intelligent believer should feel uncertain as to this statement of our holy religion.

      LITERATURE. There is a vast and growing literature which more or less directly deals with the subject of Our Lord's birth. Tim literature may be classified as follows: (1) Lives of Christ; (2) critical coinins. on Alt and Lk; (:}) critical and historical investigations of Christian origins; (4) monographs 011 the Apostles' Creed; (5) monographs and arts, on the specific sub- ject. For a list and analysis of discussions see Sweet, Birth and Infancy of Jeans Christ, ;554-57.


      VIRTUE, vur'tii: This word has two quite dis- tinct meanings in AV: (1) It was formerly often used in the now obsolete sense of "manly power," "valor," "efficacy" (Lat virtue, "manly strength" or "excellence," from vir, "man"):

      "Trust in thy single virtue; for thy soldiers All levied in thy name, have in thy name Took their discharge."

      Shakespeare, King Lear, V, iii, 103 fT.

      It was also used in the sense; of a mighty work, a miracle. Thus Wycliffe translates Mt 11 20: "Thanne Jhesus bigan to save repreef to cities in whiche ful many rcrtucs of him weren don." So in AV Mk 5 30; Lk 6 19; 8 40, in the sense of "power," "miraculous energy or influence" (duvct/us, dunamis, "inherent power, residing in the nature of a thing"; contrast ^ovala, c.roitxid, "power arising from external opportunity or liberty of action"). In these passages it is tr' 1 in RV "power" (as elsewhere in AV; cf Acts 3 12, etc). (2) In its ordinary modern meaning of "moral goodness" it occurs in AVandRV Wisd 4 1; 5 13; 8 7; Phil 4 S; 2 Pet 1 3.5. In these passages it stands for apery, arete, the usual classical term for "moral excellence" (originally "fitness" of any sort), used in LXX to translate words meaning "glory," "praiseworthi- ness," as in Hab 3 3; Isa 42 12; 63 7 (of God); Zee 6 13 (of the Messiah). The LXX sense may color the meaning of the word as applied to God

      in 2 Pet 1 3 RV; as also in its pi. use (of God) in 1 Pet 2 9 (AV "praises," RV "excellencies'';.

      The adj. "virtuous" occurs in AV, KRV Ruth 3 11; Prov 12 -1; 31 10 (AKV "worthy"), and the advb. "virtuously" in Prov 31 29 (ARV "worthily"), in each case for ^? , hnijil, "strength," "force" (whether of body or of mind), then in a moral sense of "worth," "virtue." D. MIAU, KIMVAKDS

      VISION, vi/h'un (r~Tl, haznn, "p-Tri , Jilzzuyon, T^$~P~ , mar' ah; bpap.a, lioniinti, oirracria, uplnxid) : Psychologists find that man is prevailingly and per- sistently "eye-minded." That, is, in his waking life lie is likely to think, imagine and remember in terms of vision. Naturally then, his dreaming is predominantly visual; so strongly visual, we are told, that it is not rare to find dreams defined as "trains of fantastic images." Whether man was made this way in order that, God might, communi- cate with him through dreams and visions is hardly worth debating; if the records of human life, in the Bible and out of it, are to be trusted at all, then- is nothing better certified than that God has com- municated with man in this way (Ps 89 19; Prov 29 IS; cf Am 8 11.12; Hos 12 10). If one is disposed to regard the method as suited only to primitive peoples and superstitious natures, it'still remains true that the experience is one associated with lives and characters of the most saintly and exalted kind (1 S 3 1; Jer 1 11; Ezk 1 if Dnl 2 19; Acts 9 10; 10 3; 16 9).

      The vision may come in one's waking moments (Did 10 7; Acts 9 7j; by day (Cornelius, Acts 10 3; Peter, Acts 10 9fT; cf X'u 24 4.10) or night (Jacob, Gen 46 2j ; but commonly under condi- tions of dreaming (Nu 12 0; Job 4 13; Dnl 4 9). The objects of vision, diverse and in some instances strange as they are, have usually their points of contact with experiences of the daily life. Thus Isaiah's vision of the seraphim (6 2) was doubtless suggested by familiar figures used in the decoration of the temple at Jems; Paul's "man of Macedonia" (Acts 16 9) had its origin in SOUK; poor helot whom Paul had seen on the streets of Troas and who em- bodied for him the pitiful misery of the regions across the sea; and "Jacob's ladder" (Gen 28 12) was but a fanciful development of the terraced land which he saw sun-glorified before him as he went to .sleep. Among the recurring objects of vision are natural objects rivers, mountains, trees, animals with which man has daily and hourly association.

      The character of the revelation through vision has a double aspect in the Bib. narrative. In one aspect it proposes a revelation for immediate di- rection, as in the case of Abrain (Gen 15 2 and frequently); Lot (Gen 19 15); Balaam (Nu 22 22), and Peter (Acts 12 7). In another aspect it deals with the development of the Kingdom of God as conditioned by the moral ideals of the people; such are the prophetic visions of Isaiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, and Micah, and the apocalypses of Daniel and John. The revelation for immediate direction has many correspondences in the life of the devout in all ages; the prophetic vision, dealing in a pene- trating way with the sources of national growtli and decay, has its nearest approach in the deliverances of publicists and statesmen who are persuaded that the laws of God, as expressed in self-control, truth, justice, and brotherly love, are supreme, and that the nations which disregard them are marked for ultimate and speedy extinction.

      From the nature of the vision as an instrument of Divine communication, the seeing of visions is naturally associated with revivals of religion (Ezk 12 21-25; Joel 2 28; cf Acts 2 17), and the ab-

      Visitation Vulgate



      sence of visions with spiritual decline (Is;i 29 11. 12; Lain 2 <); K/k 7 2(>; Mic 3 (>).

      One m:iy see visions without, being visionary in the bad sense of that word. The outstanding char- acters to whom visions were vouchsafed in the his- tory of Israel Abraham, Moses, Jacob, David, Isaiah. Jesus and Paul were all men of action as well as sentiment, and it is manifest from any fair reading of their lives that their work _ was helped and not hindered by this aspect of their fellowship with (loci. For always the vision emphasizes tin- play of a spiritual world: the response of a man's spirit to the appeal of that world; and the ordering of both worlds by an intelligent and compelling Power able to communicate Himself to man and apparently supremely interested in the welfare of man. CHARLES M. STUART

      VISITATION, viz-i-ta'shun, vis- (rH^E , jfkud- duk; TTL

      (1) In a general sense: ''Visited after the visitation of all men" (\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\u 16 29), i.e. in natural death, the usual lot of men, as opposed to a calamitous death; "She shall have fruit in the visitation of souls'' (\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\Yisd 3 13 AV), i.e. in the time of Divine judg- ment. So Sir 18 20 and perhaps 1 Pet 2 12.

      (2) In a good sense, of Clod's care, providence and mercy: "Thy visitation [RVm "care"] hath pre- served my 'spirit" (Job 10 12). So Lk 19 44, and, according to some, 1 Pet 2 12 (sec- above).

      (3) Most frequently in an evil sense, of calamity or distress viewed as Divine punishment: "What will ye do in the day of visitation, and in the deso- lation which shall come from far?" (Isa 10 3). So Jer 8 12; 10 15; 11 23; 23 12; 46 21; 48 44; 60 27; 51 IS; Hos 9 7; Mic 7 4; \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\isd 14 11.

      D. MIALL EDWARDS VOCATION, vo-ka'shun. See CALLINT..

      VOICE, vois. See BATH KOL.

      VOID, void: The uses of "void" in EV are all modern, except for the phrase "void place" in AV 1 K 22 10 2 Ch 18 <) (RV "open"); 2 Mace 14 44 (so AVand HVm). On the OT passages see OPEN PLACE. In 2 Mace the (!r word is K-eceu/, kencon, which may mean either "an open place," in general, or, specifically, "the hollow between the ribs and the hip," whence RV "his side." Moffatt in Charles' A/x)c translates "the open street."

      VOLUME, vol'um: This word (from Lat rolirre, "roll"), twice used in AV (Ps 40 7 [Ileb /n'

      VOLUNTARY, vol'un-ta-ri: For the sake of variety AV in Lev 7 K>; E/k 46 12 (/n.s) has ren- dered" rQ~! , tfilhabhah, by "voluntary offering" instead of the usual "freewill offering" (so RV). The words "of his own voluntary \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\yill" in Lev

      1 3 AV are a pure gloss, properly omitted in RV, as they represent nothing in the Ileb. 1 Maco

      2 42 has "voluntarily" as part of the tr of exovaidfa, hekotisidzo, RV "willingly."

      VOPHSI, vof'sl OPS? , u'ophst, meaning un- known): Father of Nahbi the Xaphtalite spy (Nu 13 14); but the text is doubtful. LXX B has 'TajSet, labci, A F Luc., 'Ia/3/, Iain.

      VOW, vou ("n; , nedher; tt^n, euche; 'i$s&r, found only in Xu 30 G.8.10 and tr d o

      ln>riniS>n, by LXX) : A vow could be positive (nedher) and included all promises to perform certain things for, or bring certain offerings to, God, in return for certain benefits which were hoped for at His hand (Gen 28 20-22, Jacob; Lev 27 2.8; Xu 30; Jgs 11 30, Jephthah; 1 S 1 11, Hannah; 2 S 15 S, Absa- lom; Jon 1 K), vows of heathen); or negative ('is- ar), and included promises by which a person bound himself or herself to abstain from certain things (Xu 30 3). Xowhere in the ( )T do we find the making of vows regarded as a religious duty (Dt 23 22), but the fulfilling of a vow was considered as a sacred and binding duty (Dt 23 21-2:5; Jgs 11 3r>; Eccl 5 4; cf Ps 22 2. r >; 66 13; 76 11; 116 IS). A vow was as binding as an oath (see OATH) and therefore- to be kept to the letter; and it was not to be lightly made (Prov 20 25). A father could veto a daughter's vow, and a husband a wife's. If a husband did not veto a wife's vow, and then caused her to break it, the sin was his and not hers (Xu 30, pussim'). It seems that vows were considered binding only when actually uttered (Dt 23 23). Persons, including one's self, animals, land and other possessions, could be vowed, but all these could be redeemed with money (sec JEPH- THAH), which money was to be estimated by the priest, except in the case of a clean animal. In the case of land, houses and unclean animals a fifth part of the estimated value was to be added to make up the redemption money. In the case of land the sum was greater or smaller as the coming year of Jubilee was far off or near (Lev 27, pusHtui). Nothing which was by nature holy could be made the object of a vow, e.g. firstlings, tithes, etc (Lev 27 26.28.30); and, on the other hand, an abomina- tion, e.g. the hire of a prostitute, could not be made the object of a vow (Dt 23 IS). In Mai 1 14 the offering of what was of less value than what had been vowed is vigorously condemned.

      In the XT Jesus refers to vows only to condemn the abuse of them (Mt 15 4-0; Mk 7 10-13; cf Talm, \\\\\\\\\\\\''n, and see CORBAX). In Acts 18 IS (cf Acts 21 23.24) Paul desires to show his Jewish brethren that IK- is willing to keep the forms of Jewish piety so long as they do not clash with his Christian conscience (cf 1 Cor 9 21). For the vow of the Nazirite, see XAZIRITE.


      VOYAGE, voi'aj, AND SHIPWRECK, ship'rek, OF ST. PAUL. See PAUL THE APOSTLE; PHOKNIX; and ''Literature" to SHIPS AND BOATS.

      VULGATE, vul'gat :

      I. N\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\MK AND ITS HISTORY

      1. Present I' sage

      2. Earlier Usage

      3. Post-IIieronymic

      4. Historical Importance of the Vulgate II. ORIGIN

      1. Corruption and Confusion of Old Versions

      2. Heresy

      3. Inevitable Separation of East and West

      4. Request of Pope Damasus


      1. The XT

      Gospels or Whole NT ?

      2. OT from the LXX

      3. OT from the Hebrew


      1. In the MSS

      2. Printed Vulgate V. MSS OF VULGATE



      /. Name and Its History. The term "Vulgate'' with us means but one thing the standard authori- tative Bible of the Lat or Rom church, prepared mostly bv the labors of Jerome. But this is not




      the original use of the word ;ind it was never so

      used by Jerome himself; indeed, it did not, at first

      refer to a Lat, VS or tr at all. The word

      1. Present "Vulgate"' comes from the adj. or Usage participle rnlijntn which usually accom- panied editio, and meant, at first, current

      or regularly used text. It was originally used as tin;

      equivalent of Kotvij e/cSocns, koine ekdosis = t,he L.XX.

      Jerome and Augustine both use the

      2. Earlier term in this sense. Jerome ((\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/nn. in Usage Isn 65 L'()i, "Hoc juxta LXX inter-

      pretes diximus, ([uorum oditio toto orl)o vulgata est" (and ih 30 22), vulgata editio again refers to the LXX. Elsewhere .Jerome actually gives the Grce-k words (of the LXX) as found in edilione vulyata (foinni. in Once 7 13). August ine identifies the expression with the LXX (l)e doclr. rlirist., xvi.10): "Secundum vulgatam editionem, hoc est, interpretum Septuaginta." The term edit I'D vulgata was next extended to the form in which the LXX was at first known to the West the Old Lat VSS (see LATIN; LATIN VKKSIONS), although, as Westeott remarks, there does not appear to be any instance in the age of Jerome of the ap- plication of the term to the Lat VS of the OT with- out regard to its derivation from the LXX or to that of the NT, so that Jerome usually intended the LXX though he emoted it in Lat form. Vulgata editio, having acquired the meaning of the current or ordinarily used text of LXX, was once again extended to mean a corrupt or unoorrected text as opposed to the standard emended LXX VS of Orige-n's Hexapla, and in this sense is used by Jerome as synonymous with antiqua or veins edilio.

      Ep., cvi.2 deserves citing in this connection : " Admonoo aliam esse editionem quam Origenes et ( 'aesaricnsis Kuse- bius omnesque (Jrae-ciae translatores KUIVTIV [kuinfn], i.e. communein appellant atque 1 vulgatam, et a ple-risenio AouKini'os, \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\Loukian6s] mine dicitur: nlinm LXX interpre- tum quae in 'Efan-Aois [lli'.rai>li>!*\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ {i.e. of Origen] eodicilms rcperitur, et a nobis in Latinum sermemem fideliter versa .... Kon'T] [ktrint] [commiini* editio] .... veins corrupta editio cist, ea antem quae habetur m 'EajrAoi [Hexavlols] et qnam no.s yertimus, ipsa est quae in eruditorurn llbris incorrupta et immaculata LXX intorpretum translatio rc- servatnr." ("I recall that one is the text which Driven and Eusebius of Caesarea and all the (J-rpi-k translators cull the Kon'rj [koinf], i.e. t he common and current text, and is now called by most persons Lucian's [version] ; the other- is the text of the translators of the LXX -which is found in the codices [or books] of Driven [or the Hexapla], and has been faithfully translated by vis into the, Latin lan- guage .... the koine [the ordinary text] .... is the old corrupted text, but that which is found iti the Hexa- pla, and which we are translating, is the same one which the version of the translators of the LXX has preserved unchanged and immaculate in the books of the scholars.")

      It was only very slowly that Jerome's VS ac- quired this name, the phrase editio vulyala being ap- plied to the LXX or the Old Lat VSS of

      3. Post- the LXX sometimes down to mediaeval Hieronymic times, while Jerome's tr was known as

      editio nost.ra, codices noslri, tr emendol- ior, or tr quam tenet Rom ccelesia. The Trident ine Fathers were therefore guilty of an anachronism when they referred to Jerome's tr as reins el vulgata editio. Roger Bacon was apparently the first, in the 13th cent., to apply the term V ulyata in our sense (not exclusively, but also to the LXX), and this usage became classic through its acceptance by the Trident ine Council ("vet us et vulgata editio").

      The interest of the Vulg will be apparent when we reflect that this 1r proved to be to the West what

      the LXX had been to the East, that

      4. Historical it was prepared with great care by Importance the greatest scholar whom Lat Chris- of the tianity produced, that it was for Vulgate hundreds of years the only Bible in

      universal use in Europe, that it has given to us much of our modern theological termi- nology as well as being the sponsor for many Gr words which have enriched our conceptions. It

      ' has also proved of primary importance 1 as an eailv ami excellent witness to the sacred text. Add to this (hat "directly or indirectly it is the' re-al parent of all the; vernacular \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"SS ef \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\e.-te-rn Europe" exe-ept the; (Jothic of I'lfilas. For ling. -speaking Students it pe>sse-sses peculiar intere-st as the; souice of the earlier 1 1" 1 made by the Venerable Bede, and portiems of the ( )T were tr' 1 in the 10th e-e-nt. from the Vulg by ^Klfrie-. Its gre-ate'st, influene-e; was e'xe>rte'd in the Eng. VS of \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\Vye'!iffe -a, literal t r from the Vulg (13S3J. Ariel Coverelal<-'s Bible (ir>3.">) was "faithfully ami truly t r'' enit e>f Duich [i.e. German of Luther] and Latin." The' Rheims and Douay \\\\\\\\\\\\'S was based on the Vulg, though "diligently conlVrred with the- Ile'b and (Jr." The Vulg exercised considerable influence upon Luther's VS and through it upon our AV.

      //. Origin of the Vulgate. Lat Christianity had

      m>t bee'n withemt a Bible- in its own language. Old

      Lat VSS are found in Xorth Africa

      1. Corrup- as e-arly as the middle e>f the 3d edit. tion and and are- found in the; te-xts e>f Cyprian Confusion and Tertullian. But these- t r s were of Old characterized by "simplicity," "rude- Versions ne-ss" and provincialism. There- was

      ne)t erne- si andard authoritaf ive VS wit h any ecclesiastical recognition. VSS we're rather due to "imlividual and successive- efl'e)rts." Augus- tine says that anyone; who ge>t holel e>f a Gr MS anel thought he knew Gr and Lat would venture on a tr. These; VSS originated in Africa anel ne>t from Rome, else they had bee-n me>re authoritative-. Be-- siele-s, the first twe> centuries of the; Re>m church were rathe-r (Jr; the; earliest Christian literature; of Rome is Gr, its bishops bear Gr names, its earliest liturgy was Gr. When the e-hurch of Italy became; Lat-speaking probably at the 1 e-nd of the 3el cent. the provincialisms e>f the Afrie-an VS rendered it unfit for the more polishe-d Romans, anel so recensions we're called fe>r. Scholars now ive-ogni/e a Eure>- ])ea,n type of Old Lat text. Ami We\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\stce>tt thinks a North Italian reevnsion (at least in the Gospels) was made in the 1 4th ce-nt. and known as the; Haiti (sen 1 LATIN), and which he- recognizes in the Itnla mentioned in Aug., DC doclr. c/irist., xv, as "verborum te-nacior cum perspicuitate sente-ntiae"; but F. C. Burkitt (The Old Lat and the Itala, 54 If) take's the Itala here as referring to Je-rome's VS. Amid such confusiem and the appearane-e of national or pro- vincial recensiems, the Lat church be'came> conse-iems of the ne'eel erf a standard eel. The're; we-re almost as many types of texts as there were MSS: "Te>t exemplaria paene quot cexlices," says Jeremie (Pref. to Gospels}. Independent and unauthorized e>r anonyme>us tr a esp. of the NT aideel by the gross carelessness of scribes, maele confusion worse con- femneleel. Augustine, complains of this "Latinorum interpretum infinita varietas."

      In adelitiem to the' inconvenience in preaching

      and the liturgical variations, a greater demanel for

      an authoritative 1 VS arose fre>m the

      2. Heresy continual watch of the 1 early e-huivh

      against heretics. Confusion e>f text abetted heresy, anel the> absence of a standard text made it hareler te> refute it. Besides, the Jews, with erne authe>ritative text, laugheel at the confusion e>f the Christian Script ui-es.

      The inevitable 1 se'paratiem of East and West, both

      politically ami ecclesiastically, and the 1 split between

      Gr and Lat Christianity, re-mlere-el the

      3. Inevi- exist e'ne-e of a standard Lat le'xt im- table Sepa- perative 1 . Christianity was fell to be ration of the religion of a book, and hence 1 that East and be>ok must be inspire-el anel authori- West tat ive in every worel even in its oreler

      of words. Pope Damasus determined to reme-ely this state




      of affairs, and with all the authority of the papal see commissioned Jerome to produce an authentic and standard authorized VS.

      t *~ e( l uest The pope's choice could not have fallen of Damasus upon a more competent scholar a man who had been providentially gifted and prepared for the Jerome his Lat name was Eusebius Hioronymus was born at Stridon on the borders of Dalmatia about 340. or a little later, of Christian parentage. He had the advantages of the best classical education and became a devoted student of the best writers. In a dream he saw a vision of judgment, and on claiming to be a Christian lie was re- buked: "Mentiris, Ciceronianus es. non Christianus." lie began his theological studies in Gaul; but later sought the seclusion of ascetic life in the desert near Antioch. Here he studied Heb from a converted rabbi in order to subdue fierce passions by (he difficulties of that language. About 3/5 or 37<> began his correspond- ence with Damasus. In 3X2 he came to Home, and became the intimate friend and adviser of Damasus.

      ///. Jerome's Translations and Revisions:

      Method. These fall into three main groups: (1)

      revision of the NT; (2; OT juxta LXX;

      1. The NT (3) OT from Heb. The exact (late of

      the. pope's commission is not given: it was probably in 3S2 the year of Jerome's arrival in Home or early in 3X3, in which year the Gospels appeared in revised form. Damasus asked simply for a revision of the Old Lat YSS by the help of the Gr rather than a new VS. Jerome collated Gr AISS, and carefully compared them with the "Italian" type of Old Lat texts; where possible the Old Lat was preserved. Thus Jerome 1 approached the task with a conservative spirit. Still the result was a considerable departure from the Old Lat VS, the changes being (1) linguistic, removal of pro- vincialisms and rudeness, (2) in interpretation, e.g. supersubstantialis for ^mota-iov, epioiision, in the Lord's Prayer, (3) the removal of interpolations, (4) the insertion of the Eusebian Canons.

      The (7o,s'/W.s or the whole NT revive/I S It is dis- puted whether Jerome revised the whole NT or only the Gospels.

      Against the revision of (lie whole XT the arguments briefly are: (1) That Augustine, writing 20 years after the appearance of the revised Gospels, speaks only of "Gospel": " Kvangelium ex (iraeco interpretatus esi " (Ep., civ. 6): but Augustine may here be speaking gen- erally or applying "(iospel" to the whole XT. (2) Jerome in his preface apparently speaks of "only four Gospels" ("quattuor tantum evangelia"). ('.'>) The rest of the XT does not show the same signs of revision as the Gospels. (1) The absence of the prefaces usual ("solita praefationc") to Jerome's revised VSS. On the other hand, to more than counterbalance these, (1) Damasus required a revision of the win, It XT, not only of the Gospels (1'rcf. of Diim/isux). (2) In other state- ments of Jerome he expressly says he revised tin- .\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ T (not Gospel or Gospels); in Ep., cxii.20, he seems to correct Augustine's evangelism by writing: "Si me, ut dicis. in Nori Te.xtamrnti emendatione suspieis, " and in >., Ixxi. 5, "I translated tin- XT according to the Gr" ("XT Graecae reddidi auctoritati ") ; cf also DC Vir. III., cxxxv. (3) Jerome quotes passages outside the Gospels where his VS differed from the Old Lat VSS. e.g. Kom 12 11; 1 Tim 1 1">; cf Ep., xxvii. (4) Damasus died at the end of 3S4 perhaps before the rest, of Jerome's revision was published, and so Jerome thought no further prefaces needed.

      The more likely conclusion is that Jerome revised

      the whole NT, though not all with ecmal care.

      His revision was hasty and soon be-

      2. OT came more or less confused with the Juxta LXX Old Lat VSS to which the people citing

      as they do to all old VSS. Having probably completed the NT from the Gr, Jerome began immediately on the OT from the Gr of the LXX.

      (1) Roman Pwiltcr. He commenced with the Pss, which he simply emended only where impera- tively required (cf preface), and cursorily (c384). This revision is called the Rom Psalter (Psalterium Romanum), which continued in use in Rome and Italy till it was displaced under the pontificate of Pius V by the Gallican Psalter, though the Rom

      Psalter is still used in St. Peter's, Rome, and in St. Mark's, Milan.

      (2) Gallican Psalter. This Psalter soon became so corrupted by the Old Lat VS that Jerome (c 387) undertook a second revision at the request of Paula and Eustochium. This became; known as the Galli- can Psalter because of its early popularity in Gaul, it, was also made from the LXX, but with the aid of other ( ir YSS. Jerome adopted in it the critical signs used by Origen a passage inclosed between an obelus and two points being absent from the Heb but present in the LXX, that between an asterisk and two points being absent from the LXX but supplied from Theodotion (Preface to / J .s.s).

      (3) Rest of the OT. About the same time Jerome published tr s of other OT books from the LXX. Job was revised very soon after the Gallican Psalter. The preface to Prov, Ecel, Cant and Ch is extant to show he had revised these books. Job and Pss are the only books of this revision juxta LXX extant.

      It is again disputed whether Jerome completed the whole OT in this revision because (1) the usual prefaces are again lacking (except to the books already men- tioned), and (2) in his prefaces to the revision from the Heb Jerome makes no reference to an earlier revision of his own; (3) the work implied was too great for the brief space possible and must have been done between 3S7 and 390 (or 391), for by this latter date he was already on the tr from the Heb. But Jerome was a phenomenal worker, as we learn that his tr of Prov, Keel and Cant from the Heb was made in three days. And liis commentary on Kph was written at the rate of 1,000 lines a day.

      Jerome probably completed the whole, as we infer from his own direct positive statements. He speaks of "mea in ///>//* c

      If the postscript to Ep., cx.xxiv, to Augustine is genuine, Jerome complains he had lost, the most of

      his former labors by fraud ("pleraquc 3. Transla- enim prioris laboris fraude cuiusdam tion of OT amisimus"). And Augustine requests from (Ep., xcvi.34) from Jerome his YSS

      Hebrew from the LXX ("Nobis mittas, ob-

      secro, interpretationem tnnm de LXX (j/tani te cdidisxe nesciebam"). Having in the course of these labors discovered the unsatisfactory condi- tion of the LXX text, and his friends pleading the need of a tr direct from the Heb, Jerome began this huge task about 390 with S and K, which he pub- lished with the Prolog UN galentns ("helmeted pro- logue"), next the Pss (c 392), Job and the Prophets (393), 1 and 2 Esd (c394) (3 and 4 being omitted), Ch (390). Then followed a severe illness until 39X, when "post longam aegrotat ionem" he tr d Prov, Eccl and Cant. He then started on the Octateuch : "Octateucho quern mine in manibus habeo" (Ep., Ixxi. 5), the Pent being first tr d in 401, Josh, Jgs, Ruth and P^st soon after (xl.4: "post sanctae Paulae dormit ionem"). Tob and Jth were tr d for him from Chaldee into Heb from which he then tr d them into Lat (c 405), and shortly before or after these he added the apocryphal additions to Dnl and Est. Bar he passed over. Wisd and Ecclus were not revised by him. Whether he revised Mace is doubtful. Thus was completed in 15 strenuous years (390-405) a work which has proved a KTTJ/HO. Is dei, ktcma es aei (Thuc. i.22), "a possession for all time." The tr was largely undertaken at the re- quest of friends and at no papal request. Indeed Jerome did not pretend to be working for publicity; he actually asked one friend not to show his tr.




      Reception. But human nature rarely recognizes merit in its own generation, and the spirit of con- servatism rose in rebellion against beneficial inno- i vation. Jerome was accused of slighting the LXX, which even in (he eyes of Augustine was equally inspired with the Heb original. Jerome's fiery ' temper and his biting tongue were not calculated to conciliate.

      IV. Subsequent Recensions and History of the Vulgate. By degrees the fierce opposition died ;

      down, and even by the time of Jerome's 1. In MSS death men were beginning to perceive

      the merits of his VS which Augustine used in the (Jospels. Some parts of Jerome's \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ulg won their way to popularity much sooner than others the Old Lat VSS died hard and not without inflicting many a wound on the \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ulg. His Psalter from the Heb never ousted the Galilean which still holds its place in the Vulg. Some scholars were able to appreciate Jerome's ed sooner than others. And it was at different dates that the different provinces and countries of the West adopted it. Pelagius used it in his comm. on the Pauline Epp. As might be expected, the Old Lat YSS retained their place longest in the place of their origin North Africa. Britain proved the next most con- servative. The old VSS were never authoritatively deposed, and so Jerome's YS was compelled to win its way by its own merits. In the 5th cent. esp. in Gaul it continued to grow in popularity among scholars, being adopted by Yincent of Lerins, Eucherius of Lyons, Sedulius, and Claudianus Ma- rnertus, and Prosper of Aquitaine. In the next century its use became almost universal except in Africa," where the Old Lat was retained by Junilius and Facundus. At the close of the 6th cent. Pope Gregory the Groat acknowledges that the new (i.e. the Vulg) and the old are both equally used by the Apostolic See; and thus the Vulg was at least on equal footing with the old. In the 7th cent, the Old Lat retreats, but traces of it survive down into the Middle Ages, affecting and corrupting the Jerome YS. Mixed texts and conflated readings arose the familiarity of the Old Lat in lection- aries and liturgies telling on the Vulg. The NT, being only a revision and not a fresh tr, and being most in use, degenerated most.

      (1) As early as the 6th cent, the need of an emendated Vulg text was felt, and Cassidorius undertook to revise part of it. This was merely private enterprise and did little to stem the flood of corruption.

      (2) About the close of the Nth cent .Charlemagne commissioned an Englishman Alcuin, abbot of St. Martin, Tours, to produce a revised text on the basis of the best Lat MSS, without reference to the Gr text. Alcuin sent to York for his MSS and thus produced a text after British MSS. On Christmas Day, 801 AD, he presented the emperor with the emended text. The authority by which this text was prepared and its public use together with the class of MSS used did much to preserve a pure Vulg text and stay interpolations: "The best MSS of his recension do not differ widely from the pure Hieronymian text" (Westcott).

      (3) Another recension 9f about the same date but a scholar's private enterprise was produced by a Visi- goth, Theodulf, bishop of Orleans. He made, the Spanish family of MSS together with those of Southern France the basis of his text. His inscribing variant readings in the margin really helped the process of corruption. His text though prepared at enormous labor was far in- ferior to that of Alcuin and exerted little influence in face of the authoritative VS of Alcuin. MSS wen; rapidly multiplied in the 9th cent, on the Alcuinian model by the school of Tours, but with carelessness and haste which helped to a speedy degeneration of the text. Again the confusion called for remedy.

      (4) In the llth cent. Lanfranc, bishop of Canterbury (1069-89), attempted correction apparently with little

      success. About the middle of the l_'th cent., Stephen Harding of Citeaux produced a revision extant in MS in Dijon public- library (no. !)), as did also Cardinal Xicolaus. The increased demand for Bibles in the- 13th cent,, gave opportunity for further corruption of tin- text publishers and copyists being indifferent as to the character of MS chosen as a basis.

      (")) In consequence of tin- fame of the University of Paris in the- K'.th cent, and the enormous activity in producing Bible- MSS, there- resulted a type- of text called by Roger Bacon Kxcmiilar I'arixicnxe, for which he has nothing good to say.

      ((>) In the same century stc-ps were taken toward a standard text and to stay corruption by the drawing up of correctoria, i.e. books in which the readings of (ir and I. at MSS were weighed to decide a text, the authority of Fathers cited, etc. Some of the principal corn-ctona are: Correctorium Pariaiense known also as Senonenxt one of the; worst, following the Parisian type of text;, the best; Correctorium Sor-

      in the Sorbonne; Corni-ti


      (1) Kniiij editions. -Little more was done till the invention of printing, and the first products of

      tin- press were Lat Bibles. I'nfor- 2. Printed tunately at first the current text was Vulgate accepted without any critical labors,

      and so the earliest printed Vulgates only perpetuated an inferior text. Only a few from among some hundreds of early VSS can be noted: (a) the Mazarin Bible one of the most beautiful and valuable books in the world printed at Mainz about the middle of the 15th cent. (1455, Westcott,) by Gutenberg, Schoffer or Fust; (//) the first Bible published at Rome in 1471 bySweynheym and Pan- nartx and reprinted in Nuremberg in 1475; (c) 1504 a Paris ed with variant readings; (d) an ed in Complutensian Polyglot (1514 ff) from ancient MSS and from the Gr; (<) practically the first critical ed, by Robert us Stephanus (1st ed 1528, 2d 1532, reprinted later), of interest as being practically the basis of the standard Rom Vulg; (/) Hentenian critical ed (Louvain, 1547). Attempts to produce a corrected text by aid of the original were made by Erasmus in 1516, Pagninus in 1518 ff, Cardinal Cajetan, Steuchius in 1529, Clarius in 1542, etc. Even new tr 3 wore made by both Roman Catholic and Protestant scholars. This bewildering number of VSS and the controversies of the 16th cent, called for a standard ed. The Council of Trent (1546) took up the matter and decreed that the "ipsa vet us et vulgata editio quae longo tot saeculorum usu in ipsa ecclesia probata" ("the same old and ordina- rily used text which has been approved in the church itself by the long usage of so many centuries'') should be regarded as authentic (authentica). By this they apparently meant the Jerome VS, but did not state in which MS or printed ed it was to be found.

      (2) f)ixtine edition (1590). No further steps were taken for the present to secure a standard official Bible for the church the private ed of John Hentenius of Louvain serving in the meanwhile until the pontificate of Sixtus V. This pope in- trusted the work to a committee under Cardinal Caraffa, but he himself strenuously cooperated. MSS and printed edd were examined, but the origi- nal Gr or Heb was to be regarded as decisive in difficulties. The result was published as the Six- tine ed of the Vulg by the Vatican press in 1590 (see title on 1st and 2d pages). The text resembles the Stephanus ed of 1540. A new puzzling method of verse enumeration was introduced. As one; would expect, there was prefixed to the ed a Bull Acltrnus ille, etc, in which the divines gave them- selves credit for their painstaking labors, and the result was declared the authorized Vulg of the Tri- dent ine Council, "pro vera, legit ima, authentica ct indubitata, in omnibus public-is privatisque dis- putationibus . . . ." ("by virtue of truth, usage, authenticity and certainty, in all public; and private disputes").' Errors of printing were corrected by

      Vulgate Wait



      (lie pen or by pasting a slip of paper \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\vith the cor- rection over tne error. This ed was not to be re- printed for 10 years except at the Vatican, and after that any ed must be compared with the Vatican ed, so that ''not even the smallest particle should be altered, added or removed'' under pain of the "greater excommunication." Sixtus died the same year, and the Jesuit Beliarmine persuaded Clement VIII to recall the Sixtine ed and prepare another standard Vulg in 1.VJ2.

      (:i) Clementine, edition (1- r >!).?}. In the same year appeared 1 lie Clement ine ed with a preface by Bellar- miiK! asserting that Sixtus had himself determined to recall his ed on account, of printers' errors (^t'rom which it was remarkably free 1 ). Tin; pains and penalties of the Sixtine Bull were evaded by print- ing the book as a Xu'linc ed, actually printing the name of Sixtus instead of Clement on the t itle-page: liibl id Xacra V nlyiitae Editionis S'i.r/i Quinti Paul. Max. iii.s.sit rccognita at(/ne cdila. The awkward system of verse, enumeration of the Sixtine was dropped. The text itself was rather of the Ilenten- ian type. No future ed was to be printed except on the exact pattern, "even to the smallest particle" of the Vatican ed. Thanks largely to the papal Bull this Clementine ed of 1;"> ( .)2 still remains the official VS of the Roman Catholic church. A second ed appeared in ir>93, and a third in l. r ><)8. Roman Catholic scholars were discouraged from under- taking a new VS, and Protestant scholars were, until recently, too occupied with the original texts.

      Bent ley's projected ed of the NT never appeared. I'nder cover of the works of Jerome a corrected text was published by Vallarsi, 1734 really the completion and revision of the ed of Martianay of 170C>. Little more was done in the way of critical cdd till the latter half of the 19th cent.

      (4) Hlodcrn critical editions. In 1.S01 Vercellone reprinted the Clementine Vulg (with an excellent preface), the names of Sixtus and Clement both appearing on the title-page. In l ( .)()(j an ed Bib Sac Vidi/dtue I'd by Hetzenauer was published at Oeniponte. (The majority of recent edd have been confined to the NT or part of it : Tischendorf, A or. 7Y.s7. I.n!.: tixtn/n Ifiernni/ini. .... restituit, Leip- zig, ISdl; Hetzenauer, A 7 or. Test. Vulg. ed.: ex Vat. cdd. car unique corrcctorio critiee. edidit P. M. II., Oeniponte, 1899.) The Oxford Vulg, prepared by Bishop J. Wordsworth and II. J. White, of which the first, part was issued in 1XS!), is a compre- hensive work of great value. P. Corssen published the first instalment of a Vulg NT (K i>. (id (lul, Berlin, IKS")). This is exclusive of the printed edd of several important MSS. Pope Pius N intrusted the preparation of a revised ed of the Vulg to the Benedictine order but as yet nothing has appeared.

      V. MSS of the Vulgate. To give a satisfactory list would be impossible within our space limits. Tho number is legion estimated at about s.000. As yet the same order has not been called out of the chaos of Vulg and Old Lat MSS in the manner in which \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\Vestcott and Hort have; reduced the Or MSS of the NT to a system. The student may conveniently approach the subject in White's list in the 4th ed of Scrivener, .1 Plain Intro to the Criticism of the \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\T, II. 07 IT, or the longer one by Gregory in Tisch- endorfs NT Or, 8th ed, III, 983 ff, also in Westcotf s art. in DB or White's in 11DB; Yereellone, Variae Lectioncs, I860; Berger, Ilistoire de la Vulgate, 374 ff.

      VI. Latinity. Space permits only a few general remarks. The Lat of the old VSS was simple, rude and vernacular, abounding in literalisms and pro- vincialisms. In many ways, in vocabulary, diction and construction, it offended scholars. As was natural Jerome smoothed the roughness of the old VSS and removed the most glaring solecisms and offensive provincialisms. His work is a master- piece like our AV in the harmonious blend of

      simple, popular, forceful language and a scholarly graceful tr. "As a monument of ancient linguistic power the tr of the OT stands unrivaled and unique" (Westcott). The Vulg has enriched our language by introducing many Gr words, ''apostle," ''evan- gel," "synagogue," "baptism/'' etc. It has also given us much of our theological vocabulary, "edi- fication," "justification," "propitiation," "regen- eration," "Scripture," etc. It still retains many marks of its birth in (1) Old Lat words elevated from the vernacular, (2) Africanisms: clnrifico, etc, saeculum for mundus, long compound vbs. like ob- tenebrare, etc, (3) Graccisms, like the use of the pro- noun for the art., as hie >niindnx = b Koo-fMS, ho /co.s/was, ( Hebraisms, like (idpoxitit itl n/i/irc/icitiltrct et I'et- rum (Acts 12 3; see special works mentioned in "Literature").

      VII. Use of the Vulgate. In the OT the Vulg is not of much importance for the criticism of the lleb text, because; of the freedom which Jerome permitted himself in tr, and because our present Massoretic Heb text had by that time taken on its present f.>rm. But on the LXX it often throws a very use- ful light. In the NT Jerome's VS ranks practically in importance with our oldest and best Gr MSS in establishing (in conjunction with the Old Lat VSS; the received Gr text of the 4th cent., both by way of supplementing and correcting our Gr authorities. It is in the Gospels that Jerome's work is most thorough and useful. His VS also supplies many a hint for the interpretation of our Gr text.

      VIII. Differences between Vulgate and Our English

      Version. Apart from differences of rendering and minor points, the Vulg text differs from the. Eng. in the order of tho books, in the amount contained in some of them, in t lie occasional divergence of chapter and verse enumer- ation. The NT is practically t he same in the Clementine fcoxt, though the order of books varies in many MSS the Catholic Kpp. being placed sometimes after Acts. In some MSS the Ep. to the Laodiceans is found. Most variety obtains in tho OT. The sequence of canonical books is the same, but the apocryphal books are inter- spersed among them and not placed at the end. Tob and Jth are inserted between Neh (2 Esd) and Kst, Wisd and Keel us between Cant and Isa. Bar follows Lam, eh 5 of which is called the "Prayer of Jeremiah the prophet"; land 2 Mace are placed after Mai; Ii and 4 Ksd and Pr Man appear as an appendix after the NT. In Pss the divergence is considerable, the Vulg like tin; Heb counting the title as the first verse. Pss 9, 10 of our VS=Ps 9 in Vulg, so that the Vulg is one Ps behind the Eng. till Ps 114, then Pss 114, 115 again form one Ps = Vulg 113. The Vulg is now two behind. Mat- ters arc; equalized by Ps 116 being divided into two in tho Vulg ( =114, 115). and 147 again = t\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\vo Vulg Pss 146, 147. Thus only Pss 1-8 and 148-150 run tho same. Against Jerome's advice the apocryphal parts of Dnl and Kst were accepted as integral parts of those books, tho Throe being inserted at Dnl 3 2:5, Sus forming eh 13 and Bel eh 14. Ad Est is linked on to the end of Kst. In conclusion, the present Vulg, as Westcott remarks, is a composite of elements belonging to every period and form of tho Lat VS, including (1) unrevised Old Lat (YV'isd, Ecclus, 1 and 2 Mace and Bar); (2) Old Lat cor- rected from tho LXX (Psalter); (3) Jerome's free tr from the original (Job and Jth) ; (4) Jerome's tr from the original (the OT except the Psalter) ; (5) Old Lat revised from (ir MSS (the Gospels); (G) Old Lat cursorily re- vised (the rest of the NT).

      LITKUATURK. This is too vast to cite, but in some of the following works sufficient bibliographies will be found: Berger, Ilixt de la Vulg pendant lex premiers sierlra du moi/en Age, 1S93; H. Hody, De bib. textibus orii.iinalibus, 170."); P. Kaulen, Gexch. der Vulti, 1868; Van Ess, Pragmatisch-krit. Gesch. der Vul/j, 1824; E. Nestle, Urtcxt u. Uebersetzungen der Bibel, 1897, and Ein Jubil'ium d. lat. Bib., 1892. Two splendid arts. each by an authority in Dfi (Westcott) and in HDB (White). A very readable account is in Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient Jlf.S'X, 1C>.~> if, and ill his Handbook to the Test Crit. of the XT, KiS If. For the language: Ronseh, Itala u. Vulijata, 2d ed, 1875; A. Hartl, Sprack- liche Eigentiimlichkeiten d. Yulg, 1894.

      S. AXGUS

      VULTURE, vul'tur (Hin , da' ah; LXX y^, gups, and KKTIVOS, iktinos; Lat Vulturidae): Any mem- ber of a family of large birds that subsist wholly or in part on carrion. The largest vulture of Pal was the Lammer-geier. This bird waited until



      smaller vultures, cables and hawks stripped a car- case to the bone, then carried the skeleton aloft, and dashed it on the rocks until the marrow could be secured. This was a favorite delicacy. This bird was fond of tortoise also, and is said to have dropped the one that struck the bald head of Aeschylus, which the bird mistook for a stone, so causing the death of tin' poet. Several smaller species, includ- ing "Pharaoh's chickens," flocked all over Pal. Those; were protected by a death penalty for their value as scavengers in cities. They fed on carcases of animals that killed each other, ate putrid fish under the nests of pelican and cormorant, followed caravans across the desert, and were ready for offal thrown from animals dressed for feasting. They nocked over the altars for the entrails from sacrifice!, and devoured scraps cast aside by tent-dwellers

      and residents of cities. They paired with affection- ate courting and nested in crevices, in walls, hollow trees and on cliffs. They raised only one pair of young to the season, as the nestlings were over two months old before; they took wing. The; young we're white: at first,, then blae'k feathers enveloped the'in. On aeeemnt e>f their steady diet ef carrion, no one over has been able to use their flesh for fe>e>d, although some; daring ornithologists have; tried. For this re-ason the vulture; was plae-od among the; abominations and should by right have; heade-d the lists (Lev 11 IS; I)t 14 13). The othe-r refere-nces that used to be Ir' 1 ''vulture" in AY (LNX e\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\a "fal- e:e>n" and ''kite*." Isa 34 !."> e;hangos "vulture" to "kite." Job 28 7 changes "vulture" to "falcon."


      flag divider


      flag divider

    "God's Goals"

    For This World!

    Does God Achieve His Goals?
    OR, does Satan achieve his goals?

    (All Teaching- and Commentary is from "INSPIRED-INERRANT!" View of Scripture!)

    The most IMPORTANT "3-QUESTION QUIZ" you'll ever Take?

    The Adversary’s Goals:

      SCRIPTURE: "The ‘Devil’ ... walketh about seeking whom he may DEVOUR." I Pet 5:8

      SCRIPTURE:"The ‘Thief’ (Devil) cometh not, but for to steal, to kill and to DESTROY." John 10:10

        QUESTION: Do you Believe Satan the Adversary Succeeds?___ Or Fails?___

    God the Father’s Goals:

      SCRIPTURE: "For God sent NOT His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world though Him might be SAVED! See John 3:16 John 3:17

      SCRIPTURE: "Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, ... The Lord is ... NOT willing that any should perish, but that ALL should come to repentance. 2 Pet 3:9

        QUESTION: Do you Believe God the Father Succeeds?___ Or Fails?___

    God the Son’s Goals:

      SCRIPTURE: "For the Son of Man is come to seek and to SAVE that which is lost!" Luk 19:10 "For I came NOT to judge the world, but to SAVE the world. John 12:47

      SCRIPTURE: "And I, if I be lifted up from the Earth, I WILL DRAW ALL men unto Me." Joh 12:32

        QUESTION: Do you Believe God the Son (Jesus Christ): Succeeds?___ Or Fails?___ center>

    God the Spirit’s Goals:

      SCRIPTURE: Jesus declares: "'I ’WILL’' send Him (Holy Spirit) unto you, and when He is come 'He ’WILL’' testify of Me: John 14:26

      SCRIPTURE: "He ’WILL’ reprove the world [convict, convince, correct] of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment: John 16:7

      SCRIPTURE: (1) Of sin, because they believe not on me; ... (2) Of righteousness, because I go to my Father; ...(3) Of judgment, because the 'Prince of this World' IS JUDGED![A] John 16:8-10

        QUESTION: Do you think God the Spirit Succeeds?___ Or Fails?___


        If you believe




      COPYRIGHT (c) 1977 Cambridge Theological Seminary
      COPYRIGHT (c) 1965 Cambridge Bible Institute, NewtonStein


      In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in the NewtonStein, Cambridge Theological Seminary is archived here under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in reviewing the included information for personal use, non-profit research, and educational purposes only.


      flag divider

      "CHURCH USA!


      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!


      flag divider

      FROM: Cambridge Theological Seminary, TO: Dr. D. James Kennedy: Can you be as Bold as Him?

      FROM: Cambridge Theological Seminary, TO: Cambridge Theological Seminary Office, USA

      FROM: Cambridge Theological Seminary, TO: Free Ordination-1 by Cambridge Theological Seminary

      FROM: Cambridge Theological Seminary, TO: Religious Degrees, Bachelor's, Master's and Doctorate

      FROM: IAIA Accreditation, TO: A few Recent Ministry Partners

      FROM: Cambridge Theological Seminary,

      FROM: Cambridge Theological Seminary, TO: Ministers Main Page

      FROM: Cambridge Theological Seminary, TO: Home-Based-Ministry: Serve God, Make Money, Save Taxes

      FROM: Cambridge Theological Seminary, TO GENERAL HOME PAGE

      FROM: Cambridge Theological Seminary, TO MINISTERS HOME PAGE

      Most Important Questions You'll Ever Answer?

      Do you understand "Eternal Life as God's FREE GIFT" - Unearned and Undeserved?
      "Eternal Life as God's FREE GIFT!"

      Do you know FOR SURE that you have Eternal Life: Here & Now?

      "Eternal Life: Here & Now FOR SURE!"

      In 'VERY FEW MINUTES' ... you can Know for Certain if you're saved ... or not!
      In 'TWO MINUTES' - Know if you're Saved or not!

      Red-White-and-Blue In-God-We-Trust

      Search Web's Most Comprehensive Christian Site

      All-Things-Bible, Church, History, Leadership, Psychology, Politics, Science, Health,
      Sermon Resources, "Starters", Illustrations & Stories, Humor, Quotes, Sermons (Audio & Print)
      From Ancient Rome, Greece & Jewish History to Latest News Headlines!

      The Web Ministers-Best-Friend


      flag divider

      Could you share your State of Salvation that we may better serve our readers?

      At this time, I do not believe Jesus is the Saviour!

      I do believe Jesus is the Saviour and I know I have eternal Life!

      I do not believe it is possible to 'Know in this life' if one has Eternal Life.

      god bless bar

      A Christian Family in Every House, in YOUR Community, in YOUR Lifetime!

      Worth Giving For? Worth Living For? Worth Working For?

      Please name "" aloud in Prayer Daily? PLEASE?

      DOCTRINAL DISCLAIMER: is an Absolute, Bible-Believing, Conservative Christian Ministry, seeking to serve the Ministers who serve the LORD JESUS. As such, we provides web-space to a number of Ministries, notably NewtonStein (a Creation-Science-Based Research Group), as well as AMERIPEDIA, BIBLIPEDIA, CHRISTIPEDIA, CATHOLIPEDIA, ISLAMIPEDIA, JUDAEOPEDIA, TEA-PARTY-UNITED, TALK-RADIO-REPUBLICANS, ETC., – seeking to be an outlet for many CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVE VOICES who love the LORD JESUS CHRIST ABOVE ALL!

      Obviously, all phases of Christianity do not agree doctrinally or politically and sometimes even disagree on the actual facts concerning a particular leader, nation or situation, hence there are well over 10,000 denominations extant.

      We neither claim nor present ourselves as having perfect knowledge in all things. Thus views and articles posted on this website are those of their authors – who often insist their identities, denominational, and/or doctrinal persuasion be made known for various reasons – offered to you as wise people of God - Christian Patriots, whatever your nation - to discern for your own judgement and edification.

      In the NAME of Jesus Christ Our Lord and Saviour:

      Be Blessed!


      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!)


      "HOW TO"

      Start a Church, HomeSchooling, Bible School, Get Accredited, etc;

      How to Start a Church Legally: PART-1

      How to Start a Church Legally: PART-2 (Background)

      How to Start a Church Spiritually: PART-3

      How to Start a Local Church Ministry: PART-4

      How to Start a Church Legally: PART-5

      How to Name a Church: PART-6

      How to Write a Statement of Faith: Part-7

      How to Name a Church: PART-8

      How to Start a Church TODAY with immediate Tax-Exemption!
      Just TEN-SURE-&-SIMPLE STEPS! PART-9 (Most Popular!)

      HOW TO DO Church Planting, Part-10

      How to do Church Minutes for Business Meetings: Part-11

      How to know if you are being called to Minister: Part-12

      How to make your Ministry Sales Tax Exempt: TODAY Part-13

      EKKLESIA ARCHIVES: Who Started Your Church? History, Part-14

      HOME-SCHOOLING: How to get Started! TODAY! Part-15

      What Is A "FREE-CHURCH!" - General Background;

      What is a "FREE-CHURCH?" 33-Questions and Answers

      You MUST Understand this Teaching! EYE-OPENING! (Most Important!)


      Pulpit Freedom Sunday! Freedom of Speech and Preachers!


      Home School Your Children: 20-Great-Resaons!

      How To Get Your Christian School or Bible School Accredited By;
      Cambridge Theological Seminary: "CAMBRIDGE! Greatest Name in Education"

      Free Ordination-1 by Cambridge Theological Seminary

      Cambridge Theological Seminary: Religious Degrees, Bachelor's, Master's and Doctorate


      rotating star  BRIGHT BLUE & RED rotating star


      Please Visit TOP-TWENTY-FIVE AMERIPEDIA™ Pages

      flag divider


      [2] "AMERIPEDIA™" – Potential President Marsha Blackburn: TEA-PARTY SUPER-HERO!

      [3] "AMERIPEDIA™" - Ronald-Reagan Files: The Great Communicator

      [4] "AMERIPEDIA™" – Kristi Noem, The New TEA-PARTY-PRINCESS!

      [5] "AMERIPEDIA™" – REAGAN REPUBLICAN Michelle Bachmann for President: 2012 or 2020?


      [7] "AMERIPEDIA™" - Barack Obama Files: His Muslim Connections



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

      [11] "AMERIPEDIA™" - SARAH PALIN HOME PAGE: "Winning Big Winning Easy in 2012!"

      [12] "AMERIPEDIA™" - TALK-RADIO-CONSERVATIVES Home Page: For a Judaeo-Christian America


      [14] "AMERIPEDIA™" - Sarah Palin Blog: The Webs Largest "Pro Sarah Palin Site!"

      [15] "AMERIPEDIA™" - The "Rush-Recommended Republican Blueprint!"

      [16] "AMERIPEDIA™" - "Rush Limbaugh Quotes" on Christ and Christianity!

      [17] "AMERIPEDIA™" - PNN, "PALIN NEWS-NETWORK”: Her Book Sales Set Records!

      [18] "AMERIPEDIA™" - "TALK-RADIO REPUBLICANS, Michele Bachmann, BRIEF-BIO!"

      [19] "AMERIPEDIA™" - "TALK-RADIO REPUBLICANS, "Republican Power and Catholics!"

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

      [21] "AMERIPEDIA™" - "TALK-RADIO REPUBLICANS, "American Bible Catholics!"


      [23] "AMERIPEDIA™" - Reagan Republicans Home Page

      [24] "AMERIPEDIA™" - PRO-LIFE Page

      [25] "AMERIPEDIA™" - Michele-Bachmann, TEA PARTY DARLING Causing “Hysteria-on-the-Left!”

      flag divider


      "Fair Use" Notice:

      Contributions from the best scholars in numerous fields are added to website daily. Such research papers and articles:

        * May not represent the views of Cambridge Theological Seminary;

        * Have not been peer-reviewed by Cambridge Theological Seminary;

        * Being a global ministry of huge proportions - yet of mostly retired volunteers (locally) - it is not possible to "verify" every piece that is submitted to us.

        * There is not - and never has been - any money, checking or savings account, or any other such fund associated with or Cambridge Theological Seminary.

        * The 160,000-plus page archive (1-1-2011) of may or may not contain a tiny amount copyrighted news/political reporting material whose use may or may not have been authorized by the copyright owners;

        * To the best of our knowledge we believe that this not-for-profit, educational use on the web constitutes a "fair use" of the copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law).

        * If readers wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

        * "Fair use" notwithstanding, we will immediately comply with any copyright owner who can show our use of such material is not in compliance with the fair Use law.

        Thank You for your part in the Global Ministry of - as of 1-1-2011 - in nearly 200 nations, approaching 40,000 associated Bible Believing Ministers and over 30,000 Ministries.

        Editor: NewtonStein


      * Cambridge Theological Seminary USA & Global has no connection or relationship to Cambridge University in England, EXCEPT . . . we in the USA are carrying on their "Christian Values of Hundreds of Years" . . . as they have long since become secular humanists, agnostics and atheists: "Anti-Christ" in almost every way and contrary to every Scripture.

      flag divider

      JCSM's Top 1000 Christian Sites - Free Traffic Sharing Service! The


      RETURN TO TEXT; Last term before footnote