Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924098819406 CORNELL UNIVERSITY LBRARY 3 1924 098 8 9 406 In compliance with current copyright law, Cornell University Library produced this replacement volume on paper that meets the ANSI Standard Z39.48-1992 to replace the irreparably deteriorated original. 2004 CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY FROM i : ;. . . I ■ f : THE BARNES REFERENCE LIBRARY. THE GIFT OF :^tfrc6 C. Barnes. 3. Not to be taker] froiT| tl"ie rooiT|, ^/^ T. and T. Clark's Publications. LOTZE'S MICROCOSMUS. Jiixt puhlUlied, ill Tn\) Vols. 8ro (1450 pagex), price SCs., MICROCOSMUS: Concerning Man and his relation io the World, By HERMANN LOTZE. ' These are indeed two masterly volumes, vigorous in iiiteUectual power, and tran.'=- lated with rare ability. . . . This work will doubtless find a place on the shelves of all tlie foremost thinkers and students of modern times.' — Evanfjelical Magazine. ' Lotze is the ablest, the most brilliant, and most renowned of the German philosophers of to-day, . . . He has rendered invalnable and splendid scrvico to Christian thinkers, and has given them a work which cannot fail to equip them for the sturdiest intellectual conflicts and to ensnre their victory.' — Baptist Ma{jaziiic- ' The repntation of Lotzc bolh as a scientist and a philosopher, no less than the merits of the work itself, will not fail to sccnro the attention of thoughtful readers.' — Scotsman. ' The translation of Loize's Microcosmns is the most important of recent events in our philosophical literature. . . . The discussion is carried on on the basis of an almost encychipmdic knowledge, and with the prufoundcst and subtlest critical insight. We know of no other work containing so much of speculative suggestion, of keen criticism, and of sober judgment on these topics.'— Jj(c?(^rn' Hcrieiv. Now Ready ^ Vols. I. and 11. of Second Division^ price 10s. (jd. each^ HISTORY OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE IN THE TIME OF OUR LORD. By De. EiA'IlL SCHURER, Professor of Theologj^ in the University of Gicssen. TRANSLATED FROM THE SECOND EDITION (HuvrsKD tiikougiiout, ano GUEATLT ENLAr.GKi>) ov ' HISTORY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT TIME.' A Third Volume, which will shortly fullow, will complute the Second Division. The First Division, which will probably be iu a single volume, is undergoing revision by the Author. ' Under Professor Schilrer's.' guidance we arc enabled to a large extent to construct a social and political framework fur tlio Gospel Uiato]'y, and to set it in snch a light as to see new evidences of the truthfulness of that history and of its contemporaneonsness. . . The length of our notice shows our estimate of the value of his work.' — Eit-'jlish Churchman. 'Messrs. Clark have afresh earned the thanks of all stndents of the New Testament in England, by undertaking to present Schtirer's masterly work in a form easily accessible to the English reader. ... In every case the amount of research displayed is very great, truly German in its proportions, while the style of Professor Schilrer is by no means cumbrous, after the manner of some of his countr^'uien. We have inaderiuately described a most valuable work, but we hope we have said enough to induca our readers v/-ho do not know this book to seek it out forthwith.' — Methodist Recorder. In demy St-o, jjrlce 9s., GREEK AND ENGLISH LEXICON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. By Peof. EDWARD ROBINSON, D.D. 'We regard this Lexicon as a valuable addition to j)hilological science, and, on the whole, the best Lexicon xtpon the New Testament which a student could purchase.' — baptist Magazine. T. and T. Clm^Iis Publications. Just publislieii, in demy 8vo, price 12fl., AN INTRODUCTION TO THEOLOGY: lis Principles, lis Branches, lis Resuiis, and lis Liieraiure. By ALFRED CAYE, B.A., PRINCIPAL, AND PUOFESSOII OF TIIEfll/.lGY, OF HACKNEY COLLEGE, I.ONl ON'. ' We can most liearlily recommond tliis work to students of eve]-y degree of attain- ment, and not only to those who will have the opportunity of utihzing its aid in the most sacred of the professions, but to all who desire to encourage and systematise their knowledge and clarify their views of .Divine tilings.' — Nonconformist and Enrjlish Independent. ' We know of no work more likely to prove useful to divinity students. Its arrange- ment is perfect, its learning accurate and extensive, and its practical hints invaluable.' — Christian World. 'Professor Cave is a uiasler of theolcgiual science. He is one of the men to whose industry thei'e seems no limit. . . . We can only say that we have rarely road a book with more cordial approval.'— Uapiisf Mar/ardne. Jiisl pvlili.shcrl, ill rruirn Sci\]>rice is. Gd., THE BIBLE AN OUTGROWTH OF THEOCRATIC LIFE. By D. W. SIMON, rniKcirAL of thu congueoational collicoe, Edinburgh. ' A book of absorbing interest, and well worlhy of study.' — Methodist New Connexion J\Iar/anne- ' We heartily recommend every one who desires a better understanding of the true character of the liook of Books to procure it at once and make a study of it. ... A more completely satisfactory book we have not had through our hands for a long time.' — Aberdeen Journal. Just published, in crown 8vo, price 3s.. 6d., ' THE RELIGIOUS HISTORY OF ISRAEL. A Discussion of the Cliief ProlDlems in Old Testament History, as opposed to the Development Theorists. By Dr. FKIEDEICH EDUARD KONIG, THE UNIVEli.'SITV, LEIPZIO. Translated by Rev. ALEXANDER J. CAMPBELL, M.A. 'An admirable little volume. . . . By sincere and earnest minded students it will be cordially welcomed.' — Freevxan. ' Every page of the book deserves study.' — CJiurch Bclh, Just published, in crown Svo, price Gs., NEW TESTAMENT TEACHING IN PASTORAL THEOLOGY. By J. T. BECK, D.D., PaOF. ORD. THEOL., TlJBINaEN. Edited by Professor B, RIGGENBACH. Translated by Rev. JAS. M'CLYMONT, B.D., and Rev. THOS. NIGOL, B.D. ' The volume contains much which any thoughtful and earnest Christian minister will iind helpful and suggestive to liini for the wise and efficient discharge of his sacred functions.' — Literary World. BIBL ICO -THEOLOGICAL LEXICON OF NEW TESTAMENT GEEEK BY Av,^^.st) HERMANN ORE ME R, D.D., PKOFESSOE OF THEOLOGY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF GKEIFSWALD. TRIED ENGLISH EDITION. WITH SUPPLEMENT. Stranslafcti ham Ifjc latest (icrmnn fiFiition, BY WILLIAM URWICK, M.A. EDINBURGH: T. & T. CLAEK,.38 GEOEGE STREET. MDCCCLXXXVI. •s/:l PRINTED r.Y MOKTirSO.V AND GIT^n, FOR T. & T. CLARK, E D I N R U U 11 . LONP.ON, TTAMrLTON-, ADAMH, AND CO. DIT.LIN, HEO. HERDERT. NEW YORK PCKIP.NER AXD -WELmRD, TRANSLATOE'S PEEFACE. PEOFESSOR CREMER'S Lexicon of New Testament Greek is in Germany considered one of the most important contributions to the study of New Testament Exegesis that has appeared for many years. As is clear from the author's preface, the student must not expect to find in it every word which the New Testament contains. For words whose ordinary meaning in the classics is retained unmodified and unchanged in Scripture, he must resort still to the classical lexicons. But for words whose meaning is thus modified, words which have become the bases and watchwords of Christian theology, he will find this lexicon most valuable and suggestive, tracing as it does their history in their transference from the classics into the Septuagint, and from the Septuagint into the New Testament, and the gradual deepening and elevation of their meaning till they reach the fulness of New Testament thought. The esteem in which the work is held in Germany is evident from the facts that it has procured for the author his appointment as Professor of Theology in the University of Greifswald, that a second edition has been so soon called for, and that a translation of it has appeared in Holland. The present translation contains several alterations and additions made by Professor Cremer in the sheets of his second edition ; about four hundred errata, moreover, occurring in that edition have been corrected. WILLIAM URWICK. 49 Belsize Park Gardens, London, N.W., August 1878. AUTHOE'S PEEFACE TO THE EIEST EDITION LEXICAL works uxDon New Testament Greek have hitherto lacked a thorough appreciation of what Schleiermacher calls " the language - moulding power of Christianity." A language so highly elaborated and widely used as was Greek having been chosen as the organ of the Spirit of Christ, it necessarily followed that as Christianity fulfilled the aspirations of truth, the expressions of that language received a new meaning, and terms hackneyed and worn out by the current misuse of daily talk received a new impress and a fresh power. But as Christianity stands in express and obvious antithesis to the natural man (using this phrase in a spiritual sense), Greek, as the embodiment and reflection of man's Qiatural life in its richness and fulness, presents this contrast in the service of the sanctuary. This is a phenomenon which repeats itself in every sphere of life upon which Christianity enters, not, of course, always in the same way, but always with the same result — namely, that the spirit of the language expands, and makes itself adequate to the new views which the Spirit of Christ reveals. The speaker's oi writer's range of view must change as the starting-point and goal of all his judgments change ; and this change will not only modify the import and range of conceptions already existing, but will lead to the formation of new conceptions and relationships. In fact, "we may," as Eothe says {Dogmatik, p. 238, Gotha 1863), " appropriately speak of a language of the Holy Ghost. For in the Bible it is evident that the Holy Spirit has been at work, moulding for itself a distinctively religious mode of expression out of the language of the country which it has chosen as its sphere, and transforming the linguistic elements which it found ready to hand, and even conceptions already existing, into a shape and form appropriate to itself and aU its own." We have a very clear and striking proof of this in New Testament Greek. A lexical handling of IST. T. Greek must, if it is to be really a help to the under- standing of the documents of Eevelation, be directed mainly to that department of the linguistic store which is necessarily affected by the influence we have described, i.e. to the expressions of spiritual life, moral and religious. For other portions of the linguistic treasury the Lexicons of classical Greek suffice. A lexicon of K T. Greek such as I mean will be mainly hihlico-tlieological, examining those expressions chiefly which are of a biblico-theological import. In order to this, it wUl not be enough to prove by classical quotations that the word in question is used in classical Greek. The range of the con- ception expressed in its extra-biblical use must be shown, and the affinity or difference of the biblical meauing must be pointed out. Here the ever recurring antithesis between PREFACE. nature, and spirit most strikingly appears ; and who will venture to deny that the observation and investigation of this will exei't an influence, hitherto too often over- looked, upon our understanding of the truths of Eevelation ? Thus we shall find, for example, as Nagelsbach {Nachliomarisclie Theolocjie, p. 239) observes, that "it is with this expression (o TreXay, -ifKricriov) as with many others in which heathen and Christian ideas meet; the old word has the ring of a Christian thought, and is (so to speak) a vessel already prepared to receive it, though it did not before come up to it." Hence, as Ger. V. Zezschwitz in his lucid little treatise (Profangrdcitdt und biUischsr Sprachgeist) says, " such a lexicon must be a key, thorougly elaborated, to the essential and funda^ mental ideas of Christendom." It will likewise show how the common complaint, that many notions with which theology deals are inadmissible, is directed mainly against con- ceptions that have been alienated from their scriptural basis, that have lost their clear- ness, and have (if I may use the term) again become naturalized. I regret that through lack of necessary helps I have been imable to trace the historical strengthening or weakening which such conceptions have undergone in patristic Greek. A further valuable addition to such a lexicon Schleiermacher names {Rermeneutik und Kritik, p. 6 9), when he says : " A collection of all the various elements in which the language- moulding power of Christianity manifests itself would be an adumbi'ation (a Sciagraphy) of N. T. doctrine and ethics." The Seventy prepared the way in Greek for the N. T. proclamation of saving truth. Fine as is the tact with which in many cases they endeavoured to fulfil their task (cf. Saw;), it must be allowed that their language differs from that of the N. T. as the well- meant and painstaking effort of the pupils differs from the unerring and creative hand of the master (see e.g. iX-jrh). The words by which they rendered Hebrew ideas (for which, indeed, they sometimes simply substituted Greek ideas) had already undergone much modi- fication in ordinary or in scholastic usage (see e.g. /BejSrfKo'; and kovvo^). In many cases the Hebrew word answering to the IST. T. conception will be something different in the Septuagint. It is a matter of regret that the materials and helps accessible for a thorough review of the Septuagint are so meagre, and that one has to depend for examples almost solely upon a troublesome and laborious search. The works of PhiLo and Josephus afford very little help. In them, even more than in the Septuagint, the endeavour is apparent to import Greek ideas and Greek philosophy into Judaistic thought, so that we find no trace of that missionary character of divine revelation, breaking up and sowing anew the profane soil, which so strikingly charac- terizes IST. T. Greek. Nevertheless we must on no accoimt overlook the manifold and important affinities of N. T. Greek with the language of Jewish religious schools, with post-biblical synagogal Hebrew. See almv, ^acr. tov &., elica>v, etc. " Christianity, as the universal religion, has moulded the form of its announcements alike from Hellenistic, Old Testament, and synagogal materials" (Delitzsch, Heirclerlrirf, p. 589). Here, as is well known, we VI PREFACE. have the most valuable helps. I regret that the lexicon of Dr. T. Levi upon Targums is not yet complete. The work which, after the labour of nine years, I have now brought to completion is certainly an attempt only, an effort to do, not a result accomplished ; it simply prepares the way for a cleverer hand than mine. The lack of such a preparation I have felt step by step throughout. Hardly any even of the commonest N. T. conceptions has received any adequate investigation, biblical or theological, at the hands of the commentators. The commentaries of Tholuck, my dear tutor, form, with a few others, a notable yet solitary exception. I am therefore obliged to pursue my own course, to make my own way, and peradventure often to go wrong. But thus I have learned more and more to admire the unerring tact of the Evangelical Church, who, by the more immediate discern- ment of faith, learned long before us what we can only confirm as truth by our after labours. It was of no small use to me to be obliged and to be allowed to test these my studies in the practical work of my ministry. I have but rarely, as in the case of Bo^a, had to correct the lexicons of classical Greek. As to the arrangement of words, they are placed according to the simplest laws of derivation, so that the review of the linguistic usage and of the scope of the thought denoted might be as little cumbersome as possible. The alphabetical index at the end will facilitate reference. And now : " quibus parum vel quibus nimium est, mihi ignoscant. Quibus autem satis est, non mihi sed Domino mecum congratulantes agant ! " (Aug. De Civ. D. xxii. 30.) AUTHOR'S PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. rpHE extraordinarily favourable reception awarded to this first attempt to reform and -L scientifically to reconstruct N. T. lexicography must of necessity put me to shame, all the more because no one can see so plainly as myself that it is due more to the want which the lexicon was intended to meet, than to the satisfaction which it rendered to that want. I have endeavoured in this new edition, by emendation, enlargement, revisions, and additions of new words, to satisfy in some degree the claims which may and must fairly be set up. Comparatively few articles have been transferred unaltered from the first edition. While in some cases the changes are but small, e.g. the revising and multiplication of examples from profane Greek and Holy Scripture, and affecting precision of expression, a considerable number of articles have been either extended or re-written, such as dya66'; ; cf Gregor. Nyss. de opific. horn. c. 20, t. 1, p. 98, TO oVtw? dyaOov dirXovv Kal /xovoetSe's ecm Ttj cf>va€i, wdat]'; BiirXor]^ Kal t^9 ttoo? TO evavTLOV av^vyia<; dXXoTpiov. (h) Good, in relation to something else = what is of advantage. It ig thus used of Ayadoi; 5 'AyaOo'; persons in Matt. xx. 15, et o 0(^ddXiM0 Kal Xoya dya6a>; 2 Tim. ii. 21, uKevo^ . . . el oaov Kpeirrwv o iroiwv, eTrl roaovTO Koi TO yevo/ievov afiavov. Cf. the oxymoron in Plat. legg. i. 627 B : to x^ipov Kpeirrov Tov afieivovo^, dcterius moliore superius. The word is used in a sense most nearly akin to the fundamental meaning in Heb. xii. 24 : KpeiTrova \a\ovvTi irapa Tov"A^e\, where Lachm. and Tisch. read KpelrTov advcrlially = more emphatically. — (a) More excellent : Heb. vii. 7, to eXaTTOv inrb rov KpetrTovo^ eiXoyelTai, ; i, 4, Kpelrrcav yevofieva rojv dyyeXcov ; vii. 19, KpeiTTcov e\7ri?, opp. to to t^5 ivroXrj'i aa-0eve'i Koi dva>(f>e\e<; (ver. 18), ovSev yap eVeXetwcrei' o i/o/io? (ver. 19); vii. 22, KpeiTToov hiaOrjicr} ; viii. 6, KpelTTove<; iTrwyyekiai ; ix. 23, KpeiTTOve^ Ovaiai,; x. 34, rrjv dpTrayfjv tojv inrapvovTcov vficbv /xera •^apd'; Trpoae- Be^aaOe, yivaxTKovTe^ '^X^''^ eavTol<; Kpeirrova virap^iv koX fikvovaav ; xi. 16, KpelrTovo'i (sc. TraTp/So?) opeyovrai, toOt ecnv iirovpaviov; xi. 35, ov TrpocySe^d/jievoi, rrjv d7ro\vrpaiai,v (deliverance in this life) "va KpelTTovo<; dvaaTdaeco^ TV)(a>cnv. On the KpecTTov to (tov Oeov irepl rifiwv irpo^e'^afiivov) in xi. 40, see Kiehm, Lehrhcyr. cles Kebr. Br. 583 : " Our living in the time of fulfilment is the great advantage we have above them ; and we enjoy this advantage by virtue of the divine decree, — a decree so peculiarly in our favour, — that the Messiah should appear in our days." Heb. xii. 24, Eec, Kpen-Tova XaXelv, where it would be more correct to read KpeiTTov, adv. Phil. i. 23 : ttoWw Brj r/ iTrlracnv t»5? ZbKawawri'i eh cLjadoTTod'av eTTtBeBcoKev, TovT

iXdya6ov. — In ecclesiastical Greek, on the contrary, we find the word mostly used in the particular sense of one who likes to he kind, who likes to do good, joined e.g. with (j)iXoi,KTipij,av. ^iXayddci)'; and tpiXayaOojcrvvr] occur there with a like meaning, whUe (ptXajaOta in Philo and Clemens Alex, answers to ^iXdyado'; in its general sense. Thus, also, Chrysostom explains the word in the only place where it occurs in the K T. (Tit. i. 8), TO, avTov Trdvra Tot? Beo/iivoL<; ■iTpoii/j.evo'; ; and likewise Theophylact : tov eTrtebicri, TOV jJueTpiov, TOV fif] (j}6ovovvTa, — the same expositor who explains the a-rr. Xey. d(piXd- yaOof in 2 Tim. iii. 3 by ixdpo<; ■jravTo'^ dyaOov. Considering that d^uXdyadoi in 2 Tim. iii. 3 occupies a middle place between dvrj/j-epoi and TrpoSorat, and that ^iXdyadov in Tit. i 8 appears side by side with ^Cko^evov among the requirements in a presbyter, the more general moral qualities aw^pova, hUaiov, oauov, not being enumerated till after- wards, the meaning given by the above-named Greek interpreters must apparently be preferred, and the word may perhaps be explained : one who willingly and ivitli self- denial does good, or is kind. ^Aj)iXdyaOo<;, ov, only in the K T., and there only in 2 Tim. iii. 3, among the characteristics of the wickedness and apostasy of the last days. In accordance with what has been said under (^ikdr/a6oi\o2o av, aK)C koX epwo vtt avdpcoirwv, on which Sturz {lex. JTcm.) remarks : scil. ^CKovaiv amici ; sed qui veJiementius amant, tanquam aniasium, ii epwai. 'Epav denotes the love of passion, of vehement, sensual desire ; but so unsuitable was this word, by usage so saturated with lustful ideas, to express tho moral and holy character of that love with which Scripture in particular has to do, that it does not occur in a good sense even in the 0. T., save in Prov. iv. 6, Wisd. viii. 2 ; and, as already remarked, not at all in the N. T. Concerning this latter fact. Trench {Synonyms of the N. T.) well says : " In part, no doubt, the explanation of this absence is, that these words (epco?, ipav, ipaarrj^), by the corrupt use of the world, had become so steeped in earthly sensual passion, carried such an atmosphere of unholiness about them (see Origen, Prol. in Cant. op. 3, pp. 28-30), that the truth of God abstained from the defUing contact with them." 'AyaTrdv and (piXdv are used, indeed, in many cases synonymously ; they even seem sometimes to be used the one in place of the other ; cf. e.g. Xen. 3fem. ii. 7. 9, iav Be TTpocTTaTij? y;, 'ottco'; evepyol u>ai, cv jxev iKelva<; (J3iXi]aeK, opwv w^eXi'/iov? creavTO) ovaa';, eKSivai Be ae uyairrjcrovaiv, alcrdofievai, ^(aLpovTd ae auTat?, with iL 7. 12 : al fiev a)? KrjBeiMova icpiXovv, 6 Be tu? co^e\i'yu.ou9 ^ydira. Yet it follows from these veiy passages that a distinction not too subtle exists between the two words. Of. Plat. Lys. 2 1 5 B, 6 Be fxrj rov Beo(j.evo<; oiiBe Tt dyairuyr] av ; Ov jap oJjv. 'O Be /xrj dyaTraiv, ovB' av (pcXot ; ov BrJTa. Hom. Od. 7. 32, 33, ov yap ^eivov; o'lBe fidX dv6pci)'jrov<; dvi'^ovTat,, ovB' dya-Tra^o- fxevoi iptKeova-', o? k aXkodev eKdy. Dio Cassius 24, i^iXrjaaTe ainov cos irarepa, Ka\ Tjy a-rrriaaTe w? evepyirrjv. However often dyairav and (piXeiv are used in the same com- binations and relations, it must not be overlooked that in aU cases wherein the simplo designation of kindred, a friendly or in any way intimate relation between friends, etc., was required, the words ^t'Xo?, <^CKelv were naturally used, and hence we laeet these more frequently by far, dyairdv less frequently. 'Ayairav, moreover, possesses a meaning of its own, which, in spite of other points of agreement, never belongs to ^Ckeiv, viz. to he contented, to he satisfied with {rivl, and rl, or with the participle, or followed by el, iav ; so we find from Plomer onwards to the later Greek in Thuc, Plat,, Xen., Demosth., Lucian) ; according to the old lexicographers, = apweZcr^aj nvi Kal fM-riBev TrXiov eTri^rjTeiv. On the other hand, dya-Trdv never means " to kiss," or " to do anything willingly," " to be wont to do," — significations which are peculiar to ^tXeiv. If, after aU this, it be asked, in conclusion. How do you account for the surprising fact that everywhere in hihlical Grceh in both the 0. T. and specially in the K T., where the love which belongs to the sphere 'Ayavdo) 1 1 'AyaTrdco of divine revelation is spoken of, dyaTrav is systematically used, while (piXelv has received no distinctive colouring at all ? — the answer must be, That the love designated by dya-rrdv must certainly possess a distinctive element of its own. We shall not go wrong if we define the distinction thus: (piXetv denotes the love of natural inclination, affection, — love, so to say, originally spontaneous, involuntary (amare) ; dr/airdv, on the other hand, love as a direction of the will, diligere. This must be regarded as the true and adequate explanation, at least as regards Scripture usage, and it is surely confirmed by the tes- timony of classical usage above given. God's love to man in revelation is but once expressed by ^CKeiv, not in the text cited by Tittmann {de synon. N. T. p. 53), John xvl 27, where the special relation of the Father to the disciples of Jesus is spoken of, but in the expression cpikavdpwiria, Tit. iii. 4, and there the word has a meaning quite different from its signification in classical Greek. ^i\eiv is never used of the love of men towards God. [But see 1 Cor. xvi. 22 : el' rt? ov (piXel tov Kvpiov.] Love to God or to our neighbour, as a command, is unheard of in the profane writers ; this love, again, is always expressed by djairav. 'Ayairav, and never (piXeiv, is used of love towards our enemies. See, on the other hand, John xv. 19: el e« tov Koajxov rjTe, 6 KoafioiXeiv, includes also the dyaTrdv. The range of (pikelv is wider than that of dyaTrdv, but dyaTrdv stands all the higher above Trarpl ■^ya'Trrj/xivoi,'; (Eec. ■^yiacr- fievoti), rjy. denotes a thought complete in itself (like rjyiaafievoi in Heb. x. 10); and the added words iv BeS Trarpi are to be explained like iv in Heb. x. 1 ; — that they are rjyaTj-rjiikvoi and ^Irjaov Xpicrrat TeTrjpr]p,ivoi, has its ground in God as the Father. The meaning of dyanrav having been fixed by such usage, it is used finally to denote the love of Christians towards each other. John xiii. 34, xv. 12, 17; 1 John ii. 10, iii. 10, 11, 14, 23, iv. 7, 11, 12, 20, 21, v. 1, 2 ; 2 John 5. In all these passages, as in Eom. xiii. 8, 1 Thess. iv. 9, 1 Fet. i. 22, ii. 17, the object is specified: tov erepov, dSe\6v, dBe\(f>ov<;, aWTjXov?, aBe\(f>6rr]ra, etc. Without specification of an object, it is used to denote Christian brotherly and social love in 1 John iii. 18, iv. 7, 8, 'Ayd-TTT], rj, love, not found in the profane writers. The LXX. uses it in 2 Sara. xiii. 15 ; Song ii. 4, 5, 7, iii 5, 10, v. 8, vii. 6, viii. 4, 6, 7 ; Jer. ii. 2 ; Eccles. ix. 1, 6, as an equivalent for "nns^ which is elsewhere translated dydtrrfffL^ and ^tX/a. It is also found in Wisd. iii. 9, vi. 19. In the K T. it does not occur in Acts, Mark, and James. The peculiar !N". T. use of dyarrav would seem to have rendered necessary, so to speak, the introduction of dydrrT], a word apparently coined by the LXX., and unknown both to Philo and Josephus. 'Aydrrr] in the LXX. does not, it is true, possess any special force, analogous to that which it has in the N". T., unless we choose to lay stres.» 'Aydirr) 14 'AjdwT] on its use in Solomon's Song; but from 2 Sam. xiii. 15, Eccles. ix. 1, 6, it is clear that the LXX. aimed at a more decided term than the language then afforded them, — a term as strong in its way as filao<;, for which epw?, 6eat Zlcl tov davwrov tov v'lov avrov. We are accordingly told that this form of love was first exhibited in Christ's work of redemption, 1 John iii. 16, ev tovtoi iyvdoKafiev rrjv dydinjv on iicelvo'i iiirep rjiioiv rrjv '^JfV'x,^^ avrov eSrjKev, where the object is not to characterize the spirit manifested in this fact, but to set forth what the love is that is required from us ; cf. what follows, icaX ■)]p,e2<; 6cf)etKofj,ev virep tuv dheXc}}(x)v Ta? i|ri;T^a9 ddvai. In correspondence with this, the action of God towards us has now been shown by the giving up of His Son to be one of ayditi], 1 John iv. 9, eV Tovra i(f>avepa)d'rj rj dyairr] tov deov ev rjfuv, otl tov v'lov avTov tov fiovoyevrj d'TTecTToXKev 6 6eov; ver. 18, ipo^of ovk eaTiv iv ttj dydirrj, dXX' rj TeKeia dydirrj ef(u ^dTCXet tov <^o^ov, oti o (j>o/3o'; KoXaaiv e'^ei, he ^o^ov/jievo<; ov TeTeXeicoTai iv Trj dydirr], with which cf. Eom. viii. 14 sq., irvevfia vloBeaiat;, opp. to irvevjia hovXeia'^ (eh (po^ov). We do not find, it is true, in the Pauline writings, any such penetration into the essence of dydirr] ; but, nevertheless, the estimate of it is not less high ; the expression 6 ^eo? t?5? dydirrji; icdl elprji'r]<; corresponds pretty nearly to John's words, ^eo? dydirrj iaTiv, and Eom. v. 7 contains even a profounder description of love than any passage in John's writings. Eoth Paul and John, however, assign to love the same central position as the distinctive peculiarity of the Christian life, cf. Kara dydivrjv irepmaTelv, Eom. xiv. 15 ; Eph. v. 2 ; Gal. v. G, iriaTb<; Si' dydinj<; ivepyov- fiivrj ; Eph. iv. 16, et? olKoSo/j,f]v eavTov iv dydirrj. See particularly 1 Tim. i. 5, to TeXo'; T?)? irapayyeXla<; iaTlv dydirrj iic Ka9apd<; KapSia<; Kal avveiZijaeai'i dya6?j<; koI iricy- Tea>9 dwiroKpiTov, on which Huther remarks : " As the gospel proclaims to the believer 0116 divine deed alone, the atonement by Christ which has its root in the love of God ; so does it demand one human deed alone, to wit, love, for irXijpwjia v6p,ov r) dydirrj, Eom. xiii. 10." There is this difference, however, between Paul and John, that the latter uses dydirrj to designate not only our action towards our fellow-men, but also our action towards God and His revelation in Christ ; cf. 1 John ii. 5, 15, iii. 17, iv. 17, 18, v. 3 ; John v. 42 ; Eev. ii. 4 ; cf. Jer. ii. 2. Compare also the description of the Church as the Bride of Christ in the Apocalypse. In the Pt^uline writings, on the other hand, the relation of 'Aydirri 16 'AyuTrr) men to God is only once expressed by the substantive ajd-n-r], viz. 2 Thess. iii. 5, o 8e Kvpio'i KarevOvvai, vfiuv ra? KapBla<; et? ttjv a/fdTrrjv tov 6eov icai, et? rrjv vTrojjbovqv tov XpiaTov. Tiie other texts in liis Epistles where d'^dirr) with the genitive of the ohjed is said to occur — Eom. v. 5 ; 2 Cor. v. 14 ; 1 Thess. i. 3 — cannot, upon closer examination, be brought forward to support this view. As to Eom. v. 5, it is contrary alike to Christian experience and to St. Paul's chain of thought, here and elsewhere, to make the certainty of Christian hope rest upon love to God existing in the heart; cf. ver. 8, viii. 35, 39. As to 2 Cor. V. 14, that must be a marvellously forced and distorted exegesis which regards love to Christ as more suitable to the connection as a determining motive for the conduct of the apostle described in vv. 11-13, than Christ's love to us, which leads the apostle to the conclusion or judgment expressed in ver. 15. Lastly, as to 1 Thess. i. 3, to refer the objective genitive tov Kvpiov ■^/xwv 'Irjcrov XpiaTov, which belongs to t^? {nroijLOvrj<; rrj': eX,7r/So9, to the preceding tov kottov tt]'; dyd'n-7]';, is hardly necessary, especially in this juxtaposition, not unusual, as is well known, elsewhere in St. Paul's writings, of faith and love and hope. The Paidine substitute for the Johannine dydTrrj in this sense, is per- haps irvevfia vlo6e(7iapiaai diro tjj? dyd'!r7)<; tov 9eoii iv Xpicrra> 'iTjaov; v. 5, 17 dydirr] tov 6eov inKexvTai ev Tah KapBiai^ tj/moov Sta tov irvevfiaTo'! dov dr^airriTov, must be rejected, on a comparison of the usage elsewhere. (For 1 Tim. vi 2, cf the like union of •ma-TO'i Kol df^a'TT'qro'i in Col. iv. 9 ; 1 Cor. iv. 1 7. For Philem. 1 6, cf both the constant association with dSe\d7} dyyeXoi'i, 1 Tim. iii. 16, likewise to refer to men, dyyeXoK being a poetical name for ctTroo-xoXof? ; but this view may possibly rest more upon a certain aversion to the angelology of Scripture than upon "A'yyeXo<; 20 "AyyeXoi; any reasons. Besides, he would have to show that djyeXoj is more "poetical" than d7roaTo\o<;. II. (h) Kar' ef. dyyeXoi, angels, denotes the memhers of the crTparicl ovpavio'i, Luke ii 13; cf. Acts vii. 38; Eev. xix. 14; Matt. xxvi. 53, SdBeKa Xeyeaivat ar/yeKcav; Hebrew D'-OE'ri N3^, 1 Kings xxii. 19 ; 2 Chron. xviii. 18 ; Ps. cxlviii. 2 ; Dan. vii. 10 ; 2 Kings vi. 17; Josh. v. 14, 15. Compare the designation of God as niK3V inpK in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Zechariah, Malachi. In accordance with their nature and their appear- ance they are caUed spirits, 'TrwJyiiaTa, Heb. i. 14; and according to their essence and life, they belong not to the terrestrial, but to the superterrestrial or heavenly sphere of the creation. Hence they are called olayyeXoi toiv ovpavwv, Matt. xxiv. 36 ; ev roh ovp., Mark xii. 25, xiii. 32 ; e'^ ovp., Gal. i. 8 ; cf Luke xxii. 43 ; in order to indicate the spliere to which they belong ; and they bear the name ayyeXoi, not on account of their nature, but as describing their of&ce and position as the messengers of God to men. These members of the (TTparia ovpdvio^ are designed, just as men on their part, to praise God's glory, to glorify God; see Ps. ciii. 20 ; Eph. i. 14; and, moreover, in such a way that in them especially the omnipotence and resplendent majesty of God are reflected (cf. the very term aTpanh ovpdvco'i, and God's title, nisis "^nW ; further, Ps. ciii. 2 0, nb ' kol Xarpevco, dyjeXo's = DTi^Nn HN^D, whereas dyyeXot; Kvpiov = nin'' ^xf'D. The definite o dyyeXc; Kvpiov is only used after the appearing of an angel has been named; cf Matt. i. 20, 24; Acts xii. 7, 11, vii. 30, 38 ; Luke ii. 9, 10, 13. This observance is of importance in determining the well-known q^uestion about the meaning of the 0. T. nin'' ^^<^D. For it follows from this that there is no support in the N. T. for the opinion that dyyeXo<; k. always denotes one and the same person. But now there is also no reason for distinguishing the d/yy. Kvp. of the N. T. from the nini -[vba of the 0. T. ; just as little as dyy. Kvp., Acts viL 30-35, 38 (without the article), can have a different meaning from the same term as it occurs elsewhere in St. Luke's writings, where an d.yy. Kvp. appears in exactly the same manner as nini ']t6ii in the 0. T. Cf with Acts vii. 30-35, 38, the passage, 1 Kings xix. 5, 7, 9, 13, which "AyyeXo^ 21 "AyyeXoi is quite similar and very important for this question, where in ver. 5 a "]i6a appears who ill ver. 7 is called niD'' 1i6Q. (In ver. 9 the word of the Lord comes to Elijah, and in ver. 13 Jehovah Himself appears, obviously as quite distinct from His angel.) In addi- tion to this, it is to be observed that nin'' ']i6ii stands in the same relation to D^^^K^ ^K^a in the 0. T. as ayy. Kvpiov does to dyy. rov deov in the N. T. There, also, nw ^N^D is the more frequent and usual term to describe the angelic appearance in question, and in fact the same appearance which is elsewhere called DTii'Kn ix^D. (The former occurs 52 times; the latter — apart from 1 Sam. xxix. 9; 2 Sam. xiv. 17, xix. 28 — only 7 times; Gen. xxi. 17, xxxi. 11 ; Ex. xiv. 19 ; Judg. vi. 20, xiii. 6, 9 ; 2 Sam. xiv. 20.) C£ Judg. xiii. 6, and especially ver. 9 with vv. 3, 13, 15, 16. But if an angel, or an angel of God, is more definitely described by the title angel of Jehovah, because he appears in the service of the God of the revelation of salvation, an important step has been gained towards the answer to the question as to the relation of this niiT' ^KSD to nin''. If, after the appear- ance of such an angel, mention is made of Jehovah and not of the angel ; if words of the angel are frequently spoken of (though not always) as words of Jehovah ; yea, if the presence of Jehovah is replaced by the presence of an angel, or of His angel (Ex. xxxiii 2, 3, compared with xxiii. 20), who is therefore the angel of His presence (Isa. Ixiii. 9), in whom is His name (Ex. xxiii. 21), — it follows from this, it is true, that there is a repre- sentation of Jehovah by the angel, a certain mediation through the angel, — in the main, the view which we find in Heb. ii. 2, Gal. iii. 19 (see s.v. /xeo-tri;?),— but not an identity of any kind whatsoever between Jehovah and His angel. Cf also Acts vii. 30, 32 with the ori- ginal passage quoted, and with Judg. vi. 11-23. The relation is the same between Jehovah and His angel as between Jesus and His angel, Eev. i. 1, xxii. 6-9. But if we cannot overlook the distinction between Jehovah and His angel, and in order to do justice to the occasional identifying of the two we infer that the angel of Jehovah, whom we suppose to have been always one and the same, is a manifestation beforehand of the incarnation of God in Christ, — or at least that, in this distinction between Jehovah and His angel, there is an indication of that distinction of subject in the unity of the Godhead which was fully revealed in Christ, — it is of course true that this representation of God by the angel of the Lord (which is so characteristic of the 0. T.) recedes in the N. T., where we have the presence of God in Christ. But to infer from tliis that there subsists a definite relation between the angel of Jehovah and the Son of God, — that the angel of Jehovah is an anticipatory manifestation of Christ, — is not merely logically and exegetically rash in the highest degree ; for not a word is said in the N". T. about any such relationship, — a relationship which, if it really existed, would be of the highest import for the Messiahship of Jesus. Such an inference is also quite contrary to the N. T. ; for both from Gal. iii. 19, Heb. ii. 2, and especially from the way in which Stephen, Acts vii., introduces the angel of the Lord, where the 0. T. contains no mention of it, and from the rare appearance of the nin'' laba in the N. T., this only may be inferred, that anr/cl service as a sulstitute for God's presence, — an effecting of His revelation hy means of angels, — is as characteristic "A'^/r^eXoi 22 "Ayye\o<; of the old covenant as the presence of God in Christ specifically characterizes the new. Prom the fact of Christ's taking the place of the 0. T. nin^ ^kS^», — if we choose thus to call it, — we must, quite on the contrary, conclude, in view of the texts cited, that the niH'' "jx^D is not the 0. T. manifestation of Christ, but that the two stand related to one another in the same way as the old and new covenants, eV rep \eyeiv Kaivrjv, TreiJ-aXalayKev Ttjv ■7TpdiT7]V TO Se 7ra\aiov/Mevov Koi yrfpacrKOv iyyv6opd<;. In particular, of the offers of the Sophists to teach some- thing. (Cf Ecclus. iii. 25, yvwaem Bk dfioipwv firj eTrayyeXov.) This is the use in 1 Tim. ii. 10, i'TrayyeXXop.evai'} Oeoae^eMv, professing godliness, pretending to he godly, IIpoeTrayyiXKa) 2? 'ErrayyeXia hence = to pretend, 1 Tim. vi. 21, {iKTpeir6ixevo|revSJ)? deoi ; cf. 1 John ii. 25 ; Jas. i. 12, rov are^avov rrji fw";? ov iTTTjyyelXaTo xot? k.t.X. ; Jas. ii. 5, tjJ? ^aaiXeta^ 779 iTrriyyelXaro k.tX. ; Eom. iv. 21 ; Ileb. xii. 26, e-n-ijyyeXrai Xeycov. Absolutely = to give a promise (cf. above, Ecclus. iii. 25 : Aristot. Eth. x. 9. 20, twv (to^lo-tuiu ol iirayyeXXofjLevoi) ; 6 iirayyeiXdfievo';, Heb. vi. 13, X. 23, xi. 11 ; Gal. iii. 19, uTrepfia a> iin^yyeXTM, the seed, to which the promise is given; cf. ver. 18. As Paul also uses iirayy. only in the middle, and it is a technical term, it falls under the category of those deponent verbs which, in some tenses, especially in the perf, have both an active and a passive meaning ; cf. Matth. sec. 496a. — The 0. T. has no corresponding technical term. — See T-poevayyeXl^o/j-at. n p oeTrayyiXXco, to proclaim beforehand, to promise beforehand ; it occurs fre- quently in Dio Cass, in both active and middle. — In the N. T. it occurs in the passive in 2 Cor. ix. 5, 'iva . . . -rr po KarapTLcrcoa-i, r-qv T7p oeTrTjyy eXfiivrjv eiiXoyiav vfiuv (Eec. nrpo- KaTrjyyeX/jLevrjv) ; in the middle in Eom, i. 2, o (sc. evwyyiXiov) TrpoeTrrjyyetXaTo Bia k.t.X. 'EwayyeXla, 17, proclamation, both in an active and a passive sense. Except as used as an Attic law term in the combination i-7rayyeXiav eirayyeXXeiv, " to bring an accusation [against an orator] " (see Passow), the word occurs only in later Greek, where it is mostly ecLuivalent to consent, promise, offer (even summons, Polyb. ix. 38. 2), for which, in 0. T. Greek, and in Isocr., Dem., Aesch., iirdyyeXfia is used, q.v. ; cf. Polyb. i. 43. 6, vii. 13. 2, xviii. 11. 1, iv eV. KajaXelweiv, to rest content with promising; i. 72. 6, eTrayyeXui'i TroielaOai Trpo? rrjv aTToaTacnv. On the other hand, Aeschin. p. 24. 14, iav S' avTO'! iv Toi<; 7rpo<; vfia<; epyoi'; yevrjrai, olo<; vvv icrrlv iv T0Z9 eTrayyeXfiacnv. The word seldom occurs in the LXX.; once through a misunderstanding of the Heb. ^'JJ^., Amos ix. 6; in Ps. Ivi. [Iv.] 9 = nnsp. In Ezek. vii. 26, a passage which Schleusner cites in addition, we have not ivayy. but dyyeXia = njJlOK'. In the only place wherein it occurs in its true sense, Esth. iv. 7, it is added by the LXX. In 1 Esdras i. 7 and 1 Mace. X. 15, it is = promise, promises. In the Prayer of Manasses, ver. 6, it stands as in the ]Sr. T. of God's promise of salvation ; to eXeo? tjjs itrayyeXla'^ crov = miserieordia conspicua in promissione tua (Wahl). In the N. T. Acts xxiii. 21, TrpocrBe'^o/j.evoi rrjv afro crov iircu^yeXiav, in the general sense, promise or consent. Elsewhere always in a special sense, to denote tlie divine pro- mises of salvation, as, in fact, all the derivatives of dyyeXXa, as already remarked, are used to designate the proclamation of salvation. As it occurs also in the N. T. (Luke, Acts, 'ETrayyekla 28 'EirayyeXla Hebrews, St. Paul's writings, 2 Peter, 1 John) in an active and a passive sense, — thougli but rarely active, besides Acts xxiii. 21, only in Gal. iii. 18, — we have in K T. usage of the passive an extension of the meaning, so that it denotes not only the promise given, but also the promised Uessing itself. (I.) Actively, it denotes the ad of promising, GaL iii. 18, Tw 'A^paan Bi iTTayyeXLaf Ke-)(api(TTat, 6 de6 (Xen., Polyb., Pint., and other later writers), to publish somewhither, to proclaim, rt or Tivd tivi, Acts xvi. 1 7, xvii. 3, 2 3, xxvi. 23; 1 Cor. ii. 1 ; pass. Acts xiii. 38 ; without specification of the direction, merely with the object in the accusative. Acts iii. 24, iv. 2, xiii. 5, xv. 36, xvi. 21 ; 1 Cor. ix. 14, xi. 26 ; Phil. i. 17 ; Col. i. 28 ; in the passive. Acts xvii. 13; Eom. i. 8; Phil. i. 18; iv with dative. Acts xvii. 13, Eom. i. 8, denotes not the direction, but the locality, in which the KarayyeWeiv takes place. The word may contain both a hint of the unknown purport of the proclamation (cf. icaTayyeXKev';), and a strengthening of the simple verb ; cf. Eom. i. 8 ; 1 Cor. ix. 14, xi. 26 ; Viger, ed. Herm. p. 638. KaTayyeXev<;, ew?, 6 = 6 KarayyeWeov, Kardyyekor, proclaimer, only in Acts xvii. 18, ^evav Zaijjiovioiv BoKel KaTayyeXei)'; elvai, and in eccl. Greek. n poK arayy eWeo, to proclaim beforehand; Jos. Anit. i. 12. 3 ; ii. 9. 4. In the N. T. Acts iii. 18, o Be 6eo<; a ivpoKaTrjyyeiKev Bta aro^aro^ vdvTcov tuv -irpotjiriTcau, TraOeiv tov XpicTTOv ainov, iifkripaaev ; vii. 52, uiriKTeivav rov<; 'irpoKaTayyel\avTa<; "Trepl T^? iXevae(D<; tov SiKaiov; iii. 24, Eec, where Griesb., Laclim., Tisch. read KaTrjyyeiXap ; 2 Cor. ix. 5, Eec, rriv TrpoKaTrjyyeXfiivrjv evXoytav, where Beng., Lachm., Tisch. read the more concrete irpoeTrriyyeXiiev-qv ; cf. Eom. i. 8 with Acts iii. 18. n apayy eXXto, to proclaim, more rarely in the sense of a mere communication, as the LXX. in Jer. xlvi. [xxvi.] 14, dvayyeiKaTe (T'Sn) et? MdyhcaXov koX TrapayyelXare (y'DE'ri) el<; Mifi^Lv, than to denote a summons, a proclamation, or an enjoining of some- thing which is to be done ; cf. Xen. Cyrop. ii. 4. 2, koX tm Bevrepa sKeXevcre tuvto tovto irapayyeTXai, in which sense also the German expressions, anlcilndigen, teJcannt machcn, to proclaim, to maJce known, are used to denote what certainly will or must be done. Thus in Greek it is the proper term for military commands. Cf. Acts iv. 18, iraprjyyuXav ro KadoXov fir] ^OeyyeaOai fiTjBe k.t.X.; v. 28, irapayyeXia TrapTjyyelXafiev vfilv firj BiSdcrKeiv ; ver. 40, xvi. 23. Also in a milder sense = lo charge. Acts xxiii. 22, ■n-apayyetXa'i p.7]Sepl eKXaXyjcrai on, Tama ivep,a KoX (TV/jifieTO'^a tt}? i7rayyeXiaVTa. (c) tI nva. Acts xiii. 32, rjfiel'; vfid<; evayyeXi^op,e6a ttjv eirayyeXiav k.tX.; cf. Alciphr. Ep. iii. 12, TavTd ere ovv eiiayyeXl^ofiai, ; Heliod. Aeth. ii. 10, EvayyeXl^o/xaL ffe TTjv ^7jfiaLveT7]<; TeXevTijv ; Chrys. Som. 106, ecrTt Be evayyeXwv epfirjvela tov TrpdyfJbaTO'i . . . evayyeXi^eTai yh,p rj/idi ttjv TroXv/jbvrjTov tov ctcottj/jo? olKovop,tav. (2) Without a thing for its dbl%Q,t = to proclaim the divine message of salvation, (a) tivL Luke iv. 18 ; Eom. i 15 ; 1 Cor. xv. 2 ; Gal. i. 8, iv. 13 ; eh, 2 Cor. x. 16 (cf. 1 Pet. i 25). (b) nvd. E E vayyeXicTT'^'; 34 " Ay 009 the most intensive construction = by proclaiming tlie message of salvation, to bring one into relation to it, to evangelize him. Luke iii. 18 ; Acts viii. 25, 40, xiv. 21, xvi. 10 ; Gal. i. 9 ; 1 Pet. i. 12, a vvv dvrjyyiXr] vjuv Sia tcov evayyeXicrafievosv vfid'; ; cf. Euseb. Vit. Const, m.. 26: ra? yvvalKa'; evayyeXi^o/jievoii. Cf. lioheck, Fhri/n. 268. (c) Used abso- lutely, Luke ix. 6, xx. 1 ; Acts xiv. 7 ; Eom. xv. 20 ; 1 Cor. i. 17, ix. 16, 18. II. Passive. (1) With an impersonal subject. Luke xvi. 16, 97 /3atr. tov 0. evayye- Xl^erat.; GaL i. 11, to evayyeXiov to evayyekiaOev vir ffiov; 1 Pet. i. 25, to prjiJia to evayyeXcadev eh vfia.'i ; iv. 6, veKpoK evrjyyeXiaO'rj. (2) With a personal subject. Matt, xi. 5, TTTco'^ol evayyeXl^ovTM (compare Luke iv. 18) ; Luke vii. 22 ; Heb. iv. 2, 6. E vayyeXiaT')]<;, ov, 6, only in N. T. and ecclesiastical Greek, proolaimer of the message of salvation, Acts xxi. 8 ; Eph. iv. 11; 2 Tim. iv. 5. ("Heralds of the gospel history;" Otto, die gescldclitl. Vcrh. der Fastoralhr. p. 80.) Theodoret's definition does not touch the essence of the word : melvoi Trepd'ovTe'; iKrjpvTTov ; cf. 2 Tim. iv. 4, 5, eVt Tou? fivdovi e/cTpaTrrjaovTai.. (7V Be . . . epyov Troirjaov evayyeXiaTov, with Eom. i. 16 ; 1 Cor. i. 17 ; Eph. iv. 11 ; Jerome, omnis apostolus cvangelista, nan omnis cvangclista apostolus. In distinction from the •7rpocf>T]Tr]i;, the evangelist speaks of the facts of re- demption, the revelations of God (cf. the combinations KTjpvcraecv, Sia/u,apTvpe<70ai to ev., etc., s.v. evayyeXiov), the Bi,SdcrKaXo<; aiout them ; the irpocf). has revelations. Cf. I-Iarless on Eph. iv. 11. At a subsequent period (Chrys.) the authors of the four Gospels were so called. npoevayyeXi^ofiai, to proclaim beforehand a joyful message, or something as a joyful message. Philo, de nomm. mut. p. 1009, ed. Paris, tov veoTTov ov-^ opa<;, . . . ryv eXTTiSa TOV TreTeaOai BvvrjcreaOat, •jrpoevayyeXi^o/xevo'i ; id. de mund. op. 7, wv 17 /nev (sc. TTpwta) irpoevayyeXi^erai /MeXXovTa f)Xiov dvla-^ew ; Mang., quorum alterum praenunciat lactiim adventum solis orituri. Gal. iii. 8, -TrpoevrjyyeXtcraTo (touching the augm., vid. s.v. euayyeXi^(o) tS> '' A^padp, = eirayyeXKeaOM, q.v. ; cf. the correspondence between iirayyeXla and evayyeXiov under evayyeXiov, according to which iwayyeXXeadai does not materially differ from "TrpoevayyeXi^eaOai. Bengal says on this passage : Verhcm ad catachresin accedens suavissime. Ahrahamo ante tempora cvangelii evangclizatum est. Evangelium lege antiqidus. Cf Gal. iii. 12, 16 sqq. "Ay 10 ?, La, tov, holy, is the rarest of five synonyms, lepoi, oaio?, crefivo^, ayi,o<;, ar^voii, which the Greeks had to express the idea of holiness, so far at least as they knew such an idea. In biblical Greek, on the other hand, of the Old as well as of the New Testament, it is the only word by which the hiblical conception of holiness is expressed, — that conception which pervades the Bible throughout, which moulds the whole of divine revelation, and in which, we may say with perfect truth, are centred the fundamental and leading principles and aims of that revelation. What constitutes the essence of holiness in the biblical sense is not primarily contained in any of the above- "Aym 35 "^710? named synonyms ; the conception is of purely biblical growth, and whatever the Greeks surmised and thought concerning the holiness of Divinity in any sense remotely similar to that in which Holy Scripture speaks of it, they had not any one distiact word for it, least of all did they express it by any of the terms in question. For the purpose of rendering or receiving the biblical conception and its contents, these terms can only come into consideration or be regarded as designations of God's holiness in so far as holiness is that element in the divine nature which lies at the basis of, determines and moulds, the reverence which is due from man towards God, — therefore in a furely formal sense. As Greek of itself did not possess the right word for it, the only term presenting itself as in any degree appropriate — wyio'; — had to be filled and coined afresh with a new meaning ; and thus a^to? is one of the words wherein the radical influence, the transforming and newly fashioning power of revealed religion, is most clearly shown. Of all the ideas which, within the world subjected to the influence of Christianity or in the modern lan- guages, are bound up in the word lioly, none are to be found in the ancient tongues, Greek and Latin, in the terms above named, save those of " the sublime," " the consecrated," " the venerable." The main element — the moral — is utterly wanting. Hence it is not merely a topic of linguistic interest, it is a significant moral phenomenon which here presents itseK to our inquiry. In order to show, first of all, that the Greeks did not possess the true conception of holiness, as it more or less fully has penetrated the consciousness of mankind through revealed religion, we must anticipate, so far as to assert that holiness in tlie Scripture sense is a historico-ctJiical coneeption. Now, as to the Homeric age, Nagelsbach {Homer. Theol. i. 1 2) says : " Holiness, as a constituent element of the Divine viewed in itself, or only perceived in the intercourse of the gods among themselves, is never mentioned. Never is there a title given to the Godhead indicating a consciousness similar to that in which the Bible speaks of the holiness of the true God." Afterwards, indeed (cf. Nagelsbach, Naclihomer. Thcol. i. 28 sqq.), all moral and ontological perfections are attributed to the gods (Isocr. xi. 41 : £70) jiev ovv ov'^ o-n-co'i tov'^ Oeov'; aW ovBe tov'; i^ eKeivav yejovora'; ovSefiLai ■^yov/.iai Ka,Kla Od. viii. 264, and sometimes expresses the divine origin of a gift or talent; thus, salt is called 0eiov, II. ix. 214." It is particularly to be observed that i6p6<; is never used as an epitJiet of the gods them- selves, and is as Utile employed CA'en in a remotely similar sense of men, as the biblical tJ'np and its derivatives. For instance, we seek in vain among the derivatives and compounds of lepo^ for the conception of halloiuing, which has attached itself to the biblical term holy. Sometimes, perhaps, it occurs of men in the same sense, — as in Pind. Pyth. v. 9 7, kings are called lepol, because they are under the protection of the gods, and derive their dignity from the gods (Hom. 11. ii. 205); Aristoph. Ban. 652, lepo<; dvOpanro';, of one initiated into the mysteries; Plut. De Socr. clacm. 589 D, olrwv Baifiovuv Xojot Bia iravjav (jiepofievoi, fiovoK iv7]'xovcn rot? d6opv/3ov ^9o'; Kai prjvefiov ej(ova'L rfjv ■\ln!-yr]v ov? Be Kal lepov^ koX BaifjLOVLOv^ dv6pco7rov^ KaXovp,ev ; De def orac. 2, dvBpe<; lepol Bvo avvBpaiJ,6vTe<; el<; AeKj>ov<;, — and it might be regarded as analogous when, in 2 Kings iv. 9, Elisha is called by the Shunamite woman ^'^\> D'''?^^. ^^^ ; but this is also the only and not quite perfect analogy in biblical usage in which K'ili^ (only occurring thus again, Ps. cvi. 16) is used of individual persons. In 2 Pet. i. 21, the reading of the Eec. Text, ol dyioi 6eov dvdpaiwob (instead of ttTTo 6eov dvdp), would be remotely analogous to this use of te/jo?. In Be Alex. fort. i. 1 0, Plutarch calls the Indian gymnosophists dvBpa lepol koI aiiTovofjLoi ; not because they are tm Oeo> o-T^oXa^oi'Te?, as he describes them further on, but, as the connection with avrovofioi suggests, in the same sense in which he elsewhere joins dvrjp I'epo? ical atrnXo? = inviolable, Mor. 410 A; Vit. Til. Graecli. 14, 15, 21 ; cf. Quacst. Rom. 219 B, ra davXa koX dyia lepd ; yet this again is something different from that unapproachableness which the biblical holy involves, Isa. Ixv. 5, where the LXX. renders \i>'ip by Kadapoep6vT0}'i av fieydXa orav el<; Brjp,oai,a Kal ayia rj Kara pepr] Koivd — distinguished from lepa IBia, of which ayca cannot, according to this, be properly predicated.— The connection of the word with cre/ii/09 also confirms the meaning laid down, ayio<; being used to complete or strengthen aep,v6<; ; Plato, Sophist. 249 A, aepvbv Kal ayiov vovv ovk e'^ov ; Crit. 51 A, p,r]Tp6<; re Kal irarpo'i Kal tcov aWtov Trpoyovcov aTravraiv ripiaiTepov ecm rj Trarpt? Kal (rep^vorepov Kal ayicoTepov Kal ev p,el^ovi. p,olpa Kal irapa Oeol'; Kal irap dvOpco'nao'i. ' Ayio'; also occurs in Pint. Quaest. Rom. 290 B, ra davXa Kal ayia lepa; Plato, Lcgg. v. 729 E, Trpo? Toil's ^evov<; BiavorjTeov fu? dylwTaTa avp,^6\aia ovTa. The important distinction hetuieen ayw; and lep6<; appears in Plut. Conviv. v. 682 C, \ol epcoTiKol Kai aKo\aaToi\ reXeuTcoi/re? ovBe twv dyiaTaTuiv d'7re-)(eadai Bvvavrai. acopaTcov, while the prostituted bodies of the lepoBovKoi are called lepa <7uip,aTa. If, now, we pass on to examine the etymology of the word, it appears with tolerable, indeed we might say with full, certainty that ayio^ signifies what deserves and claims moral and religious reverence ; and this was true originally of ayv6''^^i7; this word is rendered only by KaOapo's (Num. v. l7) besides dyia ; B'lp by icadapov elvai, Isa. Ixv. 5 ; Bo^d^eiv, Isa. v. 1 6 ; Piel, Hiphil, Hithpael = dyvl^eiv. Josh. iii. 5 ; Ex. xix. 10; 2 Chron. xxx. 17, etc.; Kadapl^eiv, Job i. 5, and also by the explanatory rendering of it by SiacrTeXKeLV, Josh. xx. 7 ; TTapardcrcreiv, Jer. vi. 4 (TrapacKevd^eiv X) ; dva^i^d^eiv, Jer. li. 28. We have now to inquire into the import and range of tJie biblical conception of holiness which, transferred to 0710? by the LXX,, established its authority in the hitherto profane sphere by the N. T. announcement of salvation. There is a certain difference between 0. and N. T. usage, not affecting the import of the word, but arising out of the historical relations of N. T. revelation to the 0. T. The K T. does not introduce what is actually new, it simply adopts a conception clearly and definitely expressed in the 0. T. ; but the thing itself which corresponds to the word is realized in the K T. The difficulty of clearly bringing out, not one side nor a few aspects only of the conception, but its complete fulness, and tlie various opinions entertained on the subject which are least of all settled by the latest attempt (that of Diestel) to define lioly as a relative conception, demand yet a fuller investigation. First, it is to be noted that holiness is predicated (besides God) of those men and things only which either God has appropriated as His own, or have been dedicated to Him by men. Now, as this predicate is applied to other subjects besides God only in a secondary and derived manner, on account of certain relations in which they stand to Him (as is expressly stated in Deut. xxviii. 9,10: " Jehovah shall establish thee an holy people to Himself, as He hath sworn unto thee, . . . and aU the people of the earth shall see that the name of Jehovah is named upon thee"), it is self-evident that the predicate of holiness does not in a formal sense express the establishment of such relations, but that the men and things in question themselves and in their degree participate in the divine holiness, and embody and manifest it. The question therefore arises first and foremost. What do we express concerning God when we predicate holiness of Him 1 Etymologically, the signification of E'i^iJ is not free from doubt. " The most probable view is, that the verbal stem VIp, which is akin to ttnn (as 2Vp to 3Sn, f\)ip to fivn, ivp to -\)in, etc.), comes from the root E^l, from which also HV1 springs, which primarily signifies enituit, to break forth shiningly" (Oehler, in Herzog's B.-Encyh. xix. 618). Hofmann, on the contrary, finds {Sehrifthewcis, i. 82) that E'i^i^ "means what is out of the common course, beyond the common order of things," so that the affinity between the roots vhn and vhp answers to the affinity of their meaning ; " both denote that whieh is different : the former, different from what has been ; the latter, different from the common." The word, however, thus, in the face of the psychological laws of language, obtains a purely formal abstract meaning, and the rich contents of the conception which it expresses would appear only after a very careful reflection upon the difference between vnip and ^in ; indeed, by the explanation God is the Holy One, " as He is the absolutely separate self-contained Being who, in contrast with the world to which He does not belong, is in His supra- mundane essence the self-existent one," we express in a purely negative way a formal relation between God and the world, and in reality it is only asserted that holiness is the negation of all relation between God and the world. Besides, it will appear that tlie signification to separate, belongs to c'lp only in a derived manner. We must try to discover the essence of holiness, from the connection in which the word occurs, and from its historical usage. It is mentioned for the first time when God's presence among the people chosen and prepared for Him begins, and when an historical relation of communion takes the place of what had till then been only individual inter- course, c^lp does not occur in Genesis, nor its derivatives, except in chap. ii. 3. We first meet with it in Ex. iii. 5, in the account of God's appearing to Moses in the burning bush which was not consumed, wherein is presented to us a perfect and unique symbol of the holiness of God in Israel. Next, — apart from Ex. xii. 1 6, xiii. 2, — in Ex. xv. we find, with reference to the deliverance wrought by God for His people, the first express emphasizing of God's holiness, ver. 11: "Who is like unto Thee among the gods, Jehovah ? who is like unto Thee, glorious in holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders ?" Ver. 13:" Thou hast in Thy mercy led forth the people whom Thou hast redeemed : Thou hast led them by Thy power to the dwelUng of Thy holiness." Ver. 17: "Thou shalt bring them in, and plant them in the mountain of Thy inheritance, in the place which Thou hast prepared for Thy dwelling, Jehovah ; in the holi/ place, Lord, that Thy hands have prepared. Jehovah shall be king for ever and ever." God's first great redemptive act for Israel — their marvellous deliverance out of Egypt — had been accom- plished ; God's holiness had been displayed in His judgments upon Egypt, while in Israel His grace was experienced, and had unfolded itself in the sovereign rule of Jehovah, the covenant God. This twofold proof of God's holiness — in judgment and in redemption — continually meets us. Henceforward God in His holiness is present among His people, and the place of His presence is His sanctuary, and there was Israel's dweUing to be (cf. Isa. Ixiv. 1 0). God's holiness, accordingly, must manifest itself in and upon Israel ; Israel must participate in it. " Ye shall be holy, for I am holy," is henceforward the keynote and the norm of the union subsisting between God and His people ; so that the " I am holy" is explained, " I am holy, Jehovah, who sanctifieth you," Lev. xxi. 8 ; Ex. xxxi. 13. The holiness of God, which at first manifested itself thus in gracious or retributive operations of power, conditions and brings about the holiness of His people ; for it appears as the principle of the covenant made hetween Sim and them, unfolding itself ahke in their divinely-given laws and in their heavenly guidance. In the ordainments of national life summed up in the Decalogiae and the ceremonial law, and indeed of their entire moral and religious life, we find this principle : " Ye shall be holy, for I am holy," Lev. xix. 2 sqq., XX. 8 sqq. God's holiness and the place where He dwells demand, and at the same time render possible, an atonement. Lev. xvi. 16, 33, Num. viii. 19, which can be effected only in the sanctuary. Lev. xvi. 1 7, 27; and it is of the greatest importance, in order to a right conception of holiness, to observe how this religious and ceremonial hfe, whose central point is atonement, reflects this principle in the language also — the holiness of God, and the sanctifying both of God and of what belongs to Him, specially of His people. We need only call to mind the continual recurrence of the words " holy place," " to make holy," " to sanctify myself," in the language of their rehgious life. It thus appears how fuUy righteousness — the requu'ement and goal of the law, both of the Decalogue, and of the ceremonial law for the vindication and carrying out of the Decalogue — is the necessary correlative of holiness. But abiding only by the truth, that God's holiness conditions the sanctification of the moral and religious life of His people, we should arrive at a conception of it which at bottom coincides with righteousness, and the manner God's holiness elsewhere is spoken of would remain inexplicable. It is of the highest importance to hold fast also by the truth that God's holiness Irings abmd the holiness of His elect people; how the "I "A'^io'! 4:4: "Ayooi am holy" becomes at once "I am holy, Jehovah, who sanctifieth you." God's holiness leads on to the sanctifying of His people. Hereupon we have the expression of God's holiness in His guidance of the people and in the historical progress of the revelation. Of great weight here are the statements of Ezek. xx. 41, 44, xxviii. 22, 25, xxxvi. 23, 24 sqq., xxxvii. 26 sqq., xxxix. 7, 25, xxxviii. 16. By judgment, as by redemption and cleansing from sin, God sanctifies Himself and His name, which Israel has profaned by their sins, and taken away its holiness before the nations ; and in like manner He sanctifies Himself by acts of judgment upon the enemies of Israel, who have inflicted punishment upon the people and have despised God on account of them ; and the result of this self-revelation of God is : " I will magnify myself, and sanctify myself; I will be known in the eyes of many nations ; and they shall know that I am Jehovah," Ezek. xxxviii. 2 3. The self-manifestation of God in the leadings and history of His people m preparing a way for and bringing about their ultimate salvation, is a manifestation of His holiness, asserted alike in the punishment of sin and in the cleansing from guilt and sin inseparably connected with redemption, Ezek. xxxvi. 23, 25-27, 29-33. Of special significance here is the designation of God as -'f^'i^l t!'i^ip, often in Isaiah, and 2 Kings xix. 22 ; Ps. Ixxviii. 41, Ixxxix. 19 ; Jer. 1. 29, li. 5 ; cf. Ezek. xxxix. 7 : ^K'lB'^a B'ini?. God is the Holy One of Israel in His acts of deliverance wrought for Israel, to which the manifestation of judg- ment is the necessary set-off, while the free revelation of holiness aims at redemption, Ps. Ixxviii. 42 sqq. He is holy in His electing love, Isa. xlix. 7, ^\> !0«3 IK'S nin^ \wh !|1?}C?!1 '^If'l, Lev. XX. 2 1 ; and as such He appropriates the name ?W, which in Isa. xli. 14, xliii. 3, 14, xlvii. 4, xlviii. 17, xlix. 7, liv. 6, Iv. 5, is parallel with the ^^-\f\ E'^p, so that the one logically follows from the other. He is the refuge of the lost, Isa. xvii. 7. Here, again, God's holiness is the essential element of His self-revelation to Israel, and indeed of the revelation of salvation as the final goal of this self-manifestation ; cf. Isa. liv. 5 : " Thy Saviour the Holy One of Israel ; the God of the whole earth shall He be called." " Great is the Holy One of Israel," shall it be said in the day of redemption, Isa. xii. 6. (The following are the places in Isaiah where ^^!)^>\ ^\> occurs : Isa. i. 4, V. 19, 24, X. 17, 20, xii. 6, xvii. 7, xxix. 19, 23, xxx. 11, 12, 15, xxxi. 1, xxxvii. 23, xli. 14, 16, 20, xliii. 3, 14, 15, xlv. 11, xlvii. 4, xlviii. 17, xlix. 7, liv. 5, Iv. 5, Ix. 14.) The holiness of God in this its significance meets us in that primary saving act, the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt (Ex. xv. ; cf. Num. xx. 12, 13; Josh. iii. 5) ; it appears in the election, deliverance, and gracious guidance of Israel ; and this meaning must he faith- fully received, and must not he defiled through mihelief. Num. xxvii. 14; Deut. xxxii. 51. This is very important : faith on man's part must answer to the holiness of God ; an uncon- ditioned reliance not on mere power, but upon the power of love, the grace of God. Mention is made of this just in the same way in the Psalms and elsewhere. Eedemption proceeds from the sanctuary, from the holiness of God, Ps. xx. 3, Ixxvii. 14 sqq. (cf. Isa. Ixv. 25), cvi. 47, xcviii. 1, cii. 20, ciii. 1, cv. 3, 42, cxlv. 21, xxii. 4, 5 ; Jonah ii. 5, 8. Prayer and praise alike mention God's holiness, 2 Chron. xxx. 27; 1 Chron. xvi. 10 ; Ps, XXX. 5, xcvii. 1 2 ; and the answer to prayer is based upon this, Ps. xxviii. 2, iii. 5, xx. 7 ; cf. Ps. xxxiii. 21: "we have trusted in His holy name." Isa. x. 20. God swears by His holiness when He would assure us of His redeeming love and the final accomplish- ment of His saving promise, Ps. Ixxxix. 36, Ix. 8, cviii. 8. God's holiness will not suffer Israel to be destroyed, Hos. xi. 9 ; cf. Isa. Ivii. 15 ; Ezek. xx. 9, according to which last- named passage God spared and did not destroy Israel, that His name might not be polluted among the heathen ; and yet Israel was not suffered to go unpunished, vv. 1 4 sqq. — 1 Kings ix. 3-7 ; 2 Chron. vii. 16, 20 : "I have sanctified this house; mine eyes and mine heart shall be there perpetually." The antithesis to sanctification is rejection, and therefore God's holiness is revealed in His election ; Lev. xx. 26: " Ye shall be holy unto me : for I Jehovah am holy, and have severed you from the nations, that ye should be mine." Cf. also Isa. xliii. 28, xlix. 7 ; Jonah ii. 5. We may also compare siich passages as 1 Sam. ii. 2 ; Isa. Iii. 10 ; Zech. ii. 17 ; Ps. Ixviii. 6 ; Isa. Ixii. 12. In a word, God is holy in His electing love, as tlie God of grace and of redemption. Now it would be as unjust and one-sided absolutely to identify God's holiness with His grace or redeeming love (Menken) — thus neglecting the connection of redemption with election — as it is to make, according to the popular view, the holiness of God dependent upon its connection with the law, and thus, if not wholly to identify it with His righteousness, yet to regard it as nothing else than the principle on which righteous- ness is based. It must be taken for granted that the holiness of God is not only the principle of the Decalogue, but of the ceremonial law, and thus also of the atonement. But it is just here that we have the point of union between these two manifestations of the divine holiness. God's holiness, which not only gives, but itself constitutes, the law for Israel, at the same time provides redemption ; it extends to both, for it reveals itself as the principle of that atonement, wherein the removal and punishment of sin and saving and bliss-giving love are alike realized. All revelations of mercy are made in the Holy Place, the place of atonement ; cf Ps. xx. 3. By the law, the Decalogue and the ceremonial law (concerning their inner unity, see z'dwo?), God prepares Israel to be His possession and His sanctuary, that He may show them His grace; cf. Num. viii. 19. God's holiness, which has been and is still to be revealed so gloriously in the redemption of Israel, conditions and effects the cleansiag of the people from sin, Ezek. xxxvL 23 sqq., for it stands in most decisive antagonism to every sinful thing, which it must either judge or in some other way remove ; cf. the significant passage Isa. vi., where not only the prophet's conviction of sin, but his cleansing likewise, is derived from the holiness of God. It only needs an occasion to convert the saving revelation of God's holiness into its opposite ; Isa. x. 1 7 : " The light of Israel shall be for a fire, and His Holy One for a flame ;" cf. ver. 20 : " The remnant of Israel, and such as are escaped, . . . shall stay upon the Lord, the Holy One of Israel." It is the same holy God who punishes Israel for their sin, and who yet spares and delivers them from judgment, and in both ways displays alike the holiness of His name, Ezek, xxxix. 2 1 sqq. God's holiness is manifest, there- ' ^7'"' ^^ "A}. tJ-'inisn i^^«n•| lOBK-'ea hS^yi r\Sr\\^ naa^l npli'?. We must, however, take care not to regard judgment as the chief and primary outcome of holiness ; becaj.Tse the revelation of holiness belongs properly to the history of redemption, holiness is here displayed in its fulness. According to Ps. xcix. 3, as all that Israel would say of the name of God is summed up in the words " He is holy" cf. vv. 5, 9 ; this holiness itself was known above aU things in this, " He is a God who forgave Israel, and an avenger of their deeds," ver. 8. Corresponduig to this is the relation of man to God's holiness. Man trusts His holy name, and thereby hallows it, Ts. xxxiii. 21, Isa. x. 20 ; he dishonours it by unbelief, Num. xxvii. 14, Deut. xxxii. 51 ; at the same time he hallows it by fear, Isa. xxix. 23, viii. 13, cf. also Ex. xv. 11, Vs. xcix. 3, cxi. 5, 9, Prov. ix. 10 ; and must not defile it by sin. Man's true relation- ship to God's holuiess accordingly is that Mending of fear and trust which we find in Holy Scripture throughout, e.g. Ps. cxxx. 4; Eom. xi. 22; Phil. ii. 12, 13; 1 Pet. L 17, etc. Prom all this it is clear that God's holiness is the fundamental and moulding prin- ciple of the ivhole revelation of redemption in all its elements, and that the history of redemption, as a whole, can be understood only from the standpoint of divine holiness. We must now endeavour, by arranging the several elements, to determine the essence of holiness so as logically to discover its meaning. As God's holiness is man's law, it excludes aU communion of sinful man with Him (Isa. vi. ; Josh. xxiv. 19 ; 1 Sam. vi. 20 ; Ex. xix. 22 ; Num. iv. 15, 20 ; cf. Isa. Ixv. 5). It does not exclude man's fellowship with God in and by itself, just because this is the law for man. We might almost more correctly say it demands this fellowship. Now the fact that fellowship between God and man is realized only in the form of the election, tending to pardon and redemption, corresponds with this exclusive significance of hohness ; election answers to the exclusion, and thus God's holiness historically appears in the election of His people, in His guidance of them from their deliverance from Egypt, onwards to that redemption which is intended for the whole world, based upon pardon and atonement. Corresponding with that turning-point in history, begun by the deliverance from Egypt, according to its import as explained by St. Paul, Gal. iii. 19 sq. (see /lieo-txi??), is the fact that God's holiness there for the first time in its full meaning appears in history, and finds expression in the law, in the regulations of life, and the regulations of worship. It must be borne in mind, however, that knowledge of this holiness to a certain extent — a natural knowledge, if we may so say, and conformable with the infancy of the race — was possessed before, and was always to be found wherever there was any knowledge of God. The first mention of holiness, therefore (Ex. iiL 5), is not as of something unknown and new. But " that great sight, the burning bush unconsumed," was a perfect symbol of God's holiness as it was now in a special manner to be revealed to Israel, the nation of a final and historical vocation; cf. Isa. x. 17, vi. 4 sqq. Opposition to sin is the first "An certainly denotes what is open to unhindered and universal use, what is free to every one, but it never stands alone with this meaning. In the few places where it occurs, it is always in contrast with ^p, and it is by virtue of this contrast that it has its special meaning, Lev. x. 1 ; 1 Sam. xxi 5, 6; Ezek. xxii. 26, xlii. 20, xliv. 23, xlviii. 15. We cannot say: because ^h denotes what is unhindered and common to all, therefore ^'}p means the special, separated, set apart ; but we must argue : because what is holy includes the notion of separation and exclusion, its opposite is expressed by hh. This is evident if we ask why ':hn denotes the opposite of mp. If it were because the primary meaning of trip were selection or separation, this would also be the primary meaning of n^"!:! (Ps. Ixxxix. 35, Iv. 21 ; Mai. ii. 10), naboD (Lam. ii. 2), Dna (Jer. xxxi. 5 ; Deut. xxii. 6, xx. 6, xxviii. 30), with which ??n is likewise joined as a technical term ; whereas in all these cases limitation or separa- tion is not the primary conception of the object, but is simply an inference implied in the case itself ; cf. Lev. xix. 29:" Thou shalt not abandon (??"?) thy daughter to whoredom." "Ayioi 49 "Ayio<; 9?n means primarily " to bore through," " to make a hole through," " to open," " to tear asunder/' " to abandon," anything that hitherto has enjoyed some protection or estimation, or has been closed up ; to dissolve a position which hitherto had been maintained and respected; e.g. p.?, Jer. xvi. 18; Isa. xlvii. 6, l]T3 aim) in^nj ijri^^n; Ezek. xxviii. 16, d-inSs -inn r[9?m ; Num. xxx. 3, n^T hni i6, " he shall not break his word." It stands in antithesis to the esteem with which anything is to be treated, and is parallel with yi^J, nn, and other words = "to despise;" of. Ps. Ixxxix. 32, Viof] i6 ^nip ^ib^n] ''rijsn-DK ; Jer. xvi. 18 ; Ezek. xxii. 8 ; Zeph. iii. 4 ; Isa. xxiii. 9 ; Ezek. xx. 16, 24. What is holy becomes specially the object of such treatment, because it demands the highest and most earnest respect (cf. Ex. iii, 5 ; Josh. v. 1 5 ; Isa. Ixv. 5), God abandoning and rejecting what before He had specially chosen and sanctified (Isa. xxiii. 9 ; Ps. Ixxxix. 35 ; Isa. xliii. 28 ; Ezek. xxviii. 16, etc.), or men despising or abandoning to disesteem what God has sanctified, or God's own holiness. His name, or the like ; cf. Lev. xxi. 12, 15 ; Num. xviii. 22. This only is evident from this contrast, as we already otherwise know, that holiness and exclusion therefrom are not identical conceptions, but that exclusion and inaccessibleness, separation and setting apart, pertain to what is holy. Thus hh, in common usage, signifies the koivov, not in and for itself, but so far only as it is not included within the sphere of sanctification ; it everywhere includes the idea of what is unsanctified, and accordingly the LXX. never render it by Kotvo?, but, in harmony with Greek usage, by y36/3i?\o?, though thus injustice is done to the biblical view. For though the contrast between ^h and B'lp determined the entire Jewish estimate of things, what was not devoted to the gods among the Greeks was not always called Pe^rjkov ; so that, in the language of Israelitish life and of the N. T., Koivo G "Ayioi; 50 "Ayooi a<^Lo(Ti. Cf. T'pn, Dent, xxxiii. 8, Ps. xvi. 10 ; see s.v. ocrio';. In the same or an analogous sense, ayiov is also an epithet of KXrjat,':, 2 Tim. i. 9 ; StaOj^Kr], Luke i. 72 ; ypa, — the latter the more correct, as in iepwavvq, dyaQaxjvvt), fieyaXaavvT}, because a short syllable precedes. It is evidently to be derived not from dyoovv = dyid^eiv (Valck.), but from 0740?, and denotes sanctity, not sanctification, which does not need to be proved. Used by LXX. in Ps. xcvi. 12 =^y; Ps. xcv. 6 = t5); Ps. cxliv. 5 =1in. 2 Mace. iii. 12, mcrreveiv rfi rov roTTov dyicoavvr). Clem. Alex. Paed. iii. p. 110, ed. Sylb., dyiaa-vvrjv inroKplveaBat. It occurs in only three places in the N. T. 1. In Eom. i. 3, of the holiness of God per- vading and moulding the scheme of redemption, and manifested finally in and by Christ : rov opiaOevro'i vlov deov iv Swdfiei Kara "Trvev/xa dyicocrvprj^ i^ dvaa-rdaea'i veKpcov, side by side with rov viov avrov rov yevofievov iic cnrepfiaro'i AavlZ Kara adpKa, where the 'Ayid^Q) 5 3 'Ayi,d^(o topic is not the contrast of natural and moral qualities, but of human and divine relation- ship or dependence. We have not here the simple Kara adpKa . . . Kara irvevjia, as if to indicate a conflicting contrast in Christ's person (cf. Gal. iv. 23, 29 ; different in 1 Tim, iiL 16, itpavepmOr) iv crapicX, ihtKamdr) ev TrvevfjiaTi), but, as the topic is what makes Christ vtos deov iv Swdfiei, Trvevfia dr/iaavviri, not ttv. dyiov, because the peculiarity of the antithesis of the irvevfia to the adp^ was to be made prominent. 2. Of the holiness of man, to be made manifest in moral conduct; 1 Thess. iii. 13, eh to a-TTjpi^ai v/mwv ra? KapBla^ a/ie/iTTTou? iv dyiaxT^vvrj (cf. Eph. i. 4, v. 27; Col. ii. 22); 2 Cor. vii. 1, iiriTeXelv Trjv dycwavvrjv, and expressions like Troielv ttiv BiKaiocrvvTjv, ttjv dXrjdetav = per- fectly to sliow forth holiness. 'Ay id^o), to mate holy, to sanctify. In classical Greek, dyi^co = to consecrate, e.g. altars, sacrifices, etc., answers to this word, which, like aU derivations of dyio^, is peculiar to bibL Greek. 'Ayl^m means, " to set apart for the gods," " to present," generally = " to offer." It occurs but seldom ; Ka6ayl^eiv is for the most part used. Pind. 01. iii. 1 9, ^co/jlwv -irarpl dryiadevTcov. Soph. Oed. c. 1491, UocreiZaovia 6em BovOvtov earlav dyl^cov. Dion. Hal. Ant. Som. i. 57, Alveiw; Se t?}? /Mev vb<; rbv tokov . . . Tot? TrarpuoK dryi^et, 6eol^ ; iv. 2, ras dirb tmv hemvasv dirap'xa^ dyl^ovaiv. The biblical dyod^eiv differs not inconsider- ably from this, for it is seldom used of sacrifices, but mostly to denote what is effected by the sacrifice, and it signifies, " to place in a relation with God answering to His holiness." Sacrifice is necessary in order to such sanctification ; Heb. x. 29, iv ra> a"iLaii rrj'; Bia- 6^Krieaiv dfiapTiwv Kal KXrjpov iv rot? '^yiaa/j.ivoii; ; they are rjyoaafiivot, iv XpiaTw 'Irjaov, 1 Cor. i. 2, because this divine and saving act is accomplished in Christ, and mediated through Him, see above ; and hence elsewhere Christ is the subject accomplishing this sanctification, Eph. v. 6, ha avTtjv (sc. Trjv iKKXyjatav) dyiday Ka9apLaa<; k.t.X., where KaOaplaa'i is named at the same time, without which the dyid^av does not take place ; cf. Lev. xvi. 9, ^N'lB') ''33 JiiKDiSD \^y>\ iintpi, Josh. vii. 13, Heb. ix. 13, 14, where to the dyid^ei, Trpbi KaOapoTTjTa, ver. 13, in ver. 14 ' Ayiaa-jMO? SS *A/iaTO<; 'Ifjaov XpicTTOv ; x. 14, fiia jdp '7rpo(j-(popS, TerekeidiKev e^? to Bi'r)v£K€'} tou? dyia^ofiivov^ ; x. 29, to at/xa ttJ? Bia0i^Kr] ; cf ayw;, I., what is said concerning ttv. ay. — The expression, 1 Cor. Vii. 14, riyiaarai o dvijp o aTrtcTTO? iv rfj yvvaiKl, fcal riylaarai 17 yvvrj rj aTTicrTo^ iv tw dBeXj)a>, clearly cannot signify the sanctification in its fulness which the N. T. divine and saving work produces ; for a personal faith is required in the object of it, which is in this case denied. Still it is unmistakeably intimated that by viftue of the marriage union the unbeUeving side in its measure participates in the saving work and fellow- ship with God experienced by the believing side ; and therefore Bengel in loc, comparing 1 Tim. iv. 5, says, " Saiiciijlcatus est, ut pars fdelis sancte uti possit, neque dimittere debeat." Cf 2 Tim. ii. 21. (2.) When men " sanctify" anything, we must distinguish whether the object is already God's in and for itself, and therefore dyi,ov, or whether it is now for the first time appro- priated to God and brought into association with Him. See ayio';. In the first, as in Matt. vi. 9, Luke xi. 2, dyuaaQriTai to Svo/id crov (cf. Heb. x. 29, koivov 7)yelcr6ai), 1 Pet. iii. 15, Kvpiov tov 6e6v dyidcraTe iv Talii KapBlaii; ■^/jlmv, the word denotes that manner of treatment on the part of man which corresponds with the holiness of God, and which springs from faith, trust, and fear ; cf 1 Pet. i. 1 7. If the second, the establishing a con- nection with God, and excluding all connection with sin, as in 1 Tim. iv. 5, "Trdv Kria-fjca wyid^erat Bid Xoyov deov Kal ivTev^ew; (where, therefore, divine and human sanctifica- tion are combined), it means the preservation and establishing of fellowship with the God of salvation, Kev. xxii. 11, o dywi dyiaadrirm en; cf 2 Cor. vii. 1 ; Heb. xii. 11. — 2 Tim. ii. 21, iav oZv rif imcaOapr) eavrbv dirb tovtcov, earai aicevo<; et? rifirjv, r^yiaa- fiivov, ev'^prjo-Tov rm Beuirorri. — This circumstance, peculiar to the N". T., is worthy of notice — namely, that the reflective, " to sanctify oneself," which occupies so important a position, comparatively speaking, in the 0. T., does not occur in the N. T. at all (unless we except Eev. xxii. 1 1) ; because the thing itself, Heb. x. 1 0, ■^yi,a(7p,ivoi ia-fih k.t.X. (cf 1 Cor. i. 30), has already taken place through the self-sanctification and offering of Christ, John xvii. 19, virep avr&v iyw dr/id^co ifiavrov, "va wcriv Kal avrol '^ycaafievoi iv dXrjOeia. See further, dyia(7fi6<}. 'Ay Laa- ix6^, sanctuary) and Amos ii. 1 1 (paraphrase for T'W ; also for sanctuary). In the Apocrypha it occurs 2 Mace. ii. 17, 3 Mace. ii. 18, for sanctuary ; 2 Mace. xiv. 36, ayit Traz^ro? dyiacTfjiov Kvpie, SiaTTjprjaov el<; alwva afilavrov rovBe rov irpoaipdrai'; KeKaOapicrfievov oIkov, where it obviously is used to strengthen the ayte superlatively, therefore = holiness, though Schleusner takes it actively, and renders, " onini divino cidtu prosequcnde." Of. Ecclus. xvii 9 : ovofia dyiaafiov alviaovcnv, iva SorjjaiVTai, rd fieya'Xeta tS)v epywv avrov. The meaning of Ecclus. vii. 31, Ovaia djiacriMov, is doubtful, though many take it as signifying sanctuary. This use of the word in the LXX. and the Apocrypha rests upon the fact that, like other words of the same form, a passive as well as an active meaning can be given to it, e.^. TrXeoz^ao-yxo?, ^acravicrp.o'i, and others. Both significa- tions occur in patristic Greek, though here the passive prevails, while in the E". T. it is the rarer. (I.) Actively, sanctification, and indeed (1) the accomplishment of the divine saving work designated by dyid^eiv, the setting up, advancing, and preserving of the life of fellow- ship with the God of grace and righteousness. 1 Thess. iv. 7, ovk eKoXecrev vfid^ 6 ^eo? eirl aKaOapaia, dXKa iv dylaafiS ; sanctification, as the removal of existing impurity, accom- panies and characterizes the calling ; the change of prepositions is observable in this passage. 2 Thess. ii. 13, etXaro v/j,d<; 6 6eb<; . . . el<; aanriplav iv dryiacrfia irvevpuaTO';. 1 Pet. i. 2, eVXe/cToi iv djiacr/j,a) Tn'ei'yaaro?, because it is the Spirit who accomplishes this saving work. See dyoo:;. — (2) The preservation and nurtui'e of the divine life-fellowship on the part of the man who has become the subject of divine influences. 1 Thess. iv. 3, 4, TovTo icTTW TO BeKrjfia tov 6eov, 6 dyiaafio'i vfiwv, d'Tve')(eadai v/j,a<; a.7ro tt}? iropvelat;, elBevat maaTov vfiwv to eavTov aKevo<; KrdcrOat iv djtacrfia koL Tbfifi ; cf ver. 7. Of. Chrys., Theophyl., and Theodoret, who explain it in Heb. xii. 14 by aax^poavvti, in the narrow sense of cliastity, continence. 1 Tim. ii. 1 5, fieveiv iv iricneb icaX dydirrj kuI dr/taafim /jLerd crco(])po(TVvr)<;. Heb. xii. 14, elprjvr^v SuoKere fierd •jrdvrwv Kal tov dyiaafiov, ov vcoplf ovBeU oi^erai tov Kvpiov (cf. Matt. v. 8). It cannot be denied that the passive meaning claimed for these texts in the first edition, as if they denoted a divine work accomplished in the individual, is in some degree strained. If the reflective meaning, " to sanctify oneself," is and must be, as remarked under dyLa^ew, foreign to the N. T., we must suppose here an inconsistency of linguistic usage, not without its parallel, which is connected M'ith the element of abstinence from impurity peculiar to the 0. T. " to sanctify oneself ;" cf. Lev. xi. 44; Eoni. xi. 18 ; Josh. iii. 5, vii. 13. It is important to observe, however, that dyi,apoBlTrj ovk av e'^oi) can hardly be explained by supposiag its primary meaning to be ^jzwe, 7'emote and free from touch and spot ; for it would be difficult to connect this signification with the original stem, and to explain the other use of the word as descriptive of sacrifices, places of worship, feasts, — that, e.g., the atoning bath of the corpse of Polynices should be called ayvov. Soph. Ant. 1201, tov UoXwe'iKr) . . .XovaavTe^ djvov \ovTpov; cf. Soph. Trach. 258, 69' dyvb'i rjv - eo;piatcd ; that Persephone, Hom. Od. xi. 386, should be called dyvr), "oh purificationem et lustrationem mortuorum, quae fit igne " (Steph. Thes) ; that, finally, a reference to sacrificial acts appears in all words derived from djv6<;. We can, on the other hand, see how the sense passes into the signification 2^ure, imspotted, if the fundamental meaning be revered or consecrated, H Ayva:^ 58 ^Ayveca atoned for, purified, hy sacrifice. The derived meaning, pure, unspotted, became narrowed into a special designation for virginity and chastity, and the word thus narrowed became the special epithet for Artemis. The word was now most frequently used with the significa- tion pure, unspotted, when joined with the genitive and accusative, e.y. Plat. Zegcf. vi. 759 C, Aovov Be ayvov Kol Travrav toov irepi ra Toiavra et? Tci Oeia ajxapTavoiLevwv, also with airo Tivo'i. Then = chaste. Soph. Ant. 880, ij/aet? yap dyvol rovirl Tqvhe rrjv Kopnjv. Dem. adv. Neacr. 1371) 'Ayiareva), kclI elju icadapa km. djvij d-rro twv aXKaiv rwv ov KaOapevov- Tcov Kol dir dvhpo'i avvovaia<; (oath of the priestesses of Bacchus). With this meaning, pure, chaste, the word passed into biblical Greek in the 0. T. to designate a moral and theocratic purity = "i^nD, Ps. xii. 7, xix. 10; cf. Prdv. xx. 9, 3^ nsT = Kaphlav dyvrjv e%ew. See dyv'i^w. Still it occurs very seldom in the LXX. In the ISr. T. with a special application, in 2 Cor. vii. 11, avvea-TrjcraTe eavrov<; dr/vov^ elvai 7u> Trpajfiari (Eec. text, iv rm -Trp.). Of chastity, in 2 Cor. xi. 2, r/pfioa-dfiTjv vfid'; evl dvBpl TrapOevov dyvrjv Trapaarrjaai rm Xpicrrw ; cf. ver. 3, /AT^Trw? . . . ui Trpcorov fj^ev dyvr\ icrTiv, cf. ver. 16, ^rj\o<; Kal ipiOeia, and Phil. i. 17, s.v. dyvm. Cf. Clem. Alex. Strom, ii. 219, dyveia jdp ol/xai, TeXeia, r] rov vov koL tcov epjuv Kal tcoj' BLavorj/Mdrmv, tt^do? Be rwv Xojwv elXiKpiveia. 'AyvoKi, purely, sincerely; cf. dyvw^ ex^iv, Xen. Mem. iii. 8. 10; vid. s.v. dyvtXco. Phil. i. 17, oi Be ef epiddwi tov XpiaTov KaTayyeWova-ov ov'X^ dryvw^, olofievoi k.t.X., in saying which Paul denies the simplicity of the spirit in which they preached ; cf ver. 18, TrXriv TravTl TpoTrai, elVe irpoi^daei,, elVe dXijOela, XptcrTo? KarayyeXXeTai. Of Cic. p7~o leg. Man. 1. 2, Labor mens in privatoncm periculis caste integreque versatus. 'AyvoT 7)<;, purity, sincerity, 2 Cor. vi. 6 (some codd., also 2 Cor. xi. 3, t% d-rrXo- rr]ro<; koI rij? dyv6T7]To<;). Not quite unknown in classical Greek, " Copulantur qiioque in titulis, ut BiKato^ et dyv6v t5'Yi3ri nnriD ; IsTum. vi. 21, explanatory, icarci vojiov aYma? = ilM JTiin 7^, of. ver. 5; 1 Mace. xiv. 36, ifilawov KvicK(p twv cv^Lav icaX iirolovv TrXijyrjv /leyaXtjv iv ry af^vela, where dyvela is a designation of the sanctuary, to indicate how sacrilegiously it had been treated; cf s.v. dyvi^a. — Phavor. dyveia, Ka9ap6T7}<;, i'KiTacu'i craxppoauvr]';, iXevdepia 'iTavTo<; jiokvcfjiov aapKo^ Kai •jrvevfiaTO's. 'AyvCi^oa, to consecrate, to purify. Plut., Joseplius, bibl. and eccl. Greek ; other- wise only isolatedly. In accordance with the fundamental meaning, the LXX. use it as term, techn. for the purification required in priests for the divine service ; Num. viii. 21, 2 Chron. xxix. 5, and, indeed, in all who belonged to the chosen people. Ex. xix. 10, 11 ; Josh. iii. 5, dyvlcyaaQe et? avpiov, on avpiov iroirjcet Kvpio'i iv v/uv dav- fiaa-Ta ; 2 Chron. xxx. 17 (ver. 20, Ida-aro icvpio<; tov Xaov, throws light on the meaning) ; Num. xix. 12, xxxi. 19, 2o ; = dcf}(vyvi^eadM, ISTum. xix. 12, 13, 19, 20 ; vi. 3, avro oivov Koi tjMepa dyvicrdrjcreTai,, l''-!^ "iStJ"! |)JD, cf. ver. 2, d(f>ayvlaaa9ai, dyvelav KVpiw, of the vow of the Nazarite ; opposed to fnalveadai. It includes KaOapi^eiv and dyid^eiv, cf 1 Sam. xxi. 5 ; 2 Chron. xxix. 5, stands in the corresponding genus for ''??["!''?, "'i'?, and "'D??'?, t>'lp Piel, Hiphil, Hithpael. With Num. xxxi. 23 compare Plut. Qu. Horn. 1 : to Trvp Kadaipei, koX to vBrnp dyvl^ei. — In the same relation the LXX. use dyveia, ayvia-jxa (Num. xix. 9), dyviafio<;. In the N. T. on the same ground of the Israelite's relation to God as in the 0. T., c£ John xi. 55 (colL 2 Chron. xxx. 17 ; Ex. xix. 10 sq.) ; Acts xxi. 24, 26, xxiv. 18. Otherwise, as a term, techn. not used in the N. T. = purify, cleanse (without the collateral meaning " consecrate"). Jas. iv. 8, dyvio-are Kaph[a<; Biyfrv^oi; 1 Pet. i. 22, Ta? ■\lrv')(a'; vpuwv rjyviKOTe'i iv Tjj vvaKofj tjJ? d\7j6eLa<; el<; (pt,\aBe\lav dvvTTOKpiTov ; 1 John iii. 3, dyvl^ei eavrbv, KaOcb^ iKeivoi; dyvo'; icrriv (where dyv6 xvi. 387, Od. xii. 439.) Acts xvi. 19, market-place, Matt. xi. 16, xx. 3, xxiii. 7, Mark vi. 56, xii. 88, Luke vii. 32, xi. 43, xx. 46, Acts xvii. 17. Mark vii. 4, d-Tr dyopa,<; idv /MTj ^aiTTia-covTM ovk eaOlovcriv ; cf. Winer, 547 j Ecclus. xxxi. 30, ^aTTTi^o/Mevof dvo veKpov Koi irdXiv dirTOfievo'i avrov. Prom this, — 'Ayopd^co, to buy; with ace. Matt. xiii. 44, 46, xiv. 15, xxvii. 7, Mark vi. 36, XV. 46, xvi. 1, Luke ix. 13, xiv. 18, 19, xxii. 36, John iv. 8, vi. 5, xiii. 39, Eev. iii. 18, xviii. 11. — With accus. of the thing and genit. of the value, Mark vi. 37; — passive, 1 Cor. vi. 20, vii. 23. In the last two passages, '^yopdaOijTe Tifirj'i, — buy for a price, " as the opposite of a gratis acquisition" (Meyer) : by which stress is to be laid both on the right of possession and especially on the worth of the equivalent, — as we say, " a thing is worth money, it cost me money;" Propert. iii. 14 (vid. Wetst. on 1 Cor. vi. 20), Talis mors pretio vel sit emenda mihi. — Value assigned by iv with the dat., Eev. v. 9 ; cf. 1 Chron. xxi 24, iv dpyvplo) d^ia>. — Without mention of an object. Matt. xxi. 12, xxv. 9, 10, Mark xi 15, Luke xvii. 28 (xix. 45, Eec. text), 1 Cor. vii. 30, Eev. xui. 17. — Transferred to the redemptive work of Christ, 1 Cor. vi. 20, vii. 23, '^yopdadrjre rifirji;; 2 Pet. ii. 1, rov djopacavra avToii^ ^eciroTqv dpvov/i€voi ; Eev. v. 9, rjy6pa(Ta 6em koX to3 dpv'itp. The negative aspect of this idea is found in the use of Xinpov, Xvrpovv, diroXvTpasai';, in Matt. xx. 2 8, 1 Tim. ii. 6 ; i^ayopd^eiv, Gal. iii. 13, iv. 5. Por the positive, vid. Acts xx. 28, ^v •n-epi.e- iroiriaaTo hid rov IBlov aXfiaro^, Tit. ii. 14, 1 Pet. i. 18, Eph. i. 14, 2 Thess. ii. 14. — In Eev. xiv. 3, 4, riyop. diro, diro is used as in Od. v. 40, d-Ko XrjtBo'i ala-a; Herod, vi 27, d-rrb exaTov TraiScov eh jjlovvo^ ; Thucyd. vii. 87, oX^ot, d-Trb ttoWmv. — Cf. also the idea expressed in Eom. iii. 1 9 by vttoBiko^ (g-.v.) with Gal. iv. 5, yevo/ievov viro vofiov, ha tovi vTTo vofiov i^a/yopda-rj. See further, 6j>eiX7)fia. The idea accordingly is, that Christ, by offering for us the satisfaction due (cf. Gal. iii. 1 3), freed us from our liability ; we, on the other hand, are now His, i.e. as it were bound to Him ; vid. 1 Cor. vii. 23, Tt/i. r)y. firj yivea-Oe BovXoi, dvOpdovav ; vi. 19, ovk icrre eavrwv. 'E ^ayo p d^w, peculiar to later Greek, and there rare = to buy out, redeem, e.g. prisoners ; redimere, Polyb., Diod. Sic. — So in Gal. iii. 1 3, iv. 5, where, however, only the negative aspect of the idea contained in dyopd^eiv is expressed. — Also = to buy up, i.e. to buy all that is anywhere to be bought ; Plut. Crass, ii., i^rjyopa^e rd Kaioneva nal yeoTviMVTa Tah KaiojievoK. So the Middle, Eph. v. 16, Col. iv. 5, rov Kaipov; by Huther in loo. rightly taken to be = not to allow the suitable moment to pass by unliecded, but to make it one's mun = ^(pdcrdai a/c/st/Sw? tw Kaipm. Suicer, s.v. Kaipo^ : Quando jiibemur i^aryopd^eaSai, Kaipov, sensus est, t ek Siov 'Xprja-Teov, — juxta Theodoreticm. Dan. ii. 8, Kaipbv u/^et? i^a/yopd^ere, py pr = seek time or delay. Cf 1 Cor. vii. 2 9 and the parallels quoted by Wetstein on Eph. v. 16 ; M. Anton, IV. 26, KepBavriov to -Trapov. Dion. Hal. Aiit. iu. 23, Ta/j,i,ev6/j,ivo's ifxavToi rov t?}s iirideaea}'; Kaipov. ^ A. The usage of the LXX. and classics presents no point of resemblance or affinity with this passage. In the LXX. irpoa-dyeiv is the translation of 3"ip, y^pn, as a religious term, side by side with wpoa-cpepeiv (see vpoaip'^ofiai,), but, like the Hebrew word used, without personal object, to designate the setting up of a personal relationship. Cf. Lev. vi. 38,6 Upev^ 6 irpocrdr^wv oXoKavrafia dvBpcoirov ; x. 38, el crij/iepov irpoa-i.v to ovo/jia vfiwv w? irovTipov eveKa rov vlov rov avOpanrov, a synonymous expression. 'ETrta-vvdjo), aor. 1, ivLavvd^ai, Mark xiii. 27, Luke xiii. 34. Aor. 2, i-ma-wa- yajelv, Matt, xxiii. 3 7, to gather thereto, or near, to bring together, to a place ; also in a hostile sense, to assemUe together against, Mic. iv. ll,Zech. xii. 3. Only in later Greek (Polyb. Pint.). In the LXX. = flDS, Isa. lii. 2, Mic. iv. 11, Hab. ii. 5 ; D33, Ps. cxlvii. 2 ; pp, 1 Kings xviii. 20, Ps. cii. 23, cvi. 47; ^np, 2 Chron. xx. 27. In the N. T., Mark i. 33, r]v oXt) 7] TToXi? iTTtavvrjjfievr] tt/so? ttjv Ovpav; Luke xii. 1. The connection regu- lates the choice of eTnavvwy. instead of the simple away., as even in Matt, xxiii. 37, iroadm^ rjOekricra iTna-vvajayelv ra reKva aov, ov rpoTrov opvf; hncrvvcuyei ra voacrla inro Ta<; nTTepvyayrj<; eV avTov, with reference to Matt. xxiv. 31, Mark xiii. 27, 1 Thess. iv. 17. In the other place, Heb. x. 25, it stands, like a-vvaymyij, in a passive sense, firj eyKaTaXehrovTe'i TTjv i'TTia-vvaycoyrjv eavTcov, Kadoit; Woi], sister, from a copulative and SeX^u?, Hesych. aSeX- ^01, ol €K T^9 auTij? SeX^yo? yeyovoTe^' SeX^us yap fj firjTpa Xeyerab. The Hebrew HX is also used of more distant relatives, e.g. Gen. xiv. 16, xxix. 12, 15; and some think this circumstance ought to be taken into consideration where brothers and sisters of Jesus are referred to, Matt. xii. 46, 47, xiii. 55 ; Mark iii. 31, 32, vi. 3 ; Luke viii. 19, 20 ; John ii. 12, vii. 3, 5, 10; Acts i. 14. But the conjoined mention of the mother of Jesus (besides John vii. 3, 5, 10) appears to imply that children of the same mother are meant (cf. Ps. 1. 20), against which no argument is furnished by John xix. 26, which ought rather to be explained by Matt. xix. 2 9 and parallels. The answer to this question depends, indeed, on the view taken of the relation between James the son of Alphaeus and James the brother of the Lord; cf. Mark xv. 47, John xix. 25, with Matt. xiii. 55. — 'ABeX^6<; denotes further, in general, a fellowship of life based on identity of origin, as also the Hebrew ns< is also applied to members of the same tribe, countrymen, etc. ; so in Acts iii. 22, vii. 23 ; Eom. ix. 3, vvep tcov aSeXrj Kal firjTrjp eajlv ; as also Mark x. 29, 30, ouSet? iaTiV o? acprJKev oiKiav fj dSeX^ous fj aSeXoi eare. Christ thus speaks of His brethren in Matt. xxv. 40, xxviii. 10 ; John xx. 17 ; cf Heb. ii. 11, 17. Eom, viii. 29, eh to elvai avTov TrpanoroKov ev woXXol'; dBeXcpoK, has to do with community or fellowship of life. In classical Greek it is a designation of an intimate friend, Xen. Anab. viL 2. 25, vTna-'vvov/jievo'i aoo (j>lXa> '^prjcreaOai Kal dBeX(f>a; ibid. 38, Kal dBeX(j)ovi; ye ttomj- aofiai Kal ivBi,(f>p[ov'; Kal KOivaivov<; diravTav wv av BvvcofieOa KTrjcraaOat,. Also as an adjectival of things connected with each other, e.g. Plat. Rep. iii. 404 B, 57 ^eXTia-Tt) yu/xvaariKri dBeX^ij Tt? av etrj t^^ dirXrj'; fj,ovai,Krj6TTj<; denotes brotherhood, a brotherly or sisterly relation. The word seems to be altogether unknown in classical Greek. It begins to appear more frec[uently in the Byzantine writers. In Jos. 3facc. ix. 10, 13, of brothers and sisters by birth, who seal their common kinship in a common behaviour as martyrs; c. 13, to, t^? dhekj)6Triro<; cplXTpa avvav^dveiv ; e.g. rj t'^? evi^v^la'i aZek^orrj';. Transferred to a relationship of friendship in 1 Mace, xii 1 0, rrjv aSeXiXt,av avaveaxraaOai (also v. 1 7). — Then, especially in the N". T. and eccl. Greek, — transferred to the community in which this relation is realized, — the circle of the Christian aZeXj>oi, as in German the words Freundschaft, Venvandscliaft, Herrschaft denote both the relationship and the persons spoken of So 1 Pet. ii. 17, ttiv dSeX^uTTjTa dya-n-aTe; v. 9, rj iv Koa-fia vfjuuiv dBeX.cjiOTr]';. Cf Nestor, ad Cyrill. in act. ephesin. c. 11 (in Suic), irdaav ttjv ctvv aoi dBeXla, Rom. xii. 10,1 Thess. iv. 9, Heb. xiii. 1, 1 Pet. i. 22, 2 Pet. i. 7 (cf (piXaSeXfo^, 1 Pet. iii. 8), — a word whicli in the classics is used only to denote the love to each other of brothers and sisters by birth ; and thus the N. T. meaning of the words, dBeX(f>6'i, aSeX^drij?, (f)iXdBe\^o<;, ^iXa- Be\(pla, is a valuable contribution to the reformation wrought in ethics by Christianity. "A Br]<;, ov, 6, from a privative and IBeiv = atSrjv, as the reading is in Horn. = the invisible, the invisible land. Pint. Is. et Osir. Ixxix. 382 F, to dei.Se'i Kal doparov. Origin- ally only the name of the god of the nether world, who holds rule over the dead ; hence et? or iv aSov, sc. oUa, oIkov, Bcofiara, in poetry and prose, as also in the LXX. ; cf Acts ii. 27, 31. Then, also especially later, the place of the dead. Cf Lucian. de luct. 2, fih Br] TToXu? ofjLiXo^, — 'Ofiripai re koI 'HcioBa Kai Tot'i aXXo49 ixvOottoioI^ irepl tovtcov ireiOofxevot, Kal vofiov OejjLevoi, ttjv irouqaiv avTcov tottov Ttva vtto tTj yrj ^aOvv ' ABr]v viTeCKri(^aai, fie'yav Be Kal TToXv^copop tovtov etvau Kal ^o^epov Kal dv-qKiov k.t.X., where the ideas in question are found in the connection; Plut. I.e. Cf Nagelsbach, Homerisehe Thcologie, vii. 28. 405 sq[. ; Nachhomerische Theologie, vii. 26. 413 sq. "The idea connected therewith recurs with tolerable unanimity of import amongst the heathen, so far as the faith in per- sonal immortality was able to gain recognition. Hades, taken in its most general sense, would thus be the place of assembly and residence for all who depart from the present world, — in a word, the world beyond." See Glider's article in Herzog's Beal-Encyldop. v "AB7,? ^vXkov OaKKov . . . o5to9 ^eveh crapKo^ koI a'ifiaro'i • rj fxev TeKevTa, erepa Se ryevvuTat ; xvii. 3 0, •jrovrjpo'; ivOvfiija-eTM adpKa koI aXfiara. Q'J) 1"f 3 occurs oftener in post-bibl. Heb., Liglitf. Hor. Hdbr. on Matt. xvi. 17, infinita frequentia lutnc formulam adJiihent scriptores judaici eaqice Jiomines Deo op'^onunt. — (II.) Aliia by itself serves to denote life passing away in bloodshed, and generally life takm away hy force, Matt, xxiii. 30, 35, xxvii. 4; Luke xi. 50, 51; Matt, xxvii. 6, Tip}] a'lp.aTO'; ; ver. 8, ^7^09 at/iaro? ; Acts i. 19, ^&)/3toi' atjaaros; Matt, xxvii. 24, a^oSo? dp,i airo toO a"p.aTO atpaTi, p,ov. 1 Cor. xi. 25 ; 1 Pet. i. 2, pavnap.o'i a"p,aTo, coll. ver. 20, o dp'^ipev'; elaep'^^erai eh tcl ayia . . . iv aifiaTi dXKoTpiu), only that to atpia tov XpiaTov does not, perhaps, denote the substance of the blood as separated from the body (against Bengel on Heb. xii. 24, who represents it as blood separated from the body, and as such eternally present and efficacious ; likewise against Delitzsch on Heb. ix. 12, who understands it of the substance of the blood shed at the first, and then renewed in the heavenly corporeity of Christ at the resurrection, upon the basis of the residue of the blood remaining therein ! Cf. what is said above on aip,a eic^ieiv. — Beck, Lehrvnssensch. i. 624 sqq. ; Eiehm, Lehrlegriff des Sehr. Brief es, § 61). Cf. Heb. ix. 2 5, ovK Xva TroWaKt? Trpoa^ipr] kavTov, parallel with ev aip^aTi aXKoTpiw ; ver. 7, ov %(i)jol? aip,aTo<; o Trpoacpepei, coll. ver. 1 4, eavTov '7rpo(7i]veyKev t& 6ea> ; cf. ver. 26, Sia T^s dvaia^ avrov m-et^avepaiTM. In other passages, too, of the K T., where AifMaT€K^vaia 71 Air the blood of Christ is spoken of, the reference is not to the sulstanca, but to the life offered for atonement ; and al^ia is the designation of the aceomplislied and offered sacrifice. So 1 John i. 7, TO alixa 'Irjaov KaOapl^ei rjjxa'i airo ira(Tr]<; ccfjLapTLa'j ; v. 6, oSto9 iariv 6 ekdwv 01 uSaTo? Ka\ ai/jLaro?, — eV tqj vSart Kal at^ari ; of. ver. 8 (for the construction with Sia, cf. Heb. ix. 12 ; with iv, Heb. ix. 25, Matt. xvi. 27, 28 = 3 Ni3 Vs. Ixvi. 13, etc.) ; Eom. iii. 25, bv irpoeOero 6 ^eo? iXaaTijpiov Bia 'Tricnew alfiari avrov ; Eph. i. 7, e'^ofiev rrjv airokvTpaai.v Sia tov a'lfiaTOi aiiTov ; ii. 1 3, eyyvi eyevi]6r)Te ev rm aXjj,. tov XpiaTov (Col. i. 14, Eec. text); Col. i. 20, elprjvoTroiTjaa'} Bia TOV a"fiaT0<; tov (yjavpov avrov ; Heb. x. 19, xiii. 12 ; Acts xx. 28, tjv TrepieTroujcraTo Sik TOV aifiaTO'; rov ISlov ; 1 Pet. i. 19, iXvTpwdriTe Tifiia atfiaTi XpiaTov ; Eev. i. 5, V. 9, vii. 14 ; Matt. xxvi. 28 ; Mark xiv. 24 ; Luke xxii. 20 ; 1 Cor. xi. 27 ; 5? 7r/3oo-p^Dt7t? TOV aXiMiToov (TOV ovK aTratTJjffet?. Ver. 3, tov dXKoTpiov aTraLTrjijeK ocra eav jj aoi "Trap' avTm. With two ace, or tI sk tivo^, Aesch. Cho. 398. In the N. T. Luke vi. 30, otto tow atpovToi ra ah, fj,r] dm-airet; Luke xii. 20, ttjv ■^V'^j^v crov diraiTovaiv dvo aov. Cf. Wisd. xv. 8, to T^5 -i^up^jj? diraLTijOel'; %/3eo?. — Andoc. p. 126 ; Eeisk., ravTa vfjia<;, el fiev ^ovXeade, aha' elBe /Mr] ^ovXeade, diravrSi. 'E ^ a IT e(o, to claim back, to require something to be delivered up (to re-claim), Diod. Sic. iv. 79, e^f/Tei tov AaiBoKov eh Tifiwpiav. Middle, to re-claim for oneself, cf. ahea>. Luke xxii. 31, o v eaTiv anro tov ail eivai eiXrjcfiax; TTjv eTTcoTrvfiiav, where the linguistic usage is rightly presented. In early Greek especially, and still also in the Attic, aicov signifies the duration of human life as limited to a certain space of time, and this is clearly closely connected with the conception ; hence = tJie duration of life, course of life, term of life, lifetime, life in its temporal form. So in Homer, Hesiod, Pindar. Cf. Hom. ii. 24. '725, dvep, anr aiwvo<; veo<; &\eo, KaB Be fie^^ijprjv XeiTTct? ; Pind. 01. ii. 120, aBaicpvv vifMovTai alwva; Hom. II. xvi. 453, avTap eVetS^ tov epeiv tov alcSva; Xen. Cyrop. ii. 1. 7, Boa iravTo^ rov alcovo<; dp,7)')(avovvTe'i PioTeveiv. Hence explained by Eustath. = to fierpov Trj'; avdpa- TTti'ij? ^co7J vfia'; Trvevfia acj) ixprjXov ; cf. ver. l7j Kal Kparijcrei 17 SiKaiocrvvr) avdiravcriv Kal ireTToiOoTe'i eta? tov alcove^ ; vid. Lexica, s.v. DPiy. Specially often do we find diro tov alcSvo<;, dir alcove's, Bt aluivov 76 Alcou iL 2 ; Jer. xxiii. 20, xxx. 24, xlviii. 17, xlix. 39 ; Ezek xxxviii. 16 ; Hos. iii. 5 ; Mic. iv. 1 ; ^''JB'n n''l.nN3, Ezek. xxxviii. 8, not to signify the latest future, " farther than which the eye cannot penetrate " (Hitzig on Mic. iv. 1) ; nor " the end of this world's history, which seems to the eye of the speaker to lie at the extreme limit of his horizon " (DeUtzsch on Heb. i. 1) ; but the last days in general (opp. I^B'N'i, Eccles. vii 8 ; Isa. xlvi. 1 ; Deut. xi. 1 2 ; not, however, as contrasted with the time of the speaker), the last period of historical development, vid. Num. xxiv. 14; Deut. iv. 30, xxxi. 29; Ezek. xxxviii. 8; Jer. xxiii. 20, xxx. 24, xlviii. 47, xlix. 39 ; Hos. iii. 5, in which both the threatened curses and the Messianic salvation (vid. Isa. ii. 2 ; Mic. iv. 1, etc.) are to be revealed ; in a word, the time of final decision, the time of settlement ; — hence the term is always taken by Jewish interpreters (and rightly so) in a Messianic sense. Kinichi on Isa. ii. 2, IJUcungue leguntur haec verba niD"'n nnnN3, iii sermo est de diebus Messiah. {Vid. also Drechsler, Knobel on Isa. ii. 2 ; Hengstenberg on Balaam, p. 158 sq., Ghristology, L on Mic. iv. 1.) We need not be surprised that the prophets compress mucli into this time, for they conceive the history of the final decision as taking place in it. Vid. Deut. iv. 30; Hos. iii. 5 ; Isa. ii. 2 sq., etc. Possibly, therefore, the occupation of Canaan described in Gen. xlix. is placed in this time, so far as it is to be regarded as the beginning of the fulfilment of prophecy, while the actual entrance of the final end into the present shifts itself further on. The LXX. render this expression by eV iaxdreov twv rjiiep&v, eV ea-^drov, ecr^dr^ rwv y/ieptSp, iv rots iffxarai'} f]iiepal<: (vid. ecrjjjaTo?) ; cf. Heb. i. 1, etc. Chald. = t«?|n fliD3,N;oi^ eiioa, post-biblical synagogal = chSvn f'p (Dehtzsch on Heb. ix. 26), for which in the N. T. avvreXeia rov amvc;. Matt. xiii. 39, 40, 49, xxiv. 3, xxviii. 20 ; cvvTeKeia t5)v alavmv, Heb. ix. 2 6, close of time, of the present development of the world, of the course of the world; cf Paul's words in 1 Cor. x. 11, Tama he tvttoi crwi^aivov eKeivoii, iypdipT} Be 7rpo9 vov6ealav tj/imv, ek ods to, teXt/ twv alwvwv KurijvTrjKev, as also TO TfX'^pwfia Tov -xpovov, in Gal. iv. 4. Between Heb. ix. 26, 1 Cor. x. 11, on the one hand, and Matt. xiii. 39 sq. on the other, there is a difference, so far as the latter marks the end as still future, whilst the former characteristically describes the present. Looked at in relation to the past, the Messianic age is the awreXeta twv alwvav ; considered in relation to the future, the avvTeXeia tov attSvos is still to come, in so far as the existing course of the world has not yet found its final termination. This is clear from the mode in which the idea suggested by d'DNT nnnNl is further carried out. The etrxaTai rjiiepai give us the view of a future, which owes its entire character to the fulfilment of the Messianic prophecies, — a future designated K3n oMy, alwv ipxofievos, fiiXKcov, e'/cewo?; whereas the past and present, down to that time, were denoted by T\^^ thS]!, alosv ovto<;. The question now is, to which of these times belong the n''?'i3n nils*. ? In Schabbath, fol. 63, we read : Dixit B. Chijja, Bar Ahha: omnes prophetae omnino nan sunt vaticinati nisi de diebus Messiae, sed N3n hb'W^ oculus non vidit praetcr te, o Beus, Isa. Ixiv. 4. In this and many other passages, therefore, agreeably to the expression D^a^n n'-ins, the time of the Messiah is reckoned in the ntn nh'W, like all that is viewed as belonging to the end Alcov *77 Atwv of days. See Bleek on Heb. i. 1. So, e.g., the resurrection promised in Dan. xii. 2, on ■whicli E. Saadias Gaon, in Emunoth, fol. 36. 1, says regarding those who rise again: " God wiR transfer them from the days of the Messiah to the joys of the K2n D^lJ?" On the other hand, however, alo>v fiiWatv also is sometimes described as the time of the Messiah, e.g. Targ. on 1 Kings iv. 33 : Nn''l5'D1 Tita N»^j;ai pn KD^yn, in seculo hoc et in seculo futuro Messiae. Beracoth, cap. 1 (in Lightfoot on Matt. xii. 32) : Diehus vitae tnae innuitur hoc saeculum ; omnibus dielnis vitae tuae superinducuntur Dies Messiae. Cf. also Oehler, art. "Messias" in Herzog's Realencycl. ix. 434, who quotes also Tosephot on Bab. Sanh., fol. 1106.- "the future world, that is, the days of the Messiah." Finally, how- ever, the days of Messiah are elsewhere separated from and placed between the two ages of the world ; — affirmed by Oehler (in Herzog) to be a modification of the first view, which may perhaps be described as the one that has at last gained exclusive recognition ; o alrnv fieWmv would then denote the time of the new world. The expression o aiwv oStos and fteWav then passed over into the N". T., being used there also in the first instance to distinguish the present from the future which follows on the final decision, and in which retribution takes place. So in Mark x. 30 ; Luke xviii. 30, OS ov'^l fit] a7ro7M/3r} iroXKaTrKaaiova iv Tat '^atpa Tovrto koX ev rw alwvb rm ep'^o/ievco l^wrjv aldviov. In the parallel passage, Matt. xix. 28, we read, iv rrj iroKiyyeveaia orav Ka6iari vlb<} ToO avBpamov eVt dpovov B6^7)i; avTov ; and in Luke xx. 35, ol Be KaTa^ta)devTev used in the plural to denote the past, just as elsewhere for the future (Eph. iii. 21, el<; yeveai tov atcoj/o? twv alwveov ; Heb. xiii. 8, et? tovs alSvai), for the purpose of giving it a more general character, — like '^ovot, e.g., in 1 Pet. i. 2 ; Acts i. 6 ; Lat. tempora. Eiehm (Lehrhegriff des Hebrder-Br. i. 209) thinks that crwTeXeia twv ald)viov,in Heb. ix. 2 6, implies that the turning-point of both ages, the aloDv fiiXKav, had already commenced with the first advent of Christ, — in opposition to Heb. i. 6, ii. 5-8, xi. 40 ; 1 Cor. XV. 20-28. Cf. Heb. vL 5 with iv. 9, 11, x. 35, 36. That expression means, however, nothing more than eV ia-'^uTov twv •^p.epav tovtwv in Heb. i. 1 (cf. 1 Pet. L 20) ; and as the latter is drawn from biblical usage, so the former from that of the Schools and social life. The final portion of almv ovtoi; commenced when Christ appeared ; — eVj^aroi/ TWV ■xpovcov, ea'x^. r)p^epa. Acts ii 17; 1 Pet. i. 20 ; Heb. i. 1; which last -mentioned expression is elsewhere limited to the time immediately preceding the irapovaia, 2 Tim. iii. 1 ; cf . 1 Tim. iv. 1 ; 1 Pet. i. 5. As the alwv p,eWav derives its Tnoral value from the decision arrived at in the o-iwreXeto tov aiwvo'} (Matt. xiii. 39, 40, 49; cf. Luke Alavio<; 78 Ala>v(,o<; XX. 25j ol Be Kara^ia>6evre'; tov uImvo? eKeivov TV)(elv), an opposite moral character is attributed to almv oi)ro<;, as a course of time alienated from the revealed truth of God Matt. xiii. 22, ^ fiipifiva tov aloovo'} tovtov (Lachm., Tisch. omit tovtov) a-vfiirviyei tov Xoyov, cf. ver. 24 sq., 40 ; Luke xvi. 8, ol viol tov alwvo<; tovtov t^povL/iaiTepot, virep tow viovvo f] Bo^a km vvv koI eh fjfiepav alo)vo<;, is peculiar; see rjfiepa, rj/^ipa diroXvTpwaeai'i, awT'qpia<;, Kvplov, where the genitive specifies what is characteristic of the Day, — because it serves to make it manifest. Accordingly, r)p.epa alwvoi opposed to vvv denotes the Day on which eternity will become manifest, and that in the sense in which the expression is used in Ecclus. xviii. 10, w? aTajwv vSaTO'; d-Tro 6aXda(Tr) Tovra koX iv tui alSivb ra ip'^onevq) ^arjv alwviov ; Mark x. 30; John xii. 25, o p^ccrSiv rrjv •^jrv^rjv aurov iv tw Kocrpo) tovto) et? ^(orjv aicoviov ^v\d^ai avTriv. In the Gospel and first Epistle of John it occurs only in this connection ; where ^for) almvio^ is represented as both future (vi. 27, xii. 25, iv. 14, 36) and also for the most part as already present (John xvii. 3, and the other passages; cf. xi 26, 27, viii. 51) ; akin is the view contained in Hebrews, according to which the Svvdp,ei,<; p^eWovToii alcova may be tasted even now. Vid. ^wrj. Cf. "Weiss, Ber Johann Zehrhegr., sec. 1 ; opposed to TO TTvp TO aldiviov, Matt. xxv. 41, xviii. 8, Jude 7 ; KoXaa-Ks alwvwi, Matt. XXV. 46 ; 2 Thess. i. 9, 6'\e6po<; ald>vio<;. Cf. also Mark iii. 29, aldivi,o<; Kplai.'i (where Lachm., Tisch., dp,dpTr)pa) ; Heb. vi. 2, /cpt/ia almviov. Conjoined with acoTrjpla, Heb. V. 9 ; XvTpooa-L^, Heb. ix. 12 ; K\rjpovop,M, ix. 15 ; hiadrjicr), xiii. 20 ; Sofa, 2 Tim. iL 10, 1 Pet. V. 10 ; ^aaCKeia, 2 Pet. i. 11. Alcoviof is specially predicated of the saving blessings of divine revelation, by which is denoted their not belonging to what is transi- tory ; cf 2 Cor. V. 1 ; syn. a^OapTO'^, 1 Pet. i. 23, cf ver. 25 ; d/caTaXuro?, Heb. vii. 16, iepev<; . . . kuto, Svvap^iv ^onj'; aKaTaXmov, cf. ver. 17, and ix. 14, 89 Bio, •7Tvevp,aTo<; alcoviov eavTov Trpoa-ijvejKev tS dew. The expression, %povoi alwvtoi, Eom. xvL 25, KaTo, dvoicd- Xinjnv fMVcrTTjplov ■^ovot'; alatvioK aeaiyrjfiivov, avepd>dri. On 2 Tim. i. 9, cf. Eph. i. 4, 11 ; 1 Pet. — Further, Eom. xvi. 26 ; 2 Cor. iv. 17, v. 1 ; 1 Tim. vi. 16 ; Eev. xiv. 6. 'A KoXovQea, from KeKev6o<;, a going, journey, path, way (perhaps connected with the German gleiten, " to glide or slide," which is not to be confounded with the compound 'AKoXovOea 80 'AicoKovdeco gchiten, whence Begleiter) ; aKoXovdoi, "attendant" (a copulative), accordingly = to be an attendant, to accompany, to go with or follow, as brothers in arms (Xen. Hell. v. 3. 26 and often, parallel to (rv/iijLa^o<; elvai), as soldiers, in contrast with ■jrdX.efiap'xe'iv, as servants (Plut. Ale. 3); cf. Matt, xxvii. 55, a"rtvev kuv twv oKKwv /car avTovi TjKdXovdriKOTwv SeSo/xevwv ; Strabo, iii. 165 ; Theophr. Dc cans. plant, iv. 11. 9. Cf. 2 Mace, iv. 17, Tavra 6 aKoXovOo'; Kai,po. In Demosth. and Polyb., toIi; KatpoLi aKoXovOelv, to serve the time, to act according to circumstances. (The passage cited by Pape from Thuc. iii. 38, d/e. rfi yvwfir], is perhaps wrongly explained, for t^ yvw/irj here is the dat. instr. ; cf. K. W. Kriiger in loc.) Akin is the usage of the Gospels and Eev. xiv. 4, with reference to the scholars and disciples of Christ, not, however, because in ancient times instruction was given ambulando, as is stated in all lexicons hitherto without any confirmatory examples. The only place in ante-Christian Greek where the word is thus used, is 1 Kings xix. 20, of the relation of Elisha to Elijah. The remembrance of this fact as it stands makes the representation significantly expressive. Distinguishing between the occasional and temporary following of Jesus by the o'x>^i> 7roXXo/f, Matt. iv. 25, viii 1, and the following Him to which Jesus calls individuals (Matt. ix. 9, xix. 21) or people generally (Matt. x. 38, xvi. 24 ; John viii. 12, xii. 26), or which was under- taken by individuals (Matt. viii. 1 9 ; Luke ix. 5 7, 6 1), — this much, in the first place, is clear, that it denotes an abiding fellowship with Jesus, not only for the sake of learning, as a scholar from his teacher (Matt. viii. 19, BiSaaKaXe, aKoXovd^a-to aoi, ottov iav uTrepy^r]), but for the saJce of the salvation known or looked for, which presented itself in this fellowship; cf. Luke ix. 62, oiBeh eTn^aXwv rrjv xet/sa avrov iv aporpov, koI ^Xeircov el's T^ (miam, evOeTot iariv ry ^aaCKela rov 0eov ; Matt. xix. 21, Bevpo aKoXovOei /jloi, in answer to the question of ver. 1 6, tI ayadov iroirjcrm, Xva ey((0 l^arjv almviov ; cf what is 'AKoXovdeco 81 'AkoXovOco) added in Mark x. 21, efet? Or]aavpbv ev ovpavm ; Matt. xix. 27, ISoi/, ^fie?^ atfiTjKafieu iravra, koI rjKoKovdrjcraiiev aof rl apa ecrTai yfuv ; Matt. x. 38, S9 oii "Xa/ji^dvet tov cTavpov avTov kol aKoXovdei otrlaa fiov, ovk ecmv fiov d^ioi; Matt. viii. 22, uko- \ov6ei ytiot, Kal a^69 tov? veicpov^ Od'^ai tou? eavrav veKpovi. Hence also the necessity of Trdvra d^dvai, for the sake of fellowship with Jesus, Matt. ix. 9, xix. 21, 27, 28 ; Mark ii. 14, x. 21, 28 ; Luke v. 11, 27, 28,xviii. 22, 28 (c£ Phil. iii. 7 sqq.). For this very reason, following Jesus implies a trustful and hopeful cleaving to Him, following His guidance, as is particularly clear from John viii. 12, o d/co\ovda>v i/jiol, ou /j,rj irepi- •jraTtjar) ev t^ cricoTiq,, aXX' efet to a)<; t?}? fwjj? ; John x. 4, ra TrpajSaTa avrm aKoXovOei, OTi oiBaaiv TTjv (fimvfjv avrov ; ver. 5, aXXoTptw 8e ov /irj aKoXovdijaovcnv, dWa (pev^ovrai UTT aiiTov ; x. 2 7, 2 8, rd irpo^aTa Ta ifid tjJ? ^(avrida\iiopr)ai evaryyeXio) ; iii. 1 4, rm Xoyo) ; Acts vi. 7, rjj Triarei (vid. Tric-n'i) ; cf. Heb. v. 9, rm XpiarS ; xi. 8, iria-Tei Ka\ovfi€vo<; 'A^p. inrrjKova-ev i^ekOelv, as also alone to denote the continuous subjection of faith under the preached word, the keeping of the word in believing obedience ; so in Phil. ii. 1 2, Ka6w] \aXla BfjXov ere "TToiei, hence = real, actual. Vid. Acts xii. 9, ovk i]Sei on dXij^e? ianv TO yiv6/j,evov vtto tov ayyeXov, iBoKei Be bpafia /BXeTreiv ; cf. ver. 11, vvv olSa aXrjd&'i oti i^a-jrecTTeiXev Kvpio'i tov ayyeXov avrov. That, therefore, is dX-ij^e? whose appearance is not mere show : that which is the reality it appears to he, 1 Pet. v. 12, iirifiapTvpSyv ravrrjv elvai aXridr) 'x^pi'V tov 0eov, eh rjv ea-T^KUTe, real grace of God (Bengel : alteram non esse cxpcctandam) ; 1 John ii. 27, 009 to avrov '^picrfia BiBda-Kei vp,a<; "jrepl iravTcav, koX aXr]9i<} ia-Tiv, Kal ovk ecTTiv ■<^evBo<;, so it is in reality, — i/reOSo? = deception, lie. (The neuter in classical Greek, especially since Herod., as an adv.) 1 John ii. 8, 6 io-Tiv aXrjBe'; iv avrat KoX ev vfuv, according to Huther = actually realized ; better merely = actual, manifest. In John vi. 55 it makes no difference whether we read aXrjOi]'; yS/jwcrt?, ttoo-iv, or d\rj6a>^ : it is actual food, food which shows itself to be such, or is reaUy food. '.4Xij^7j? always says emphatically that something is what it professes to be, and as it professes to be. Thus oXridrj<; designates the object of a statement or testimony as conformable to the reality, as not disguising the reahty. So in John iv. 1 8, toOto aK7)6e<; e'lpr}Ka<; ; John X. 41, TrdvTa oaa eltrev 'ladvvqi; irepl tovtov ahjqdrj rpj. The witness itself, rj p-aprvpla, is in this case oKrjQivri, coincident with the reality. Cf. John xix. 35, dXrjdivr) avrov iaTlv Tj fiaprvpia, KUKelvo^ olBev on oXtjOtj Xeyei. When not unfrequently the witness itself is designated aXrjOri^, it is owing to a weakened use of aXrjdrj'; in the sense of aXr]6iv6<;, as is clear from classical Greek and the LXX. Cf. Herod, v. 41. 1, aXrjdel X6yu> trvOo/jLevoi, for which we iind in vi. 68, dp6m Xd^fo ; Plato, De Rep. i. 330 E, aXr]dei<; p,vdot. Still it is possible, cf. John xix. 35, that in the passages cited it is intended to lay stress upon the fact that the witness is really a witness — that which deserves the name, and which may fairly claim the authority and value of a witness, John v. 31, 32, viii. 13, 14, 17, xxi. 24 ; 3 John 12 ; Titus i. 13. Cf 2 Pet. ii. 22, d\7?5^? irapoifila ; Soph. AJ. 664, aXX' ecTT aXrjOr]^ rj j3pora>v irapoi/Mla. In John viii. 16, the Received text has jJ Kpiaif 57 ifif} aXt^dtj^ euTiv, where Lachm. Tisch. read aXirjdivrj. The latter reading appears more suit- able to the context (oVt /aoi/o? ovk elpl k.t.X.). But aXr)6rj<; also gives a good sense, so far as Christ's judgment, in contrast with that previously mentioned, vpieh Karb. ttjv adpKa KplveTe, appears as unassailable — my judgment answers to its idea, is dXrjOi]'}, syn. BlKato<; ; cf. John vii. 18 ; Eom. i. 18, ii. 8 ; 1 Cor. xiii. 16 ; 2 Tbess. ii. 10, 12 ; cf. John vii. 24, fj,rj KpiveTe Kar o-\^iv, dXXa ttjv BiKaiav Kpiauv Kplvare. SiKaioi := what is as it ought to he — normal; dXrj6rjavelci-0e oiiK dXrjdei'i Kpiral ovre^ ; Plat. Conviv. 212 A, tIktsiv ovk e'lBcoXa dpeTri<; . . . dXX' dXrjdfj ; ioid. dpeTTj dXrjOi]^, and often ; Eur. Or. 414, dXrjdr]<; S' e's lXovi e^vv vaXat, ypvovvro elBevac Oeov iireyvmaav dXrjOr). Wisd. i. 6. Then also = sincere, open; of. Wisd. vi. 17, ^ aKTjdeaTdrr} iracSeiai e-mdv^la; Jie who is as he professes to he, e.g. Horn. II. xii. 433, <^vvr} d\r}9ri^ = a guileless, pure, and true wife. Hence opposed to irXdvo^ = one who does not deceive, nor awaken false impressions, whether in relation to himself or another object; cf. 2 Cor. vi. 8, w? irKdvoi kuI dXrjdel'i; Matt. xxii. 16; Mark xii. 14, DiBafiev on d\r}Or]<; el Koi ttjv oBov tov Oeov ev dXrjdeia StSaa/cet? ; cf. Luke xx. 21, olhajjiev opOwi 'X.eyei'; koI BiSdffKeif koI ov \a/i/3ai/ets Trpoaairop. Hence also syn. BiKaio^ opposed to aSt/co?, John vii. 18, o d 7) ar/diri} tov Oeov TereXetwrat ; Acts xii. 11, vvv olBa, dX'r}9m (cf Luke xxiii. 47, ovtcc;, with Matt, xxvii. 54) ; cf. ver. 9 ; John vii. 26, firjiroTe dXr]9m eyvacrav = can they really have recognised? John xvii. 8. In Luke (Luke ix. 27, xii. 44, xxi. 3, aXri9m Xeyco vjuv) it is the Greek expression for the common affirmative formula, dfifjv Xeya vjilv, which refers to the entire statement. Cf Mark xii. 43 ; Matt. xxiv. 47, xvi 28. "AXrjO iv6<;,ri,6v, real, genuine; cf Kriiger, § xii. 11. 19, " The endings lv6<; and eti-o? denote that the quality, as a fundamental idea, exists in abundance, TreSwo?, opeivo'i." Accordingly, aXrjOivoi is related to aXij5?f? as form to contents or substance ; dX7]9ri'i denotes the reality of the thing ; dXr]9iv6'; defines the relation of the conception to the thing to which it corresponds = genuine. (1) —genuinus, legitimus. Plat. Bcp. vi. 499 C, dXr]9i,vr]<; ^LXo(To^laLa Kal apeT-q dXr)9tvri. Of genuine materials, as silver, colour, etc, Xen. Oec. x, 3. So John i. 9 ; 1 John ii. 8, to <^ws to *AXri6eia 86 'AXr^deia oX-qOivov ; John iv. 23, o'l oXtjOlvoI irpoa-KvvqTal ; vi. 32, 6 a/jTos o aK'r]6Lv6<; ; John xvii. 3, 6 ijl6vo(; dXrj6ivoi 0e6<; ; cf. 1 John v. 20. On the contrary, o ^eo? aKrj6r)'i eanv, God — ?'.<;. He who is already recognised, known as God — is as He reveals Himself. 1 Thess. i. 9, 6ea> ^SvTo KoX aXr}6iva>, as Lachni. reads in Heb. ix. 14, according to Cod. A. — Heb. viii. 2, T'^? aKrjvrji; t/j? aXrjOivrj'i ; ix. 24, avTiTVTra TtSi" aXrjBiVQiv ; John XV. 1, i/ a/^TTeXo? ?; a\7]dLvrj; cf. Jer. ii. 21. Then (2) = reliable, that which does not deceive, which bears testing, e.g. Xen. Ancib, i. 9. 17, (rTparevfian oXtjOlvw e')(^priaaTO, koX yap uTpaTTijol Kai Xoyayol ov ■yp7)fxdra)v eveica irpo'S eKelvov eirXevcrav, a-XX' eTrei eyvwaav KepBaXeoorepov eivai Kvpa KaXm ireiOap'^elv rj to Kara ij.i)va KepSo<; ; Luke xvi. 11, to akridivov, opp. t&) ahU(p fia/j-fxava, which is not as it ought to be, which does not correspond to the require- ments made of it, to the BUij. The main idea is, ver. 1, ra inrdpxpvTa ; hence to aX.r]9iv6v, the genuine reliable possession (cf. ver. 12 ; Heb. x. 34, t7]v apTra'yrjv tSjv virap'x^ovTtov vfj,cSv . . . TTpocreSe^acrde, yivaxTKOvre'; e'xeiv eavToli KpeiTTOva vTrap^iv koX fievovaav). Plat. Rep. vii. 522 A, oaot, fj,vdu>Sei<; t&v Xo'^wv km, oaoi dXrjOivcoTepoi, rjaav. So John iv. 37, o X6yo<; 6 dXr)0iv6'i ; Eev. xix. 9, xxii. 6 ; John xix. 35, dXrjdivrj avTov ia-Tlv rj /xapTvpia, KaKelvo^; olSev OTi dXrjdrj Xeyei. Syn. St'/cato?, Rev. xv. 3, BiKaiai koI dXtjOivaX al ohoi crov ; xvi. 7, xix. 2, al Kp[a-ei,<; aov = according to truth, — the truth considered as an objective norm, — full of truth ; whereas in the case of o-Xt^^j?'?, the subject of which it is predicated, or that which the subj. represents, the reality in question, is itself the norm. Sometimes this distinction is less clear, according to the subject, e.g. dXr)6riavep6v icTTLV iv avToh K.T.X. ; hence = the manifest, real essence of God. — Od. xi. 506, 507, avTap Toi TratSo? 76 NeoTrroXefioio (plXoLO iraaav dXriOeirjv fivdi^aofiai, w? fie /ceXeuei? ; Plat, Phacd. 275 B, ao(f)ia<; tow iiaOrjTai'; ho^av ovk dXrjGeiav Trojot'fei? ; Palaeph. de inercd. iv. 2, rj oXrjOeia fjBe = res ita se habet. So also in the adverbial combuiations, tTj dXTjdela, eV aXriOela'^, fieT dXrjdeM';, etc. = re vera, actually, really, in very deed ; Plat. Prot. 339 D, dvSpa dyadov yeviadai dXijdeia; Rep. 426 D, oaot o'lovtm t§ dXrjdeia ttoXltikoI elvai. ''AXrjQ. accordingly denotes the reality lying or clearly to be laid before our eyes, as opposed to a mere appearance, without reality ; the reality, so far as an appearance or setting forth thereof is in question. Plat. Phacd. 65 B, apa e-^^ei, dXrjdeidv Ttva 6->{ndaei. e'lre aXrjdeia XpiaTo'i KarafyiX- Xerat. As aX7]di]<; means really, eorresponding to the recdity, syn. hUai.o'i, oiormal, corresponding to the requirements, so does aXrj9ei,a also denote the truth, not merely as the representation of that which is, but as the representation, realization, of that which ought to he, viliich alone has a right to he, and to appear. So Xen. Anah. ii. 6. 25, rot? 8' oaloi,^ (opP- iTriopicois:) koi aXrjOeiav aaKovcnv (opp. aStKoi<;) ; 26, aiyaXXeTM eVt Beoae^ela Kal aXrjdela koI BiKacoTrjTi,. So also in the N. T., especially in St. Paul's writings ; Eom. i. 1 8, aae^eia Kal aBtKia avOpcoTTcov TMV T7]v oXrjdeiav iv dBt,Kia KaTe'^ovTCOv ; ii. 8, tok direiOovaiv fiev ry aX., ireido- fievoL<; Be ry dBtKia. The same combination occurs in Gal. v. 7 (iii. 1, Eec. text), where, however, as in most of the passages to be adduced, dXr}9. is more precisely defined in accordance with the peculiar import to which we shall refer below ; cf. 2 Thess. ii. 1 0, 1 2 ; 1 Cor. xiii. 6, ov X'^^P^'' ^''''' '''V olBlkm, a-v'^)(alpet, Be rfj aX. ; v. 8, fJ^yBe iv ^vfirj KaKiai Kal •7rovr]pM<;, aXX! iv d^vp.oi'j elXiKpivelai; Kal dX. ; 2 Cor. xi. 10; 1 Pet. i. 22, to,^ ■\lrvya'} 7jpia<; aK07r6<; icrri^v rj ti}? dXrjdeiai; epov, 1 Cor. xii. 7. — To transform, 1 Cor. xv. 51, 52; Heb. i. 12 ; to exchange, Eom. i. 23, t^ji" Bo^av tov d(f)9dpTov deov ev o/iouofjiaTi eiKovo'; ^Oaprou dvOpanrov K.T.X. ; of. Jer. ii. 11; Ps. cvi. 2 0, ijXXa^avTO ttjv Bo^av avrav iv 6/j,oi,d)fjLaTi fi6a')(pv = 3 "i'''?'!'. With kv in Soph. Antig. 936 ; elsewhere dat., cf. Ex. xiii. 13, and often in classical Greek. The genit. is frec[uent, also in Plato and Eurip. tX dvri Ttvoy. If the object remain the same, and only alters its appearance, et? is for the most part used; cf. Plat. Sep. ii. 380 D. ^AvT dWay /j,a, from dvTaWdcrcra), to exchange, to barter ; hence, that which is given in cxchamge, the 'price for ivhicli something is bartered. Ecclus. vi. 15, (plXov ttlo-tov ovk effTiv dvrdXKayfia ; xxvi. 1 4, ovk ecmv dvTaXXayfia TreTraiSev/xivt]'; '^v'^rj';. So also Matt. xvi. 2 6, Tt Bd>aei avOpwTro'; dvTdXKar^fia rrj'i •vlrup^ij? avTov ; therefore here the price at which the exchange is effected, compensation, ransom, Mark viii. 37; cf. Ecclus. xliv. 1 7, NS)€ evpedr) reXeto? BiKUio^, ev Kaopai opyrj'; eykvero dvrdWayfia' Sia tovto eyevrjdr) Kwrd- Xeifi/jLa rfj yy, Bm tovto iyeveTo KaTaKXv(Tfi6<;. In both the IST. T. texts (Matt. xvi. 26 ; Mark viii. 37), like XvTpov, the word is akin to the conception of atonement; cf. Ps. xlix. 8, ov Bwaei tw 6ea> e^iXacr/ia eayroO = 1S3, which, in Isa. xliii. 3, Amos v. 12, is = aXKay/xa. Isa. xliii. 3, eiroiTjo-a aXKayixd crov AtyvirTov Kal AWioirlav, km Sorjvgv vTrep aov, cf. ver. 4. This is a confirmation of the fact that satisfaction and substitution essen- tially belong to the idea of atonement. Cf XvTpov, inroBiKof. 'Att aWda a CO, aor. 1 d-TTrfKXa^a, per£ pass. d'TrijXXayfjiai,, originally either to transfer from one state to another, that is, primarily, merely a stronger form of dXXdaffco, or it is related to dXXd, as to turn away, turn aside, is to turn. Strictly, to change by sepa- rating, therefore to brcaJc up an existing connection, and set the one part into a different state, a different relation. Very frequently in the classics, where it = to lay aside, lay away, mahe loose, move av;ay, set free. Middle = to turn oneself away, to escape, Acts xix. 12, wcrre . . . aTraXXda'creaOat, d-jT aiiToiv ra? voaov; (in Hippocr. often dTraKKdaa-oi Trjv voaov or Tr\riKe. 'Aiivai denotes to dismiss from confinement, to absolve. — Zeun. in loc., " diraXXdrTeuv, vel, ut h. I. diraXXdTTeadai,, dicitur aceusator qui actionem deponit et acciisationem non persequitur ; d<}>i,evai idem dicitur accusator, C2cm reum criminibus objectis liberat et absolvit : quod majus est." So, under AiaXKaaaed 91 KaraWdcra-co appeal to Harpocration, in Suidas, a^ei<; koI a'7raX\.d^a<;' to fiev d(j)elv<7iv. KaT aXXda crco, aor. 1 KaTijXXa^a, aor. 2 pass. KaTTjXXdyrjv, to change, to exchange ; then like BtaXXdaaeiv, avvaXXdaaeiv = to reconcile (e.g. Aristot. Oec. ii. 1 5, KaTrjXXa^ev avTovi 7r/305 dXXijXovi), both in onesided and mutual enmity ; in the former case the context must show on which side is the active enmity, e.g. Xen. Anah. i. 6. 1, 'OpovTrj't . . . iirb^ovXevei Kvpa, koX irpoaOev TroXejjbrjaat;, KaToKKaryeh Be. On the contrary. Soph. Aj. *74:3, Oeolai tu? KaTaXXa')(6f} 'XpXov; 1 Cor. vii. 11, t£ dvBpl KaTaXKw^riTa). Possibly it is here uncertain who is guilty, and that the apostle only requires in general that the marriage be re-established; the probabihty, however, is that a change of feeling is required on the part of the wife, for we must suppose that ver. 10, be accomplished by man himself. Cf. also Eom. xi. 15. It is God who forms the relation between Himself and humanity anew ; the part of humanity is to accept this reinstatement; cf. 2 Cor. v. 20, KaTaXKdyrjTe rm dem; cf. Acts iv. 40, a-ooBrjTe diro k.tX. This appears to be the only yet conclusive reason obliging us to take KaTaWdaa-eiv ij/^a?, rbv Koff/iov kavr& in the sense of Eph. L 6, i'x^apiTaa-ev ^fia^, i.e. God establishes a rela- tionship of peace between HimseK and us, by doing away with that which made Him our avTiBiKo^, which directed His anger against us ; cf. the mention of 0/3717, Eom. v. 9 {vid. 2 Mace. v. 20), and 1 Sam. xxix. 4, iv tivi BiaWayT]a-eTai, oJto? to) Kvpicp avrov. Matt. V. 24, BiaXKdjTjOi ra dBeX^m irapeadXei, KaraX- XdKTTjv aiiT&v yevea-Oai irpo'i tov 6e6v. Thus alone does it answer to the Pauline train of thought, in which KaraWayivTeq, Eom. v. 1 0, appears completely parallel to SiKaia- 6evTe<;, ver. 9 ; BiKai(o6evre<; awOriaoiieOa . . . KaTaWayevTei a-codrjaofieda, and accordingly KaTaXKayrjvai may be used to explain Bi,Kai(oQei. Thus the difference of object is always important; KaraWdcraeiv admits of a personal object only, because it has to do with personal relations ; l\d<7Kea9ai, in Scripture usage, besides a personal object, the sinner, is joined also with an impersonal object, viz. ra? diiapTla, tu) he uSeX^m aov aipeaiv TTOMjtrei? tov ypeovs aov ; Ezra X. 2, eKaOiaafiev yvvalKa^; dXXoTpia'; diro twv Xaoiv Tri<; 7779, and often. Cf. Neli. xiiL 30, eKaOdpura avTov<; ctto Trda7jaea)<; ; Ecclus. xxix. 18, xxxiii. 3, xxxix. 4, xlix. 5. Also = "It, which, however, is less frequently in this particular sense rendered by dXXoTp. ; cf. Hos. V. 7, viii. 1 2 ; Lev. x. 1 ; Isa. i. 7. Never = D^iJ, so that the note in Bruder's Concordance, " ol aXXorpcoi, Heb. Q^i3, D^IJ," is quite erroneous. Not thus in the N. T., for Acts vii. 6, irdpoiKov ev yfj aXXoTpia, where the LXX. Gen. xv. 13 render, iv yfj OVK IBla, Dn? tO f?.^?, should more appropriately (cf Bar. iii. 10 ; 1 Mace. vi. 13, but not 1 Mace. xv. 13, where 7^ aXX. means a hostile country) be included under (1) ; for the fact of his being a stranger is expressed by irdpoiKof, and this is strengthened by 'AWorpioa 9 5 * AiraXKorpioa the addition eV 7^ aXK. ; cf. Heb. xi. 9, where both facts, the fact of being a stranger, and the fact of beuig without possession, are conjoined : irlcnei -TrapmKrja-ev eh 7^1/ t^9 iTray- 7e\ta? ft)? aXXorpiav. 0pp. to kinship. Matt. xvii. 25, 26, aTro t(Sv vlav avTwv f) utro Twv aXKoTpiav; cf. Herod, iii. 119. For the union of both meanings, see Deut. xv. 3. It seems never to have been used in classical Greek in the sense of strangership ; on the contrary, (3) of enemies, as in the passages, quoted by many as having the sig. strange, in Horn. Od. xvi. 102, xviii. 219, aWoTpio'i ^m?. So often in Polyb. and Diod., Horn. II. V. 214 ; Xen. Anai. iii. 5. 5 ; Polyb. xxvii. 13. 3 = hostile. In the LXX. only Ps. xviii. 14, aiTo aXKorplcnv Oeiaat tov BovXov ctov (where the Heb. is ^t, " haughty," " proud "). Cf. Jer. xvii. 1 7, /xrj jevrjOfj'i not, ets aXKorpiaxTuv, ^eiZofievo'i fiov iv ■^fiepa iroviqpa. Thuc. i. 35. 4, aXkoTpLwai'; = rejection. Often in 1 Mace. ii. 7, syn. exOpo?, i. 38, xv. 33, j!) aXKoTp'ia, "hostile land." Cf. Ecclus. xi. 34, xlv. 18. In the K T. Heb. xi. 34, rrapep,- /SoXa? eicXivav aXkorpLav. 'AWo T p 16 CO, to estrange ; Herod., Plato, Demosth., Thuc, and in later Greek. Gen. xlii. 7, rjWoTpiovro cnr' avruv, lie made himself strange, he kept himself strange. 1 Esdr. ix. 4, auro? aXXoTpimdrja-eTai dirb tov ttXij^ou? ti}? al'^aXaaia'; ; cf. Ezra x. 8, ^LacyraKriaeTai aTro e/cK'X.rjcria'; tt}? a.'rroiKia';, n^ian pni^O ?n3* = to he shut out from. Ecclus. xi. 32, akXoTpiwaei, ere twv Ihlmv aov. So with the gen. Epict. Fr. cxxxi. 106, fir]he\<; ^pwt/iov wv TOV ap')(eiv aXKoTpt,ova9a>. The passive in a middle sense, Gen. xhi. 7, to turn away from, to heeome hostile to; cf. Kriiger, Iii. 6. — 1 Mace. vi. 24, aXKoTpLovvTau a(f rjfibjv. With the dative, 1 Mace. xi. 5 3, rjXkoTpidBr) rai ''IdvaOav ; xv. 2 7, rjXKoTpiovTo avTU). Not m the N. T. ^ A IT aW T p I 6 (a, to estrange, to alienate, t\, tlvo, wko Tt,vo<;, oftener rtvo? ; Polyb. iii. 77. 7, airaXKoTpbovv t^? irpo'i ' Paiiaiov; evvoia^ ; Josephus, Antt. iv. 1. 1, Kciv airaX- XoTpiovv aiiTcbv M.oivarj'i iOeXrjaeie tov 6e6v. Often in the LXX. joined with the dative, as in Ps. Ixix. 9, aTrr}WoTpi(j3p,evo^ h^evrfirfl) tol^ aBeX(pol<; fiov Ka\ ^eVo? tow utot? k.t.X. — Ezelv. xiv. 5, KaTa ras Kaphia<; avTuv to.? a-rrrfSXcoTpoaip.eva'i air ifiov iv rot? ivdvp.'^fiaaiv avTcov. Ver. 7. Absolittely. Ps. Iviii. 3, aTrr/XXoTp too Orjcrav ol d/jiapTcoKol dm p.i^Tpa'i, " tliey have fallen away from their birth," syn. Tfkavaadai, Heb. lit. Cf. Josh. xxii. 2 5, diraXKoTpia^crovaiv ol viol vixwv T0v67)aav eh ala-'xvvrjv. In the ISr. T. Eph. ii. 12, dTrrpCKoTpico/Mevoi, t»5? TroXtTeta? tov 'IcrparjX Kai ^evoi twv Sia- drjKcov K.T.X. Here emphasis must not be placed upon the preposition prefixed to the verb, because it is not estrangement, but simply strangership that is meant, — a use of the word not elsewhere to be found. 'AvyXX. may be taken as the correlative of Israel's election, i.e. as signifying " excluded," and this would give the prep, its due force. The expression is obviously akin to the use of dXX6Tpt.o<; in the LXX. (see dXXoTpio^ (2) ) ; and there is no need to refer to the supposed usage of classical Greek (which cannot be proved) that 'AXX.7]yopico 96 ^AXK'q'yopew those ■who were not or could not be partakers of citizen rights were called aWorpioi rrj^ TToXtretist? (Aristot. Fol. ii. 6 ?). Nor can the force of the prep, be much urged in Eph. iv. 18, airriXkoTpimixevoi ri]^ ^cotj? tov 6eov. The word occurs absolutely in Col. L 21, vfiai TTore oWa? aTr'rfSXoTpi(op,evov<; koI i'^dpoiif rrj Biavoia k.tX., where diraW. is used as in Ps. Iviii. 3, Josh. xxii. 25, of the relation of the eOvrj not to Israel, but to God. Thus the use of this word, which in the N. T. is peculiar to the Epp. to the Eph. and Col., is akin to the usage of the LXX., not of the classics. '^X\'i770jOeoj, like iraprj'yopeu), from ayopd, ayopiaj unused, = to speak differently from ivJiat one thinks or literally means, or to say or think differently from what the words in them- selves mean, aliud verhis, aliud sensu ostendcre. The word occurs in later Greek only Plut., Porphyr., Philo, Josephus, and the Grammarians. According to Plut. dWrjjopla signifies the same as vmvoia previously meant = " the hidden sense or figurative form of a statement," except that dXXriyopla signifies the speech itself thus qualified, Ittovom the distinguishing quality of the speech. Plut. de And. Poet. 1 9 E, ov? (sc. /jLvdov;) Tai<; irakai fiev viro- voiaiovTe^. Cf. de Is. et Os. 363 D, where he describes as vtrovoia, wairep ol "EWrjve'j Kpovov dXKr}yopov(n,v tov ')(^povov, "Hpav Se tov depa, jevecnv Se ' H^alcrTov ttjv et? irvp depoopd ; Cur. Pythia, etc., 409 D, ovToi TO, alviyfiaTa kuI ras d\X7]yopca<; Kal xa? /jLeTa(}iopa<;, t^? fiavTiKriopd, aXXo Xeyov Tb ypdfifia, Kal dXXo to voTjjia. Hesych,, dXXrjyopta dXXo n Trapa to aKovo/ievov xnroBeiKvvova-a. Heraclid. de allegor. Horn. 412, aXXa fiev dyopevcov Tpoivo';, erepa Be &v Xeyei crrjfiaivcov, iTravv/Mcoi; dXXrjyopia KaXeirai. Artemidor. Oneirocrit. iv. 2, dXX7]yopiKov9 Be (pveipovi) TOV? t^ a-rjfiaivofieva Bl alviy/xaTcov iTTiBeMvvvTa's. (See Wetstein on Gal. iv. 24.), With the Alexandrine Greeks, and through them with the Alexandrine Jews likewise, dXXrjyopelv, dXX'qyopia are technical names for that philosophy espoused by Aristobulus, and especially by Philo, which regards the Greek myths and the 0. T. narratives, theo- phanies, anthropomorphisms, etc., partly as an unreal clothing, partly as an historical embodiment of moral and religious ideas. Philo's method differs from that of the Alex- andrine Greeks, m that the historical clothing is not, according to him, utterly unreal and 'AWrjyopeo} 97 'AWiryopeo) poetical ; but he is on a par with them, inasmuch as he does not hesitate in difficult cases wholly to set aside the historical element, and to treat it as merely a formal clothing of the idea. In this self-contradictory method of Philo's, we see the power of the Christian truth and character of divine revelation, which typically the history of redemption moulds. The allegorizing explanation of sacred history is nothing more than a remnant of the above- named philosophy, and a hasty inference concerning, and renunciation of, the fulfilment of types. It is a significant fact that we find in Philo but a very small residuum of Messianic views, and that neither the person nor even the name of the Messiah is to be found in him (see J. G. Miiller, art. " Philo" in Herzog's Real-Enc. xi. 578 sqq.). It may therefore seem strange that (in Gal. iv. 22 sqq.) we should find an instance of this method of using Scripture, — a method more than abrogated by the N. T. revelation; for St. Paul, concerning the fact raised from Scripture, ort ^A/Spaa/j, Bvo vloii^ ea-^ev, eva iv tjJ? iraihiaK'qq KoX eva eK t^? ikevOepwi, says, arivd iariv aWrjyopovfjLeva, ver. 24. Still there is a very essential difference between this Pauline and the Alexandrine allegorizing. It is first to be noted that Gal. iv. 22 sqq. belongs at least to that class of allegorical interpre- tations wherein the matter of fact is retained as an embodiment of the idea, as an embodi- ment which belongs to actual history, where, therefore, allegory and type meet. Whereas the Philonic method knows nothing of the type as an historical prefiguring of future his- tory, and infers or abstracts only general truths, moral or religious, from the historical fact by allegorizing, the apostle's aim is to prove, by the fact he cites, a certain law in the history of redemption which underlies that history from its beginning to its close. While the Philonic allegory removes itself as far as possible from the type, the Pauline is almost identical with the type. It must not be overlooked that St. Paul does not introduce his application with the words arivd i(7Ttv dXKrjyop. until after he had characterized in ver. 2 3 the fact stated in ver. 22. He purposely uses dX\r]yop. instead, perhaps, of avrirvTra T opvidc; dfiaprcov ; Thucyd. ill. 98. 2, TMV 6Ba)v dfiaprdveiv. To lose, Herod, ix. 7. 3, rjfidpTOfiev t^s Boiarlrj'i; Thucyd. iii. 69. 2, T^s Aea-^ov rjjjbapTrjKeaav; Plato, Soph., Eurip., and later writers. In general = to fail of the right, Thuc. i. 33. 3, vi. 92, jvdj/xr]'; dfj,., not to hit the right sense. Herod, vii. 139. 3, " if some one maintained that the Athenians had saved Hellas, ov/c av dfiaprdvoi rdXrjdeo'i" Plat. Legg. xii. 967 B, dp,. ■\lrv^rj- TTov? "jrava-aade dpaprdvovre's eh Ttjv irarplBa. This word, however, does not so fully designate sin in its moral import ; for this other terras are employed, cf. Xen. Cyrop. viii. 8. 7, ij trepX p,€v deoii^ dcri^eia, irepl Be dvOp^TTov; dBiKia, although dp-aprdvecv may pos- sess the full moral import, cf Plat, de Legg. 318 E, ov yap eaO^ o ti tovtov dae^earepov iaTiv, ouS' n '^pr) pdXkov evXa^eiadai, 7rXi]V et? 6eov<; Kal X070) Kal epyo) i^afiaprdveiv, — but sin appears, considered in its natural course, as an action that has failed or miscarried; hence, as a general rule, the more remote object is subjoined; in like manner dpaprdveiv is used equally to describe actions which are morally estimated (e.g. Plat. Phaed. 113 E, p.eydXa ■^papTrjKevat, dfiaprijpara, where sins in our sense of the term are referred to), as also actions in which this is not the case, down to the latest writers ; so e.g. in Plat. Legg. xii. 9 6 7 B {vid. sup.) and other places ; Polyb., dp,dpT7]p,a ypa^iKov, a mistake in writing. Primarily in this sense, i.e. sinning regarded as mistaken action, it is said in Xen. Cyrop. v. 4. 19, to yap dp^apTdveiv dv6pa>'7rov<: 6vraea-i'i r&v dfiapTtav. Matt. ix. 2, 5, 6, xxvi. 28 ; Mark i. 1, ii. 5, 7, 9, 10 ; Luke i. 77, iii. 3, v. 20, 21, 23, 24, vii. 47, 48, 49, xi. 4, xxiv. 47; Acts ii, 38, v. 31, xiii. 38, xxvi. 18. The same combination. Col. i. 14 ; 1 John i. 9, ii. 12, iii. 5 ; John xx. 23. Other com- binations. Acts iii. 1 9, i^aXei]'\Jre(o<; re Kal (f>povi]crea}<;, Kal rwv aXXwv Bvvdfj,ecov, oaa irepl ainov elaiv, avap'^a^ avandivai rm dem rm ttjv eixpopLav tov Biavoeladai, Trapatr^ovTi. Between this idea and the Pauline view there is the difference which distinguishes moral volition from intelligence. It is important, however, to find here a view in which the vague anticipa- tions and aherrations of the heathen mind are brought hack to the truth. Cf. Tholuck on Eom. vii. 22 ; Harless on Eph. iii. 16. (III.) 'TraXoio?, Kacvb'} avBpcoiro'i. This expression also is peculiar to the Pauline writings. Eom. vi. 6, o TraXato? ■^/x&v dvOpwrro'i o-vveaTavpoidr), "va KarapyTjOfj to cra>/j,a Tij? a(iapTia6eipofi€vov KaTO, ra? iiridvfiia'i tjj? aTraxTj?" avaveovcrdat Be t&) TTvevfjMTi, TOV voo'i vfi&v, Kal ivBvaaaOat tov Katvov avOpocnrov, tov KaTo, 6eov KTiadevTa iv BtKacoavvr] k.tX.; Col. iii. 9, 10, a-rreKSvadfievoi tov TraXaiov dvOpwirov avv rat? Trpd^eaiv avTOv, Kal ivBvo'dfievoi tov viov, tov dvaKaivovfievov eis iirvyvwatv KaT eiKova tov KTiaavTO^ aiiTov. As generic conceptions, both of them designate a particular mode or manifestation of human nature, and, indeed, 6 Kaivo<; av0pcoTro<;, humanity as renewed after the image of God, Eph. iv. 24; Col. iii. 10, o TraXato? dvOpatvo';, on the contrary, human nature as it is in contrast with this renewal, as the individual is naturally,— accordingly similar to cra/af, vid. Eom. vi. 6, iva KaTapyrjdy to tywfjba ttj? dfiapTiag, cf. s.v. o-dp^; cf. Gal. v. 24, oi Se TOV Xpia-Tov 'Irja-ov ttjv adpKa icrTavpmcrav, with Eom. vi. 6, only with the distinc- tion that whereas a-dp^ and irvevfia denote vital forces, principles, and define the form in which they appertain to man, o TraXato? and o «an/os avOptuiro'; express the result and outcome of the principles in question. Cf. Eph. iv. 23 with ver. 24; Col. iii. 9. This suggests also the explanation of Eph. ii. 1 5, "va tow Bvo ktiVj? iv eavTm eh eva kuivov dvOpooTTov. Cf. Chrys. in loc, 6pd<; ov'^l tov "EWrjva yevojievov 'lovBaiov, dWa Kal tov- Tov KaKelvov et? eTepav KaTaaTaffiv ^KovTas: Cf. Gal. iii. 28, TravTe:; jdp v^aei? 619 ia-Te iv XpiffTm 'Irjaov. Inasmuch as one and the same species of human nature is communicated in like manner to both, the difference between them ceases ; the one as well as the other is a Katvoi dvBpcoTro'i. (IV.) The word dvOpwrro'; is used in classical Greek with the subordinate idea of what is despicable or the object of compassion, both in connection with the names of persons and alone (cf John xix. 1 5, iBe 6 dvOpwiro'}) ; to this corresponds its use in the N. T., where reference is made to the distinction between man and God, Heb. ii. 6, viii. 2, Eom. ix. 20, ii. 1, cf. Jas. ii. 20 ; especially in his conduct toward the revelation and mes- sengers of God = the man whose conduct is opposed to God, tJie man whose way or nature it is to act in opposition to God, e.g. syn. dfiapTcoXo';, Mark ix. 31, iito? tov dvOpdnrov irapaBiBoTai eh xelpa'i dvOpwirav; Matt. xvii. 22; Luke ix. 44; cf. Mark xiv. 41, el- wcov irapaBujaovai jap k.tX. Gal. i, 10, 11 ; Eph. iv. 14; Col. ii. 8, 22, and other places. Avdpwinvo'; 106 ''AuwOev 'Av 9 pcov ivo<;, ivt), ov, humaiij like avOpiaireio^ in the Tragedians, used especially by Xen., Plato (along witli the rarer av9pa>ireio<; in the same connections, e.g. povetTe ] Gal. iv. 26, ^ dveo 'lepova-oKrjjjb, opposed to ry vvv 'lepovcr. in ver. 25; Phil, iii. 14,17 avo) icXfjai^ ; cf. Heb. iii. 1, KXrjai,<; iirovpdvio';, vid. s.v. «:Xijcri9. On Johnviii. 23, iycb iic tS>v dveo elfii, Stier explains the opposite Karca of Hades as the place of destruction, appealing to Matt. xi. 23, Eph. iv. 9, and n«v> ni'nnn, Ps. Ixiii. 10, Ezek. xxvi. 20, Ps. cxxxix. 1 5, etc. This contrast, v/iel'; iK twv Karco ia-re, iiyco k.t.X., does, indeed, mean more than John iii. 31, d dvcodev ip')(^6ix,evo^ . . . 6 &v e« t^9 7^9, to wit, not as here, primarily a difference of degree or of place (eTrdvco Trdvrcov i rfKidlai eivai. So difKor •>)<;, Xen. ITell. vi. 1 . 6 = sincerity, fidelity. Plato, Rep. ii. 382 E, Ko/xiBy apa 6 deb^ aifKovv Kal a\Tj6€KXr)po% TeXeto?, dO&o'i, a/if/iTTTo?, but not = dTrXou?. "iB'^, "if"^ (save once, see above) are not rendered by dirXov's and its derivatives. We can hardly therefore call in the analogy of tliis Hebrew word to establish the fact that dirXovf in Luke xi. 34, Matt. vi. 22, iav 6 6daX/u,ol ttj? Kaphiat, Eph. i. 1 8, Acts xxvi. 2 8, xxviii. 2 7, Eom. xi. 8, 1 0, 1 John ii. 11, Kev. iii. 18, and dTrXox?;? t^9 KapBia<;, Eph. vi. 5; Col. iii. 22. Cer- tainly aTrXov? and '7rov7jp6i8j, both in the sense oath, Gen. xxiv. 41, xxvi. 28, 1 Kings viii. 31 ; and in that of imprecation, curse. Num. v. 20, opKot Trj- Oopdv.—LXX. = rhhj), n^K, rrisD. KaTapao/xai, to wish any one evil or ruin, to curse, opp. to eiXoyeiv. In classical Greek mostly with the dat. ; by later writers used occasionally, as always in the LXX. and N. T., with the accusative = to give one over to ruin. Matt. v. 44 ; Luke vi. 2 8 ; Horn. xii. 14; Jas. iii. 9; Mark xi. 21. — Matt. xxv. 41, oi Karrjpafievoi, whose being cursed is a settled fact. Cf. Deut. xxi. 23. — LXX. = T}K 7i)\), and other words. 'ETrtKaTdpaTO<;, verbal adj., from iiriKaTapdoiiai, to lay a curse on, or to connect it with anything, LXX., instead of the word iirapdo/Mat, usual in classical Greek. Num. V. 19, 23, 24; Mai. ii. 7 = "nK; Num. xxii. 17, xxiii 7. Hence iviKardpaTO^, one on whom the curse rests, or in whom it is realized. In Gal. iii. 10, corresponding with virb Kardpav elcrtv; ver. 13, iiriK. Tra? 6 Kpep,dfievo<; iirl ^vKov. LXX. = 111^, Gen. iii. 14, 17, iv. 11 ; cf. Prov. xxiv. 24, parallel with fxitrrjOoi;. Isa. Ixv. 20 ; Wisd. iii. 12, xiv. 8 ; Tob. xiii. 12, opp. to eiXoyrjfievoi:. — In John vii. 49, Lachm. and Tisch. read 6 o%\o9 ovto<: 6 uri yivaxTKCov vojiov iirdparol elcnv — instead of iiriKardpaToi — in the same sense. 'A perij, f), " quaelibet rei praestaniia," Sturz, lex. Xen. According to Curtius, from the root ap, which we find in dpapiffKa, to join to, dprio^, fitted to, becoming, of the insepar- able particle dpi, which in the epic and lyric poets, as a prefix to substantives, strengthens the meaning ; whence dpeicov, apicrro';, dpeaKo>, to please ; apexj;, fitness ; dperdm, to lie of use, to thrive, in Homer and later writers. Cf. Od. viii. 329, ovk dperS, kuk^ ^PI"'', xix. 114, Xaol dpeTW(7i, "the people prosper, are happy." — Akin to the Latin ars, artus, arma, the German " arm," the English arm. (1) Generally, without any special moral 'Apveofiai 110 'Apveofiai import. Cf. Horn. II. xx. 411, ttoBuv apex?? ; Aiistot. Mh. Nicom. iv. 7, OrfKeimv aperi) a-afiarof jiev icdWoi teal p^eyeOo';, ■\lrv'^rj<; Se crco(f)pocrvvrj. In this general sense = superiority everywhere in Greek. So also the LXX., who speak of God's dpeTi], syn. So^a, answering to the Heb. i1?nri^ Isa. xlii. 8, 12; xliii. 21, ra? apera^ avrov avayyeWeiv, SoTjyeiadai, parallel with So^av rSt deS BtSovai ; Hab. iii. 3, eKoXv^ev ovpavow ij apcTrj aiirov = lin, as also Zeeh. vi. 1 3, aino'i Xrj-^erM aperrjv. In the N. T. 1 Pet. ii. 9, oVw? ra? dpeTa' v^pei \eyeL indicates a putting away on the part of the speaker, a recoil on his part ; of. Eurip. JSl. 796, eTOifioi KovK a'7rapvovfj,e(Td\ Plat. Hep. v. 468 C, /ji7)Bevl i^elvau dirapvi^drjvai o &v ^ovkrjTai, (piXelv, qtcemcunquc vohierit osculari. Dem. 575. 27, oine (pvyoL/jL av ovt airap- vovfiai Tovvofia ; cf. Eev. iii. 8, ova ■^pv^aa to ovofxd fiov. But it is not a mere strengthen- ing of apveicrOai, as Suidas explains, dpvov/xai Ka66\ov. dirapvo^- o dpvov/ievo<; Ka9' oXov. It must be added that where it signifies a denial, it always, in linguistic usage, expresses a false denial, and thus it differs from the simple verb. Plat. Thcaet. 1 6 5 A, ^dvM re kuI aTrapveladai. In N. T. usage the back reference to the subject always gives a very strong sense. It occurs here only with a personal object (like dpveladai, 2) ; cf. ApoUon. Rh. i. 867, Ta? 'EWrjviBa^ 'yvvaiKapcuyicrdjjLevo'; fjiiat; koI Bovf Tov appa^wva tov Trvevfiaro^ iv rat? Kaphiai<; rj/M&v ; v. 5, o Sov? '^p.iv rbv dppa^wva tov TTvevfiaro^ ; Eph. i. 14, o? eariv dppa^wv t>}s KXrjpovofiia'i ■^fiwv; likewise of the Holy Spirit, who in the same sense is called dirap'x^^ in Eom. viii. 2 3 ; accordingly, Basil. M., TO TrvevfjLa t»}? alcoviov KXnjpovofiia'; appa^cbv koX tcov fMeXT^vrav dyaOuv dirap'^rj. Cf. Suic. Tlics., synon. evi^vpov, Prov. xx. 19 ; Deut. xxiv. 10-12. "A px^> to l^e first, to begin, to reign. According to Curtius, coincident with the Sanscrit arhdmi, " to be worth," " to be able," " to have ability ; " arhas, " worthy," etc. " The idea forming the common basis of both is worth, perhaps Iriglitness, apxeiv Xa/ttTrew " (Hes.). J. Grimm compares the German ragen. 'Apx^, v- (I-) Beginning; dpxv mBivuv, Matt. xxiv. 8 ; Mark i. 1, d. rov 6^077. ; cf. PhU. iv. 15 ; John ii. 11, ^ dpxv t&v aTjfieioov. — Heb. iii. 14, v. 12, vi. 1, vii. 3. — Matt. xxiv. 21, air dpx^t Koa/iov ecu? tov vvv. Mark xiii. 19, dmr' dp^rj o'''* "^^^ XaXw vjuv. iroKKa 'ix'^ ''^^pi' vficov XaXeiv k.t.\. Hengstenberg's explanation seems quite inad- missible ; he sees in rrjv apxjiv the self - witnessing of Christ to His pre - existence, " originally, the beginning am I ; " for this we shoiUd rather have expected, according to John's usage, jj «PX'?- l^or an answer intended to signify this, the expression would be too vague and unintelligible. Certainly apx^jv, Trjv apx^iv, signifies not merely earlier, lefore, in contrast with tiow, — cf. Gen. xliii. 20 ; Thuc. ii. 74, ovre ttjv apx^v dBUax; eVl 7)}i/ T-i^vBe 'ijXdofiev, oine vvv dBiKj^aofiev, not merely " in the beginning," " originally," in contrast simply with after time; cf. Herod, viii. 142. 1, -jrepl t% v/xerepTji; dpxhv o dyav iyevcTO ; ii. 28. 1, rama fiev vvv eaTw (is 'icni re koI co? dpxvv iyeveTo, — but also "from the beginning onwards, hitherto," apart from any intended antithesis ; cf Herod, i. 9. 1, dpxvv yap iyib fiT^X'^vrjaopbai ovtco ware /u,r]Be fiaOeiv fiiv oi^Qelaav inro aev ; and we must in this case, though it be not wholly without difficulty, transfer the full distinctively biblical conception of dpxv into the adverbial expression. But then the relative clause (John viii. 25) would rather run, o ti Kal XeXdXTiica vpHv, if indeed XaXetv could be used here at all, XaXeiv, as distinct from Xiyetv, giving prominence not to the contents, — the thing said, — but to the act of discoursing; c£ ver. 26, xvii. 13, xii. 48, xvi. 25. Here, at least, no reason could be seen why just \dKelv should be employed. Considering that in ver. 26 Christ answers the question concerning Himself by a statement as to His relation to His qtiestioners, weight must be attached to the fact that the nrepX vp,wv of ver. 26 should stand over against the al rt's el of ver. 25, and thus t'i]v apxf]v should introduce a putting off of the question. If, now, we join Tr)v ap'^/iv with -rroXKa ejj^w irepl v/jiwv k.tX., and regard on Kal \aXw vfuv as a parenthesis (so Hofmann), no relation of former time to subsequent or present time will be denoted by t^v ap')(rjv, but it is either equivalent to " from tbe beginning hitherto," " first of aU," " before all things," as in Herod, i. 9. 1, or it includes a contrast between the preserit and the future which finds its close in the tots of ver. 28 (Hofmann, Schriftheweis, ii. 1. 178). The first rendering cannot, in view of the passage quoted from Herod., be rejected on the ground that ap'xrjv, rrjv dp'^i]v, with the signification " generally," occurs only in negative sentences ; for this is true only in those cases where the primary idea of time in the word quite disappears, and it is equivalent to generally, entirely. Of Christ, as used in Eev. iii. 14, ij a/3%^ t^? KTicreo)^ rov 6eov, it signifies the causal relation of Christ to the creation of God ; cf. 77 ap')(T) Kal TO reXo?, xxi. 6, xxii. 13, under aX,v, Xva yevrjrat, iv Tracriv avro'i TrpcoTevov, see •7rpa)TOTo/co<;. Cf. Gen. xlix. 3, a/3%^ TeKvwv fiov ^ Deut. xxi. 17, 7rpa)TOTO«o? vto? . . . earlv ap')(r) reKVwv avToO. (II.) Government, specially the highest dignitaries of the State ; e.g. ti/jloI koI ap^al, honours (dignities) and offices ; also the autliorities ; vid. Lex. So in Luke xii. 11, orav Be ^epovcTiv vfia'i iirl xa? (Tvva'YCO'ya<;, Kal ra? ap')(a'i Kal ra<; i^ovaia'i ; Luke xx. 20, wcttc irapahovvai avrov ry apj^fi Kal rfi i^ovaiq, rov riyefiovo';, where ajO%»? relates- to his position and authority; i^ovaia, to the executive power connected therewith; Tit. iii. 1. Herewith is connected the peculiar Pauline usage in Eom., 1 Cor., Eph., Col., where up-xpl, conjoined with e^ovcrlai, Swdfiei<;, Kvpi6T7jT6<;, Opovoi, denotes supramundane powers^Kugel^ ; so in Eph. iii. 10, Iva jvcopiaOy vvv rat? dpj(cu'; Kal rat? e^ovaiaK iv rot? iirovpavloi'; Boa Trj<; eKK'Krjaia'i f) iroXvTTOLKiXo'i cro^la tov 6eov ; Col. L 16. Of evil supramundane powers in Eph. vi. 12, ovK ea-Tiv rjiuv rj -rrdXr) •7rpb<; alfia Kal crdpKa, dXKa Trpo? ra? dp'^a';, wpo'; ra? e^ovaia^, Trpo's tou9 KO(TfjbOKpdTopa<; tov ct/cotou? tovtov, 7rpo9 to, TrvevpaTiKO, Trj<; Tvovqpla'i iv Tot'i itrovpavloi,';. In Col. ii. 10 also, 05 iaTiv 17 Ke(pa\r} Trdcrrj'; dpj(9)<; Kal e^ovcrla<;, as in contrast with ver. 18, according to the context it refers to supramundane, and indeed (cf. ver. 15, aTreaSuo-a/^ei/o? Ta<; dp^d^ Kal ra? i^ovcria'i iBeiy/j,dTtcrev k.tX.) to evil povxrs; so also, probably, in Eom. viii. 38 ; 1 Cor. xv. 24; and the analogy of other passages warrants the supposition that the apostle generally refers to evil powers (cf. 1 Cor. XV. 26, e(7xaTo<; ix^po'i, with ver. 24), where the context does not, as in Col. i. 15, Eph. iii. 10, as compared with 1 Pet. i. 12, demand the opposite. The several synonymous designations by no means indicate a relationship of the angels one to another, nor a difference of rank, though this may have to be recognised elsewhere (see dp'x^dyjeXo';, and cf 2 Pet. ii. 1 1), for the synonymousness of the designations forbids such a distinguishing. They rather bear upon the relation and conduct of angels toward mankind ; cf. Tit. i. 3 ; see under Swa/^t?, i^ovaia, Kvpiorv'S- We have hei'e therefore no indication of, or con- nection whatever with, the Eabbinical or Neo-Platonic angelology, which in itself, upon closer comparison, is found to be altogether inappropriate. See Harless on Eph, i. 21. ^Apy(alo<; 116 ^Ap^aio<; Cf. 1 Pet. iii. 22; Jude 6; 2 Pet. ii. 20. "(7zw autem non simpKciter nominavit angelos? Responcleo, amplificanclae, Ghristi gloriae causa Paulum cxaggerasse hos titulos,acsi diceret : nihil est tarn suUime, aut excellens, quocunque nomine censeatur, quod non suhjectum sit Christi majcstafe," Calvin. 'A pvaio<;, a, ov,{l) wliat is and endures from the beginning, from of old hitherto. Old; Xen. Rcll. v. 2. 23, dp^a'tov elvai vofiifiov, i^eivai to, Toiavra; Anah. vii. 3. 28, ap'^aio'; vofioi, iii. 1. 4, ^eyo9; Ecclus. ix. 10; 2 Mace. vi. 22, ap'^aia (piXia. So Eev. xii. 9, XX. 2, o(^« dpxaloi. In the sense of originality, not with the kindred idea of age, Acts XV. 7, a' rifiepwv apxaiav, from the first days onward; xxi. 6, dp-xato(i (lad'rjTrj';, perhaps = one of the first disciples, who had been so from the beginning of the gospel pro- clamation. (2) WJiat was hefore of old ; Xen. Hell. ii. 4. 30, rot? v6/j,oi<; roh dpxaioK ; "jam ncglcctis, alrogatis, antiquitatis" Sturz. — Dion. Halic. Ant. B. iv. 18, ras KaXeVets apxalov eKuXovv KkdaaeL'i ; Ps. Ixxix. 8, [xr] iiV7}a6fi<; ri/j,a)v dvajMrnv apxaimv ; 2 Pet. ii. 5, dp^am KocTfio';; Acts xv. 21, sk 'yeveuv apxalmv. Especially in later Greek, yet already also in the Attic writers, ol dpxaioi signifies predecessors or ancestors, as a certain dignity and authority clothe these for descendants ; syn. with ol TtaXaioi, which, without any side reference, simply denotes those who have lived in earlier times. Dem. Phal. in Walz, Mhett. ix. 79. 11, olov to dpj(aloi dvrl rov TraXaiol ivrtfiorepov ol <^ap dpj(a'ioi avipe<} ivTi/xoTepot,. — Aristoph. Uq. 507, el jxiv Tts dvrjp twv dp^alcov KW/AwSiSacr^aXo? rj/j.d^ rjvdy- Ka^ev. Plato, Thcaet. 180 C, to 76 Sr) Trpo^Xrjfia aXKo rt "jrapeiXrj^afiev 'wapd fiev rav dpxaLo>v dvearr}. Akin to this, we might take the dp^aioi named in the Sermon on the Mount, Matt. v. 21 (27, Eec. text), 33, ippiOr) to'1<; dpxawi,';, to signify the old teachers, explaining the dative in the sense of the ablative ; but the connection of the discourse forbids this, — therein Christ aims at something more than setting up His authority in opposition to an earlier authority, — apart from the fact that, with eppeOr), the dative never elsewhere occurs in this sense, and that the old authorities used to be designated by the term ■7rpea-/3vTepoi,,Ma.tt. xv. 2; Mark vii. 3, 5; Heb. xi. 2. The predecessors who received the law and handed it down to those who came after, possess for this very reason a dignity, cf. ol nrarepe';, Eom. ix. 5 ; and by the choice of this expression, what is said to them of old is intended to be both recognised in its significance and estimated in its temporary limita- tion, Christ intending His words to be regarded not as an abrogation, but a deepening and fulfilling, V. 17 sq. It is true that ol dp^cuoi, in classical Greek, is specially iised when reference is made to some prominent representatives of antiquity, yet not so as kut i^. to denote these, or to warrant the statement that ol dpx- signifies the great ones of antiquity, whether writers or teachers. Such a narrowing of the thought expressed by the word cannot be proved. If, moreover, according to the context, single individuals from among the ancients were meant, even this limitation does not lie in the word, but in the context only, which indicates the special circumstances upon which this comprehensive conception rests. Cf. Aristoph. I.e., Thuc. ii. 1 6 sq. below. Often in Aristotle. (3) dp'xa'iovaea>aveaTdTa Kav')(aaai,, Eom. ii. 23, thus acquires special emphasis. 1 Tim. ii. 14; Heb. ii. 2; syn. 'TrapaKoij. On Heb. ix. 15, et? awoXiiTpaia'tv twv eVt ry TrpcoTrj hiaO-qKy Trapa^atrecov, cf. Josh. vii. 11 ; Plat. Legg. iv. 714 D, to. redevra irapa^alveiv. Aelian, V. H. x. 2, irapa- fifjvat Ta<; avvdrjKa'i ; Ep. Barnab. c. 12. napa^drrji, ov, 6, transgressor of the laws ; thus only rarely in classical Greek, for which Aesch. U^im. 533, tw avTiToXfiov irapa^drav, is adduced, as also the designation of a perjurer as -TrapajS. 6edov, Polem. in Macrob. Sahirn. v. 19. (Usually it denotes the combatant who stood in the war-chariot alongside the charioteer.) Symmach. =r'!?, Ps. xvii. 5, ijcb iijyvXa^dfiTjv oBow -rrapa^aTov. So also Ezek. xviii. 10 ; in Ps. cxxxix. 19 JJK'n. Patriotic writers designate Julian the Apostate (dTroaTaTTj';) also Trapa/SarT;?. Cf. Jas. ii. 11, yeyova'; Trapa/SaxT;? vofiov, where Cod. A has dvoaTaTr]?. — Like irapd^aai';, irapa- ^aTrjt; is used with reference to the imputation of sin, so far as it is transgression of the known law, deviation from recognised truth. See Jas. ii. 9, iXey^op^evot vtto tov vo/mov &)? Trapa^drai ; Gal. ii. 18, irapa^dTqv i/iavTov avviaTavof, v/heve ver. 17, dfiapTwXoL Cf. Eom. vii. 13, s.v. 'rrapd/Saai'i ; Eom. ii 25, 27, Kpivel ij aKpo^vaTla ere tov hia ypd/jLft.aTO'; KOI TrepcTOfirj^ Trapa^aTir^v, mcl. ypd/ifia. B dXXco, to throw, to lay, to set ; frequently in the N. T. Hence : /i la/SdXXoy, to throw over ; iig. = to accuss, to malign ; usually explained = I'ecvc or hatchel with words (censiorc). On the contrary, Steph. thcs. s.v., " proprie signific, ut opinor, calumnior trajicicnclo culparn, in alium." It would be perhaps still more correct to derive this sense from the meaning, to stir vp a quarrel (between friends), (0 soiu discord, opposed to (TVji^aXXeiv. So Plat. Conv. 222 C D, e'/^e koX 'AyaOcSva Bia/SdXXecv ; Bep. vi. 498 C, etc. In the sense of to acmse in Luke xvi. 1, ovto<; BiefiX^Orj avTw co? Bi.aaKopTvl^wv to, vTrdp^ovra avTov. So with the dative. Plat. rep. viii. 5 6 6 B, and followed by cL?, the usual construction. Instead of the dative, also ■7rp6<; Tiva, Herod, v. 9 6 ; Plat. Ep. xiii. 362 D ; Xcn. Anah. i. 1. 3, el? Tiva ; Plat. Euthyd. iii. B ; Xen. Hell. iii. 5. 2. In LXX. Dan. iii. 8, vi. 24 = ^5^"^i? ^3X^ vicl. Fiirst, heir. Wurtcrh. s.v. PP ; in Num. xxii. 22 = (tfi^; in !>. zJt«'/3oXo9 121 Aid/SoKoi Ixxi. 13, \d^ = evBta^aWetv, as in Ps. cix. 4, 20, 29, xxxviii. 20. Only in Zech. iii. 1 = avTiKeladat,, Prom which : A ta,^oXoa)v rj/Ma)v. The chief of the daemons (who are his angels) is thus designated. Matt. xxv. 41, as it would seem, in view of his relation to men over against God ; whilst in his name cruTdv, aaTavd^, he appears merely as the antagonist of men, without respect to the relation which he thus assumes as against God; cf the passages where ]f^'f is used of men, 1 Kings v. 18, xi. 14, 23, 25 ; 1 Sam. xxix. 4; 2 Sam. xix. 23. It looks, however, as though at an early period in the use of this expression, the reference to the relationship of men over against God was withdrawn, for we read in Num. xxii. 32, e^rjXdov eh Bia^oXijv aov, \i}f? '''^^Vr ''?'^? ! ^o ^^^^ ™ Stci/SoXo?, as in ivBia^dXXeiv in other places, the meaning accuser, maligner, has acquired the more general signification of antagonist, enemy ("the evU enemy"). Cf John vi. 70, ef vfiav eh Bid^oXo^ iaTiv; comp. Matt. xvi. 23; Mark viii. 33. (The pass. Bia^ej3X7J<79ai tivi, irpo'i Tiva, to he indignant at any one, cannot be referred to here because of the derivation from the active.) In no case is there in the expression what is suggested by Chrysost. Horn. Ixvii. 6 (in Suic. Tkes.), Sta/SoXo? dirb tov Boa^dXXeiv e'ip7}Tai, Bie^aXe yap tov avOpwirov vpb^ tov deov, Bii^aXe TrdXiv tov Oeov ■7rpo<; avdpanvov. A distinction between Bi.d^oXo'i and aaTavaavepcod7] 6 vto<; tov Oeov, Iva Xvarj to, epya tov Bia^oXov. The devil appears here in possession of a power to influence man, and that, too, in opposition to God and His influences ; cf Eph. ii. 3. The result of the devil's activity is sin, which, in its collective manifestations, is described as to, epya tov Bia^oXov. Cf. Acts xiii. 10, 9 K-arajSaSXa 122 Kara^oX?) vie Bi,a^6\ov, ix^pe irdar)'; Bucaioa-vvr]?. It is tliis aspect -which is made everywhere specially prominent in the N. T. ; so Eev. xx. 10, o Si,aj3. 6 irXavwv avrov^; xii. 9, o ■jfkavcov TTjv ooKovfievTjv oXrjv. James, in iv. 7, contrasts the virord'^rire Ta> dew with dvrb- <7TrjT6 r& Sta/SoX^), where there must likewise be a reference to an influence exerted by - the devil on human conduct, described in the Eevelation as m-Xavdv, its design being to exchange the truth (righteousness) for a lie (sin), 2 Cor. vi. 8 ; Eom. i. 2 7 ; Jas. v. 1 9 ; cf. John viii. 44. In the same sense does Eph. vi. 11 speak of the fieOohelai, rod Sta^oXov, ■which must probably be assumed also in reference to iv. 27, /j^rj StSoxe tottov tw Sia/36Xa); cf. 2 Cor. ii. 11. Arts of seduction are meant, as in fnj ttm? . . . (j)Oapy ra voijfiara v/ioov diro T?7? aTfKoTrjro'i eh Xpiarov, 2 Cor. xi. 3; cf. 2 Tim. ii. 25, 26, /jurjiroTe Sm aiiToi'i 6 0eo? jxerdvoiav et? ewb^vaxTiv aK7\Seia6eli; eh Kplfia ijjLTTea-r) tov SiafioXov — it would be better perhaps to say, execute a judgment, cf 1 Cor. v. 5 ; 1 Tim. i. 20. — Other designations are: aarava,'?, 6 irovr^po';, 6 dvTtKel/Mevo';, 6 6. In Heb. xi. 19, o6ev amov Kal ev vapa^oXy eKop,taaTo, some explain ev 'jrapa^oXfj = Trapa^oXax; (as iv dXriOela = dXridoo';, iv Tappet = Tap^ea?), which cannot be shown to denote anything but hold, venturesome, temerario au^u; e.g. Trapa^oXwi BiBov^ avTov et? tou? klvBv- vov;, Polyb. iii. 17. 8 ; Trapal36Xco<; BieKOjiiaav tov<; dvOpa'i, i. 20. 14, etc.; vid. Eaphel; Bleek on Heb. xi. 19. But even if the subst. irapalSoXrj in the passage cited for this — Plut. Arat. 22, Bia 'ttoXXwv eXi'yfiaiv Kal irapa^oXwv irepaivovTO'i irpo'i to Telyo'i — denotes lold enterprise (Pape, Wdrterlucli ; Tholuck), and not synon. eXc. atjxaTi = ?3D. — 'Efi^dwTeiv, Matt. xxvi. 23 ; Mark xiv. 20 (John xiii. 26, Lachm.). Hence: B aTTTi^a, aor. 1 pass. e^aTTTiaOijv, aor. 1 mid. i^airTiddp'rjv, only in Acts xxii. 10, 1 Cor. x. 2 ; to immerse, to submerge; often in later Greek, Plut. de Supcrst. 166 A, ^diTTKTov creavTov eh Od'Kaaaav. LXX. once = b3D, 2 Kings v. 1 4, i/SaTTTicraTO iv t&5 'lopSdvr). Metaphorically, e.g. Plut. Galb. 21, 6(p'\rip,a€aiv d/j,. in view, vv. 7, 8. The expression implies, notwithstanding, that there is a distinction between the baptism of John and that of the Messianic church, in which SaTTTi^o} 128 BaiiTi^co fuerdvoia is appropriated by Tr/o-rt?. The baptism of John is styled, icaT i^., the ^airTicrna ixeravolwi in Mark i. 4; Luke iii. 3; Acts xiii. 24, xix. 4, — we might accordingly designate Christian baptism /3a7rT«7/xa Trifo-xeco? ; comp. Acts xix. 4, 5, 'ladvvrj'i fiev i^dir- Tia-e ^dTTTia-fia fieTavola';, tw \aa \eya>v, eh tov ip'xpixevov fier avrov iva ■maTeva-caai,, TOVT tariv eh tov 'Itjctovv. aKOvaavTei S^ e^aTnlaOrjaav eh to ovofia tov Kvpiov 'Irjaov ; Acts viii. 12, 13. The difference lies, however, not in the ^aiTTl^eiv, which was in all cases a washing nnto purification from sin, but in the temporal relation thereof to Jesus Christ. For all depends on what is had in view at the immersion or washing. Acts xix. 3, €1? Tt ovv i^a'7TTlv veKpSiv is parallel therefore with t/ koI ■^/Meh KivSvvevo/j,ev (ver. 30); el veKpoX ovk iyeipovTai, TV. 29, 32. Metaphorically used, /SaTTTl^eiv occurs in Matt. iii. 11, ^awT. iv irvevfiaTi djia Ka) BaTTTi^eo 129 BavTicrjjLO<; trvpl, opposed to eV v^ari et? fieTavoiav ; cf. Luke iii. 16 ; John i. 33. That the meaning " to wash in order to purification from sin" is metaphorical, and not that of " immerse," is clear from the contraposition of eV i/8. and ev ttv., by which the two baptisms are distinguished from each other. Both in the case of John and of the Messiah the question was one of washing for purification from sin, which the former effected by means of water, the latter by means of the Holy Spirit and fire ; cf. Ezek. xxxvi. 25—27 ; Mai. iii. 2, 3 ; Isa. vi. 6, 7. (It makes no material difference whether ev be taken locally or instru- incntally ; it is the former, if in ^aTrrl^eiv, with the meaning to dip, we maintain the idea of immersion ; it is the latter, if we maintain the idea of a ivashing or pouring over.) No distinction is drawn between the baptism which Christ adopted from John and trans- mitted to His disciples, and John's own baptism ; it is only said what Messiah's work is in relation to John's; cf. Acts i. 5. It follows, however (comp. Acts ii. 38), that the baptism enjoined by Christ, not pointing to something future, but to something present (Acts xix. 4, 5), must have conjoined with the use of water the factor of which John had opened up the prospect; in other words, that it was a baptism ev iiBaTi Kal TTvevfjiaTi, or -jrvpl, cf. John iii. 5. The use of the word in Luke xii. 50, ^aTrrca-fia Be e%o) ^aimaOijvai ; Mark x. 38, 39, TO ^d-TTTLcr/Ma o 67a) I3a'jni^0fiai ^aiTTLadrjaeaOe, was probably suggested by 0. T. expressions like Ps. Ixix. 2, 3, 15, 16, xlii. 7, cxxiv. 4, 5, cxliv. 7, Isa. xliii. 2, cf. Eev. xii. 15, not by its employment in the sense " to baptize for purification from sin," in opposition to Mark x. 39, as Theophyl. on Matt. xx. 22, /SaTrxtcryaa ovo/jbd^ei, rbv ddvarov avrou, cos KadapTLKov ovTa "TravTcov 17/iftjy, assumes. — The active and passive occur in Matt. iii. 11, 13, 14, 16, xxviii. 19 ; Mark i. 4, 8, vi. 14, x. 38, 39, xvi. 16 ; Luke iii. 16 ; John i. 25, 26, 28, 31, 33, iii. 22, 23, 26, iv. 1, 2, x. 40 ; Acts i. 5, viii. 16, 36, 38, x. 47, 48, xi. 16, xix. 3, 4; Eom. vi. 3 ; 1 Cor. i. 13-17, xii. 13; GaL iii. 27. The middle = to let oneself be baptized, with the aor. 1 both pass, and middle (cf. Kriiger, § 52, 6. 1, 4, cf. Matt. iii. 13, 14 ; Mark x. 38, 39, xvi. 16 ; Luke xi. 38, for the notion that in this case the middle is properly a medial passive, and that the verbs injlquestion, owing to the affinity between this meaning and that of the pass., hover between the passive and middle aorist. Acts xxii. 16; 1 Cor. x. 2); Matt. iii. 6; Mark i. 5, 9 ; Luke iii. 7, 12, 21, vii. 29, 30, xii. 50; John iii. 23; Acts ii. 38, 41, viii. 12, 13, xvi. 15, 33, xviii. 8, xxii. 16; 1 Cor. x. 2 (where Lachm. reads e^airTicFdrjcrav instead of i/SaTTTicravro, — the middle to be explained with a regard to Ex. xiv. 31) ; 1 Cor. xv. 29. BaiTT 1,(7 ii6p) koI vjj.d'i avTirvirov vvv crco^ei jBairTbajxa, ov aapico^ d'7ro6e(Ti<; pvTTov, dWa '; v-jrepe^ovTi ; cf. 1 Tim. ii. 2 ; John xix. 15, ovk e-^oiJ,ev ^aaiXea el fir) Kalaapa, c£ Acts xvii. 7. Hence it is a designation of every one in possession of a dominion, both of the Pioman emperor, 1 Pet. ii. 13, 1 Tim. ii. 2, and e.g. of the tetrarchs (Luke iii. 1), Matt. ii. 1, Acts xxv. 13 ; of Aretas of Arabia, 2 Cor. xi. 32. — Cf Pleb. vii. 1, xi. 23, 27; Eev. i. 5, ix. 11. God is designated /xeYa? /3aa-tXeu9, Matt. v. 35, cf Ps. xlviii. 3, as the sphere of His rule includes all, world and time, Ps. ciii. 1 9 ; Wisd. vi. 5 ; cf. 1 Tim. i. 1 7, d ^acrCkev^ twv alwvcav ; Tob. xiii 6, evXoy^aaTe top KVpiov t^? hiKaioavvi)^ Kal v-<^u)aaTe tov /SacriXea twv alcovoiv, ver. 10; cf. Heb. i. 2, xi. 3, see aldov; 1 Tim. vi. 15, d /jlovo'^ SwdcrTrj'?, 6 /Sao-tXevy toop ^aaiXevovTcov Kal KvpLo<; tcSv Kvpievovrcov ; Eev. xv. 3, /3. tSv idvajv, cf. Ps. xlvii. 9. In this sense God is repeatedly designated King in the 0. T,, Ex. xv. 18; 2 Kings xix. 1 5 ; Jer. X. 7, 10, and frequently in the Psalms, especially Ps. xciii.-xcix., where, however, it must not be forgotten that both the revelation and the recognition of this His universal rule are reserved for the future, Zech. xiv. 9, 16, Isa. ii. ; at present it manifests itself only in isolated cases ; as, for example, in judgments on those who resist His plan of salvation ; cf Eev. X. 17, etXrj^a? ttjv hvvafiiv aov rrjv /j,€yd\7jv Kal e^aaiXevaai k.tX. But espe- cially is God a King in His relation to Israel, Deut. xxxiii. 5, ^)? Jl"'?'''? ''n*'i, and that, too, not merely as the one who rules Israel, 1 Sam. viii. 7, xii. 12, Judg. viii. 23, but so far as His relation to Israel is a manifestation of what He is and designs to be to the whole world, Isa. xxiv. 21—23, ii. — that is, so far as He procures help and redemption, Isa. xxxiii. 22 ; Ps. Ixxiv. 12 ; cf Dan. vi. 26, 27. He is King, in a special sense, within the economy of redemption, Isa. xliii. 15; Lev. xxv. 23, xxvi. 11, 12; Deut. vii. 6, xiv. 2, as He who carries out His saving purpose (Ex. xv. 18, and particularly Isa. Iii. 7), and thus binds the people to Himself, makes them dependent on and subject to Him, — nay more, thus will bring about a totally different state of the world from that hitherto, Isa. ii. ; Mic. iv. Cf 1 Cor. xv. 24-28 ; Dan. ii. 35, 45. As the Messiah, Jesus is designated ^aaCKev-^, and, indeed, in the first instance, /S. rmv 'lovSalcov, Matt. ii. 2 ; Mark xv. 2, 9, 12, 18, 26 ; Luke xxiii. 3, 37, 38 ; John xviii. 39, xix. 3, 14, 15, 19, 21 ; d iQ. tov 'la-parjX, Mark xv. 32 ; John i. 50, xii. 13 ; cf Luke Ba(rlXeio<; 132 BacriXeia i. 32, 33 ; Saiaei, avrm Kvpw; o 6eo^ rov 6p6vov Aavlh tov iraTpo'; avTov, koX ^aaoXevaei eVt TOV ol/cov 'IaKa>l3 et? toi;9 alaiva<;, kol rij? jSaaiXela^ aiirov ovk 'icnav reXoy. This in connection with prophecies such as Isa. ix. 6, 7 ; Dan. vii. 14 ; Ezek. xxxiv. 23, xxxvii. 24 ; Jer. xxxiii. 15 ; Zech. ix. 9 ; cf. Matt. xxi. 5 ; John xii. 15. Hence XpiaToi /Sao-tXei;?, Luke xxiii. 2; o ep'^6fJievo<; j3acn\ev<;, Lvike xix. 38; cf. John xviii. 37, /SacriXei!? elfii i'ydo; ver. 36, ij ^aa-iXeia rj ifirj ovk ecrriv eK tov k65?- Also, probably, in xvii. 12, oiVwe? /3acnXeLov oinro) eXa^ov, aXX' e^ovaiav w? ^aaCket^ piav &pav Xap^avovacv ; cf. ver. 1 7, Bovvat, ttjv ^acn- Xeiav avTcov tS> drjpia. Further, Eev. i. 9, crvyicoivaivo'; iv rfi GXl-^frei, kcu jSaaiXela km imojjLovfi eV Xpiarm ^Ir)aov; ver. 6, i-Trolrjaev rjfici'i /SacriXeiav k.tX. ; cf. v. 10, xx. 4, 6, xxii. 5; Dan. vii. 27. As iyevero y /SacriXeLa toO koct/xov tov Kvpiov rjfxwv in xi. 15 must, it would seem, be explained as = " dominion over the world," one will be disposed to take it in the same sense in the only other passage, Eev. xvi. 10, iyevero r/ j3aai\e[a avTov icTKOTicrp,evr), so that, in the Eevelation, ^aaiXeoa would always denote royal povxr, or glory. It occurs, besides, in this sense in 1 Cor. xv. 24, orav irapaBiBol ttjv ^aaCXelav To3 6eS) Koi "Trarpl; Luke i. 33, ^acrtXela^ avrov ovk earai reXo?. (II.) In the remaining passages ^aaiXela denotes the sphere of rule, realm, or kingdom ; Matt. iv. 8 ; Luke iv. 5, eSei^ev avTa> irdaa's 70,:; ^acnXelav re avToii^ irepl tov ^Irjaov BaaiKeia 134 Baa-iXeLa airo re tov vofiov Maaeat kuI t(ov 'jrpo^7)Taiv. Cf. Luke iv. 43, oti teal rat? erepai'; iroXecriv evayyeXlcraadal fie Bel r^v ySacr. t. 0., oti eVt tovto airea-ToXrfv. The combinations eva'yyeKlaaa-Oai rfjv 0. t. d., further, in Luke viii. 1, xvi. 16 ; Acts viii. 12 ; cf. to evar^- r^eXwv TTj? /8. T. 0., Mark i. 14; Matt. iv. 23, ix. 35, xxiv. 13 (evayj., the good tidings of the fulfilled promise of salvation, correlate to irraiyyeXia, the promise of salvation itself) ; Krjpva-creiv ttjv /3. t. 6., Luke ix. 2 ; Acts xx. 25, xxviii. 31 ; XaXeip Trepl t?}? /S. t. 0., Luke ix. 11 ; SiayyeWeiv Trjv /3. t. ^., Luke ix. 60 ; Xeyeov to, irepl rr)? /3. t. ^., Acts i. 3, xix. 8 ; TO, fivaTijpta t?)? /3. t. 0., Luke viii. 10 ; Mark iv. 11 ; Matt. xiii. 11 ; ver. 19, o X0709 T779 /3. With the fact that the kingdom of God offers the realization of the divine purpose of salvation, it is in keeping that the working of miracles by Christ and His dis- ciples goes hand in hand with the preaching of the kingdom. Matt. xii. 2 8 ; Luke x. 9 ; Matt. ix. 35 ; Luke ix. 2, etc. ; because the connection between these miracles and salva- tion in the kingdom of God- corresponds to the connection, everywhere expressed or pre- supposed, between sin and death in the world (cf. Gremer's Ueher die Wunder im Zusam- menhange der gottlichen Offenharung, Barmen 186 5). Hence the expectation of great blessedness in the kingdom of God, Luke xiv. 15, p.aKapLO'; 09 cfidyeTat dpTov iv Ty ^. t. 6.; cf xiii. 29, avaK\i6r)aovTai, iv t§ yS. t. 0. ; Matt. viii. 11 ; cf. Matt. xvi. 19, Saicrco eroi, Ta9 K'XelSa'i tij9 /3. Ttui' ovp. ; xxiii. 14, KXeleTe ttjv /3acr. twv ovp. ; xxi. 43, dp0'>jcreTat, a^' Vfldv Tj j3. T. 0. Now, inasmuch as the saving designs of God already found their realization with and in Christ, it is said, rj /3. t. 0. ivT6<; v/jlwv ia-Tiv, Luke xvii. 21 ; cf John i. 26, /jiecroi vjj,wv (jTrjKei, ov vp.el'i ovk o'iSaTe ; Luke xi. 20 ; Matt. xi. 12, xii. 28. But inasmuch as this realization first becomes manifest when Christ's work is completed, the kingdom of God is spoken of as yet to be revealed, with the tacit assirmption that this can only be accomplished after the appearance of Christ. Cf. Luke xix. 11, Bia to iyyv<; elvai 'lepov- aaXrjiu. avTov Koi SoKelv avToii'; oti Trapa-^^prifia fieWei rj /3. t. 0. ava(^alve ^BeXvKTov<;. B BeXvy fji,a, to, what is detested, abomination, only in biblical and patristic Greek, to mark an object of the highest moral and religious repugnance. LXX. = Y^?p, Deut. xxix. 17 ; 2 Chron. xv. 8, i^e/SaXe ra ^BeXvyfiara aTro ■7rd(77]<; tt;? yrj^ 'lovBa, over against ivsKalviae ro Qvaiaarripiov Kvpiov; Jei'; xiii. 27; Ezek. xi. 21; Dan. ix. 27, xi. 31, xii. 1 1 (PP?' elsewhere also = eiBoiXov, 1 Kings xi. 7 ; Trpocro'^OicT^a, Deut. vii. 2 6 ; 2 Kings xxiii. 13). =}'?.?', Lev. vii. 21, xi. 10-xiii. 20, etc. =n33)in Ex. viii. 26 ; Gen. xliii. 21, xlvi. 43, ^BeXvy/xa yap iartv AlyviTTioi'i Tra? voifirjv TrpajSaTCOv, Prov. xi. 1, 20, xvi. 11; 2 Chron. xxxvi. 14; Lev. xviii. 26, 27. {Also = aKaOapTov, uKaOapaia, Prov. iii. 32, xxiv. 9.) Ecclus. xiii. 20, xxvii. 30, xlix. 2, Wisd. xii. 23, xiv. 11, it is said, concerning the idols, iv KTicr/xan 6eov eh ^BeXvy/x,a iyevrj6if}aav. Everything that loosens the connection of man with God is an object of the highest religious detestation, /SBeXvy/jLa ; hence also, in general, sinful actions and sinful men, so that the frequent connection or interchange of /3S. with aKadapaia, aKadapTot; (q.v.), is well accounted for ; cf. Prov. iii. 32, vi. 16, xxiv. 9 ; Jer. xiii. 27. Especially, however, is it used as term, teelm. for everything in which — answering to the highest religious detestation — the greatest estrangement from God manifests itself. Hence unclean beasts and the eating thereof is designated ^BeXvyp-a, cf. Lev. xi., Deut. xiv. 3, for therein was manifested the difference between the Gentiles and Israel as united with God. Then it denotes idols ; in general Kar i^., all forms of heathenism. Cf. Deut. xxix. 17; 2 Chron. xv. 8; Isa. ii. 8, 20 ; Lev. xxviii. 27, etc., as also the combinations of dKadapala, iropveia, and /SSeX., Eev. xvii. 4, 5. — This must be kept in mind in all the N. T. passages. It denotes the greatest repugnance on the pait of God in Luke xvi. 15, to eV dvdpanroK v'^^Xov /3Se'- Xvy/jLa evwiriov tov deoii; heathenish character in Eev. xvii. 4, 5, xxi. 27, trav kolvov Koi 6 TToimv fiBeXvyp,a koX ■>^evBo'i, with reference to the semblance of Christianity (world- liness). Only in this moral religious sense, therefore, and not in that of physical disgust, can /SSeXvyfia epT^/icoo-eco?, Matt. xxiv. 15, Mark xiii. 14 (comp. Dan. ix. 27, xi. 31, xii. 11 ; 1 Mace. i. 54 ff. ; Matt, xxiii. 38), be understood as designative of a manifesta- tion of the highest opposition to God (Antichrist), cf. Cremer on Matt. xxiv. 25, p. 59 ff. B e/3 aio?, a, ov, in Attic Greek usually o, 17 (from ^aiveo) = firm, e.g. of firm land, terra firma. Figuratively, synonymous with dXT^Orj^, daj>aXr]aaKuiv ehai AaKeSai/ioviov;, untribstworthy , inconstant. Comp. Wisd. vii. 23, [eart iv ttj crania] 'irvev/xa . . . drj ; 1 Cor. i. 6, to jiaprvpiov rov Xpiarov i^efSaiQiOri iv i)fMv. While the combination of ^e^aio'; with a personal subject, so usual in classical Greek, does not occur in the N. T., the union of ^e^aiovv iiritJi a per- soncd object, hardlj' known in classical Greek, — certainly not at all in the manner of the N". T., — is distinctive of the N. T. When it is said in Thucyd. vi. 34, e? tov5 XiKeXov; irepiwov- T€? Tou? fjilv (xaXXov l3eBaia)<7cop,e6a, this corresponds simply with the import of the adjective with personal subject, Schol. /Se^alov^ TJ79 StSacTKaXta.?. This combination of ^e^Movv with a personal object was anti- cipated by the LXX. Ps. xli. 13, e/3ej8ix«Bcra9 /tie evdi-mov aov et? rov alwva = 2)S^ in the Hiphil. See Ps. cxix. 2 8, ivvcrra^ev ('^7'?'^) V "^^X^ 1^°^ ^""^^ dKrjBia^, ^e^alwaov /xe eV T019 710704? aov. The middle, which is usual in classical Greek, does not occur in biblical Greek. B 6 /3 a two- 1 9, eo)?, 97, establishing, confirmation, corroboration, 80^7^9 (Plato), 7yw/x7;s (Thucyd.). Thucyd. iv. 87, oii/c av fielXai irpo'i roh opKOK ^e^alwa-w Xd/Socre. Wisd. vi. 20, irpoGOxh Be vofiasv /Se/3at&)o-t9 d 143 Bov\oiJ,ai of ^laa-fio'i, ^lacTTO'i, and in its connection with apird^eiv (cf. Plut. l.c), is most naturally to be taken in a bad sense. Thus Luke's expression, vra? et? avTr}v jStd^erai, is to be compared with Josephus, Anti. iv. 6. 5, ware fjir) ravd' direp virayopevei to Oetov \eyeiv, ^id^ea-9ai Se rrjv eKeivov /3ov\7]criv, to struggle against God's loill. The preceding sentence in Luke, aTTo rdre r] ^aa. t. 6. evajyeki^erai, corresponds then to Matt. xi. 11. Thus, linguistically, that explanation alone can be justified which by the espousers of other interpretations is pronounced (not perhaps in good earnest) practically inappropriate to a connection wherein Christ, with forcible and at last even decisive earnestness, denounces the bearing of Israel in its totality — the few exceptions of the disciples not being taken into account — towards John and towards Himself; independently of the fact that the other explanation, which takes /3id^. in a good sense, affords a meaning which does not harmonize with the tenor of the gospel history and doctrine; cf Lulce xviii. 26, 27. It is interesting to observe that those Greek fathers who take ^td^eaOai in this good sense, and whose linguistic authority one would avail oneself of, refer to the ascetic practices of watching, fasting, etc., whereby the kingdom of heaven is to be won ! B ovXo fiai, e^ov\6fi7]v, i^ovXijdrjv, as Lachm. and Tisch. read everywhere in the N. T., instead of the Attic augmentation ■^l3ov\6firjv, ^/3ov\./]6rjv (Received text, 2 John 12). The Attic form of the second perfect, ^otiXei, instead of ^oix-rj, has kept its place in Luke xxii. 42 ; cf Buttmann, 103, iii. 3, ncutestam. Gr. p. 37 = to will, wollcn, with which it is etymologically connected, as also with the German wdhlcn. A synonym with OeXeiv, from which it is not so to be distinguished that ^ouXo/juai, denotes the unconscious, BeKeiv the conscious willing, or as impulse is from purpose (Buttmann, Doderlein). On the contrary, compare Plato, Gorg. 5 9 E, fiTjSeva ^ovKofjuevov dSoKelv, dW' dKovTa<; . . . dBiKelv. Lcgg. ix. 862 A, fit) l3ov\6/jievo<;, d\X Hkcov, and the meaning of ^ovXrj. The converse also is not true (Ammon.), comp. Dem. Phil. i. 9, irpoarjKeL irpodvp.ai^ edekeiv aKoveiv t&v /3ov\oixevci)v a-vfifiovXeveiv. Plato, Polit. 299 E, o 7' ideXav real eKwv iv toiovtoi<; dpyeiv. Both words are, upon the whole, used synonymously ; both denote a conscious willing, as is clear from the examples above given. Cf also Plut. de trang. an. 13, ti ovv 6av/j,aa-T6v ei irXeiovei; elcrlv 01 XoveaQai deXovTe Trpdaaa, dXX' o fiiao) TovTo TTOiw. Vcr. 16, o ov deXo) tovto ttolco. On the other hand, o PovKofiai would denote an object of whim or inclination rather than of will. Cf Acts xviii. 1 5 BovXofiai 144 Bov\ofiat Kpnr]0aXf^ov<; KaTt^yopelv. While ^ovXeaOai is weaker than alpeiv, perhaps =cupere, OiXeiv stands much nearer to alpeiv, and signifies a being firmly resolved. Cf. Plato, Legg. 733 A, rjZovrjv ^ov\6jj,e6a rjfuv elvai, "Kinr-qv Be ovd' alpovfieOa ovTe ^ovXo/ieda. JJcgg. i. 630 B, Bia^avre Toxna; (I'Sn). This con- struction, however, occurs far oftener with deXeiv, which, moreover, is found with the accusative of a personal object, — a circumstance not unimportant in deciding the differ- ence between the two synonyms. B ovX7j,ri, will, project, intention, as the result of reflection; counsel, decree, aim, or estimation, as it denotes likewise deliberation and reflection, also the assembly of the council, whereby it is distinguished from deXrjfia, which belongs to biblical and patristic Greek, but not to the classics. While deXtj/jia stands also for the commanding and executing will of God, rj ^ovXr] T. 6. refers only to God's own act. His saving purpose. Even in the LXX. and Apocrypha, ^ovXij is not used of the executing will of God (not even in Ecclus. xxiv. 30). The distinction between the two words comes out specially to view in avf)p /SouXt}?, Ecclus. xxxii. 19, a man of reflection, as compared with viii. 15, /xera ToX/Mripov pJq iropevov iv 6Sa>, avro^ yap to OeXrj/uia avrov Trot^cref Koi TJ} a^[} ''3^5, may denote an act performed by God on the person addressed, so far as by constituting him king He had moulded his life afresh and set it in a special relation to Himself; in other words, so far as He gave Christ a new beginning of life by raising Him up from the dead. Acts xiii. 32, 33; cf. Eom. i. 4; Col. i. 18 ; Phil. ii. 9; for reference is made to Christ as He appeared in our Ukeness, not to what He was before His incarnation. Care must be taken not to confound John's expression, eK 6eov jewrjd^vai, John i. 13, 1 John ii. 29, iii. 9, iv. 7, V. 1, 4, 18, which is opposed to the e| aljjidTaiv,eK OeXijfiaTO'i aapK6 Xptarm koX avvijyeipev fc.r.X., cf ver. 10 ; iv. 24, Kaivo'i avOpanro'; ; Col. iii. 1, el ovv a-vvrjyepdrjre rw Xpia-rm; Tit. iii. 5, eacoa-ev rjjia'i Sia XovTpov TraXLyyeveerta'i kcu dvaKaivcoaeo)'; irvevfMaro'i dylov ; Eom. viii. 1 5, iXdfiere irvevfia vLo6eala<; k.tX. ; 2 Pet. i. 4, iva yevrjaBe 6eia<; kolvoovoi <; 'Irjcrou Xpio-Tov eic veKpwv (cf Col. iii. 1), as also to moral renewal, i. 23, dvayeyevvrjixevoL ovk e/c a"7ropd<; (pOapTrj'; dXKa d(f>OdpTov, comp. ver. 22. C£ Jas. i. 18, ra'ay 148 reved Feva, to give a taste of ; usually middle, to taste, to try or perceive the taste of ; originally -with the gen., afterwards with the ace., Matt, xxvii. 34; Luke xiv. 24; John ii. 9; Acts xxiii. 14; Col. ii. 21. In later writers = to get or take food, Acts s. 10, XX. 11. Metaphorically = to ham or receive, a seoisation or impression of anything, practically and in fact to experience anything, e.g. irovaiv, kukwv, ap')(fi<;, etc. LXX. = DJIti, Ps. xxxiv. 9, yevcraade Koi 'IBere, on ■^prjcrTb'; 6 Kvpio^. Cf. 1 Pet. ii. 3 ; Prov. xxxi. 18, eyevaaro on koKov ian ro epydi^eaOai. In the N. T. Heb. vi. 4, t^9 Sojpea^ tjj? eTrov- pavlov ; ver. 5, koXov Oeov pr}p,a, Bvvdjj,e(,<; re fj.eXKovro'i aluvo^. The combination yeveaOai OavdTov, Matt. xvi. 28, Mark ix. 1, Luke ix. 27, Hob. ii. 9, John viii. 52, answering to the rabbinical nn''p QV'O, is a periphrasis to denote the feeling connected with dying, cf. 1 Sam. XV. 32. — In John viii. 52 it answers to Odvarov Oeapelv, ver. 51, cf. xi. 25, 26, and the union of yevea6ai with ISeiv in Ps. xxxiv. 9. The design was to give prominenco to what is reaUy involved in dying. T lyvo fiat, later (since Aristotle) •yivop.ai, to be born, to become, to arise, to happen. Connected with the Latin gigno, the German " keimen," Low German " kienen," hence " Kind." Fev ed, rj, according to Curtius, p. 5 3 7, a collective noun, whose original meaning is generation, i.e. a multitude of contemporaries. Still it is a matter of question whether the fundamental meaning of the word is to be determined by the time of birth or the descent. In Homer it occurs both with the meaning race, primitive kinship, stock, or lineage, e.g. AWwKo'i yeveriv, II. xxiii. 471, xx. 241, tovti?? rot yeveri'i re kol a"p,aTO<; ev^ofiai ehai, akin to which is the meaning race = descendants, II. x:si. 191, xx. 303; and with the meaning generation, i.e. affinity of race resting upon time (not in the more abstract sense wherein it signifies, in post-Homeric Greek, a space of time regulated by the duration of a race), e.g. Od. xiv. 325, e? SeKdrrjv lyeverjv; II. i. 250, hvo fievyeveal iMepoirav avOpco'Ruiv. Both meanings lie inseparably near each other. The first widens itself in the poets of post-Homeric Greek to denote a nation, e.g. Aeschylus, Pers. 912, Tlepawv yevea, while in ]prose the narrower meaning, relations, family, stock, is to be retained (Xen., Plato, Polyb.) ; the latter meaning is akin to the still more abstract age, generation, and this both with the limitation of time = generation, e.g. Herod, ii. 142, rpet? yeveal dvBpoiv eKarov erri elievai dfiapTLa<;, Mark ii. 10, Luke V. 24, are to be understood; Matt, xxiii. 9. Accordingly, an antithetic relationship readily suggests itself between earth and heaven, not only in a natural, but also in a moral respect, seeing that heaven is not only more exalted than the earth (Ps. ciii. 1 1 ; cf John xii. 32 ; Acts vii. 49), but also answers to its purpose, as the fit dwelling-place of God. Thus with earth is associated, according to the connection, the idea of emptiness, of weakness, of what does not correspond with the wisdom and power of God, of what is sinful. Cf. Mark ix. 3, ola /yvacpevi; iirl t?}? 7779 ov BvvaTai, outcu? \evKavai ; 1 Cor. xv. 47, o •TTpcoTO'i dvdpwTTO^ Ik 'yrj'; '^oik6<;, 6 hexnepo'; av6p. i^ ovpavov; John iii. 31, 32 ; Eev. xvii. 5, xiv. 3 ; Matt. vi. 10, yevrjOi^Ta) rb dek'r^p.d aov w? iv oi/pavai koX eVt 7))?. The earth is the sphere of the K6cr/xo<;, alcov ovto^;, and representations answering thereto are associated with it. Thus cf. Matt. vi. 19, /u.^ Orjaavpl^eTe v/uv Or^aavpov^ iwl tjj? 775?, with 1 Tim. vi. 17, rot? liKovaioi'i iv tm vvv alwvi Trapd'yyeXe k.tX. ; ver. 19, diro- Brjcavpl^ovrai eavTOK 6ep,ekiov koKov et? to [xeWov, iva eTriKa^wvrai, tJ)9 ovtw; ^co?}?; Heb. xi. 13. This contrast comes most prominently into view when heaven alone is spoken of In Eev. v. 3, 13, iv r

aTo<; ecTTiv €« Tov 6eov ; 1 John ii. 3, comp. vv. 4, 5. There we read (ver. 4) in close connec- tion with ver. 3, o Xeyav, eyvcoKa avrov, kol to? eVroXa? avrov /at) rrjp&v, ■'^eva-nr; earcv, Kal iv roxiT(}> r] aKt]6eia ovk eariv ; ver. 5, o? 8' av Trjprj avrov tov Xo'^ov—uot now, ovto<; eyvcoKev avrov, but aXTjdm iv tovtm t] dydrrr] rov Oeov rereXeiccrai, cf. iv. 8. Accordingly, in ii. 13, 14, in confirmation of the assurance of salvation (cf. ver. 12), it is said, eyvooKare rov aiT upyri'; . . . rov irarepa ; iii. 1, Sia rovro o ko(t/i,o<; ov yivooaicei '^pid'i, on ovk k'yvco avrov. Thus the realization of the Christian life is represented as the spontaneous fruit of this knowledge ; 1 John iii. 6, Tra? o ev avrS fievav oupj; dfiaprdvev •7j-d<; 6 dfjLaprdvwv ov'^ ecopaKev avrov ovSe eyvcoKev avrov ; iv. 7, 8, ii. 3. Almost without analogy in classical Greek (yet cf. yvcoaro';, known to, befriended), but in keeping with the meanings already given, and anticipated in the corresponding use of the Hebrew J^l^, is that pregnant saying in Matt. vii. 23, ovEeiroTe ejvoov vfid^; Jolin X. 14, yivcoaKO) ra ep,a Kal ryivaiaKOvalv fj,e ra ejxd, KaOat^ yivcocrKei fie o rrarr^p Ka'yai yovcoa-KO} rov rrarepa (cf. xvii. 25); ver. 27 ; 1 Cor. viii. 3; Gal. iv. 9; Phil. iii. 10; 2 Tim. ii. 19 ; 2 Cor. v. 21. See dl^a. It is clear that the negative assertion of Matt vii. 23 denies any, even the remotest, connection with the object, cf. Matt. xxvi. 72, ovk olBa TOV dvdpeoTrov ; because the necessary condition of any such connection, viz. acquaint- ance, is denied. Cf. 2 Cor. v. 21, rov fxi] r^vovra d/xapriav. It is, as we say, to have no inkling, no idea of a thing, to know nothing about it. See Eom. vii. 7, rrjv dfiapriav ovk e'yvcov, cf. ver. 8 ; Matt. xxiv. 50 ; Eev. iii. 3 ; Wisd. iii. 18. In all these passages we have the denial not merely of a close and special, but of any relation whatever to the object. The positive '^u-^vdja-Kei.v nvd affirms, on the contrary, that the basis of union, and therefore the union itself, exists, that the object is not strange or foreign to the subject. Cf. Xen. Cyrop. i. 4. 2 7, e'/ae fiovov ov yiyvciocrKet';, & Kvpe, tcov crvyyevSiv. (The use of the expression to denote sexual intercourse, occurring often in the 0. T., in classical Greek in Plut., in the N. T. Matt. i. 25, Luke i. 34, is quite in keeping with this; cf. especially Luke i. 34.) FivdiaKeov, used in such connections, denotes therefore to take notice of any one, to form a connection or stand in union with any one. Cf. Ps. i. 6 ; Hos. xiii. 5 ; Nah. i. 7 ; Ps. cxliv. 3, rl icmv dvOpwrro'; on eyvdxrOrj'; avro) Kal v/o? dvOpaiirov on \oyi^r) avTov; So in Heb. xiii. 23, yivwa-Kere rov dBeXtpov Tifiodeov ; cf. Amos iii. 2 ; 1 Cor. viii. 3, el Be Ti<; dyarra rov 6e6v, ovro'; eyvcoarai vtt' avrov ; Gal. iv. 9, yvovre^; 6e6v, fidXkov yvaxr- devre^ vrro Oeov; 2 Tim. ii. 19 ; Num. xvi. 5. Hence it is evident that, e.g., John x. 27, Kayd) yivuKJKO) avrd Kal dKoXovOovalv [xoi,, is a logical inference from the thought expressed, ver. 14, by yivdia-Kova-iv p,e rd ejxd. Cf. John i. 10 with ver. 11. The connection, there- fore, of this meaning with that explained above, where yivmaKeiv equally denotes a personal relation to the object, is evident. Tvwar 6<;, r], ov, in later Greek with a jpas&ive, sig. = known, for which in Homer and the poets yva>r6<;. In the K T. John xviii. 15, r)v yvcocrroaKei.v in this sense is rare. It is thus used in Eom. xi. 33, (1) ^a.do9 k.tX. ; 2 Pet. i. 5, eTn'^oprjyria'aTe iv Tfi aperfi ttjv yvwcriv, iv he rfj yvmaei ttjv eyKpareiav ; Rom. XV. 14, fieuTol iare dyadoa-vvr]';, Trerfkripwiikvoi, TraffTj? yvaxreco';, Svvd/j,ei>oi Koi aXKriKovi vovOereiv ; 2 Cor. vi. 6, ev dyvoTTjri, iv yvoiaei, iv fxaKpoOv/xta. It means the insight which maiiifests itself in the thorough understanding of the subjects which come before it, and in the conduct determined thereby; Avhich hits on what is right, in that it allows itself to be guided by the right knowledge of the object with which it has to do. Cf Ecclus. i. 19, cj}o^o<; Kvplov yvwcriv a-vvecreco'; i^d>fj,^p7]a-e ; Prov. xxix. 7, o dae^rji; ou voel yvS)(nv ; Prov. xiii. 1 6, Tra? iravovpyo'; irpdcraei fiera yvdaeco?. Joined with aecc^ Kot ttj? d\7)6eia<; iv tw vojxw ; 1 Cor. xii. 8, xiii. 2; 1 Tim. vi. 20, dvTideaei'i Trji tlrevhaivvfjLov yvaxreoa';. Now as, for example, 2 Cor. vi. 6, 2 Pet. i. 5, Eom. XV. 14 certainly refer to an insight belonging especially to Christians, we shall not err if we take yv, as in 1 Pet. i. 5, 6. "Ayve>)a-To<;, unknown, Wisd. xi. 1 8, xviiL 3 ; 2 Mace. i. 1 9, ii. 7. Also = not hnowcMe, what withdraws itself from heing known, unrecognisahle ; often in Plat., e.g. TJieaet. 202 B, Parmen. 135 A. — In the N. T. with a passive signification in Acts xvii. 23, evpov ^cofiov iv S iireyeypairro, ^ Ayvdxjrw 6ew. Cf. Pausan. Attic, i. 1. 4, ivTavOa koX l3a>ij,ol 6ewv T6 ovofia^ofiivcov d>yvQ)crTcov ; Philostr. ApoUon. vi. 3, aco^povia-Tepov to Trepl irdvTwv Oewv ev Xeyeiv, koI ravia 'AOijvycnv, ov Kal dyvwaTCOv Saifiovcov (Scofiol iSpvvrai ; Pausan. Eliac. V. 14, eVt i-fj ^aXrjpm . . . 'AOf]va<; vao fir) ovti. In the N. T., on the contrary, corresponding to the use of ytyvaxTKecv, which = to he injlueneed by one^s hioivledge of an objcet, it signifies not merely an intellectual, but a moral defect or fault; 1 Cor. xv. 34, eKvij-^fruTe St/caico? Kal fif] dfiapTilveTe' ayv(oa-iav yap Oeov Tive<; e'^ovaiv, where the rtye? do not belong to the ddeoi iv Tm Koaixa, Eph. ii. 12, but to those who had undergone the change described in Eph. ii. 13. Again, in 1 Pet. ii. 15, (ptfiovv Trjv twv dcppovav dvOpda-n-wv dyvwaiav, it clearly denotes more than an intellectual defect, and corresponds to yvwaKs in the sense of discernment. Comp. Prov. xxix. 7. 'Avay ivaxT K(j}, accurately to perceive, later also = ^0 recognise; in Attic Greek usually = to read, and so always in the N. T., LXX. = ta->c£i,v has a narrower sphere of use, but when used gives greater weight to what is said. Cf John viii. 32, yvaxrecrde rrjv aXrjOeiav Kol 17 aXijdeia eXevdepcocret, vfia<;, with 1 Tim. iv. 3, 01 itkjtoI koi eTreyvoiKOTe^ rrjv aXrjOeiav (see iiriyvaai,';') ; Col. i. 6, iireyvcoTe rrjv %apfi' tov Oeov iv ukTjOela, with 2 Cor. viii. 9, yivcocrKere ttjv ')(a.piv rov Kvptov rjfKSv ; 2 Pet. ii. 21, KpetTTOv rjv avTol<; fit) eTreyvaiKevai, rrjv oSov ri}? Bt,Kaioavvr]<;, r} eTTir/vovatv iTTbarpe-^ai k.tX., with Eom. iii. 17, ohov elpi']vr)<; ovk eyvaaav ; Col. ii. 2 with ver. 3 ; Matt. xi. 27, ovSeh eTnyivaxTKeu rov vlov, rov irarepa, corresponding to the Johannine yivma-Keiv. It is therefore a stronger antithesis to ar/voelv than the simple ywcixTKeiv, 2 Cor. vi. 9, (i? dyvoovfMsvoi, koX iTn-yivoicr- Ko/jievoi, as unknoivn and yet ivell known. Hence also opposed to e/c p.ipov;, yivwa-Keiv, 1 Cor. xiii. 12, dpri, yivwa-KW e'/c fiepov;, rare Be eTnyvwao/xai, Ka6w<; Koi errey vu>a6r}v, of a knowledge which perfectly unites the subject with the object, cf. 1 Cor. viii. 3 ; Gal. iv. 9 (under ytvaxTKca) ; 1 Cor. xvi. 18. In some cases the verb is best rendered by understand; 1 Cor. xiv. 37; 2 Cor. i. 13, 14; cf Acts xxv. 10, av koXXiov imyvwaKeiii ; Ecclus. xii. 1 2, ctt' icT'^dra) i-Triyvdoar) tou? Xoyov; jxov ; xxii. 2 7, and often. So also sometimes, though seldom, in classical Greek, where, however, in general the stronger meaning was not without influence in determining the choice of this word instead of the simpler form ; c,//. Plato, Euthyd. 301 E; Soph. El. 1297. See Lexicons. — In the LXX. = yT ; -133, Piel, Hiph., which means, according to Fiirst, "to be marked" or "delineated," Hiph. "to penetrate vigorously into a thing," i.e. to know a thing by finding out its distinctive marks. ^Ett iyv (OCT I'i, rj, knoivledge; clear and exact knowledge, more intensive than yvcoaif, because it expresses a more thorough participation in the object of knowledge on the part of the knowing subject. Eom. iii. 30, Bid vo/iov eiriyvwai,^ d/xapria';; cf vii. 7, rrjv afxapriav ovk eyvfov el pyrj Bid vofiov, and the remarks on this passage, s.v. yivwaKeiv ; Eom. i. 28, rov deov e-^eiv iv iiriyvMaei, stronger than ywooa-Keiv rov 6., ver. 21. In the IST. T. it appears only in the Pauline writings and in Heb. x. 2G, 2 Pet. i. 2, 3, 8, ii. 20, and *ETriyv(0(Tlii 160 IJpoyLvaxTKtii always of a knowledge which very powerfully influences the form of the religious life = a knowledge laying claim to personal sympathy, and exerting an influence upon the person. Cf. Judith ix. 14. Thus, as Delitzsch says {Hebraerhr. 493), we may speak of a false 'yvwat'}, but not of a false eTTuyvaaK. Seldom in classical Greek, Herodian^ vii 6. 15, 57 t5)v a^paylScov i. ; Plut., 9? t^? fiovaiKfji i. I. c. gen. oly. d\7]6eia<;, 1 Tim. ii. 4 ; 2 Tim. ii. 25, iii. 7; Tit. i. 1, Kara iTriyvcca-iv aXv0eM<; t^9 kut evae^eiav; Heb. x. 26 ; Oeov, Eph. i. 17; Col. i. 10; 2 Pet. i. 2, cf. ver. .3 ; Eph. iv. 13, et? t^v kvoTrjra t^? iricrTeui'; koI tjj? iin'yvaia-eai^ rov vlov t. 9. ; Col. ii. 2, et? eTriyvcodiv rov ixvaTqplov rod Oeov, iv cS elalv Trayxe? ol drjcravpoi, ttj^ a-ocj)ia fieWovri rrore yvmcreaOai ^vXXa^i^v ; Xen. Apol. 30, rrpoy. rd jjieKKovra; Aristot. eth. Nic. vi. 3, e'/e TrpoycvaxTKO/jievoov irdcra SiBacrKaXta. So 2 Pet. iii. 17, v/j,€l<; ovv •7rpoyiva)crKovTela) tov<; i'7ndvfiovvTa<; Trpor^vuxjQrjvau, " to those who desire her, she gives in anti- cipation to know her ;" viii. 8, arj/Mela koI repara -n-poyivMcTKei Kal iic^daei'; Kaipcau Kal ■Xpovcov; xviii. 6, eKeivr) rj vv^ TrpoeyvcoaOrj fraTpdcnv; cf. Judith ix. 6, r) Kplcri.^ aov ev "Trpoyvcoaet ; xi. 19, ravTU iXaXijdr) /xoi, Kara irpoyvQia-iv /lov. As to the use of the word in Eora. viii. 29, on oO? Trpoeyvco, Kal irpompicre crv/jifiopfpov'; TJj? €Ik6vo<; tov v'lov avTOv, eh to elvai k.t.X., xi. 2, ovk aTroicraro 6 Oeoi tov Xaov avrov, ov "Trpoeyvoy, it is simplest to take Trpoyiv. in accordance with the meaning of ytvwaKeiv in similar texts, Hos. xiii. 5, Amos iii. 2, 1 Cor. viii. 3, Gal. iv. 9, 2 Tim. ii. 19, eyvco Kvpt,o<; Toil? ovra^ ainov, Matt. vii. 23, John x. 14, as denoting a knowing which precedes the knowledge expressed in these passages, that is, as equivalent to " unite oneself before with some one." Cf. Eom. xi. 2, " God has not cast away His people with whom He had before joined Himself," i.e. before this union was historically realized. The only question is, to what does the irpo cany us back ? to a logical past, — as might perhaps be inferred from Eom. xi. 2, — which would materially weaken the force of the argument supplied by ov -Trpoiyva) in proof of the main clause, or to the present in view of its relation to the future, — as might be inferred from Eom. viii. 29, — did not the context there suggest the union of the divine foreknowledge with the divine TrpoOeai,^. As this latter word denotes God's saving decree preceding and forming the foundation of its temporal realization, so •jrpoyivdicTKeiv denotes the divine yivcoa-Keiv as already present in the divine decree before its manifestation in history, i.e. the union between God and the objects of His sovereign grace implied in His decree of salvation, and accordingly already in existence before its accomplishment ; so that irpoytvcocrKeiv corresponds with the eicXkyecrOai irpb KarajSoXr]'; Koa-fjLov, which in Eph. i. 4 precedes the irpoopti^ew, just as irpoyiv. in Eom. viii. 29. Ilpoyiv., however, essentially iu eludes a self-determining on God's part to this fellowship (Eom. viii. 29, wJiom God had heforehand enteral into felloivsliip with), whereas inXey. merely expresses a determining directed to the objects of the fellowship ; cf 1 Pet. i. 2, sKXeKTol Kara irpoyvwa-iv deov. TlpoywaxTKeiv, like yivwaiceiv, is a conception complete in itself, the purport of which does not need to be indicated beforehand, as it would have to be if in the places quoted it meant a decision come to concerning any one. Against this meaning it cannot be objected that yiv. and trpoyw. in this sense would not be joined to the accusative of the person (cf. Dem. xxix. 58, 'Trpoyivaicrp,evo/j,evoL<;, the two terms denote those collectively for whom the functions of the liigh priest are exercised, dyvoovvje'i referring to those whose acts are not the result of previous conscious thought (see dyvorj/jba, dyvota), cf. Eom. vii. 7, 8, 13, so that their conduct cannot be regarded as deliberate and intentional opposition (Heb. nD"j T3), though in consequence of the interposition of the law it has become Trapa/Sao-t?, i.e. involves guilt. Horn. vii. 7, rrjv dfiapTiav ovk eyvoov el firj hid vojiov ; ver. 8, d^opfi-qv Be "Ka^ovaa r) dfiapTia Bid t?^? ej/toXtj? KUTeipydaaTO iv i/Mol irdaav iTridvfilav' ^wpt? yap vofiov dfiapTia veKpd. The dyvoovvTe<;, accordingly, are those who are under the power of sin, and there- fore sin perhaps against knowledge and will, but are passively subject to it ; cf. dadeveia. Their consciousness is passive, not active, in relation to sin ; cf. Aristot. Bhet, 'Aiyvorj/jba 163 rXmacra i. 10, ecTTO) Bt] TO aSiKeiv to ^XdiTTeiv eKovra irapa rov vofxov . . . eK0VTe<; Be TToiovaiv Sera etSore? koI fLTj avayKa^ofjievoi. ocra /juev ovv skovts^, ov iravra 'irpoatpovfievoi, ocra Be -rrpoai- povfievoi etSore? aivavTa' ovBel's yap o Trpoaiperrai, dyvoel. 'Ayvorjfia, to, mistake, oversight, Strabo ; moral delinquency, sin, committed Kar dyvoiav, not Kara Trpoalpeaiv, Kara rrpoOecnv, cf. Eaphel, annott. Polyh. on Acts iii. 1 7, but aKovcrlwii, Lev. iv. 13 ; cf. Heb. x. 26, eKovaio}'; afj^aprdveov . . . fiera to Xa^eiv rr]v eiri- yvfoaiv t?7? dXydeia^. According to the analogy of Scripture, it denotes not only uncon- scious sin, but generally all sin wherein consciousness is passive, — sin which perhaps may enter into consciousness, but which does not proceed from consciousness, cf. Heb. v. 2, and ayvoeiv ; Heb. ix. 7, alfia Trpocrcfjepei virep eavrov kuI tcov tov Xaov dyvoTj/idToip. Cf. Tob. iii. 3 ; Ecclus. li. 19, xxiii. 2 ; 1 Mace. xiii. 39. "Ayvoia, ^, want of knowledge, ignorance, which leads to mistaken conduct, and forbids unconditional imputation of the guilt of the acts performed ; 1 Pet. i. 14, at irpo- repov ev ry dyvoia iifiSiv eTndrifjLiai ; Acts iii. 17, KixTa dyvoiav i-n-pd^are; cf Luke xxiii. 34 ; 1 Cor. ii. 8. Cf. Xen. Gyro'p. iii. 1. 21, oh yap Kaicovoia twX tovto iroLel, aXV dyvoia' OTToaa Zk dyvoia dvdpaTTOi d/jLapTavovcri, iravra aKovaia lavr iya) vofiL^co. This dyvoia is with St. Paul the characteristic of heathendom. Acts xvii. 30, Eph. iv. 18, compare ver. 17, and is a state which renders repentance necessary. Acts xvii. 30, '^povovi ttj? dyvoia<; virepiBwv o 6eo<; rd vvv irapayyeKXei fieTavoeiv, and therefore eventually furnishes ground for blame, Eph. iv. 18, as otherwise for forbearance. LXX. = dyvorjiia, for DK'X, Gen. xxiv. 10, itrijyaye'; dv i<; to irvevfia iSiBov aTro(j)0eyyecr6ai avrol Xoyia/im), a speaking in a form of language pro- duced by the Holy Ghost which blended in one comprehensive expression the various languages of mankind, — indeed, the list of nations given in Acts ii. 9-11 is clearly meant to convey the idea of universality. As analogous passages, we may refer to Rom. viii. 2 6, avrb rb Trvevfia vTrepevrvy^avei aT€vaj/j,ol<; aXaXiJTOK ; 2 Cor. xii. 4, fjKovaev dppTjTa pi^fiara a ovk i^bv avOpuira Xdkeiv ; Rev. xiv. 3, aSovcriv mBrjv Kaivrjv . . . teal ovSelv r/hiivaTO p^aOetv rrjv (pBrjv, el fir] . . . ol rjyopacr/xevot, airb Trj(; 7^9, v. 9. In this miracle we have an anticipation of the future of the kingdom of God,^a future which thus reflected itself at the outset of its realization on earth, and indeed in a manner corre- sponding to the contrast between the present and the future ; cf 1 Cor. xiii. 8, yXwcraai iravaovTai. At first the susceptible could understand it, as is evident not only from Acts ii. 12, but also from Acts x. 46, xix. 6 ; but it gradually became more alien to the habit and life of the Church, for though the possibility of interpretation of what was said on the part of some remained (1 Cor. xii. 10), it was not even necessary that the speaker himself should understand what he uttered (1 Cor. xiv. 10). Thus the miracle became more and more isolated and rare, until, as the gospel spread, it had vanished in the age when church history began. It also tells in favour of the above (viz. that the miracle was not the actual speaking of foreign languages), that the expression erepaii; yXwaaaL<; XaXeiv occurs only in the account of its first appearance. Acts ii. 4. This suggested the name of the miracle as 7XaJcro-ats XaXeXv, Acts x. 46, xix. 6 ; cf Mark xvi. 1*7, yXuaaai^ XaX'^- aovaiv KMvah ] whence it is clear that yXwaa-a is always to be taken to mean language ; the 'phiral yXuaaai includes the idea that this kind of speaking is a blending of various, perhaps of all, human languages, representing the 751^9? yXcoa-a-av of 1 Cor. xii. 10, 28, but is not identical with the various languages ; cf as the designation of the latter, yevr} ovQiv, 1 Cor. xiv. 10. The sing. yXaiaa-rj XaXelv, which is used only of individuals, 1 Cor. xiv. 2, 4, 13, 14, 19, 27, cf ver. 26, yXwa-aav ej^et, while the plural is used both of one person and of several, 1 Cor. xv. 5, 6, 18, must be taken to mean language, i.e. the language of the Spirit, and gives prominence to the specialization of the manifolduess, as it is manifested in an individual. (Considering its connection with yX(oa-(Tai,<; XaX., Fpacfiei) 165 Fpacfir} ■we cannot explain the sing, as meaning gift of language, as in classical Greek it may- denote the power of speech or the gift of eloquence.) Tp 0,^(0, jpdylro), 'i'^pa'^a, second aor. pass. iypd^Tjv, primarily to grave, to engrave (dig in), Horn. II. xvii. 599; to write, 2 Thess. iii. 1 7 ; Gal. vi. 11; Mark x. 4 ; John xxi. 2 5 ; Luke i. 6 3, etc. With Luke x. 2 0, ra ovo/Mara vji^v iypdcpr) iv toI<; ovpavol<; (Tisch. ijyijpaTTTai), cf. Ps. Ixxxvii. 6, Ixix. 29 ; Ezek. xiii. 9. The writing of names in heaven means that God remembers and will not forget the individuals named, because generally by writing the name the recollection of the person is fixed ; cf. in classical Greek, ypdylreov ek vBcop, iv vBari, of what is given over to oblivion. A correlative ex- pression also occurs Jer. xvii. 13, Travre'; ol KaraXnrovre'i ae Karaicr'^vvOyTaxTav, dtpearr]- KOTe? eTrl ttj? 7% '^paj>rjro)aav, with which cf. 1 Sam. iii. 19, xiv. 45, xxvi. 20; Isa. xxvL 5, xlvii. 1. — The use of '^k'^pa-mai, '^er^pafifikvov, absolutely, of what is found written in Holy Scripture, finds its explanation in the use of ypd, Luke ii. 23, X. 26; iv ^L^Xep Xoywv 'Haatov, Luke iii. 4; iv rot? 7rpoc}>7]Tai,<;, John vi. 45, etc. Hence Piom. xv. 4, ocra r)Ta)v, Matt. xxvi. 56, implies the idea expressed in yeypairrab, viz. a reference to the authoritative character of the Scriptures as a whole, which gives them a special and unique position ; indeed, they are everywhere termed r] ypa) jpacp-i] ; John xix. 28 ; Acts viii. 32 ; Itom. iv. 3, ix. 17, x. 11, xi. 2 ; Gal. iii. 8, 22, iv. 30 ; 1 Tim. v. 18 ; 1 Pet. ii. 6 ; 2 Pet. i. 20. In Jas. iv. 5 there is no reference to an aprocyphal book. The declaration referred to is probably given in ver. 6, and ver. 5 must be read thus, fj SoKelre on Kevui<; rj ypa(j)rj \eyei, irpoi; (f>66vov eTrnroOei to TTvevfia . . . fiei^ova Be BlBwaiv 'XP'pw hio Xejet, 6 6eo<; k.t.X. In the first sentence Xejeiv = to speak, as in Eom. iii. 5, vi. 19 ; 1 Cor. i. 10, ix. 10 ; 2 Cor. vi. 13, xi. 21, etc. The 77/30? (pdovov . . . ■^dpiv is a N. T. way of expressing the quotation given in ver. 6. r p d fj, ij, a, TO, that luliich is ivrittcn, a Utter of the aljphaiet, a hook, letter, hand, etc. Luke xxiii. 38 ; GaL vi. 11 ; Luke xvi. 6, 7 ; Acts xxviii. 21 ; John x. 47. Tlie Holy ScrijJttorcs, rd lepd ypd/ifiara, is a name distinct from 17 ypafrj, describing them as the object of study or of knowledge ; whereas ypacfii] describes them as an authority, 2 Tim. iii. 15 ; c£ Joseph. Antt. iii. 7. 6, xiii. 5. 8, v. 1. 17, rd uva/celfieva iv tm lepai rypd/jifiaTa. It cannot be proved that rd ypd/jufiara without the qualifying word signifies Holy Scriptures ; at least there is no sufficient reason for taking it thus in the single passage, John vii. 15, wliere it occurs, — occurs, too, without the article. There we read, ttw? ovTo<; Mcovarj ov eScuKe Kvpio<; 6 6eo<; ^laparfK; ver. 11, yp, ^i^Xiov Xoycov evToXwv Kvplov Kal TrpoaTay- fiaTttiv avTov; ver. 12, yp. vofiov Kvplov tov 6eov. In Nehemiah, on the contrary, in the places above named, with no addition, though in the same sense, cf Ezra vii. 21, yp. tov 6eov TOV ovpavov; Ecclus. xxxviii. 24 ; 2 Mace. vi. 18. Accordingly it primarily denotes one well versed in the law (a clever scribe, ready in the Scriptures, comp. especially Ezra vii. 6). Winer (Eealworierb., art. " Schriftgelehrte ") has ably shown how, during the exile and afterwards, the knowledge of the law supplied the place of the relatively independent ^o^n. The ypap,. were well versed in the law, i.e. in the Holy Scriptures, and expounded them. Matt. vii. 29, xvii. 10, xxiii. 2, 13, Mark i. 22, and elsewhere; iraTpiaiv i^rjyrjTol v6p,wv, Joseph. Antt. xvii. 6. 2, are, according to the true idea of them, acquainted with and interpreters of God's saving purpose, Matt. xiii. 52, 7ra? ypap,fiaTevei,v, with the meaning to write a coi^y, to teach to write, literally, to write lender, since the writing copy of the teacher was to be followed by the scholars; of. Plat. Frot. 227 D, axnrep oi ypafi/xaricrTal rot? /jbijirw SetyoJs ypd^eiv tu>v iraiBcov inroypd'\jravTe^ 'ypafi/j,a<; rfi ypacfilSt ovtco to ypan/MarMV BiBoaai, km, avayKa^ovo'i , 6eo'i<; ol'i ovk ySeicrav, cf. Ps. cvi. 3 7, of destructive powers, Ps. xci. 6, ov (po/S^^drjcrr) aTrb haifaoviov fiearj/j.^pivov, cf. Tob. iii. 8, vi. 18, viii. 3, where dyyeXo'; stands in contrast with haufioviov, Philo endeavours still to identify the Greek view concerning heroes and demons with the Scripture view of angels, — an attempt to lessen the difference between the sphere of profane literature and the Bible, which we find also in Josephus, de Bell. Jud. vii. 6. 3, ra yap KaXovfteva Sai/xovia TTOvqpaiv ea-Tiv avdpwTraiv Trvevfiara, TOi<; ^ucriv elcrhvofieva Kol Kreivovra tov<; ^or]6eia<; fif) Tvyx^dvovTa^. We can only regard it as a modification of these views when Justin Martyr and the pseudo-Clementines find the origin of demons in Gen. vi. Cf. Hesiod, 0. 121, according to whom demons are the souls of men who lived in the golden age, now the guardian spirits of men. Vid. Lactant. Instit. ii. 14, 15, 17. An evil meaning was usually associated with the word even in profane literature, which held its ground, e.g., in Baifiovdoa (N. T. haijiovl^oiiai), even when the doctrine of good and evil daemons had in later times developed itself. Thus Pint, and Xen. use Sai,fjiovd(o = to he deranged, syn. Tjrapacppoveov ; in the Tragedians = to he in the power of a demon, i.e. to he unhappy, to sitffer. It is not therefore to be wondered at that in the sphere of Scripture, where the idea of angels as spirits serving in the divine economy of redemp- tion was included in the name, the word BalfjLwv or Baifioviov was applied specially to evil spirits (D''V3 '?^??, Ps. Lxxviii. 49 ; cf. Prov. xvi. 14 ; 1 Sam. xix. 9 ?), irvevfiaTo, d/cddapra, vid. d.KddapTO';. Thus Balfiaiv or Bai/j,6vLov is parallel to ttv. dicdO., Mark v. 12, comp. vv. 2, 8, iii. 30, on eT^^yov Uvevfia aKdOaprov e^^ei ; cf. ver. 22, eXeyov on Be€X^€J3ovX ep^et KOL on ev TM dp'^ovTi Twv 8ai,p,a)vlcov iic^dWec ra BaifMovia. So in Luke viii. 29 ; Eev. xviii. 2. Cf Eev. xvi. 13, Trvev/xara rpla ciKdO., with ver. 14, elalv yap Trvevfixna Sai- fjLovicov. Luke iv. oo,'!rvevfia Saifiovlov aKaOdprov; viii. 2 = wev/xara irovqpd. They make their appearance in connection with Satan, Luke x. 17, 18, xi. 18, Matt. xii. 24 seq., Mark iii. 22 seq., cf. Matt. xii. 26, o craTavd'; tov aaravdv iic^aXKei, with the dp')(a)v Tcov BaifjLovmv, Matt. ix. 34, xii. 24, Mark iii. 22, Luke xi. 15, and are put in opposi- tion in 1 Cor. x. 20, 21, as in Deut. xxxii. 17, with Oeoi and /cu/jto?, cf 1 Tim. iv. 1, diroa-Trja-ovTal tiv6<; rrj'; TricrTeax; 7rpocre'^ovTe<; ■77vevfj,acnv TfKdvoi^ koI SiSacricaKiai'; Sai- fiovlav ; Jas. ii. 19, Koi to Bai/iovia Tnarevovauv, koX ia . . . eVt'7eto?, ■^v)(i,Kr), Sat/xoi-taiSij? ; cf. ver. 6, jj lyXwaaa (p^oyi^o/jbivrj viro t^s r^eevvt]!}, see yeivva, iv. 7. Aeia- ihaiiieov, o,fi, used originally in a good sense = 6eov ov /SovXerat,, iricTTevei Be aKwV diridjelv 6aXii6'i, irov^, crtaywv, etc.. Matt. v. 29, 39 ; Luke sxii. 50; John xviii. 10; Eev. x. 2. In classical Greek seldom joined with x^^P> ^^ ^^ Matt. v. 30 ; Luke vi. 6; Acts iii. 7; Eev. i. 16, x. 5, xiii. 16. Hence, and in the N. T. also, y Be^id, subst. tJie right, to, Be^id (sc. fiep^, John xxi. 6), the right side, e.g. Kadl^eiv sk Be^ocov, iv rot? Se^iot? in the synoptical Gospels and Acts, KaOl^eiv iv Be^ia, elvai iv B. in the Epistles. — Je^to? " through the root AEKfl is akin to Bi-^o/xai and BeUwfii, because we both take hold of and point at anything with the right hand " (Passow, Wortcrh.) ; accordingly, when giving or receiving is' spoken of, preference is given to the right hand. Matt. vi. 3 ; Luke vi. 6 ; Eev. v. 7. In the case of division and apportionment, the right hand is first chosen as that which always comes first (Matt. V. 29, 30, 39 ; Eev. x. 2), both when the division is indifferent (see Matt. XX. 21, 23, Mark x. 37, 40; 2 Cor. vi. 7 ; cf. 1 Kings xxii. 19; 2 Sam. xvi. 6; 2 Chron. xviii. 18 ; Ezra ix. 43) and when preference is clearly given to one side, as in Matt. xxv. 33, 34. Cf. Plut. Apophth. 192 F, eVet Be AaKeBaifiovlwv i-maTpaTevo/Mevaiv dve BeecrOaL p,e Trpo? tre ; Eom. i. 10, and often. Upocrevxv expresses the general con- ception. As to the distinction between the synonyms named, see alTeco. — LXX. = L'ni, pn, Hithpael, n^an ab:^ without any special fixing of the usage. J 6 t; (7 1 9, ecl)?, r/, with the signification need in biblical Greek, Ps. xxii. 2 5 ; elsewhere always = request, as Beopai occurs there only in this sense. Aristot. PJiet. ii. 7, Ber^aea elalv at 6pe^et<;, koI tovtoiv p,aXLcrTa al fiera Xvtttji; tov p^r) yi,07]6el<; Trepl t»)? dcr(f>aXeia<; . . . Xoittov iicapaBoKei, km '7TpoaeBe')(eTO tov; k.t.X. ; iii. 34, i. 33, x. 37, 39, ii. 52, KapaBoKwv to fieWov. See Wetstein on Eom. viii. 19. KapaBoKLa, r/, expectation, Aq^js. Aquila, Pro v. x. 28, where Symmachus has virofiov^ = n?nin. Ps. xxxix. 8, LXX., vTro/iovij. Not in classical Greek. In the N. T. Phil. i. 20, KaTd rrjv KapaBoKLav Koi iXTrlSa fiov, where, however, most, and the best, MSS. read diroKapaBoKia. AvoKapaBoKia, rj, earnest, fxccl, or strained expectation; Luther, Eom. viii. 19, das aengstliche Harren, the painful waiting. Only in PbOm. viii. 19, Phil. i. 20, and transferred thence into patristic Greek, yet but seldom even there. Chrysostom, ij p-ejdXT] Kal iiriTeTafj.evr] TrpoaBoKLa. The intensity of the expression is clear from what has been said under KapaBoKea, and from the force of the preposition, which, as Hofmann on Eom. viii. 19 remarks, cannot well signify anything else than what it means in wKoQappeiv, a.TTodavp.d^eiv, namely, a strengthening of the verbal conception, to expect on and on, to the end ; comp. diraairaipa), to struggle on or aivay, to die of convulsions. — The verb dtroKapa- BoKeco is, in like manner, rare in classical Greek, Polyb. xviii. 31. 4 (see KapaBoK.), xxii. 19. 3, aTreKapaBoicec tov'} Sk t^? TroXeco? em tlvo^ eaovrau ryvcop.r]'; ; xvi. 1. 8, avToi; viro Td, cf. Gregor., inr ayyeXcov inr'qpeTelTai. — Thus BiaKovo^ Tivo<; means : (I.) tJie servant of /w'm whom the labour lenefits, e.g. BiaKovof ij-epiTOfirj'^, of Christ, Eom. xv. 8 (eh to (Be^aioja-ai TaepovTa)<; tmv ZovXmv. In its narrowest sense = to wait at table, to serve at dinner ; as often BioiKovoi} denotes Kar. e^. a waiter at table, Luke iv. 39, x. 40, xii. 37, xvii. 8 ; Matt. viiL 15 ; Mark i. 31 ; John xii. 2. Hence Blukovcov opposed to avaKelfievo<; 6 Sia- KovSiv. (Cf. Eev. iii. 20.) Generally, to do any one a service, to care for any one's needs, Matt, iv, 11, XXV. 44, xxvii. 55; Mark i. 13, xv, 41 ; Luke viii, 3, Sltjkovow avra ck TcSy inrap'^ovTav avTal<;. The BcaKovelv tok 07(019 is a beautiful expression for compas- sionate love towards the poor within the Christian fellowship, cf. Eom. xv. 25 and Bia- Kovia. — Acts vi. 2, hiaKovelv T/saTr/^at?, to attend to tctbles (i.e. to provision or food). — AiaKovelv differs from BovXeveiv as "to serve, to work for any one," differs from "to be subject to;" both may co-exist, cf. Dem. xix. 69, SeaTroTrj BiaKovelv , still there is always in BiaKovelv, as distinct from SovXeveiv, a reference to the work done, as service rendered, bringing advantage to others, cf Athen. 6, eWca-Tai yap ip rat? olKiaKol'; BmkovsIv tou? veoiTepov; rot? '7rpeaj3vTepoi,v ; viii. 19, 20, 'x/xpa BLaKovTjOetaa v

op'r)(jov ; Rom. xi. 13. With o-ttoo-toXt?, Acts i. 2.5, comp. ver. 17. Amkovm is, accordingly, office or ministration in the Christian community viewed with reference to the labour serviceable to others conferred therein, both in the case of individuals (1 Cor. xii. 5 and elsewhere) and generally as a general conception in- cluding all branches of service, Rom. xii. 7; Eph. iv. 12; 1 Tim. i. 12; 2 Cor. vi. 3, iv. 1. This ministration in the 0. T. economy is called BiaKovla rov davdrov, t?;? Kara- Kp'ia-cco<;, to distinguish it from that of the N". T. BiaKovla tov TrvevfiaTo^, rr]? Bucaioavvri';, 2 Cor. iii. 8, 9 ; t??? KciTaXkayrj';, v. 18, reference being made to the characteristic element of it in its operations. A iB d a Kco, BlBu^o}, iBlBa^a, iBiBuj(6'qv, " from the same theme as Be.(Kvvp,i ; comp. doceo, properly BiBaic-aKW ; comp. disco " (Schenkl) = to teach, to give instruction or direction, Matt, xxviii. 1.5, 20; Luke xi. 1, xii. 12; Acts xv. 12; 1 Cor. xi. 14; Rev. ii. 14 ; BlB. TLvd, Malt. v. 2 ; Mark ii. 18 ; John vii. 35 ; once with the dative rivt, Rev. ii. 14, iBlBaaKev tw BaXaK ^aXetv cTKavBaXov k.t.X., either answering to the Hebrew p f?, Job vi. 24, p 10?, xxi. 22, or because BiBdaKecv is here akin to a-vpi^ovXeveuv (de Wette) ; Ti, Matt. XV. 9, xxii. 16 ; Acts xxi. 21, and elsewhere; irepl tivo<;, 1 John ii. 27; fol- lowed by oTc, Mark viii. 31 , by the infinitive. Matt, xxviii. 20 ; Luke xi. 1 ; Rev. ii. 14; Tivd Tt, Heb. V. 12 ; cf. iBiBd-)(6r)v avro, Gal. i. 12 ; 2 Thess. ii. 15. — The communication of gospel knowledge (which St. Paul did not himself gain in this way. Gab i. 12, ovBe fyap iyu> irapa dvdpcoTrov irapeXa^ov avro ovre iBiBd')(67}v, dXXa Bi diroKaXxr^eaii 'Irjaou Xpicnov) results from BcBdaKei.v and KTjpiiaaeiv to evayyiXiov t^? ^acriXeia<;, Matt. iv. 23, ix. 35, cf xi. 1 ; in Luke, BiB. Kal evayyeXl^eaOai, xx. 1, Acts v. 42, xv. 35 ; indeed, while K7]pva-aeiv denotes the mere communication or call included therein {e.g. [leTavoeiTe, cf. Matt, xxiv, 14, Kr]pvj(6r]v Ttjv ^aaiXeiav tov deov Kal BiZdaKcov to, Trepl tov Kvpiov 'Irjaov XpiaTov ; xviii. 25, iBlBaaKev uKpi^o)'; to, Trepl tov 'Irjaov; iv. 2, BiBdcrKeiv tov Xaov Kal KaTcyyyeX- Xecv iv Tw 'Itjo-ou ttjv dvdaTaaiv k.t.X.; Col. i. 28 ; Acts iv. 18; 1 Tim. iv. 11. Joined AiZaaKO) 181 AioaaKoXo'i with vovdeTelv, Col. i. 2 8, iii. 16; with TrapaKoKelv, 1 Tim. vi. 2 ; cf. iv. 13; Tit. i. 9, TrapaicaKelv iv rfj hiZaaKaXia rfj vyiaivovcrrj. As the object of the BiBdaKeiv is " the way of God " (Mark xii. 14), the 8tS. itself is the leading into that way. The thing aimed at is to beget a determining of the will by the communication of the knowledge spoken of; Rev. ii. 20, BiBdaKeL koI irXava tov<; efiov?; Col. i. 28 ; Acts xxi. 21 ; Matt. v. 19. It is used absolutely, as of Christ's teaching, e.ff. John xviii. 20 ; Mark ix. 31, x. 1, etc. ; as also of instruction in the object of Christian faith, of Christian teaching, Acts xi. 26 ; Eom. xii. 7 ; Col. i. 28 ; Heb. v. 12 ; 1 Tim. ii. 12, etc. ; cf. Acts v. 28, BiSdaKeiv i-Klrw ovofiaTi I'qaov. AiBaKTiK6<;, 1], 6v, apt to teaeh, e.g. aper-i^ SiSuktik^] in Philo, dc jpraem. ct virt. 4 ; named as a req^uisite in an iiriaKoiro'i, 1 Tim. iii. 2, 2 Tim. ii. 23, of course M'ith reference to the subject-matter of Christian teaching, cf. Acts xviii. 24, 25. Theodoret, 6 to, dela iveTTaihev^evo'; Koi Trapaiveiv Svvdfi€Vo<; rd ■rrpoarjKovTa. A iB axv, V- (!•) 1^1 '111 active sense = the act of teaching, teaching, instructing, instruction, tuition, Herod, iii. 134, e'/c BiBa^rj^ eXeye, ut erat cdocia. Plato, P/iaecZr. 2 7 5 A, dvev 8tSa.p^;?5?, " to have grown up witliout instruction." So 2 Tim. iv. 2, eXey^ov, iirtrlr- IJ,r]crov, irapaKuXeaov, ev Trdcrr] fxaKpodvjjLio, koX BiBa'^fj. It is unnecessary to render maniier of teaching in Mark iv. 2, koX eXeyev avrol'; iv rrj Bi.Ba'^fj auTov' ^Akowts k.t.X. ; Mark xii. 38. — II. In a passive sense, the teaching which is given, that which any one teaches. Matt. vii. 28, and often. Absolutely, j; BtBa'^/i denotes the StS. 'I770-0O, 2 John ix. 10; Kvpiov, Acts xiii. 12 ; tmv aTroaroXcov, Acts ii. 42 ; Tit. i. 9, 6 Kara ttjv BiBa'^rjv TTio-To? X070? ; 2 John 9, o fievaiv iv ry BlB. ; cf. Eom. xvi. 1*7, '^ BoB. fjv v/iet? ijxddeTe; vi. 17, vTrrjKovaaTe eh ov irapeBodrire rvirov SiSot^^?. A iB da- KaXo'i, 6, teacher, Heb. v. 12, Eom. ii. 29, correlative with fiadr]T^<;, Matt. X. 24, 25 ; Luke vi. 40. When used in addressing Jesus, StSacr/caXo? answers to the Hebrew ''3"i, cf. John i. 39, Matt, xxiii. 8, a name of respect given to the Jewish ypa/j,- fiareK (cf. Luke ii. 46) = mV amj^lissimus (cf 2 Kings xxv. 8; Esth. i. 8), which seems to have been introduced and established in the time of Christ ; " ajite tcmpora Hilleliana in usu iwnfuisse fastuosum hoc titulum Rabbi, satis patet ex eo qxwcl doctores praecedentes nudo suo nomine vocarentiir',' Lightfoot, Hor. Heir, on Matt, xxiii. 8. Hence the opposi- tion of Jesus, Matt, xxiii. 8-10, against this and the other titles ''^^5 and 'lb, -rraT^jp and Kad-qyi'iTT)^ or Kvpooi (cf. John xiii. 13, 14), which were similarly used, though not so widely or in such an official manner, has special weight. The objection urged against the authenticity of the Gospels, that the name Eabbi did not come into common use till after the destruction of Jerusalem, is removed by the consideration that the word must have begun to naturalize itself in our Lord's time, for it is officially given to Gamaliel in the Talmud, and the name " Eabbi " must at any rate have preceded the more definite word " Eabban '' (i^ai, our Bahhi), which Simeon the son of Gamaliel was the first to intro- duce. Cf. Winer, Becdvjorterh. art. " Eabbi ;" Pressel, art. " Eabbinismus," in Herzog's AiBda-KoX.O'; 182 'ErepoBiBaaKaXio) Bcal-Encycl. xii. 4*70; LigMfoot, I.e. In accordance with the fact that "Eabbi" was a title given to the rypafj,iu,aTei<;, we find in Matt, xxiii. 34 aocjiol koI ypapL/jLare'l'; side by- side with TT/Do^'tJTat, and in Acts xiii. 1 BtBdaKoKoi, with ■7rpo(prjrai, ; and from this we may conclude that in the Christian chixrch (in which the BiBda-KaXoi appear as having a special function, Acts xiii. 1; 1 Cor. xii. 28, 29; Eph. iv. 11; Jas. iii. 1) these BiB. answer to the Jewish ypafifiaTei'i, and are to be viewed, like them, as in a special sense acquainted with and interpreters of God's salvation ; cf Matt. xiii. 52, Upon them devolved the duty of giving progressive instruction in God's redeeming purposes, — a function which, with that of TToip.-qv, seems to have been united in one person, Eph. iv, 11 ; cf. the ^yov/xivoi of Hob. xiii. 7, 17 ; and as iroifieve'; the BiSdcrKoXot seem to have been members of the presbytery, cf. 1 Tim. iiL 2 ; 2 Tim. ii. 24; Acts xx. 28. The BiBdaKa\o<; was distinct from the KTjpv^ and the eiiayyeKtaTy^';, Eph. iv 11; 1 Tim. ii. 7 ; see BiBdaKco. Side by side with them false teachers appear, not only without, but probably within the presbytery, 2 Tim. iv. 3 ; 1 Tim. i. 3 ; cf. '^{revBoBi-BdcrKdkoi,, 2 Pet. ii. 1 ; eTepoBtBaa-KoXelv, 1 Tim. i. 3, vi. 3. — St. Paul calls himself, besides Krjpv^ and diroaToXo'i, with special emphasis. BiBdaKoXo's idvcov, 1 Tim. ii. 7 ; 2 Tim. i. 1 1 ; cf o BiB. tov 'laparfK, John iii. 10; and as to the fact, not only Gal. ii. 7 sqq., but especially Eph. iii. 8, 9. A iBaa K a\ La, rj, that which belongs to a BiBdcrKa\oh inasmuch as it refers to the authority of the teacher. Xen. Cyrop. viii. 7. 24, Trapa, tSiv irpoye'yevrjfievaiv fiavOdvere' avTT] ; BIky]. Suidas, oTnaBoTrov; Blkt), Tj fieQ^ rifispav aKoXovOovaa Tot? aBiicrifiacnv. The use of this word in its entire range is based upon the important idea here involved, that right in human society asserts itself essentially as judgment and vengeance. Thus is it when BIkt] signifies lavjsuit, process, or punishment, atonement, satisfaction. In the LXX. = T'n, Ps. ix. 5, e'7row?(7a? ttjv Kplcriv jxov KoX Trjv BiKTjv fjLov, eKo.dtaa'i €Vi dpovov o Kpivwv SiicaioavvTjv = OfJ^, Lev. xxvi. 25, ^ayaipa, iKBiKOvaa BUrjv Bia9i]Kr]<; ; fT'ia Dpji, Deut. xxxii. 41, aTroBwaa Swci?!' = Di^3 ^''B'X, Ezek. XXV. 12. It is used for ^''T in Job xxix. 16, Ps. xxxv. 23, where we have as its parallel DSB'p = /cptcrt?. Of the combinations usual in classical Greek in which Bikti stands with special reference to a decided (or to be decided) violation of right or of legiti- mate custom, there appears in the N. T.. Blicqv aheiv KaTo, tivoi;, Acts xxv. 15 (Lachm., KaTaBiKriv) ; BiKrjv vTre'^eiv, Jude 7, literally, to render justice, of those who suffer punish- ment in order to the re-establishing of the order violated by them ; and Blktjv Tivetv, 2 Thess. i. 1 0, literally, to pay the right, to atone for or make reparation, also in classical Greek something like aTroTlveiv Blktjv = to he punished. Aristotle derives BUr) from Bi')(a, Eth. Nic. V. 4, TO jxev wyadov irXeov tov Kaicov 8' 'i\aTTOV KepBo^^ to B' evavTiov ^Tjfiia' &v riv jjeaov to laov, b Xeyofiev elvai, BiKaiov (ocTTe to eiravopdaiTiKov BiKaiov av eirj to jxeaov ^rjfjiia'i KoX KepBovi. Bib kol OTav afi? ovk eaTiv ; and how greatly this influences the conception of righteousness, is clear from Plato, I^cgg. iv. 716 C, d Br; 6eo^ fjplv irdvrwv •^pripaTuv p-irpov ai> elrj piiKiaia, k(u ttoXv paXXov rj -jrov Tipcov rj/jiuiv 6ew ^(.Xo?, ofioio'i jdp, o Be firj aw^pcov dvofioto'; re Kal Bid(j}opo^ Kai aBiKo^; it lacks personal relationship to God as the basis and the goal of the entire life movement, and stops short with the o/j,oi.o<;, dKo\.ovOo<; 9em. Generally, usage and custom, the marked-out and prescribed direction or method, form the basis of right, just as BiKrj denotes right as established custom and usage. Eight is the sum of the his- torically formed relations of life as they manifest themselves in human society, — a view still current in modern jurisprudence ; and it need scarcely be proved how much the claims of civil society determine the conception of righteousness, — take, for instance, the accusa- tion and condemnation of Socrates. Eighteousness perhaps includes a certain religious bearing, but even this with a preponderatingly social reference ; comp. Xen. Mem. i. 1. 1, dBiKel So)KpdTrj<; ov? fjLev r] TToXii vofjbl^ei Oeoix; ou vofiii^wv, with iv. 4. 13, where Socrates himself argues that that man does justly who obeys a ol TroXlrai, avvdefievoL a re Bei TToidv Koi a)v dire')(ea6ai iypd-^avro. Granting, indeed, that the conception of righteousness is not here exhausted, but only, so to speak, the juristic side of it presented, — while a deeper apprehension demands the inner personal relation to the claims of right, and Aeschylus, as above cited, says that a just man is he who will not only seem, but be good, — still a closer investigation wiU ever more fully show that righteousness is a virtue essentially social, since right fixes the limits of individual liking, as the life of the community as a higher necessity authenticates them. The St'/cato? is he who does not selfishly nor yet self-forgettingiy transgress the bounds fixed for him, and gives to every one his own, yet stiU desires what is his, and does not in the least withdraw the asser- tion of his own claims, — a view which Christianity has continually to combat. How much this latter element is to be considered is clear from the frequent Si'/caio? elfj-l with the infinitive, in the sense, / am Justified, entitled, worthy, I deserve, I have a right, but rarely in the sense, / am obliged, I am hound ; and so also to inov BUaiov, to, ifia BUaia = my right, my rights (Euripides, Thucydides, Demosthenes, Plutarch). The legitimate claim stands first, afterwards comes the obligation, the requisition of right (whereas the German view, for example, " mein Eecht meine Pflicht," " my right is my duty," in which the obligation of right is emphasized, already closely approximates to the divine revelation). Further, how greatly the virtue of righteousness is confined to the sphere of social life, is evident from the contrast between ^ia and BUrj, II. xvi. 388, Od. xiv. 84; from the use of dBiKelv, in the sense, to encroach upon one's right, to wrong, as synonymous with ^id^eadai, ^XdirTeiv, comp. also Xen. Mem. iv. 6. 6, op6w<; av irore dpa opi^oifMeOa, 6pi^6fj,eva BiKalovi ehac tov<; etSdxa? rd irepl dvOpoi-rrovi vofiifia. Both elements, one's own right, and duty towards others, the suum cuique in a transitive and reflexive sense, are combined in Aristotle, Ehet. i. 9, ecrrt Be BiKaiocrwr] fiev dperr; Bi" rjv rd avTciv exacrToi, e^ovcri KM (U9 o vop,o<;, dBiKia Be Bi rjv rd dXXoTpia, oi)^ tu? o vofio^. Thus it is correct to say, that he is BiKat,o€\elv Be TO. fieyicrra Toii'i '^pcofievov's avrm k.t.X. , . . iBoKei . , ., with Isocr. xii, 124, ACaawi 187 AUaio^ tja/cijKOTa'; evcre^eiav fiev irepl tov<; deov;, hiKMoavvqv 8e TrepX tou? avOpooTTov;. Comp, further, the passages above cited from Eurip. Phoen. 527; Aeschylus, Sept. 580, where StVa(09 stands in antithesis with Bvaae^'ij';; Xen. Ancib. ii. 6. 26, aydWerai, eVt OeoaePela KOI oK-rjOeia Koi BLKaioTTjTi. Thus aBi,KLa becomes a(Tepei.a, though in and ^for itself it is not religious behaviour; BiKaioawr], however, was not regarded as separated from its religious accompaniment, comp. the passages cited by Nagelsbach, Nachhom. Tlieol. p. 238 ; Aristoph. Plut. 28, i'ym 6eoae^rj'yi ''3tt?b, Lev. xix. 3 6, appear among the divine ordainments of a life leading to eternity ; and, on the other hand, righteousness in general, in all stages of the history of redemption, signifies conduct and relationship answering to the contents of the divine revelation thus far made. Gen. vii. 1, vi. 9, 11, 12 ; accordingly it is to be observed that the manifestation of righteousness existing at the time orders itself after the standard of divine knowledge conditioned by the revelation, so that, for example, mention can be made of righteous men before the revelation of the BiKaiocrvvT] 6eov in the gospel was introduced. I. Used of God Himself, BiKaio<; designates before all His bearing towards mankind, and also His doings, not as answering to the claims to be made upon Him from men, in which case it could not be said, ttjutos iariv Kal BlKaio<;, 'iva a']6Spa jxep evka^rj Kal ZUaia koI acoTrjpia, where evXa^r}, as synonymous with crdxppcov, does not stand in a religious sense, whereas in Luke ii. 25 6iiXa/3»;? denotes the fear of God; comp. Acts X. 22, Luke xxiii. 50, of Joseph of Arimathea, avrjp a.'yadbi kol Blkmo';, o? vpocre- Be^ero ttjv ^aaCKeiav tov 6eov. In all these cases BlKaio<; is equivalent to pious ; cf. Acts X. 22, avrjp BLKaio's koX o^ov/j,evo<; tov 6e6v, Avith ver. 2, euo-e/9^? Kal cpo^ovfj.evo'; tov 6eov. How far this signification of BUaio'i is different from the narrower use of the word appears from a comparison of Peter's statement concerning Cornelius, Acts x. 3 5, iv TravTl edvei o^ovfj,evoi; tov deov Kal ipya^o/ievo's Bt,Kawc7Vvr]v BeKTOf avTw iaTiv, with the Pauline doctrine of justification, inasmuch as what Peter expresses concerning the BUaia Kal ^o^ov/jievo'; t. 9. in the words Se/cro? to) 6ea appears in Paul as the justifying act of God. In the Avider sense Blkulo^ occurs again in Matt. v. 45, tov fiXiov avTov avaTeXKei eiTi TTovTjpov'; Kal ayaOov';, Kal j3pi'^ei iirl BiKaiov<; Kal aBiKovi. In Scripture usage the conception of righteousness is more closely defined by its contrast with sin, — a contrast wanting in the profane sphere where neither the word sin nor the conception of it is defined with any sharpness ; see under dfiapTavco. Cf. 1 John iii. 7, o irotcov tt^v BiKaio- avv7]v, BiKaw; iariv, Ka6w<; eVetfo? BlKai6<; iaTtv, with ver. 8, o ttoiwv ttjv d/j,apTLav ; Eccles. vii. 21, avOpunro^ ovk eaTl BiKaw; ev Ty yfj, o? Troirjaet, ayadov Kal ov')(^ djiapTrjaeTai. A relation to sin therefore enters into the conception of BiKaiot;, cf. Luke xv. 7, iirl evl dfiapToiXm /ieTavoovvTi,rj iirl . . . BiKaioi.<;, o'iTive<; ov ^(^peMV 'i')(ovaiv fieTavoia<; ; Matt. ix. 13, ov paKa T'ij? StK. ; Eom. ix. 30, edvT] Th firj BmKovTa Bi.Kaioavvfjv KareKa^ev Bik., Bik. Be ttjv eK TrlaTeto'; ; Jas. iii. 18, Kapiro^ Be BiKaioawr]'; iv elpTjvrj aireipeTai toi<; iroiovaiv elprjvriv; cf. Heb. xii. 11, BicoKeiv Bik.; 1 Tim. vL 11 ; 2 Tim. ii 22. Thus mention is made of God's righteousness so far as God is regarded as one who acts as He is bound {sit venia verio !) by Himself to act, so that He does not contradict Himself, Eom. iii. 5, 25, 26. But that Blk. deov, which denotes a righteousness perfect before Him, is, as a state of the subject to whom it is communi- cated, more accurately described Bik. m deov, Phil. iii. 7 (Bwped t?}? Blk., Eom. v. 17), in contrast with -q efirj Bik. tj eK rov vojxov, cf. Eom. x. 5, Gal. iii. 21, which may indeed be held to be righteousness (Eom. x. 3 ; Phil. iii. 6), but which really is not (GaL iii. 21 ; Eom. X. 5), but only bears the name inasmuch as it fulfils the claims set up by itself on a legal basis {IBla Blk., Eom x. 3), but does not satisfy God and His law. This is, however, one difference between the righteousness springing from the law and that righteousness of God which is imputed and imparted as a gift to man. The other difference is, that whereas the righteousness of the law is a state to be attained only by the fulfilling of the Aikaioa'uvr] 193 zdi.Kaioto Jaw, the righteousness of God is a state called forth by God's act of justification, namely, by judicial disengagement or release from all that stands in the way of SiKaio'i elvat (see SiKaiovv), — a liberation of which man becomes partaker by means of faith. Hence Slk. 'Kicnecix;, Eom. iv. 11—13 ; e'/c Tr/o-Tecu?, Eom. ix. 30, x. 6, to which expressions the others — hbic. deov, SK deov — correspond. Cf Heb. xi. 7, t^? Kark irlaTiv hue. K\/r]pov6/j.o<;. We see, therefore, that the Pauline conception of righteousness — which as to form always expresses a relation to the judgment of God — includes this special feature, namely, it denotes the state of the believing man called forth by the divine acquittal, and this is its force in all the passages in question, Eom. viii. 10; Eph. vi. 14, iv. 24; Eom. v. 21, vi. 16; 2 Cor. vi. 7, 14, etc. This conception is to be recognised also in 2 Pet. i. 1, Tots icroTifiov rj/jLiv \aj(pv ; vi 1 3, TrapaarijaaTe rh fiiXrj v)i&v oifKa Bik., cf. ver. 19 ; ver. 18, i\ev6epa6evTe<; Be a-rro t^? a^apTia<; iBovXcoOrjre Trj Bik. ; 2 Cor. ix. 10, ryevvrjfjiaTa TJ79 Bik. v/iwv; Phil. i. 11, ireirK'qpcop.evoi Kapirov Bik.; Luke i. '75,\aTpev6tv TO) 6ea> iv ocnorrirt k. Bik.; Acts xvii. 31, Kpiveiv iv Bik., as in Eev. xix. 11 ; Eom. ix. 28 ; 2 Tim. iii. 16; Tit. iii. 5. (c.) This principle of righteousness, which expresses itself in action, is finally present in the result of action, so that BiKaioavvr) appears as expressing the object of action. So in Matt. iii. 15, TrXrip&a-ai 'jrdcrav Bik.; Acts x. 35, ipyd^eadai, Blk.; Heb. xi. 33 ; Jas. i. 20. Peculiar to 1 John and the Eevelation is the expression •jroielv Bik., 1 John iii. 10, Eev. xxii. 11 ; ttjv Bi,k., 1 John ii 29, iii. 7. The expression iroieXv ttjv Bok. (with the article) embraces the entire sphere denoted by BiKaioavvr) ; whereas, without the article, it refers merely to the result of the action ; see under afx^aprla (I.). A I K a 1 6 m, fut. axTco, to bring forth a Bkaio'i, or a BUaiov ; cf. Bovkom, a^ioca ; in gen. the verbs in oa. It denotes the activity which is directed to the restoration or production of a Bkaiov, primarily without regard to the mode in which it takes place. Cf. Plato, Zecrg. iv. 714 E, ecfia/iev irov Kara (pvaiv UivBapov dyeiv BiKaiovvra to ^laioTarov = to make a BiKaiov out of the ^laioTarov. For the most part absolutely —jus decernere, to settle or decree what is right, to recognise as right, to reckon as right, BUaiov vojiL^eiv. It cannot be shown, however, at all events not as a general rule, to denote in classical Greek — where the word occurs only rarely — " the reaction of violated justice against the offender," " to make any one righteous by doing away with his violation of law through his condemnation " = to judge, punish, chastise. In favour of this view, Herodotus, Plato, and Thuc. are 2 B AiKMcm 194 AbKawm adduced ; whereas in the IST. T. it denotes the very opposite • (see Kling in Herzog's Bmlmcycl. xii. 583). Cf. against such a view, Kriiger on Herod, i. 100: "With the meaning to judge, to jounish, the word seems scarcely to be used in Attic prose, not even in Thucyd. ; indeed, except in Thucyd., it occurs rarely at all." See, however. Plat. I>egg. xi. 934 B, BiKr]v Be eKaaTO<; Be jvovTe'i Tot9 /Jiev ov •)(api,eia6e vfia's Be avTov^ fiaWov BiKaimaea-Oe, where Elmsl. (on Eur. Med. 93) reads BtKaioia-ere, Schol. Bijca[a>i; kuO^ vfiuv diroBei^ere, oti rvpavviKw'; apyeje, Kriiger regards as faulty, on the ground that he elsewhere uses neither the middle nor the passive in the like sense and construction. Herod, i. 100, kut d^lrjv eKoa-Tov dBtKijfiaTo^ eBiKaiev = to re-esfahlish the right, recognise lohat is right, to judge; Thucyd. v. 105, ovBev e^co ttj? dvOpanreM'; twv fiev e? to deiov vo^iaea) = HK'Q3 'liJIV, is differently taken in the Greek, see below. Elsewhere BiKaiovv n, Tivd, to find anything as right, to recog- nise or acknowledge any one as just, to set forth as right or juSt = p''\)ir\, as the opposite of Vtnn, almost always, and herein difiering from the usage of profane Greek, with personal object. So in Ex. xxiii. 7, dOcoov Kal BiKawv ovk d'7roKTevei<; Kal ov BiKaLwa'ei<; tov dae^ij eveKev Bwpcov. Cf. 1 Kings viii. 32, Kpivets rov Xaov crov ^laparjX dvofiriQrjvai avofiov Bovvai Ttji/ oBov avTov et? KeipaXr^v avTov Kal rov BiKaioicrai BUat-ov Bovvai avra> Kard ttjv ^ iKaioo) 195 id i/caioco BtKaioavvriv avrov. AiKuiovv, therefore, is one aspect of judicial activity, and that not merely = Bikmov Kplveov (Prov. xvii. 15 = pnsn), but corresponding to our justify = to set forth as righteous by legal or judicial decision. Cf. Deut. xxv. 1, where the same Hebrew expression, J'B''iri"riK Wt^ni. P'''isn"nx 1p'''n^n = SiicaLcoaaxn, to (al. tov) SIkulov koI Karayvcoai Tov acre^ovi. — Isa. 1. 8, eyvav on ov jjjq ala-'^vvGw, on iyyl^eo 6 BtKaLcoaa'; fie; xlv. 24, 25, airo KVpiov Bixaicod'^aovTai koI ev rat 6ea> evBo^acrdijaeTat, trav to airep/ia k.t.X., cf. the Hebrew. Since the Hiphil was translated by Biicaiovv, the Kal, plV, to he righteous, could not be better rendered than by the perfect passive BeBticaiwaOai, which was all the easier as this part of the verb is used to denote a state which is the fruit of action ; cf from KoXeiv, KeicKriT], Xen. in Kriiger, I.e. lii. 7. 1. So in Gen. xhv. 16, rt BoKateoOco/jiev ; 6 6eo<; Be ei>pe Trjv a^wiav = plt3X2-nD. Cf. Isa. xlii. 21, Kvpwi 6 0609 e^ovXevaaro "va BbKaimdfj, explanatory translation of the Hebrew ipiy JVlob Y^n nin\ We find therefore everywhere the root meaning of Bwaiovv to be, to set forth as righteous, to justify, in a legal sense. Also in Ezek xvi. 51, 52, it stands in this and not in a material sense, ver. 51, iBiKaLcoaad<; aov ev irdaai'; toZ^ avofiMK aov at? eirovqaa's ; ver. 5 2, iBiKaia>aa<; avTa<; virep aeavTijv . . . ev tSi BiKaiwaai ae TO.? dBeX^ I^H == BiKaicoaaTe %J?/3av. — Kot different is the usage of the 0. T. Apocrypha; cf. Ecclus x. 29, xlii. 1, 2, xiii. 22, vXovawv a et? BiKatoavvrjv ; ver. 5, Xoyl^eTai 17 TTtWt? avTov et? SiKacoavvrjv, and other texts, shows that SiKatovv, even as used by Paul, denotes nothing else than the Judicial act of God, whereby man is pro- nounced free from guilt and punishment, and is thus recognised or represented as a Bikmo';. Comp. the combination of StKatova-dai, and %a/3t9, Eom. v. 1, 2. To the BiKaiovv on God's side corresponds on the side of the object BUaio'; KaOiaTaaOai, Eom. v. 19, comp. ver. 18, or SiKaiovaOai, whose result is BLKatmOrivai, Eom. v, 1. As an element in the divine work of saving the individual, Smmovv is specified in Eom. viii. 3 0, ou? irpocopicrev tovtov^ Kal eKaXecrev Koi ofij eicaXecrev, tovtov? koX iBiKalaxrev' oft? Be eBiKaiaiaev, tovtov; koX iBo^a- cev; 1 Cor. vi. 11, aTreXovaaade, rj'yidaOrjTe, iBt.Kaia)di]Te iv tS> ovofiaTi tov Kvpiov 'Itjctov Kal iv t& TTvev/iaTi tov deov r^fimv, cf ver. 9 opposed to dBiKot. — Not only do we read BiKaiol 6 060? TOV e'/c 7rt(7T€a)s in Eom. iii. 26, but also in Gal. iii. 8, e'/c irlaTew; BiKaiol Tci 'idvrj deo'i, and correspondingly in Eom. v. 1, BiKaiwdevTe^ ovv iK Trto-Tewy, and GaL ii. 16, et? XpiCTTOv ^Irjcrovv iiria-Tevaafiev "va BiKaicoOco/Mev eK TTio-Teo)? XpiaTov. So also iii. 24. The expression Trt'o-ret BiKaiovadai has substantially the same meaning, the only difference being that e'/c sets forth the divine act as taking place in consequence of faith, or man as determined by faith ; cf the passage from Lysias quoted by Kriiger, Gramm. Ixviii. 1 7. 10, e'/c Twv epywv vpfj fiaXKov r) e« twv Xoyav Tfjv ■\^r)j)OV (f>6pei,v. With the dat. the divine act is represented as effected by faith (dynamical dat.), cf Eom. iv. 5, to3 TnaTevovTi iirl TOV BiKaiovvTa tov aae^rj XoyL^eTai, 17 Tricrrt? avTov et? BMaioavvqv. Once Bia t^s iriaT., Eom. iii. 30. As we therefore read irlaTsi BiKavovcrdai, so also ry ydpoTi,, Tit. iii. 7 ; Eom. iii. 24. The combination with iv may be explained from that with e«. When we read ef epyeov v6/j,ov ov BiKaiadi^aeTat in Gal. ii. 16, Eom. iv. 2, and in Gal. iii. 11, iv v6fia> ovBeh BiKaiovTut, Gal. v. 4, in the former case epya vofiov are the cause to which the oil BoKacova-dai refers ; in the latter case, vofio'i is that in which the BiKaiovadai rests ; cf. Acts xiii. 39, anio TrdvTwv mv ovk ■^BvvrjdrjTe iv vofio) Mavaitof BiKaiovadai, iv tovtw (sc. iv XpiaTco) Tra? 6 iricTTevwv BiKaiovTai. So in Eom. v. 9, BiKaicoOevTe^ iv tS a'/L/MiTi, XpicTTov; 1 Cor. vi. 11, iBiK. iv tw ovop,aTi tov Kvpiov ^Irjdov Kal iv xm ttv. k.t.X ; Gal. ii. 17, BiKaicodrjvai iv XpicTTO); cf v. 4, KaT7]p'y>]d7]Te (xtto tov XpicrTov oirtve? iv v6p,(p BiKaiovtrOe. (If the BiKaiovadai rest in something, the subject or person must also be found therein, cf 1 Cor. iv. 4; Eom. iii. 4; 1 Tim. iii. 16.) James uses the word exclusively in this judicial sense, as is clear from chap. ii. 23. What he refers to is a mistaken view of Trtart?, not a mistaken view of BiKaiovv , cf vv. 22, 26, and Paul's to epyov Tri<; iriaTew;, 1 Thess. i. 3. In case we read in Eev. xxii. 11, BUaio<; BiKaiod^Tuy '4ti, and not, as has been customary since Bengel, BiKaioavvrjv ■n-oiTja-a.TO), the passive AiKabow 198 ALKai(Ofj,a hiKMovcrdai must be taken as a rendering of the Hebrew Hithpael (see above) in a middle sense, to 'present or. show oneself as righteoics. A I K aiwfia, TO?, to, the product or result of the Zikmovv. In classical Greek in Plato, Isocrates, Aristotle, but not frequently, and indeed — (I.) The establishing • of right, firmly established or firmly standing right, brought about by law or judicial knowledge, legitimate claim; so in Thuc. i. 41, hiKaiwfxaTa fiev oxiv Tuhe ■Trpo'i u^aa? e'^o/Mev, iKava Kara tov? 'EW'^vojv vofiovi ; vi. 79. 2, 80. 1, ov jap epyo) Xcrov watrep rai BiKaocofiari icrriv; Isoc. vi. 25. So in the LXX. = nfj"!^, 2 Sam. xix. 29, Tt ean fioi 'in SiKaicofia koX tov KSKpar^evai, en irpo^ top ^acriXea. Further = ^'''1, Jer. xi. 20, 7rpo<; ere aireKoXv^a to SiKateofid fjiov. (II.) The hUauov established by judicial knowledge, as punishment, Plato, Legg. ix. 884 E, rriv p^ev pKa^rjv awoTiveTo, tmv Se aXXwv BiKaiQ)/u,dTav a<^eia6a>. This is the only passage in Plato, according to Kriiger on Thuc. i. 41, where, in like manner, the word is = legitimate claim; but in Thucydides it is the legal claim which one makes good towards others ; here, the legal claim which one has to satisfy. Then in Aristotle it is = restoration or re-establishing of the SiKatov ; Eth. Nicom. v. 1 0, KaXelrai Be to koivov jxaXKov SiKai,o'7rpdr/p,a, SiKalcofia Be to iiravopOcop^a tov dBucrip.aro'; ; establishing of right, de Coel. i. 10, Ta twv dfi(f>iaj3r]TovvTO}v Xojcov BiKaimpaTa. (III.) Next, in a wider sense, generally, legal deed of right, as fulfilling of the law, Aristotle, lUiet. i. 3. 13; so Baruch ii. 1 9, ovk eVt to, BiKampaTa tmv iraTepwv rjp^mv . . . KaTalBaKKop,ev Tov eXeov ; ver. 1 7, Bdxyovcrtv Bo^av Kal BiKalap^a tm icvpla, therefore like BcKaioavvr). So in the N. T. Eev. xix. 8, to. BiKaimpaTa tmv d'yltov ; xv. 4, to, BLKaiwfiaTa crov i(J3avepa)67]aav, where we must not render judgments, because BtKako/jia never denotes the act of judgment itself. (IV.) Statute of right. Aristotle, fi'ogm. 569, 'ApiaTOTeXnj'; iv Tot? Bi,icaiaip.aa-{, (fyrja-tv ovTO)?, cf. Vita Arist. Marc. f. 276, koi to, yejpap,peva ainm BiKamfMaTa 'EWtjviBcov Tvokewv e^ wv ^oXitttto^ Ta? (piXoveiKui<; twv 'EXkrjvaiv BieXvaev. Du Cange, BiKaip.aTa reeentioribus Graeeis et in Basilicis appellantur privilegia, chartae, diplomata et instrumenta quibus jura in res asseruntur ; so, for the most part, with the exception of the places already cited in the LXX. as = ph, ni?n, nivp, DSK'p, 1 Mace. ii. 21. In the N. T. Heb. ix. 1, BiKaim- p,aTa XarpeCai; ; ver. 10, Bi,Kai,cop,aTa a-apKoi (comp. vv. 9, 13); Eom. i. 32, to BiKaicopa TOV deov . . . OTi ol TOiavTa 7rpdcraovTe<; a^ioi OavaTOV elalv; ii. 26, tA BiicamfiaTa tov vopov (f)v\dacreiv (comp. Eph. ii. 1 5, o f6po<; twv evToXtov iv B6yp,aaiv) ; Eom. viii. 4, wa TO BiKatwpa tov vofiov TrXTjpmdf} iv ripHv, the legal ordainment of the law, or, following I., the legal claim of the law. And now as to the use of the word in Eom. v. 16, 18, most expositors, and even still Hofmann, Die heilige Schrift. N. T. iii. 202, Dietzsch, Adam u. Ghristus, Eom. v. 12-21, p. 146, contend that its signification there is act of justification. It is said to stand in Holy Scripture in the signification, rare in classical Greek, legal act, justice (see under III, AiKamfMa 199 AiKa^oi Besides the passages citedj there is Prov. viii. 20, where, instead of BiKaioavvr), there is the reading rpl^oi. hi,Kau>i^aTo<; parallel with oBol Bi,Kat.oavvr]<;). But apart from the fact, which is certainly of less importance, that Paul does not elsewhere use the word in this sense, the connection, and especially the contrast with KaTdKptjj,a, show clearly that the word here stands in the usage arranged under II., with the modification following upon the distinctively Pauline use of BiKaiow with personal object = act of justification (cf. e7ravopd(Ofj,a tov aBiKij/iUTO'} in Aristotle), to Kpl/xa i^ ivo'i et? KaraKpifJia, to Se ■^dpicrfia 6« TToWwv irapaTTTdifidrmv eh BiKaia/ia. As KaraKpi/jia to Kpifia, so must Bcicaica/ia stand in relation to x'^picrpM, strengthening and positively supplementing it. This would be all the more easy to a Greek-tutored ear when once SiKalcofia, in contrast with TrapaTTTcofjia, of itself awakened the idea of an iwavopdcofia tov dBiKi^fjLaTO'; ; but then just in the imme- diate connection of this section the Bikmovv suggests this thought. The apostle's repre- sentation is only so far different from the usual one, that he has in his mind not so much an STravopdcofia •jroXXatv TrapaTncop.aTaiv, dSiKrjfiaTwv, as rather dfiapTwXMV dBiKr^advTCOv (so that, strictly speaking, only the object of the B^Kalcojia is different). In ver. 18, Bi evot BiKaicofiuTo'; ei<; TvdvTWi dvOpdirov; ek BiKaiaaiv, it seems to me that it denotes what Christ has done in like manner in contrast with "TrapaTrTco/xa, and according to its effects. The effect proceeding from the BiKaiafia of Christ is BoKacwcri,';. How gi-eatly the element of justification prevails in BiKalcofia is very clearly shown in the note of Theodoret in Ps. cxviii. 2 in Suidas, vofxov KoXeZ . . . BiKaico/xaTa, w? Bucaiovv tov KaTop6ovvTa Bvvdfievov. A iKa {.(OCT i, e7Xft)p/fo, n^n; n-}|K|i nSii D3^ n;ni nnx DBcip. in profane Greek sometimes = Bikmo- Xoiyia, cf. Thucyd. viii. 66. 2, tmv BpacrdvTwv ome f^'TT^crt? out ei viroTTToioivTO BiKaiaxTL'? iyiryv6T0, on which the Schol. BcKalaai^ uvtI tov KoXaaif rj et? Biktjv aTrajmryrj rjTOi Koicn^, — a meaning, amongst the Attics, pretty obsolete, an example of which is adduced by Harpocrates from Lysias {vid. Kriiger on Thucyd. I.e.). Thucyd. uses BiKala>ai<; in the sense of legal claim, demand, i. 141. 1, iii 82. 3, iv, 86, 4, v. 17. 2,— to be explained in accordance with what was remarked under BiKaioa. In later Greek it denotes, in parti- cular, the view of what is just and right, e.g. Dion. Ant. B. i. 5 8, irapekOwv rrjv diravTrnv dvBpdi'rrcov BiKoiwa-tv. The K T. use is naturally regulated by that of Bi/cawvv. As em- ployed by Paul, it is the establishment of a man as just hy acquittal from guilt ; vid. BiKaiovp — justification as an act to be performed or accomplishing itself on the man ; as BoKaiajxa in Eom. v. 16 means the act of justification accomplished on the man. Eom. iv. 25, ■^yepOi] 'Ir}aov<; Bid ttjv BiKalmaiv rificbv ; V. 1 8 opposed to KUTuKpifia &>? Bt ei'o? Trapair- T(OfiaT0'; ei's Traz/ra? dydprnirovi eh KaTaKpo/xa, oiJt&j? Kal Bi li'o? BiKaMfxajo's eh TvdvTa'i dvOpmirov; eh BuKaUoaiv fw^?. On this antithesis, vid. s.v. KaTdapifia. A iKa^o) = to exercise BUrjv, and with the definite signification, to pronounce judgment AtKCbi^ay 200 "ASiKO'i to judge. LXX. = y\ and DSB'. Hence in the N. T. BiKao-Tij<;, Cod. Vat. B. Luke vL 37 for KaTaSwd^etv. AiKaa-Ti]';, ov, 6, Luke xii. 1 4 (Lachm. Kpi,Tri<;) parallel ■with fiepiarij'; ; and Acts vii. 27, 3 5, from Ex. ii. 14, "-PX^^ ""■'' ^"'^ao"'''^? f'""' Tfi/a = "?y tDDW IB' B'''K= judge, i.e. one who executes BIkt], who maintains law and equity ; while, in so far as he arrives at a conclusion and gives final judgment, the judge is called KpiTrj<;, Pillon, syn. gr. " KpiTri ovv eKeXevev del tov BiKacrTtjv rrjv 'yjrrjcpov rlOeadai." Wyttenb. hibl. crit. iii. 2, p. 68, " De differentia, quae est infer SiKaa-TT]v et Kporijv miror nil monuisse grammaticos. Uterque judicat ac decernit, scd BiKaari]'; de re quae in jus wcatur, Kpnr]'; de aliis quibuscunque rebus ac certaminibus ; ille secundum leges, Mc aequitate. Ita intelli- gendus, Xen. Conv. 5. 10, to he ahv (dpyvpiov) cocnrep to -riKelaTOV, 8i,a Trtcrro? icncv, o iv eKaj(laT(p dBuKo^ Kal ev iroWS dBiKot ia-Tiv, and TTia-TO'i denotes the person who does not disappoint expectations nor neglect claims, but who fulfils the relations which he ought to fulfil. When, therefore (ver. 11), it is said, et ovv iv rm dBiKw p,afj,/juova -jnaTol ovk iyeveaOe, Mammon denotes something whose nature it is to disappoint and deceive — a state of things which must be rectified by the faithfulness of him who has to do with it ; cf what follows, to aKrjOwov Tt's vfuv TTtcnevaet ; Conformably with the scriptural view of the moral requirement of man, dBiKo^ (2 Pet. ii. 9) may stand in contrast with evae^ri<; ; and hence we see how in Eom. iv. 5 we read, 6eo<; BiKaiwv, not tov dBiKov, but (for tlie very purpose of more closely describing the dBoKO'i) rov dcrejSn. In 1 Cor. vi. 9, on the other hand, we read, dBucot deov ffaariXelav oii "j4St«:o? 201 ' ABi/ceoD KXrjpovofii^aovaiv. The same sense is indicated in 1 Pet. iii 18, Xpicrro'; ava^ irepi d/jUtpriMv eiraOev, SiKaio<; virep oBlkcov, and when Paul, 1 Cor. vi. 1, contrasts dScKOi with ayio(;, and in ver. 6 identifies it with diriaTO';. — Eom. iii. 8, /a^ UBiko'; 6 6e6<; ; Heb. vi. 10, oil yap aStKos o 9. "ASiko^ is really, as Aristotle says, what is wapdvoiio'i, only not in a social, but in a religious sense; cf. aBiicetv and aSiKca. Plato, adv. Colot. c. 32, l!aiKpdTr], d>, fut. ijau), to do wrong, see aSt/co?, dBiKM ; literally, to he an d'St/co?, and 2 C 'ASiKEQ, 202 "£«§, LKO<; to ad as one. Used in its most comprehensive sense, Eev. xxii. 11, 6 dSoKwv dSoKijo-dra) €TL In the narrowest sense, in other parts of the Revelation, ii. 11, vi. 6, vii. 2, 3, ix. 4, 10, 19, xi. 5= to hurt, to injure; of. Xen. Gyrop. v. 5. 9, where it is synonymous with ')(aKe'jr6v Tt, tovI ■iroie'lv, Thuc. ii. 71, 7??y dSiKeiv, to lay waste the country. Xen. Aruib. iv. 4. 6, OTI, aireicratrdai, jSovXoiTO i6i,fievov 7raT/3o? iKSiKaaTciv, lias this meaning; Eustathius, /if. p. 29, 34, iXeysTo to i^aiaiov koX ekZckov to e^a) tov alcrlov icaX SiKaloV vvv Sg ayadoXoyovvrai. Zonaras, eK^iKov eVt Siicalov Koi aBiKov Xeyerai. In the LXX. it does not occur. On the contrary, we find iKBiK7]T7^ t^? irepl Taina aae^eia<; vofxa vttoBiko'; opda)<; av 'yiyvocTO fieTa BUrj'}. Synon. ibid. B, 7roXXoi9 evo'^oi; earo) vofioK o Bpdcra<; Tt toiovtov, therefore = under obligation to make compensation; c£ Dem. 518. 3, iav Be tl<; tovtcov ti Trapa^aivj), {nroBiKd eaTco rw iraOovTi. Plato, Lefjfjf. ix. 871 B, uttoSwo? tu iOeXovTi, TtfKopeiv. In the N. T. Eom. iii. 19, iva v7roStK09 lyevrjTai, ira'i o KOcrp,o<; tw dem. A Ke(o, Bo^w, eBo^a (akin to Be^o/jLai), (I.) intransitive, to appear, to have the appearance, Luke x. 36 ; Acts xvii 18 ; 1 Cor. xii. 22 ; 2 Cor. x. 9 ; Heb. iv. 1, xii. 11. Generally used impersonally, Bokbi /j,oo elvai,, Matt. xvii. 25, xviii. 12, and frequently. In this construction it is applied to decrees, settlements, decisions, e.g. Acts xv. 22, 25, 28, eBo^e TO) ar/lw TrvevfiaTt koI rjfuv, fMrjBev irXeov eiriBkcyOat v/uv ^dpo(;, an urbane expression only approximately rendered by the German " fiir gut befinden, gut achten " (to find good, to deem good), because it means more than a mere " find, deem good ; " e.g. to, tco irX'^Oei Bo^avTa = the decisions of the majority. Plence Boryfia = a2:>poi7itment, ordinance, Luke ii. 1, etc. The same urbanity lies in the ol BoKovvre'; elval ti, Gal. ii. 6 ; ol So/cowre?, ii 2, 6 ; ol BoKovvTei ctiiXov elvab, ii. 9 ; people who stand for something, who have weight, and are esteemed ; it expressed not doubt, but the general opinion. Plat. Euthyd. 303 C, TOiv aefivwv Kal Bokovvtwv ti elvat, ovBev v/uv fiiXei ; Eurip. Troad. 608, to, BoKovvTa, opposed to to, /jiTjBev ovra. — (II.) Transitive, to hold for, be of opinion, believe, completely eavjw BoKelv, sibi videri, Acts xxvi. 9, eBo^a efxavTm . . . Belv iroXXa evavria. AoKeio 205 A6y/Ma irpa^ai. Then, ■without the addition of the personal pronoun, Matt. vi. 7, 24, 44, GaL vi. 3, etc, to intend, to purpose, Matt. iii. 9, fi-q B6^'r]T6 Xeyeiv iv eavTol'i. A 6y jxa, TO, conclusion, ordinance, opinion, proposition, dogma. The word occurs first in Xenophon and Plato, then in Plutarch and later authors. Usage pi'imarily associates it with the use of So/cet (jloi, eSo^e ravra, of conclusions of the popular assembly, of the senate, etc. Therefore (I.) = conclusion, synonymous with ylrij^iafia, d. Plato, de Lcgg. 314 B, n ovv av tovtcov iiroXd^oifiev fiaXiaTa top vofiov elvai ; to, Soj/j-aTa ravra Koi ■\lr7](piafiaTa, ifwlrye SoKei . . . Ao^av, &>? eoiKe, Xe^et? troXiTiKr^v tov vo/jlov; Aesch. Suppl. 596, Bijfiov SeSoKTai ifnf](j)ta-fiaTa; 2 Mace. x. 8, iBoy/jLaTicrav fi€Ta KOivov 'Trpoa-To.y- (iaTO<; Kal i^j)i(7naT0'i ; xv. 36, eBoyfiaTiaav Travre? /leTO, kolvov ■^^ia-jjiaTO';. In Xenophon the word occurs only in this sense, Anab. vi. 2. 11, hoy^ia eirotricravTo . . . vavaTU) avTov ^'qfiiovaOai; iii. 3. 5, eic tovtov iBoKCi rot? aTparqyol'; ^eX/riov elvai Bojfia TTOirjcraaBai tov •jroXefiov aKrjpvKTOv elvai ; vi. 4. 8, 2 7, rjv yhp twv aTpaTiwTcov Boyfia . . . Brjfioa-ia ehai t^ Xrj^OevTa; Hell. v. 2. 27, iv. 37, and often; Polyb. xx. 4. 6, /xeTa koivov B6yfmTo<;; iv. 26. 4, %(B/3t9 koivov Boy/j.aTO';. So also in Herodotian, Diodorus, and others, e.g. Boyfia Kvpovv, (TvvOewai.; Demosth. Boyjxara 'AfifiKrvovmv ; Plut. Mor. ^9, f. praec. Oer. Beip. 19. Cf. Plat. Legg. i. 644 D, eVt Be iracriv tovtoi<; Xoycafiof, o ti ttot aiiTtov afieivov rj '^eipov' o? yevop.evo'i Boyfia TroXew? koivov vop.o'i eirwvoixaaTai. So in the N. T. Acts xvi. 4, (fivXdaaeiv tA BoyfiaTa tcl KeKpofieva vtto twv k.t.X. Akin to this is the transi- tion to the signiiication, (II.) will, ordainment, decree, prescription, command, in which, however, it occurs but seldom in classical Greek, e.g. Plat. Bep. iv. 414 B, tov^ Be veov; obCkoa-6<^(ov, iav '^vyal'i rj'yefioviKWV kol 'ttoXltlkwv avopdov iyiypatpwai ^efiaicc; Kal KpaTrjcrcocrt, voficov Svvafiiv \a^pdvovai,v' fi koX TIXaTCOv et? SuceXuiv eTfKevaev, eK'rri^wv ra Boyfiara vofiov^ Kal epya •7T0ii]aei,v iv toI^ Aiovvaiov Trpay/Macnv ; 1000 J), Kau Xoyoi prjTopcuv koX Boyfiara cro(f}iaTwv; 1062 E, OTav jxev ovv fj,'r)Bevo<; eKaTrjval twv iJ,a')(p[iha)V, aXXa iravTa ofioXoyelv Kal TiOevai deXcocri . . . ^ ttou aoL hoKovcri 0av/j.aaia>^ iv rot? Boy/iaat, rrjv 6/j.oXoylav ^e^aiovv; de repugn. Stoic. 1033 A, a^tcS ttjv twv Boy/MaToiv o/ioXoyiav iv too'; jS/ot? deco- peiadai,; 1034 B, ofjioXoyei Toii'; X6yov<; avTov Kal ave^oSov; elvai Kal UTi-oXcTevTov?, Kal ra BoyfjMTa rat? ■^peiai'; dvdpfioaTa Kal rat? irpa^eaiv ; ibid. "En hcypM, Zijvwvo^ iaTiv, lepa dewv fir) olKoSo/j,eiv' lepov yap fir) iroXKov a^iov Kal ayiov ovk eaTlV OiKoBofxwv he epyov Kal ^avavawv ovBev iaTi ttoXXov a^iov ; adv. Colot. 1, irepl tov otl KaTo, to, twv dXXav (piXoaocpcov hoy fiaTa ovSe ^rjv icTTtv ; Clem. Alex. Strom, viii. 330. 11, ed. Sylb., to fitv hoyfia ecTTi KaTa.X7}i^ [<; Tt? XoyiKrf KaTaX7)-<^iiXoaodxvv, made it appear, etc. (b.) Reputation, renown, always in an honourable sense, unless an epithet alters the force ; from SoKelv ehat, Ti or SoKeiv, the expression of general recognition. Hesych. Bo^a- 4>^fir]> "A"?j Eurip. Here. f. 157, ea-'^^e Bo^av, ovBev iov, ev-^v^ia';; Plat. Menex. 241 B, Bo^av u'^pv dfia'x^oi elvai. So Herod. Xen. Thuc. Plat. Pint. Hence Plut. proll. Bom. XIII. (266 F), Tov Be 'Ovcbpefjb Bo^av av rt? i} rifirju fieOepfJLrjveva-eie. — (II.) From the transitively used Bo/cetv, opinion, notion, opposed to e7rit7T7j/.M?. From the signification I. h, the biblical usage, which is an expansion of it, starts. (I.) It denotes, as in profane Greek, the recognition, which any one finds or which belongs to him ; honour, renown, connected with eiratvo'i, Phil. i. 11; 1 Pet. i. 7 ; with Ti/i??, 1 Tim. i. 17 ; Heb. ii. 7, 9 ; 2 Pet. i. 17 ; Eev. iv. 11, v. 13 ; 1 Pet. i. 1, etc. ; with Ti^ri and evKo'yia, Eev. v. 12, opposed to arista, 2 Oor. vi. 8, Bia B6^rj<; koX drifiia';, Bia Bva(j}7]/j,iai Koi evc})7)fi[a ovBe Bo^a. How closely these meanings border on each other may be seen, Isa. xi. 3, ov KUTa ttjv Bo^av Kplvei,, i^^?"jBj' Vi''!', comp. Ecclus. viii. 14, /xr/ Biku^ov fierd Kpvrov- KaTo, yap ttjv Bo^av avrov Kpivavcnv Ma 208 A6la avTm. In this sense Sofa denotes (a.) the appearance of glory attracting the gaze ; so, e.g., as a strong synonym of sIkcov, cf. Rom. i. 23, •fjXKa^av ttjv So^av tov a^OdpTov deov iv ofioiMfjMTi elic6vov. The expression ij Sofa toO Qeov, tov Kvpiov, must be explained accordingly ; indeed, it corresponds to the Hebrew nin^ nina^ which signifies " the august contents of God's own entire nature, embracing the aggregate of all His attributes according to their undivided yet revealed fulness " (XJmbreit, die Siinde, p. 9 9), or which embraces aU that is excellent in the divine nature. (In a similar manner, Philo explains the Bo^a of God as the " unfolded fulness of the divine Swdfiec; ; " cf. Eev. xv. 8, where So^a and Svvafit'i rov 6eov are conjoined.) The ho^a of God coincides with His self-revelation, Ex. xxxiii. 22, '''133 13V3, fiviKa 8' av irape\,9y 17 Bo^a p,ov, cf the following eia)? av "irapeKdas, ver. 2 1 ; TO irpoaco'Kov fiov, i.e., in it as the form of His manifestation, God sets Him- self forth, since it comprises all that He is for us, for our good, cf. Ex. xxxiii. 1 9, l''3VK ''31tD"P3j ijQ} TrapeXevcro/jLai, irporepov aov rfj Bo^rj fiov; ver. 18, T^i^STlX S3 '^^^y}, ifi(f>dvi,- (Tov p.01 a-eavTov. (According to this, Dehtzsch's remark in Ps. xxv. 7 is to be completed, " aiti is not God's goodness as an attribute, but, as in Ps. xxxi. 2 0, Hos. iii. 5, the fulness of good promised and in store for those who turn to Him.") C£ Isa. xlvi. 1 3, xxvi. 1 0. It occupies accordingly a prominent place in the final revelation of redemption, Isa. Ix. 3, iiri Be ere (pavijaerai 6 Kvpio'i koI rj Bo^a avrov iirl ae 6(f>di]aeTat ; Isa. vi. 3, xlii. 8, xlviii. 11 ; cf. Luke ii. 9 ; Eev. xxi. 23 ; Rom. vi. 4, v. 2. This redemptive character is an essential element of the idea of Bo^a, so that one might perhaps say — the Sofa of God, as it is the fulness of all that is good in Him (*3ltO"?3j Ex. xxxiii. 19), all His redeem- ing attributes (cf ifKripccp.a, John i. 14, 16), so also is it the form in which He reveals Himself in the economy of salvation, — which, however, is not to be taken in the coarse and outward sense taught by Jewish theology in its doctrine of the Hi^SB', " splendor guidam creatus, quern Beus quasi prodigii vel miraculi loco ad magnificentiam suam ostendendam alicuhi hahitare fecit" Maimon. Mor. nehoch. i. 64. Cf. Bengel on Acts vii. 2, " gloria, divinitas conspicua." — Cf Rom. ix. 23, "va yvojplari tov ttKovtov tjj? Sofj;? axnov eirl a-Kevr] eXeov? ; Eph. i. 12, eh to elvai ■fjpba'i eh eiraivov Bo^r]'} aiiTov ; ver. 14; 1 Tim. i. 11, KaTct TO evayyeXiov t'^? Bo^t]'; tov fiaKapiov 6eov ; Eev. xxi. 11, 23; John xi. 40, eav •maTevwTi,a/M)v t?)? yvwcre(o'i]/j,elv, denotes, according to the 2 D ^o|a 210 Jo^d^a> context, angelic j)owers, so far as there belongs to them an appearance demanding recognition. (h.) More specially Bo^a means not the glorious appearance, attracting attention, of the person or thing itself, but that in the appearance which attracts attention, e.g. splendour, glory, brightness, adornment, in which sense the LXX. use it for I'ln, Isa. liii. 2, ii. 10; Dan. si. 20. IDH^ Isa. xl. 7, Tracra So^a avdpcoirov w? dv9o<; '^^oprov. finNDrij Ex. xxviii. 2, 36; 1 Chron. xxii. 5; Isa. iii. 18; cf. Esth. v. 1, especially, however = 1133, which is rendered only in Ex. xxviii. 2, 36, Isa. xi. 10, by ti/j,'^, in Isa. xxii. 18 by KaXoii, else- where always by So^a, Isa. xxxv. 2, Ix. 13, ti^apn lias = 17 B6^a rod Al^uvov. Matt. iv. 8 ; Luke iv. 6, ^ S. tSiv ^acriXeicov tov Koafiov. Matt. vi. 29 ; Luke xii. 27, ^ S. ^oXo/imvo^. Acts xxii. 11 ; 1 Cor. xv. 40, 41 ; 2 Cor. iii. 7 ; 1 Pet. i. 24 ; Eev. xviii. 1, xxi. 24 ; Phil iii. 19; Eph. i. 6, S. ttj? '^(apiTO';. Ver. 18, t^? Kk'r]povoiJ,ia<;. Col. i. 27, tou fiva-rrjpiov; 1 Cor. ii. 7. In this sense God is designated 7N")'t?'l 1123, Jer. ii. 11; Isa. iii. 8; Ps. cvi. 20; cf. 2 Cor. viii. 23, Bo^a Xpiarov. Eph. iii. 13, ^rt? {sc. al ^X/i^ets fMOv inrep vfiwv) iarlv Bo^a vfiwv. 1 Thess. ii. 2 0, vfiei^ jdp eo-re ^ Bo^a ■^jxuv Kal r) yapd. Luke ii. 32, Bo^a Xaov aov 'la-parfK. A o ^ d^ai, to think, to he of opinion, to suppose ; e.g. op6as<;, o{/t(b? Bo^., opposed to elBevai, 'yi^vmaKeiv ; to hold any one for anything, e.g. Bo^d^ofiai dBi,Ko'i, Plat. Hep. ii. 363 E ; Plut. de Supcrst. 6, Bo^d^ovai (po^epov to evjjbeve.';, Kal rvpavviKov to irarpiKov. The meaning connected therewith, to recognize, to honour, to praise, is found only in later Greek, e.g. Polyb. vi. 53. 10, eV dpeTfi BeBo^aajxevoi dvBph. LXX. = 133, Lev. x. 3, iv toi<; iyyt^ova-i fioi dyMO-Si^ao/Mai Kal iv irdarj rfi avvaycoyfj Bo^aadijaofiai, ; Judg. ix. 9, etc. It is further employed by the LXX., in accordance with their peculiar use of Bo^a, to denote to invest with dignity, to give any one esteem, to cause him honour hy putting him into an honour alle position; Esth. iii. 1, iBo^aaev 6 /SacrtXev? 'Apra^ep^rji; 'Ap,dv Kal vyfrcoaev avTov Kal iirpoiTo^dOpei irdvTCCv twv (j>i\o)v avrov = 7"^,^ ; cf. Ps. xxxvii. 20, daa tS> BoPacr- Orjvai avToii'i Kal vyjroydrjvai.^'^^y'.. Esth. vi. 6-11 ; Ex. xv. 6, rj Be^id aov BeBo^aarai iv la-xvi = '^1^l Vv. 1, 21 = nw. Isa. xliv. 23, iXvTpwaa-ro 6 6e6<: tov 'laKo)^, Kal 'laparjX So|ao-^?;'c7€Tat = iNsnn. Cf especially, however, Ex. xxxiv. 29, 30, 35, BeBo^acrrai 17 6-<^i'i TOV 'xjpdip.aTO'; tov Trpoamirov avroO = pp, to ray forth, to shine. Accordingly we may distinguish even in the N. T. the meanings — (I.) To recognise, honour, praise. Matt. vi. 2 ; Luke iv. 15; Eom. xi 1 3. rov Qeov Matt. V. 16, ix 8, xv. 31; Mark ii 12; Luke v. 25, 26, vii 16, xiu. 13, xvii. 15, xviii 43, xxiii 47; Acts xi 18, xiii 48, xxi 20; Eom. i 21, xv. 9 ; 1 Cor. vi 20; 2 Cor. ix. 13 ; GaL i 24; 1 Pet. iv. 11, 14 (over against pkaa^rnidv), 16 ; Eev. xv. 4. The occasion is indicated by eV/ with the dative, Luke ii. 20; Acts iv. 21 ; by iv, Gal. i 24. (II.) (a.) To Iring to honour, make glorious, glorify (strictly, to give any one importance). So in 1 Cor. xii. 26, elVe Bo^d^erai ev /.teAo?, opposed to Trda-'^ei.v ; cf. Bo^a opposed to Jofa^B 211 'EvBold^co vdOrjfia. Heb. v. 5, ov')(^ kavrov iSo^aae yevrjdrjvai dp')(tepea. 1 Pet. i. 8, X'^P"' ^^^°^" aa-fievT) ; cf. So^d^eadai and x^-'up^iv conjoined, 1 Cor. xii. 26, Eev. xviii. 7, oaa iSo^acre avTrjv, ToaovTov Bore airy jSacravta-jjiov icaX Trevdoq ; 2 Cor. iii. 1 0. The expression in Eom. viii. 30, oi)? iBiKaiaxrev, tovtov; koX iBo^aaev, rests upon the connection existing between calling, justification, and the object of Christian hope, the future So^a, Eom. viii. 18, 21 ; 2 Cor. iii. 18 ; cf. Eom. v. 1, 2 ; 1 Thess. ii. 12 ; 1 Pet. v. 10. SwBo^d^eiv, Eom. viii. 17 (i.) Specially, however, is the Johannine use of Bo^d^eiv connected with this meaning. As the Bo^a of God is the revelation and manifestation of all that He has and is of good (vid. Bo^a), it is said of a self-revelation in which God manifests all the goodness that He is, Bo^d^ei to ovo/j,a avTov, John xii. 28. So far as it is Christ through whom this is made manifest. He is said to glorify the Father, John xvii. 1, 4 ; or the Father is glorified in Him, xiii 31, xiv. 13; and Christ's meaning is analogous when He says to His disciples, iv tovtu) eBo^daOr] o irarrjp /jlov, iva Kapirov irokvv opLaa<; fie . . . a-jroKaXv^ai, tov vlov avTov iv ifioi; Col. i. 19 ; Kom. xv. 26, 27 ; 1 Thess. ii. 8, iii. 1 ; 2 Cor. v. 8, evBoKov/iev IxaWov iicBTj/jLricrai, k.t.X.; cf Ecclus. XXV. 16. — (II.) Where the matter under considera- tion is the relation of the subject to an object, the latter is expressed in profane Greek by the dative (vid. supra), rarely by the addition of eVt tlvi ; — in the LXX., on the contrary, we find the accusative, as in Ps. Ixviii. 17, Ii. 18, 21 ; Lev. xxvi. 34, 41 ; 1 Esdr. i. 55 (Ecclus. XV. 1 7) ; once eVt with the dative in Judith xv. 1 ; mostly, however, iv with dative, 2 Sam. xxii. 20; Isa. bcii. 4; Mai. ii. 17; Hab. ii. 4; Ps. xliv. 5, — varieties of usage which arose probably from the circumstance that when the word first began to be employed by writers its construction was not quite settled, and that fixed rules were formed on the basis of the example of the authors above quoted. In the K T. the accusative occurs only in Heb. x. 6, 8 (from Ps. xl. 7). Elsewhere iv, Matt. iii. 17, xvii. 5 ; Mark i. 11 ; Luke iii. 22 ; 1 Cor. x. 5 ; Heb. x. 38 ; 2 Cor. xii. 10 ; 2 Thess. ii. 12 ; ek, 2 Pet. i. 17, Matt. xii. 18, where Lachm. reads simply the accusative. This mode of indicating the object is justified by the circumstance that elBoicelv may be classed among the verbs which denote an emotion, a mood, a sentiment cherished towards any one = to take pleasure in something, to have an inclination towards it, as OeKeiv also is used by the LXX., and dyairav is sometimes combined with the dative in classical Greek. — In general the LXX. employ BeKeiv far more frequently to express that which they elsewhere express by evBoKelv = K?^ and ntfj. So e.^. = )^an^ deXeiv with the accusative, Deut. xxi. 14; Ps. xviii. 22, pvaeTai EvSoKeo 214 EvSoK/k (le, on, rj6e\7jae fie. (Of. Matt, xxvii. 43, pvadaOaj vvv avrov, el Oekei aiirov.) Ps. xxxiv. 12, 6e\eiv ^(oijv, cf. 1 Pet. iii. 10, ^corjv ayaTTciv, and }*sn = ayairav, Ps. li. 8 ; Hos. vi. 6, eXeos 8e\tt> Koi ov dvacav, cf. Heb. x. 6, 8. Herewith cf. eiihoKelv with the accusative in the places quoted. Further, fsn = 6e\eiv iv, quite in the same sense as eiiSoKelv ev, 1 Sam. xviii. 22, 6eKei, ev aol o ^acriXev<; ; 2 Sam. xv. 26, ovtc tjOeXrjKa iv aoi, correlative with ver. 25, eav evpco ■^^dpiv; 1 Kings x. 8, rjOeKrjcrev ev aol Sovvai ae eVt Bpovov^IcrparjX, as in 2 Ohron. ix. 8. Further = nxi, 1 Chron. xxviii. 4, ev e/Mol rjdeXriae rov r^eviadai p,e el<; ^aaCkea, parallel previously with eKXiyeadat and alperi^eiv, cf. Matt. xii. 18. like Oekeiv in these combinations, evBoKelv also denotes what is elsewhere rendered eKX,eyea-8ai, and alpeTi^etv, or TrpoaSe'^ea-Bai,, as nv"i is rendered in Isa. xlii. 1 ; Amos v. 22 ; Mai. i. 10 ; cf. Prov. iii. 12, wapaSe'^ecrOai, and accordingly evSoKeiv is fitted to express the same bearing on God's part to men (Matt. iii. 1 7, xvii. 5 ; Mark i. 1 1 ; Luke iii. 2 2 ; 1 Cor. x. 5 ; Heb. x. 3 8 ; 2 Pet. i. 17 ; Matt. xii. 18), for which elsewhere these latter expressions are employed (hence also the aor. ev w evh6K7)a-a,'M.&tt. iii. 17, etc.). Cf Isa. xlii. 1, 6 eKXeKT6<; fiov, 'TrpoaeBe^aro avrov rj "^v^ij /jlov, for which Matt. xii. 18,6 dyairrjTo^ fxov, et? ov evBoxTja-ev 17 ''j^v^V A'oi'. Cf. also 6 vl6v (cf. deXr]/j.a = tivn, Ps. xxx. 6, 8), and in this sense is parallel to eiiXoyia, blessing, Ps. v. 15, evXoy^crei<; BUaiov, Kvpie, o)? oirXai evBoKM'i iaTe(^dva)cras Vfid';, cf Deut. xxxiii. 23 ; Ps. cv. 16, i/jLimrXais Trdv ^aiov evBoKia'i. Cf |iS"; = eXeo?, Isa. Ix. 10 = T^dpt?, Prov. xi. 27. Hence Theodoret, 9j ctt' evepyecria ^ovXTjai^. — Of God's purpose of grace, Matt. xi. 26 ; Luke x. 21, ovtco? iyevero evSoKta eiiTTpoadev crov; Eph. i. 9, Kard jrjv evBoKiav avrov; Phil. ii. 13 (cf v-jrip, Eom. XV. 8). In Eph. i. 5 it serves more exactly to characterize the BeXrjfia, Kara rrjv evBoKuiv EvBoKM 215 AovX,o {nraKovere. Cf. Amnion., p. 45, BovXoi fiev ? eVt- KoXvfifJLa e')(pvTe^ rri<; /ca/cta? ttjv eKevdepiav, dXfC o)? 6eov SovXoi. The expression Bov\o<; 6eov {jcvpiov, XpicTTov), however, bears a twofold meaning. It denotes — (I.) That relation of subservience and subjection of will which beseems all who confess God and Christ, and are devoted to Him ; and indeed with the distinction, that whilst (a.) some are designated His servants by God Himself, and are separate from others as belonging to Him and well-pleasing on account of their conduct towards Him (for this latter see Eev. xxii. 3), so e.^. Ps. cv. 6, 26, and Isa. Ixv. 9, where Bov\o<: is conjoined with e/cXe/CTo? ; Ps. cv. 26, i^aTreaTeiXe MwiJaTiv rov Bovkov avrov, Aapoov ov e^eXe^aro eavTa>; Job i. 8, ii. 3, xlii. 8 ; Joel iii. 2 ; Acts ii. 18 ; Deut. xxxii. 36 ; Lev. xxv. 42 ; Eev. i. 1, ii. 20, vii. 3, xi. 18, xix. 2, 5, xxii. 3, 6 ; in other cases (&.) men thus designate them- selves ; and accordingly merely their relation to God, i.e. their devotion, submission, is expressed, as e.g. Ex. iv. 10 ; 1 Sam. iii. 9, xxiii. 10; 1 Cor. vii. 22 (cf ver. 23, /x^ r/ivea-Oe SovXoi dvOpm-waiv) ; Eph. vi. 6; Col. iv. 12; Luke ii. 29. Cf. IBov r) BovXt] Kvpiov ryevono fioi Kaja to pr)p,d aov, Luke i. 38, 48 ; avvBovXo<;, Eev. ii. 9. It is the same idea which gives weight and significance to Phil. ii. 7 — one of the most daring expressions, — /lop^rjv BovXov Xa^av, over against iv p-opcfifj 6eov vTrap-)(oiv, ver. 6. (II.) A peculiar relation of devotcdness, in which a man is at God's disposal, and is employed by Him, — a special form of the general relation referred to above; cf the passages in the second part of Isaiah, where the servant of Jehovah (6 Trat? /xou) is at the same time His Elect One ; cf also Eev. xxii. 9. Thus the prophets are designated BovXoL ToO 6eov, Eev. x. 7, eTeXeadr) to fivaTijpiov tov Beov, to? evr]y'yeXiaev tov? eavTov BovXov; tov; -Trpo^iqTa; ; cf Jer. vii. 25, xxv. 4; Amos iii. 7. — Moses, Eev. xv. 3, and Neh. x. 30, cf Josh. i. 2, Ex. xiv. 31, Num. xii. 7 == Oepdirmv; Deut. xxxiv. 5, ot/cerT??; Ps. cxxxii. 10, cxliv. 10 ; Acts xvi. 17; cf Eurip. Ion. 309, toO 6eov KoXovfiai BovXo<; etpLi re. In the 0. T., after Moses and Joshua, David is the first who is called the servant of Jehovah in a prominent sense, Ps. xviii. 1, xix. 12, 14, cxliv. 10 ; 2 Sam. vii. 20. (See Delitzsch on Ps. xviii.) — So also the apostles. Acts iv. 29 ; cf. Tit. i. 1. In the same manner Paul describes himself as a BoyXo; ''Irjcrov Xpia-Tov, Eom. i. 1, which obviously has relation to his office ; cf. Gal. i. 1 0, el eVt dvd poiTroi; fjpea-Kov XpiaTov BovXo<: ovk av fjfirjv. Cf also Phil. i. 1, where Paul designates himself and Timothy without further addition BovXoi XpujTov 'Itjo-ov ; and 2 Tim. ii. 24, where there is undoubtedly a reference to the special relation of service (and the correspondent behaviour, see I. h) ; BovXov Be KVpLov ov Bel p^d-^eadai, dXXa riinov elvai tt/jo? irdvTa;, BiBanTiKov k.t.X. ; Jas. i. 1 ; 2 Pet. i. 1 ; Jude 1 ; Eev. i. 1. — Only once does Paul use the word to designate his relation to the church, 2 Cor. iv. 5, Kijpiaa-ofiev Xptarov ^Irjcrovv Kipiov, eavToii; Be BovXovi vfi&v Bia AovXo<; 217 AovXevto Irjaovv ; cf. i. 24, ov^ on Kvpievofiev vficav t^? Trta-Tew?, aXKa crvvepyoL ecrfiev ri)? %a/5a,9 v/icoi' J 1 Cor. ix. 19j e\€v6epo<; yap 0}v ek irdvTOiv, irdcnp efiavrov tSovXaa-a ; cf. BtdKovo<:. H vvSovXo<;,6, fellow-servant, Matt, xviii. 28, 29, 31, 33, xxiv. 49; o tov aiirou SecTirorov, Pollux, Onom. iii. 82. In Attic Greek 6fi6BovXo<; is often substituted for it. — Used (I.) of companions in the same relationship of devotion and suljcetion to God, Eev. xxii. 9, as also of sicbscrvienee (vid. ZovXoi), Eev. vi. 14. And (II.) to A&noiQ participation in tlie same work, in the same divine commission, Eev. xix. 10, xxii. 9, connected with SidKovo<;, Col. i. 7, iv. 7. A ovX6(o, to make a servant, to subject, to subjugate, Acts vii. 6 ; 1 Cor. ix. 1 9 ; passive, to be subjugated, subdued ; perfect, to be dependent ; Gal. iv. 3, inro to, crTotp(;eta tov Koafxov rjjjiev BeBovXm/jLevoi. It denotes not so much a relation of service, as rather, primarily, the relation of dependence upon, bondage to any one ; e.g. in the case of subjugated nations, etc.; so in 2 Pet. ii 19 ; Tit. ii. 3. To this the use of the word in Eom. vi. 18, 22, owes its significance, iXev6ep(o9evTe<; Be dirb tjj? di^apria'; eBovXwdrjTe rfj BiKaioavvrj ; ver. 22, BovXmOevTe'; Be t£ Oea ; cf. the adjective, to, fieXr) BovXa, ver. 19. — In 1 Cor. vii. 15 the words ov BeBoiiXcorai 6 aSeX.^os ^ ^ aBeX(f}'q are hardly to be explained as standing in antithesis with 'x^copl^eadai, or ver. 13, firj afpieTw, but, as Meyer (in loc) justly remarks, relate to the legal necessity, to which attention is directed in the eV toiovtoi,<;, " in such cases ;" cf. ver. 39. A ovXevo), to he in the position of a servant, and to act accordingly ; that is, both to. be subject and to serve in subjection, in bondage, — used of actions which are directed by others. Cf. BovXovaOai as opposed to aiiTovo/io';, Xen. Hell. iv. 8. 1, 2. (I.) To be subjugated, reduced to bondage, rovi, John viii. 33 ; Acts vii. 7 ; Eom. ix. 12. Absolutely, GaL iv. 25, BovXevei fiera twv reKvcov avrri<;, opposed to eXevOepa eariv, ver. 26, synonymous with viro vopiov elvai, ver. 21. The similar expression in Eom. vii. 6, (ocne BovXeveiv ■f)p,a<; iv KaivoTTjTi, irvevfiaTO'; koX ov TraXaioTrjTi ypafifiaro';, is occasioned by the relation to the vofio:; hitherto considered, and by the antithesis between ypdfifxa and irvevfia intended to be set up by the apostle. Fpdfifia, namely (which see), denotes the law as a fixed and therefore outwardly abiding norm, and the words eXevOepa ea-Tiv d-TTo rov voiJbov, ver. 4, readily suggested the expression BovXeveiv. At the same time the apostle had in view, not merely the dissolution of the relation to the law, but also the establishment of a new relation, in which Christ takes the place of the law, just as a husband represents the law relatively to his wife until another can rightly take his place, vv. 1-4. Pinally, however, in order to express the change effected in the BovXeveov itself, the apostle in ver. 6 contrasts, not as hitherto v6fio<; aud Xpia-roi;, but irvevfia and rypdfifia ; for in the Trvev/jba the relation of Christ to man manifests itself analogously to that of the law to man in the ypdfijjLa, hence also we read BovXeveiv iv rwi and not BovXeveiv twL (II.) To serve in bondage, to put one's dependence into effect, e.g. to obey, Luke xv. 29, Z E AovXevoi 218 Avvaiii<; BovKevQ) (701 Kol ovBeTTOTe ivToKiqv crov TraprjXOov ; Matt. vi. 24 ; Luke xvi. 13, Bvcrl KvpioK, 6ea> KOL /lafjicova ; Gal. v. 13, SovXevere aWtjXoK ; cf. Eph. v. 21, v7roTac7cr6jj,evoi, aXA-jjA-ot? ; Eph. vi. 7 ; 1 Tim. vi. 2. Metaphorically, e.g. rat? Tjhovah, Plat., Xen., Herodian ; toi? .voiioi,<;, Plato. In the N. T. Tit. iii. 3, SowXeyoz/re? iiriOv/Miai'; Koi 7jBovai<; iroiKiXal'; ; E.oin. vii. 25, S. vofim 6eov ; vi. 6, rfj ajxapTia; Gal. iv. 8, S. tow (pvaei fir) ovcnv 0eot? ; 1 Thcss. i. 4, 6eS) ^(ovTi; Col. iii. 24; Eom. xiv. 18, xvi. 18, Xpiara. The expression eavTw, Xpiaro) ^Tjv, 2 Cor. v. 15, may be compared. Eurip. Ion. 182, $oij3a) BovXevaco. — If we read Eom. xii. 11, with Griesbach and others, tS Kaipw SovX6vovTe<;, instead of the Eeceived Tm Kvplo), which is favoured by the context with its special exhortations, we shall have to understand the apostle as requiring an exact and careful consideration of the circum- stances of the time. Tm Kaip& SovXeveiv denotes, namely, like the Latin tcmpori scrvire, to take the circumstances into consideration, to regulate oneself Tyy them. For examples, see Tholuck and Pritzsche in loc. In such a connection the otherwise ambiguous expression can have no less force than the general exhortation in Eph. v. 16, CoL iv. 5, namely, a force agreeable to the Christianity of the writer and the persons addressed ; vid. i^ayo- pd^eiv. A ovXeia, at, r), servitude, dependence; the state of a hovXot, who is not his own master; opposed to eKevdepia, Gal. v. 1. In this place, as well as in iv. 24, hiaOrjKr] . . . eh SovXelav ryevvucra, cf. ver. 26 and Eom. viii. 15, irvevfia BovXeias, opposed to vlo6eaia<} (cf. John viii. 35), we must understand by BovXeia the state of involuntary dependence into which man is put by the law. Prom it we are freed by Christ (Gal. v. 1, ii. 4), in that He brings about a BovXevetv iv irveviiaTi, — a figurative expression, cf. Eom. viii. 4. • — On Heb. ii. 15, ocrot <^o/3c() davdrov Boa iravrbt rod ^rjv evo^ot rjaav BovXeiat, comp. Lev. xxvi. 3 6, i-wd^a BovXeiav et? j-qv icapBiav avTwv . . . koI Bico^STai avToh'i Trda-r) Bvvd/j,ei Bwa/Movfievot, . . . et? Traaav vTrojxovrjv (Isa. xl. 31). Cf. Plato, Pliilcb. 64 E, r] rdjaOov BvvafU'i. Mostly, however, it is power showing itself as power (not passive), poivcr in action — might. So in Rom. i. 2 0, ij d&o<; tov 6eov BwafiK kul Oeiorr]';. In this sense Paul describes the gospel as Bvvap,i,<; 6eov et? awTrjpiav Travrl tm TrucnevovTi, Eoin. i. 16, as he says similarly in 1 Cor. i. 18, 6 \6'yo<; rod aravpov . . . rot? aQ3^ofj,evoi<; ■^/uv Bvvaixi5? evae^eiai;, opposed to fiopipcoai';. In the same sense in tlie doxologies as in Matt. vi. 13 ; Eev. vii. 12, xii. 10, xix. 1 ; in the combination iv Bwdp-ei, e.g. Mark ix. 1 , 17 ^aaCKela tov Oeov eKrjXvOvia iv Bwdfiei. ; Luke iv. 36; Eom. i. 4 ; 1 Cor. XV. 43 ; Col. i. 29 ; 1 Cor. iv. 19, 20, ov yap iv Xoyqj 7} /Sao-, t. 6. dW' iv Bwdjiei. God Himself, as the power who is exalted above and prevails over all things, is designated absolutely t) Bvv., Matt. xxvi. 64 ; Mark xiv. 62 (in the parallel passage, Luke xxii. 69, 17 Bvv. tov deov), like nnuan with the Eabbins, Bo^a, 2 Pet. i. 17, etc.; fieyaXco- avvT], Heb. i. 3 ; 6 fiovoi; BvvdaT7j<;, 1 Tim. vi. 15; o ttj? oTracri/? Bvvd/ieo}<; Bwda-T-q's, 3 Mace. V. 51. Analogous is the use of BvvafMci (i^ovcrla) in profane Greek to denote the ruling jiower, the authorities, Xen., Dem., Diod. Sic. Comp. Bwd/jLe^ as a designation of persons, 1 Cor. xii. 29 (Acts viii. 10). With this may be compared the designation of supramundane, angelic powers in the N. T. and Hellenistic Greek in general by Bvvajxi,'; or Bvvdfiei,';, conjoined with dp^^i], i^ovala, KvptoT-r]';, corresponding to the rabbinical ninis, Eph. i. 21, Eom. viii. 38, 1 Cor. xv. 24, 1 Pet. iii. 22, vTroTayivTwv avTa> dyyeXcov kuI i^ovcnasv kuI Bwd/xecov, perhaps describing principally their relation to humanity (but see under dyyeXot). Cf. the Philonic doctrine of the divine Bwd/xeK. For further details, vid. i^ovaia; 2 Thess. i. 7, dyyeKoi Bwdp-eax; Kvpiov. Where the appearance of Christ, ficTo, So'^t;? Kal Bvvd/j,eco<;, is spoken of. Matt. xxiv. 30, Mark xui 26, Luke xxi. 27, we may conceive the Swa/xt? as represented by the accompanying hosts of angels who, like an army in prof. Greek, Plutarch, Mar. 13, are designated Bvvap,i<; tov Kvpiov, Ps. ciii. 21, cxlviii. 2 = "in| say. Not to be confounded therewith is the expression in Matt. xxiv. 29, al Bvvd/M6t<; tS>v ovpavojv aaXevdrjcrovTat, ; Luke xxi. 2 6 (Mark xiii. 2 5, al Bvv. al iv rots ovp). 'H Bvv. Twv ovp. denotes, indeed, in Ps. xxxii. 6, Dan. vui. 10, plural in Isa. xxxiv. 4, the starry host ; but in the places cited this meaning does not harmonize with the words o ^Xto? , . . KaX 17 crekijvi] . . . koI oi da-Tepe'; which precede ; so that it must be assumed to add a new feature. I prefer, therefore, to take it to denote the powers which are connected with tJie stars or the heavens (cf. Gen. i. 14—19), to whoso influence the earth is subject. It thus corresponds to Job xxxviiL 33, ii9f'?1 ^''■W '^^'^^ pxa. Cf. Cremer on Matt. xxiv. 25, p. 104 sqq. Aiva^it; 220 Avva^i'; As a siiecial peculiarity of the N. T. use of Svvafj,i,<;, may be further adduced its appli- cation to signs and wonders. Not merely are we told that Bvva/Mi,'; Kvptov rjv eh to IdaOai avTov<;, Luke v. 1 7 ; Svvaiju,<; irap' avTov e'f JjpxeTo koI Iuto •jrdvTa<;, vi. 19; cf. viii. 46 ; Mark v. 30, but the miraculous activity of Christ, is traced to the Svvd/Jiei'; workincf in Him. Mark vi. 14, ivepyovaiv al Bvv. iv civtS; Matt. xiv. 2, xiii. 54, Trodev TOTJTq) r) a-ocpla avrq Kot al hvv.; cf 1 Cor. xii. 10, ivepji^fiaTa Svvdfiewv; xii. 28, 29, ixr/ ■7rdvTe<; Bvv., — a mode of expression which is most readily traceable to the employment of Bvvdfj,eK by Philo to designate tlia divine attributes, which were represented in the form of intermediate beings, who were the media of God's external activity. Cf John i. 52. (To a similar notion may perhaps be traced the words in Acts viii. 1 0, ovt6<; ea-riv rj Bvvafu<: Tov 6eov rj KaXovjievn fiejoKr], cf de Wette in loc.) — Further, miracles themselves are also passively termed Bwdfie^, Matt. xi. 20, 21, 23 ; Mark vi. 2, 5; Luke x. 13, xix. 37; Acts iL 22, viii. 13, xix. 11 ; 2 Cor. xii. 12 ; Gal. iii. 5 ; Heb. ii. 4 ; -n-omv Bvvd/j.eK, Matt, vii. 22, xiii. 58, Mark ix. 39, as effects wherein power is in a special sense unfolded and manifested, cf. -n-oielv Bvvdfiiv, Ps. cviii. 14, Ix. 14=^!n nfV; Job xxxvii. 13, vov6ereXa0ai Bvvafjiiv Kvplov = niN^M. Further analogies for this usage, which we find also in patristic Greek, do not exist. "We can scarcely take the term in this sense in Heb. vi. 5, BwdfieK fiiWovTO'i aiwvo'i yevaaaOai, for the writer is treating of an inward personal experience of the Bvv., such as we may have of the word of God (koXov r^evaajjuevovi Oeov prjixa BwdfieK; re (I. almv), which we could not be expected to have of miracles (Heb. ii. 4). They are influences which are connected with or arise from another order of things, but have no causal coimection with the present, and as such confer a special worth on the state and position, whose loss is referred to. Cf Eph. ii. 2 ; Tit. ii. 12 ; Heb. vii. 16 ; Eph. i. 19 ; 1 Pet. i. 3. Apart from these peculiarities of usage, Sura/xi? in other respects also has a distinctive place in the treasury of N. T. words. It denotes the power which manifests itself in all the modes of the activity of God, especially in His redeeming work. We read, accord- ingly, not only of the dtBio^ tov Oeov Svvafii';, Eom. i. 20, Heb. i. 3, which is set forth in the works of creation ; but, for example, when speaking of the possibility of the resurrec- tion of the dead, and therewith of the promised redemption, Christ says, TrXavdade /xf} etSore? ra? 'ypacpa<; /irjBe Trjv BvvajiLv tov 6eov, Matt. xxii. 29 ; Mark xii. 24. Especially at the beginning and concluding realization of salvation is the power of God active and discernible, Luke i. 35; 1 Cor. vi. 14; 2 Cor. xiii. 4 (the birth and resurrection of Christ); and where Paul speaks of the Bivafj.i'j tov Oeov, as in Eph. i. 19, 2 Cor. vi. 7, Eph. iii. 7, 20, 2 Tim. i. 8, cf 1 Pet. i. 5, 2 Cor. xii. 9, reference is made to the power which manifested itself in the resurrection of Christ, which works a-ccTrjpla (2 Tim. i. 8 ; 1 Pet. i. 5), and displays itseK savingly in and on man, — to God's redeeming and renew- incf power, cf 1 Cor. ii. 5, "va 17 Trt'o-Tt? v/iiav fir/ y iv crocpla dvOpw-wutv dXk iv Bvvdfiei Oeov. In this sense Paul terms the gospel the word of the cross, Christ the crucified, the power of God (see above). Power operates and appears everywhere where God is at Avvafiii 221 'EvSvvafioca work revealing and carrying out the plan of salvation (cf. 2 Pet. i. 1 6), or where the results of His redeeming work are found either in the whole or in the individual ; cf 2 Cor. iv. 7, xii. 9; Eph. iii. 16, 20; Col. i. 11; 2 Thess. i. 11, ii. 9; Heb. vii. 16 ; 1 Pet. 1. 5 ; 1 Cor. xv. 43. In accordance therewith, the work of those who are engaged in the service of the divine economy of salvation is done in power, Acts vi. 8 ; 1 Thess. i. 5 ; Col. i. 29 ; 1 Cor. ii. 5. It is connected with the Holy Spirit, by whose agency the per- sonal possession of salvation is brought about. Acts i. 8, x. 38, Luke xxiv. 49, Eom. xv. 13, 19, and who for this reason is termed irvevfia Bwd/jieax;, 2 Tim. i. 7 ; 1 Pet. iv. 14. Thus, always according to the contexts, these very determinate ideas are connected witli the word Bvva/iK (synonyms, tVp^tJ?, Kprno'^, i^ovala), — ideas which ought not especially to he excluded from the doxologies ; cf. Eev. vii. 12, xi. 17, xii. 10, xv. 8, xix. 1. The example was set by the 0. T. with the stress it laid on the power of God, cf. Deut. iii. 24 ; Ps. xxi. 14, Ixxxvi. 8, Ixxxix. 7, cxlvii. 5 ; Isa. xl. 26, 29, 1. 2, etc. Cf. !>«, D'iiSs, •'W i^x. " God and Power are one and the same," says Fronmiiller in ZeUer's 5tM. Worterbuch, ii. 87. Cf. Swdarr]'; as used of God, especially in the Apocrypha. A vvda-T7j<;, 6, possessor of power ; in general, of such as are in possession of authority, who occupy any high position; e.g. Herod, ii. 32. 2, yevea-Oai dvBpaiv Bwaa-Teav TratSa? v^pt.crTd';. So in Job vi. 23, ix. 22, xv. 20=r'!V; I'^v. xix. 15 = Pita; Ecclus. viii. 1. Then in the LXX. Gen. 1. 4, Jer. xxxiv. 19, of the chief officers; in the latter passage = D^PlEiri. So in Acts vui. 2 7, Svvda-T7]<; KavSaKTii. Cf Constit. apost. p. 425, oi irpea-jSvrepoi koX ol BidKovoi . . . Svvda-Tat, virdp'^ovcn t^9 eKKXrja-iaf. Specially, however, of the independent rulers of larger or smaller territories (rex and regulus) ; Phavor. Svvdcrrrj<:- 6 Tvpavvo<; koX 6 ^acnXevi;; Luke i. 52 (cf. Ecclus. xii. 5). — Avvda-TTj'; is used of God in the Apocrypha with the same predilection and emphasis as that with which God's power is made prominent in the 0. T., e.g. in Ecclus. xlvi. 5, 6, o {/•\|r(,crTo? SwacTTiy?, parallel with o fieya? Kvpioj'i, therefore actively of him who holds something to be true, somewhat Uke the German Mdeshelfer, one associated with another as surety.) In the N. T. only in Heb. vii. 22, KpecTTovo<; BiadiJKr]'; yeyovev 6771/09, which is not to be referred to the death of Christ, by which He has answered for us (to which 6771/09 might also be apphed, cf. Ecclus. xxix. 15, 14, Prov. vi. 1; but then it could not have been KpecTT. Bia9. 'iyy., but 677. rifiuiv), but to His eternal life through which (not with which) He is surety for the better covenant {Kpeir-rtov hiaOrjKri), cf. vv. 21, 24, 25. — "E771/09 often occurs in the Apocrypha, e.g. 2 Mace. x. 28, ol /lev eyyvov e^ovTes evrjfi€pLaX.a)v = similar. Wisd. vi. 2 0, acfidapcrla Sk 67711? ehai TToiei 6eov. With and without yevov;, yivei, of kinship, e.g. Aeschylus in Plato, Bep. iii. 391 E, ol Zrjvo'i e'771;? ; Eurip. Heracl. 3 7, toZo-S' 677^? ovra^. Further, 6 eyyvrcurco yevov<;, yivei, the nearest of kin, Plato, Demosthenes. Comp. above, Euth iii. 12; Ex. xxxii. 27 ; Lev. xxi. 2 ; Judith xvi. 4, 6, ol eyy nrra; Job vi. 15, ol iyyvTaroi fiov = r:^. — Esth. i. 14, ol iyyi)^ tov ^acnXeco';, ol irpcoroi, TrapaKaOi^ixevoi rai ^aaiKei=^71pn ''J& ''N\ It is used in a special sense in Eph. ii. 13, v/j,el<; ol ttote oi/re? fiaxpav iyyv<; iyevijOi^re iv Tai atyxari tov XptcTTOv, ver. 17, iXOwv evrjyyeXUraTO elprjvrjv vfuv roi? fxaKpav koX elpijvrjv Tot? iyyv<;, to distinguish between Jews and Gentiles according to their contracted rela- tions to God and to the blessings of salvation; comp. irpoaaywyi], ver. 18, and ddea iv tS> KoafKp, ver. 12. The Pauline expression (not perhaps to be compared with ol et? fiaKpdv, Acts ii. 39, which, like Isa. xlix. 1, pin"i» Q''I3X?, LXX. = eOvr], denotes locally the heathen world) needs for its explanation no further conjecture as to usage, and finds none such in biblical usage in particular. For in Isa. xlix. 1 the peoples are named according to their local relation to Israel, the peoples and Israel are not distinguished according to some supposed twofold relationship to some third thing. But Isa. Ivii. 19, ktH^cov Kapwov ^(eiXecov elpijvrjv iir elpriv7]v Toui fxaKpav koX toZ? 677119 ovcnv, denotes pin"i7 2i''i??l, the members of God's people scattered far and near ; cf. Esth. ix. 20, i^aweaTeike Tot? 'lovBawK ocTOL rjaav iv ttj 'Apra^ep^ov ^acriXela too'; 677119 Kal Tot? p,aKpdv, synonymous with ol hiecrirapiiivoi iv -Tvaarj %(upa Ty e^co, ver. 19. The apostle's expression rather points to, or rests on, a usage of post-biblical Hebrew with reference to the edvrj ; cf Bereschith Eabba 39, " Quicunqiie gentilem appropinguare facit et proselytum facit, idem est acsi ipsum creasset." Mid. Sam. 28, " Tunc dixit David, An propter proselytos Deus haec facit popido sua ? Dixit ei Deus, Si removes remotos, removebis etiam propinqiios." Literally and originally at the basis of this designation of the heathen and of proselytes, there lies simply a reference to their relation to Israel as a national community, not to Israel as in fellowship with God, since heathen and jproselytes, not heathen and Jews, are 'E'yyv<; 224 'Eyetpcd distinguished as far and near, so that we must recur to 3iiiJ in the sense of kinship ; see Levy, Chald. Wh. under ^i^i^. Probably not till later was there introduced a reference to the ritual of sacrifice, of. Beresch. xxxix. 1 8, " Et tu appropinquans remotos et purificans eos patri suo coeksti ;" cf. Eph. ii. 13, iv too u'l/j,. At any rate, however, St. Paul's expres- sion differs from the Eabbinical as the juxtaposition of heathen and Jews differs from that of heathen and proselytes. The comparative occurs in Xen. and in biblical Greek, Eom. xiii. 11, if^vTepov rjfioiv 7] o-(BT?jjOta fj 076 iiriarevaaixev. The form iyylwv is found only in later Greek and in the LXX. For the superlative both later Greek and the LXX. have the two foims iyyvTaro^ and 677«7To?. 'Eyjl^w, future iyycci), for which Cod. B in Jas. iv. 8 has eyytcrei. Only in later Greek = to bring near and to come near, in a transitive and intransitive sense, as is often the case with verbs of motion ; see under dyo). In biblical Greek, (I.) transitive only in the LXX., and there but seldom. Isa. v. 8, dypov m-po'; dypov iyyi^ovre'; ; Gen. xlviii. 10 ; Ezek. xlii. 13, ol eyyi^ovre'i 7rpo<; Kvpiov ra ayia ruv ayltov ; Ecclus. xxxvi. 12, e^ ainoiv T^ylacre koX -Kpo^ avrov rjyytae, answering to ^npn, of the officiating priests. Usually in the N. T. only (II.) intransitively = to come near, to approach ; local e'77. nvi, Luke vii. 12, XV. 1, 25, xxii. 47 ; Acts x. 9, xxii. 6 ; et?. Matt. xxi. 1 ; Mark xi. 1 ; Luke xviii. 35, xix. 21, xxiv. 28 ; Trpos Tiva, Luke xix. 37 ; ottov, Luke xii. 33. Cf. Phil. ii. 30, /Aexpt OavaTov ■>]yyi,ae, comp. Job xxxiii. 22. Without closer limitation. Matt. xxvi. 46, and often. — Temporal, 6 Katpo?, Matt. xxi. 34 ; o p^pwo?. Acts vii. 17 ; 57 wpa, Matt. xxvi. 45 ; irdvTwv TO reXoy, 1 Pet. iv. 7 ; ^ Vt^^P"', Eom. xiii. 12, here in contrast with vv^; on the other hand, in Heb. x. 25, of the Parousia. In the combination fjyyiKev rj ^aa: t. 0., tmv ovp., Matt. iii. 2, iv. 17, x. 7 ; Mark iv. 15 ; Luke x. 11 (in ver. 9, rjyyi,Kev ij> vfia'i f) ^a dS£KM crov. — On Luke vii. 11, comp. Stier, " In Cpn, human birth and divine ordainment and bestow- ment are included." — Matt. xxiv. 11, 24, of false prophets, etc., the middle passive = io make their appearance. — Cf. i^eyelpo), Eom. ix. 17. Lastly, (VI.) the passive denotes in general, to quit one's previous position, to rise, to get up, Eev. xi. 1 ; John xiv. 31, and often. "E ye pa- 1<;, r], the resuscitation of the dead. Matt, xxvii. 53.-^In the classics it cor- responds with iyeipcQ ; tov 6vfj,ov, t&v t&i'^mv, etc. S vv ey e ipco, to awaken together, both with co-operation and common activity, there- fore the combination of several subjects, Ex. xxiii. 5, avveyepel'j amo p,eT ainov (al. 2 F Xvve XpicrTw, 'X/lpiTi ecrre ae Xpt,(rT(p, ra ana ^rjreh-e. Considered from another side, crvveyepdrjvai, coincides with SiKaicodrjvai ; cf CoL ii. 12, 13, with Eom. iv. 25, v. 1. rprjyopiw, belonging to biblical Greek, from iypj^ryopa, to he awalcened, to he awake = to watch, to refrain from sleep, ISTeh. vii. 3 ; transferred from the physical to the moral- religious sphere, cf Matt. xxvi. 38, 40, 41, it denotes attention (cf Jer. i. 12, v. 6; Mark xiii. 34) to God's revelation, cf. Prov. viii. 34; Isa. xxix. 10; or to the know- ledge of salvation, 1 Thess. v. 6 ; a mindfulness of threatening dangers (cf. Prov. xxiii. 34), which, with conscious earnestness and mind on the alert, keeps from it all drowsiness and all slackening in the energy of faith and conduct ; Matt. xxvi. 40, 'ypriyopelie koI '7rpo(Tevy(ea9e, 'iva p^rj elaekdr^Te et? Treipacrp.ov; Mark xiv. 38; 1 Pet. V. 8, vrjy^aTe, rypi^yopr^aaTe. 6 avTiSLKc; vp,wv Bba^oKoi, o)? Xe'wi/ wpv6p,evo';, irepnraTei, ^r/Tcov riva KaTawlrj (conjoined with v^(f>€iv, further, in 1 Thess. v. 6, cf Joel i. 6) ; the anxiety resulting therefrom to retain possession of salvation, 1 Cor. xvi. 1 3 ; Col. iv. 2 ; Eev. xvi. 1 5, paKapio'; 6 'yprj'^opwv Kal ryjpwv ra ipdria avrov, Iva p,rj jvpvo's ■jrepiirarfi K.T.X. ; care for the salvation and preservation of others, Acts xx. 31 ; Eev. iii. 2, 3. In His eschatological discourses the Lord with this word demands constant watching and preparation for the decisive day of His nvapovaia, Matt. xxiv. 42, 43, xxv. 13; Mark xiii. 34, 36, 37 ; Luke xii. 37, 39 ; cf. ver. 40, 7tW<76le eTOipou k.t.X. Once only of life as opposed to KadevSew of death, 1 Thess. v. 10. — Synonymous with aypvirveiv, Mark xiii. 33 ; Luke xxi. 36 ; Eph. vi. 18 ; Heb. xiii. 17 ; 2 Cor. vi. 5, xi. 27. "Edvo ?, TO, host, multitude, people ; probably from e^os = the multitude hourul iogetlicr "Edvo<; 227 "E^j/09 hy like habits, customs, peculiarities ,■ both of animals = herd, swarm ; e.g. fieKtcaSiv, Horn. H. n. 87; %o//3£<)i;, Od. xiv. 3 7 ; and of men, e.g. era^pcov, yvvaiKuv ; Acts xvii. 2 6, 77-«i; e'^vo? avdpdnrcov; of. Pindar, e'^j/os ^porov. Then, however, more definitely (I.) people, tribe, with reference to their .natural connection generally with each other, less with regard to the separation arising from descent, language, constitution , Xen. Anal. i. 8. 9, ■!ra.vT£<; Kara edvT]. So in the N. T. Matt. xxi. 43, xxiv. 7 ; Luke xxi. 25, xxii. 25 ; Matt. XX. 25 ; Mark xiii. 8 ; Luke xxi. 10 ; Acts ii. 5, iv. 25, 27, vii. 7, viii. 9, x. 35, xiii. 19. Especially in Eevelation along with \a6^, yXwa-aa, <^v\ri, v. 9, vii. 9, x. 11, xi. 9, xiii 7, xiv. 6, xvii. 15 ; 1 Pet. ii. 9. Also of the Jewish people, Luke vii. 5, xxiii. 2; Acts X. 22, xxiv. 3, 10, 17, xxvi. 4, xxviii. 19 ; John xi. 48, 51, 52, xviii. 35 ; cf. John xi. 50, <7vp,j>epei rifitv "va eh dvOpcoiro'; airoOdvri v-jrep tov \aov Kal fir] oXov to 'i9vod<; ; Phaedr. 246 B, T] ■^v)(7j Trdcra ■jravTO'i eVt^LieXetrat tov a-\jrv')(pv, vavTa t6 ovpavov TrepnroXei, dWoTe iv oXXot? etBea-iv jiyvofiivrj, where etSo? scarcely could have been exchanged with p,op(f)ij. Compare also Plutarch, Mor. 1013 C, crai/iaTiKrji ovaia'i koI votjttj^, wv Tf filv vKrjv Kol vTTOKelfievov, rj Be /j,op(f>7]v Ka\ etSo? Ta> yevofievas ■rrapeay(e. As fioptjj'^ denotes the form of the appearance, eZSo? is the appearance as a whole. Accordingly 761-0? and /ao/j^j? seldom stand together; usually it is 761/0? and elBo etSet; Ex. xxiv. 17, to etSo? tjj? So^t]<; Kvplov &a-ei irvp ; Ezek. i. 16; Num. xi. 17 = '1^")?; Gen. xxix. 17, xxxix. 6, xli. 18, 19="iNri, synonymous Avith o-<|rt?. — (II.) Absolutely, the appearance which presents itself, that which appears, e.g. of an image or picture, as in Wisd. xv. 4, crKMypd]aei<; rrjv aKT^vrjv Kara to elBog to BeSetyfiivov aoi ev T

el'Set irpocreiKd^ebv. Hence of the self-manifestation of God before Moses, Num. xii. 8, aTo/ia kuto, a-To/Ma XaXrjaai aiiTm, ev e'lSei koI ov St alvi,y/j,dTQ3v, Kal ttjv Bo^av Kvpiov elSe. It is also a distinct conception, the import of which need not be defined by other references in 2 Cor. v. 7, Sta Trt'crTew? yap TrepnraTov- p,ev, ov Bm eiSov<;. But the signification externa rerum species, the outward form of things, i.e. of the things by which we are surrounded (Tittmann, Lipsius), is an unfortunate extension of the formal signification externa rei .species, in no way justified by linguistic usage. If Bia Trto-Tew? TrepfiraTetv is = to walk by faith, so that faith is the way and manner of the walk (comp. ii. 4; Eom. ii. 27, viii. 25), then Sia et'Sou? is = i5o walk in appearance, in form, so that what appears lends to the walk its distinctiveness. The question now occurs, Does Bia e'lBovq -rrepi/iraTovpLev refer back to evBripovvTe'i ev tw crcopuaTi, or to eKBrjp,ovp,ev airo tov Kvpiov, ver. 6 ? In the first case, the apostle would appeal to the fact that our walk is not moulded as to its character by appearance, but by faith, — a thought which, awkward as the expression would be, might nevertheless be appropriate as the basis of the dappeiv iravTOTe, and practically expressed might run thus, we walk in faith, and regard not what is in sight; cf. Eom. iv. 19, /i?) da6evriaa<; ttj Trt'o-Tet ov KaTe- v6r]aev to eavTov cra>p,a veveKp(c/j,evov ; but it would be inappropriate as the basis of dappovvTei ovv irdvTOTe Kal elB6Te<; k.t.X. As the basis of this twofold statement, the apostle appeals to the fact that it is not appearance, but faith, which moulds our walk; and in connection with the preceding statement, oti ivBrjp.ovvTe'i iv tS acopaTi, eKBrjp^nv- aiv a-TTo TOV Kvpiov, this has a reference to the future, which is the subject treated of in this paragraph, and the expression may be compared with 1 John iii. 2, ovnoj e^avepwdr) Tt eao/j,e9a ; Col. iii. 4, otuv Xpi,aT0<; ^avepaOfj, rj ^corj vp,S3v, Tore koX vp,ei<; avv avTw ^avepojdijcrecrOe iv Bo^rj. We might express it by the particijDles, incrTevovTe'i yap irept- ■TraTovjxev, ovk elBofievoL, cf. Horn. II. v. 462. Akin to this use is etSo? in Ecclus. xxiii. 16 and XXV. 2 ; — xxiii. 16, Bvo e'iBrj TrX7]dvvovcnv dfiapTia<;, Kal to TpiTOv inrd^ei opyijv ; xxv. 2, Tpia Be e'lBr} ifiicrijcrev 57 "^v-^^ fiov — something which appears, thing, then = species, over against yevo<;. It is questionable whether in 1 Thess. v. 22, dirb Trayro? e'lBov; irovqpov d.Tvk'yeade, we are to take irovr^pov as an adjective qualifying e'lBovi, or as a genitive de- pendent upon it, as in Plato, Rep. ii. 3 57 C, Tpkov elBo's ayadov; Joseph. Antt. x. 3. 1, irav elBov i(p6pcov -Troaov; ^a(r) km tov<; ^wet- Bora's rrjv "jrpd^iv elvac, Xeyeiv Kal irepl tovtov eVTe6<;, denoting a consciousness arising out of and qualified by tbe conduct, or a consciousness estimating the conduct, e.g. Diod. iv. 65, Sto. r-qv (rweiSrjaiv rov /Mvaovi et? fiavcav TTepiearrj ] comp. riut. Popl. 4, i'\aw6fjievo<; t& avveiSori tov vpdyfj.aTO'; ; Lucian, Amor. 49, ovSe/jbiaf cLTrpeTTovi GvveLZrjaew'i ■7rapoiKovar]<;. Next, however, it denotes an abiding consciousness, whose nature it is to bear witness to the subject regarding his own conduct, and that, too, in amoral sense, e.g. Dion. Hal. vi. 825. 15, KparicrTov Be irdvTcov to fiTfiev eKovcrlo)^ ■^evBeadat /jLTjSe /j,i,alveiv Trjv avTov avveiSTjaiv; of. Tit. 1. 15. So also in Stobaeus, FlorU. opOi], ayaOri (7vi'elS7]cn<; = fj,7jSev eavTpovr)ai^, which is eTnTaKTiKi], — is also the consciousness which follows action, not merely testifying to the fact, but also estimating its worth (discernment). Eur. Or. 390, tL %/3^/xa •7j-da-')(ei<; ; rt? vkdnew TavTrj^ ovv ti)? ^vKatcrj'; firjSa/j.u'; KaTaippovrjTeov eVel koI tw 6eM aTrdpecnoi, KM rw tStp avveiBoTi e^dpoi icro/ieda (R Hofmann in he). What the nature of this consciousness is — the fact that it is more than a mere function of the intelkct or of the memory — becomes clear where the word is claimed and makes itself felt in its fuU force, — to wit, as adopted in the N. T. ^vvelBrjcri'; there is not merely the testimony to one's own conduct borne by conscious- ness, Eom. ix. 1, ou -ylrevBofiM, avfip.apTvpovaT]'; /jloi ttj? a-vveiBija-eco^ p,ov . . . on k.tX., 2 Cor. i. 12, TO jia^prvpiov t!]<; avveihrfa-eu)'; r^fiwv, on, . . . dvearpd^rjfjbev k.t.X., but at the same time also that concerning duty, Eom. ii. 15, ivheucvvvrai, to ep-yov tov vop-ov 'ypaTr- Tov ev raii KaphLaa avTOiv, crv/J-fiapTvpova7]<; av-TU>v rrj'; avveiSrja-eco^ (the a-vv in 6eu) ^covn; 2 Cor. iv. 2, v. 11. HweiBTja-K, accordingly, is tJie consciousness man has of himself in his relation to God, manifesting itself in the form of a self-testimony, the result of the action of the spirit in the heart. The character of this relation is reflected therein, hence 2 Tim. i. 3, c5 \aTpeva> iv Kadapa avveiBr^cret,, cf. Heb. ix. 9, 14, X. 2 ; Acts xxiii. 1, xxiv. 16. Hence the obligation, 1 Tim. iii. 9, e'%etv to fjLvarijpiov tjj? 7rto-T6&)? iv Kadapa avveiBrjo-ei ; i. 19, e'^cov TTianv Kal dyaOrjv crvveiBrjaLv, riv Tive<; dTrwadjxevoi, Trepi, Trjv tticttiv evavar/rjcrav ; i. 5, to Be TeXo? Trjaov<; t^? elicovo'; tov vlov aiiTov, 2 Cor. iii. 18, T^v avTTjv eiKova /j,eTa/jLop^ov/j,e6a, but especially also Heb. x. 1, aKi,av 'yap e)(cov 6 vo/j.o'i Twv /jieWovTcov wyaQwv, oiiK avTrjv ttjv elKOva tcov irpayp.aTwv ; o'xm of the shadowy out- line, etA:(«z/ = 7r/3a)TOTi;7rov.— LXX. = %, Gen. i. 26, 27, v. 3, ix. 6 =niD'n, Gen. v. 1 ; cf. Ecclus. xvii. 3. — Cf. N3ip''N in the plural = features, in Levy, chald. Worterh. E I fi I, elvai, to be. E ^ ova- ia, r}, from e^ean, it is free, it is allowed = permission, right, liberty, power to do anything. Plat. Defin. 415 C, e^ovai'a, eiriTpoirr} vojxov. Cf. Acts xxvi. 12, ytier' i^ovala'i Ka\ iinTpoTri'j'; tt}? irapa tcov dp-^iepeosv. As e^eaTi, denies the presence of an hindrance, it may be used either of the capability or the right to do a certain action. The words e^ea-Ti, i^ovaia, accordingly combine the two ideas right and might ; cf. the German " bevollmachtigen," to authorize, and the synonyms Bercchtigung and Ermdchtigung, enxitlement and authorization. In Thucyd., Herodian, and Phitarch, i^ovala appears in conjunction with Swa/xt?; if the latter imply the possession of the ability to make power 'E^ovala 537 'E^ovata felt, the former affirms that free movement is ensured to the ability. Of. the Stoic iXevBepia icnlv e^ovala avTowpa'yta'i ; Cicero, Lilcrtas cd potcslas vivcndi ut veils. The usage may be classified as follows : — (I.) Right, authority, capability ; correctly, Sturz, facidtas facicndi vel omittcncU sine impedimento. E.g. e^ovcrlav irapk'^et.v, to jpcrmit ; i^. e^etv, he cible, he alloived, etc. So iu the N. T. Eom. ix. 21 ; 1 Cor. vii. 37, viii. 9, ix. 4; Heb. xiiL 10; Rev. vi. 8 ; Matt. ix. 6, xxi. 23, etc. — (II.) Capability, ability, power, strength (of. huvafxt.^). Matt. ix. 8, xxviii. 18. Synonymous with KpaTo<;, Jude 25; hvvafiK, Luke iv. 36. Power over any- thing, 6^. 'Trvevfia.Tcov, Matt. x. 1 ; Luke xix. 1 7, e-rrdvo) heica TroXecov. To this connection belongs also Lllko iv. 6, aol hwau> rrjv i^ovalav ravrrjv airaaav koX rrjv So^av avTcbv (sc. Tuv j3ah which see. So in Tit. iii. 1 ; Eom. xiii. 1—3 ; and, indeed, e^ovcrla denotes not so much the magistracy as magistracy iu general as represented by any one — magisterial jurisdiction ; hence the plural in Tit. iii. 1 ; Pom. xiii 1. With this usage is comiected the application of the term to supramundane powers, synonymous with dpxny 0p6vo<;, Kvpiojr]^, 1 Cor. xv. 24; Eph. i. 21, iii. 10, vi. 12 ; Col. ii. 10, 15 ; 1 Pet. iii. 22, — and that, too, at all events in the Pauline passages, probably to evil powers, who oppose Christ, 1 Cor. xv. 24; Col. ii. 25; Eph. vi. 12, eaTiv rjfxiv r) irdXr) . . . TT/jo? ra? dp-)(a';, 7r/3o? ra? e^ova[a6opa yiverai Sia Bepjxov Tivof eVXetT^iy, Tot? Se reXeioK, ev S ttj? overtax rj ap'^t] ... 97 S' dp'^rj Tfj<} fw^? eKXehrei Tolif e^ovatv, orav pr) Karai^v-yrirai, to 6epp,ov ro Koivcovovv avTri<;; Magn. Mor. i. 20, kw- Bvvoi, avatperwol Trj'i ov(TLa<;. Compare also (pseudo-) Plat. Deff. 4:05a, adavaaia' ovaia ep-y^v')(p'i Kal aihioi povrj, where ovaia, side by side with p.ovrj, hardly siguiiies natura, but existenee (in general, ovaia often occurs here in this sense). These passages may suffice to vindicate for ovaia the meaning existenee, and accordingly warrant for eVfoucrto? the meaning " what belongs to ezistence," as a short and simple rendering of l^iJn Om, for which the LXX. Prov. xxx. 8 has ra heovra Kal to. avrapKr}. Hence there is no need to take ovaia, though this was not unjustifiable, as in the first edition, in the signification, essence, nature, corresponding with the compounds in patristic Greek, opooiiaio^, etc. ; cf. Plato, Sep. ix. 585 B, irorepa ovv rjyei ra yevr) paXKov Ka6apa<; ovaia'; p,eTe.')(eiv, and often, so that i'movai.o'; would be = " conformable to the essence or nature," and o cipTo<; rjpiov 6 iiriovawi, " bread answering to our nature, our essence," taking ovaia, essence, nature, either in the freer and wider sense as popularly used, according to which a'/sTo? r)p5>v e-n-iovaio'; would signify all that Luther sums up as included in this fourth petition, or, in the stricter sense, which would require a reference to our Lord's comment on Matt. iv. 4, Luke iv. 4, ovk iir aprai p,ov(p ^ijaerai av6pw!vo<;, dXX' iirl iravrl pripaTi 6eov. It is therefore, in any case, unnecessary, on account of the meaning of ovaia, to deny its connec- tion with the substantive, and with L. Meyer (in the place above referred to) to regard the word as compounded with the participial theme -ovt, determining its meaning in a roundabout way by its correspondence with irepiovaooii (which see). ' ETriovaio<;, both in form and meaning, is said to be a correlative of ■7repiovaio<;, as already Damm, Lex. Horn., supposed, " irepiovaio';, superans (surpassing), et eTTiovaiO'i, sujfficienter praesens, qui praesto est, quantum satis est." Against this it tells at once that the analogous forms i^ovaio^ ivoiiaio'i, are connected with ovaia, and not with the analogous compounds e^elvai and ivelvai, and the same holds good of ewiovai,o<; ; as the cases are analogous, the infer- ence is that it is not connected with i-jrelvai, so that the simplest way of understand- ing the word is proved to be to regard it in like manner as a compound of i-Tri and ovaia, and the transference from ovaia, in the sense possession (what is there), to ovaia, in the sense existence, life, will not seem strange to a just linguistic apprehension. Against the suggested explanation of the formation of the word, must be urged, further, the meaning given to it, which, strictly taken, is, to say the least, very difficult to under- 2 H 'E-TTiovawi 242 nepiova-io]'io- ol Trarepe? rail's TratSa?. Opposed to fid^aLpa, Matt. x. 34, cf Jer. iv. 10; to Biafiepiafio'i, Luke xii. 51, cf Jer. ix. 7, TM ifKriaiov avTov XaXet elprjvtKa Kal iv eavTa> e^^ei ttjv 'i-^Opav. In 1 Pet. iii. 11 in antithesis to XaXelv BoKov, ver. 10 ; to aKUTaaTacria, 1 Cor. xiv. 33. — Eom. xiv. 19 ; Gal. V. 22 ; Eph. iv. 3 ; 2 Tim. ii. 22 ; Heb. xi. 31, xii. 14 ; Rev. vi. 4 ; Lul^e xiv. 32 ; Acts vii. 26, xii. 20 (1 Cor. vii. 15 ?). (II.) As used in the N. T., we observe the influence of the Hebrew Di^E'^ which denotes a state of vxllbeing, and only in a derivative manner "peace" in contrast with strife. Accordingly, opposed to KaKa, e.g. Isa. xiv. 7, o iroMv elpijvrjv km kti^wv kuko. ; Jer. xxix. 11, Xoryiovfiai . . . XojLcrfibv etpjjV??? kuI oi Kaicd, rev hovvai vfilv to. fjberh ravra Kal iX-TTiBa. Hence also opposed to 0\tyjft,';, (7vvTpi/jLiu.a, etc., e.g. Zech. viii. 10, Kal t&> iKTropevofievo) Kal tw elaTTopevo/Meva oiiK ecTTai, elpr/vr} d-TTo t^? OfXt-y^eco^ ; cf. John xvi. 33, Tavra \e\d\r]Ka vfuv, Iva iv ifiol elprjvriv exnre. iv tu> Koa/MO) &\ii^Lv 'i'^eTe; Jer. vi. 14, iSiVTO TO (TVVTpiiJ,pLa Tov \aov fiov e^ovdevovvT€'} Kal Xejovre^' elprjvr], elprjVT]' Kal ttov icrjlv elprjvTj; viii. 11; Ezek. xiii. 10, 16, cf. 1 Thess. v. 3. Accordingly elpijvr) denotes a state of untroubled, undisturbed wellbeing, synonymous with daipdXeca, 1 Thess. v. 3 ; Acts ix. 31, y fiev ovv iKKkr^dia . , . evyev elp'^vrjv, olKoSo/ioviJ,evr) k.t.X ; xxiv. 2; cf Luke xi. 21, iv elpijvT) iarlv rh inrdp-^ovra — his goods are unattached. Cf. Xen. Gyrop. \ii. 4. 6, vi. 1. 18. In this sense we are to understand the form of salutation, p DvB' (cf. Luke xxiv. 36; John xx. 19, 21, 26), and of leave-taking, et? dprjvqv, Mark v. 34, v-rrwye eh elprjv7}v, Kal 'iaOi iyi,ri<; dirb t?5? /j.dcni/yo's aov ; Luke viii. 48 ; Jas. ii. 16 ; Acts xv. 33, xvi. 36; 1 Cor. xvi. 11. Cf. tihf = vr^ialvetv, Gen. xxix. 6, xxxvii. 13, xliii. 27; ^acoTTipla, Gen. xxvi. 31, xxviii. 21, xliv. 17; ^amrrjpwv, Gen. xii. 16. The word is ElprjVTJ 245 ElprjVLKOi used in both senses as signifying peace as contrasted with strife, and peace as undisturbed wellbeing, in Jas. iii. 18, Kapiro'; Se BiKMoawrj^ iv elptjvrj aTrelperai, rot? iroiovaiv elp^vrjv. (III.) This state is the object of divine and saving promise, and is brought about by- God's mercy, granting deliverance and freedom from all the distresses that are experienced as the result of sin (cf. Job vii. 1, xiv. 1, 6, 14). Hence dpi'jvrj joined with eXeo?, Pi3. Ixxxv. 9, Kvpio^ o Oeo'i . . . XaXrjcret elprjvrjv ettI tov Xaov avrov koi iirl tov'; oalov; avrov Kol eTTL Toil? 67rt<7T|36^ovTa9 TTpo? avTov KapSia<;, comp. ver. 8, Sel^ov rj/iiv Kvpie to e\ed? aov Koi TO accTijpiov aov 8^7/9 ■^/uv. Similar is the union of %a/3i? kol elprjvri or X"P" e'\eo9 elprjvq airo 6eov TraT/ao? koi XpicrTov k.t.\. in the salutations of the Epistles ; it denotes the elprjvr} which is realized in and through Christ, and which is the object of saving promise and hope, Eom. i. 7 ; 1 Cor. i. 3 ; 2 Cor. i. 2; Gal. i. 3, vL 16; Eph. i. 2, vi. 23 ; Phil. 1. 2 ; Col. i. 2 ; 1 Thess. i. 1 ; 2 Thess. i. 2, iii. 16 ; 1 Tim. i. 2 ; 2 Tim. i. 2 ; Titus i. 4 ; Philem. 3 ; 1 Pet. i. 2, v. 14 ; 2 Pet. i. 2 ; 2 John 3 ; 3 John 15 ; Jude 2 ; Eev. i. 4. In this sense the greeting of His disciples by the risen Saviour, Luke xxiv. 36, John xx. 19, 21, 26, has a special significance. In like manner, cf. Matt. X. 12, 13; Luke x. 5, 6, ii. 29, vii. 50, xix. 38, 42; Eom. iii. 17; Luke i. 79. As sin and sorrow or distress are closely connected, so we find elprjvr] named in connection with St/catoo-wT; as a Messianic blessing, Ps. Ixxii. 7, Ixxxv. 11, cf Isa. Ivii. 18, 19; Hag. ii. 9; Jer. xxxiii. 7; hiaOrjKrj elprjvr]';, Ezek. xxxiv. 25, xxxvii. 26; Luke ii 14; Eom. v. 1. Peace as a Messianic blessing is that state, brought about by the grace and loving mind of God, wherein the derangement and distress of life caused by sin are removed. Hence the message of salvation is called to ev. t?}? elprjvr}<;, Eph. vi. 15; cf. Isa. Iii. 7, evar/iyeXl^eadai, aKorjv elpr)V'r]<; ; Nah. ii. 1 ; Eph. ii. 17; Eom. x. 15; Acts X. 36. This peace is the very elpi^vrj Oeov, Phil. iv. 7, Xpiarov, Col. iii. 15, and God is ^eo? T?5? elpijvT]';, PhiL iv. 9 ; 1 Thess. v. 23, which latter passage well presents to us the meaning of the word in its fullest range, avTo? Be 6 ^eo? tt]? elp-^vrj'; arycdaat u/iS? oXoTfiXet?" Kal dXoKXrjpov vfi&v to •rrvevp.a Kal rj "^j^v^rj kuI to crco/xa afiejj,TrTco<; . . . Tr)p7)6eirj. See Heb. xiii 20 ; Eom. xv. 33, xvi 20 ; 2 Cor. xiii. 11 ; cf. Heb. vii 2, 6 Kvpic; Tfjt elprjvr}<;, 2 Thess. iii. 16. In the same sense also we may take Eph. ii. 14, avTo<; ydp idTiv rj elprjvrj fjfiav, c£ ver. 17, i\6cov evriyyeXicraTO elprjvrjv vpZv rot? fj,aKpav Kol elprjvqv Toi? €771/9; vv. 13, 15 ; Isa. Ivii 19. See under dTroKaToKXaaaeiv. This peace can be the result only of accomplished reconciliation, Eph. ii. 16, 17 ; and as in Eom. v. 1 (elprjVTjv ej^o/iei' 7rpo9 tov Oeov) elprjvrj gives prominence to this one element, viz. tJie new relation- ship hetwccn man and God brought about by the atonement (c£ w. 9, 10), without, however, attempting to seek or to discover a reference to this presupposition in every place ; cf. Eom. viii. 6, ^corj koI elprjvr], opposed to OdvaTO'i ; Eom. xiv. 17, r] ^acr. t. 6eov icxTlv . . . BiKMoavvr] Kal elptjvrj Kal 'XP'pa iv irv. 07. (c£ O^^f = '^aipeiv, Isa. xlviii 22, Ivii 21); Eom. XV. 13, o Be deo<; Trj eimpd'^w eKwv Kal ytvwaKwv; Ex. xxi. 13, 6 he ov'x^ eK(ov (sc. iraid^a'i Kal dirodavwv Tiva) = iTlV i

; vii. 11, eKcuv . . . elBw<} koI 6 iroiel kol ov eveKa. 'E K ova 10^, a, ov, voluntary, in the same range as eKwv. — (I.) Voluntarily, pur- piosely ; Plato often combines /Siaiov and eKovcnov, because an intention of violence lies at the root of it, or the purpose to assert itself by force, /3i'atot rj eKovcriai Trpd^et^, Rep. X. 603 C; Legg. ix. 860 E, Biopiei<; ovv avTolh. 241 B, ra? a.p)(a'; Tracra? Trdcrai.<; ^aadvoi^ '^pcojj.evoi iXey^ovTcoy, Then = to convince, to convict, to prove anything that was disputed or denied, and therefore implying opposition; Ar. Plut. 574, riva irepi ti,vo<;. Thus in John viii. 46, Tt? eXeyx^i. fie irepl d(iapTM<; ; hence to reprimand, to hlame, to chide, rovd, Matt, xviii. 1 5 ; Luke iii. 1 9 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 24; 1 Tim.v. 20 ; 2 Tim. iv. 2 ; Titus i. 9, 13, ii. 15; Heb. xii. 5 ; Jas. ii. 9 ; Jude 15, 22 ; Eev. iii. 19. rl, John iii. 20 ; Eph. v. 11, 13. Thus we must understand the passage concerning the so-called punitive ofltice of the Holy Ghost, John xvi. 8, iXey^ei Tov Kocyjjbov Trepl dfiaprla^ koX irepl SiKaioavvT]^ koI irepl Kpiaeco<; ; of. 2 Tim. ii. 25 ; John XV. 24-26. — LXX. = n''=in, Gen. xxi. 25, xxxi. 37; Lev. xix. 17; 2 Sam. vii. 14; Job V. 17, ix. 33, xiii. 10, xxxiii. 19 ; Ps. cv. 14:.—e\€y^i<;, rebuhe, 2 Pet. ii. 16. "JE X 6 7 T^ o ?, d, (I.) proof, e.g. dperrj';, ev'\}rvxM<;. Means of conviction or of proof. Plat. Gorg. 471 D, ovto<; 6 eXeyx^o^ ovBevo'; a^iov. In this sense the word occurs in Heb. xi. 1 in parathetic apposition (cf. Kjiiger, § 57, 9), eWt Se Tr/o-Tts eXirt.^op.ivwv viroaTaaK, Trpayfidrav eXey^P^ °^ /SXeTro/juevcov. This passage describes what faith is to him who possesses it ; it is neither a definition nor a description of faith, but simply a statement concerning faith — a predicate. Faith is for the believer iXirL^ofievav inroa-Tacri'i, because it produces in him the recognition of the things which are unseen, it is the means of proof (Bengel, quae sperantur, sunt species ; genus quae non cernuntur), cf. ver. 2. — (II.) Conviction, blame, Ps. Ixxiii. 14, d eXe7%d9 fiov, parallel to €yev6fj.7jv fiefuicTTiycofievo'i, Job vi. 26, xiii. 6, xvi. 21 ; 2 Tim. iii. 16, cix^e'Xt/xo? ttjoo? . . . eXeyxpv. "EXeo'i, in classical Greek 6 eX., except Diod. Sic. iii. 18, where some read to eX., as for the most part in the LXX. and always in the N. T. = a feeling of sympathy ; fellow- feeling with misery (eXeo? = misery, Eurip. 07\ 833 ; Jer. xiii. 2) ; Arist. Bhet. ii. 8, ea-Tico Brj e'Xeo9 XvTrr) tk eirl ^aivofievat KaK& (pdapTiKO). — Compassion, both as a feeling and a motive, and even as behaviour, Luke x. 37; Jas. ii. 13, iii. 17; Matt. ix. 13, xii. 7, xxui. 23. In the LXX. it is the usual rendering of ipn (Isa. Ix. 10=tiVi), which else- where is = evSo/ct'a, x"-P'''' '^•''■•^- ; Gren. xix. 19; Num. xi. 15=10, which is usually rendered hj X'^P'-'^- '^^^ = 8i'Kai,oavvri, Gen. xx. 13, xxi. 23; Ex. xv. 13; iXerj/Moavvrj, Gen. xlvii. 29 ; Prov. iii. 3, xx. 28 ; olKTeiprifia, Jer. xxxi. 3 ; %apt?, Esth. ii. 9 ; So^a, Isa. xl. 7; iX-Trk, 2 Chron. xxxv. 26. Ipn, however, according to Fiirst, probably means primarily " inclination," and is " a specific term to designate the grace and mercy of God, especially towards His people Israel. . . . Thence it is applied to men, denoting their love and compassion towards each other by virtue of the sacred bond and covenant between them, and as a religious duty ; as, for instance, between blood relations, superiors and inferiors, towards the unfortunate and the needy ; " Hupfeld on Ps. iv. 4, vid. oaco';. ("JEXeo? is the god of pity, Apollod. ii. 8. 1, as distinct from SiKaioavprj, towards the "EXeo'i 249 'E\ev6epot poor and needy.) In the LXX. eXeos is the word used to denote God's bearing towards mankind or towards His people in the economy of salvation, and may be rendered mercy, pity, a feeling of sorrow (cf. Jer. xxxi. 20), as the case may be; opposed to K.plat,<;, Jas. ii. 13; Wisd. xii. 22; cf. e'Xeo9 = ^^., Isa. xlv. 8, avareikaTa rj yrj icai ^Xaarrjo-dTco eXeo?. (There can be no more difference between IDn and eXeo? than between condescending and merciful love.) Joined with hiadrjKri, Ps. Ixxxix. 2 9 ; Deut. vii. 9 ; cf. Ps. Ixxxix. 50, cxxx. 7, xvii. 7, xxv. 6, 7; Isa. Ixiii. 7; 1 Sam. xv. 6, xx. 8. — Isa. Ivi. 1, rjiyyt/ce to awTijpiov fiov izapar/iveaOai, kol to e'\eo? jjlov aiT0KaKv<^9rjvai = '"'iJ'lV. — In this sense, viz. as an appropriate word for God's merciful economy which meets the wants of human woe, we find it in Luke i. 54, avreKa^eTO 'laparjX TratSo? avTov, fivqaOrjvau ekeov;, K.adw'i iXaX'qa-ev k.t.X. ; c£ Ps. xxv. 6. — Luke i. 50, 58, 72, 78 ; Pom. ix. 23, iva •yvwplarj 70V ifkovTov Trj<; So^ij? avTOv iirl aKein) eXeof?, a irpoTfTolixaaev et? ho^av ; xi. 31, to vixeTepov eXea, where God's gracious dealings are regarded as tending to the salvation of manlvind, cf. Isa. Iv. 3.— Rom. xv. 9, cf. ver. 8 ; 1 Pet. i. 3 ; Jude 21 ; 2 Tim. i. 16, 18. Joined with aydiTT), Eph. ii. 4 (cf. Isa. Ix. 10, Bta eXeov ■^ydTrrjcrd ere), with iiaKpoOvjila, 1 Tim. i. 16 ; yapK, Heb. iv. 16 ; in the introductory greetings of the Epistles, %n/3t? e'A,eo? eiprjvrj, 1 Tim. L 2; 2 Tim. i. 2 ; 2 John 3 ; eXeo? and elp->']vn, Gal. vi. 16 ; Jude 2.— The K T. expression, however, which strictly corresponds with the 0, T. ion, is T^apt?,— a term more appropriate to IST. T. views, because it gives prominence to the freeness and unconditional- ness of God's love, an element which appears only in the eXeo? of Titus iii. 5, ovic ef epywv Twv iv SlKaioavvrj cov eTroirjaap^ev ^p^eK, dXXd KaTU to avTOv eXeo9 ecrcoaev ^p.a'i. 'EXeea, sometimes iXeday, Puom. ix. 16, 18, Jude 22, to have pity, to be compassionate, Tiva towards any one, to have compassion upon him; Matt. ix. 27, xv. 22, xvii. 15, xviii. 33, XX. 30, 31; Mark v. 19, x. 47, 48; Luke xvi. 24, xvii. 13, xviii. 38, 39; Phil, ii. 27; Eom. xii. 8 ; 1 Cor. vii. 25. — As eXeo? denotes God's mercy as the principle and rule of the revelation of His grace, so iXeelv, when applied to God, means to have mercy upon any one, to make him a partaker of saving grace, Eom. ix. 1 5, 1 6 ; in ver. 1 8 opposed to (T/cXTipvveiv. The passive aor. yXeijdtjv, perf. part. ■^\er)p,evo<;, designates the person to whom mercy is shown, who is favoured, and admitted to a state of grace ; it is used of the company of the redeemed, 1 Pet. ii. 10 ; Eom. xi. 30-32 ; of individuals, 2 Cor. iv. 1 ; 1 Tim. i. 13, 16 ; Matt. v. 7. In Jude 22 the reference, in like manner, is to the appropriation of Messianic salvation. For this application of the term we have no 0. T. precedent. LXX. =pDn, pn. Dm. Isa. xliv. 23 parallel to XvTpovv, So^aadijvai,. 'A veXeo<;, unmerciful ; a form unknown in classical Greek, adopted by Lachm. and Tisch. in Jas. ii. 13, 9? yap KpiaK dveXeoi t&5 fir) ■noLrjcravTi eXeo?" KaTUKav^dTai eXeos Kpiaew; ; Eeceived text, dvl\ea<; : classical form, dvrj\ei)<;. 'EXevOepo^, a, ov, connected with EAETOfl, whence iKevaop,ai,, fut. of ep')(piLai, therefore, perhaps, capable of movement. Curtius, p. 436, says, "As to iXevdepo'i, the old derivation Trapd to eXevdetv ottov ipa {Etym. M. 329, 44) seems thoroughly justified . . . 2 1 -EXev9€po<: 250 ''E\ev6epo<; at the same time, the mark of the free German was to go where he chose ; because, among the numerous records of emancipation among the Greeks, a7rorpe')(eLv oh ica OeXy, as the Delphic dialect expresses it, was always an essential sign of liberty." — (I.) Absolutely, free, unconstrained, unfettered, independent, of one who is not dependent upon another ; for the most part in a social and political sense, opposed to hovXo';, whose will and power another directs; cf. John viii. 32, 33. So in 1 Cor. vii. 21, 22, xii. 13 ; Gal. iii. 28 ; Eph. vi. 8 ; Col. iii. 11 ; Eev. vi. 15, xiii. 16, xix. 18 ; 1 Cor. ix. 1 ; cf. ver. 19, iKevOepof r}. "lawi yap iXevdepov ipalveTai croi to irpaTTeiv Ta fiiXTKTTa ; it is the position designated by the word BovXo0epo<; 251 "EXevdepooy (II.) Eelatively, free, separate from or independent of; with the genitive, cij. i^rjixiai, (f>6^ov, and other words. Instead of the simple genitive we have in Eom. vii. 3, eX. airo Tov vofMov ; 1 Cor. ix. 19, e« -TrdvToiv. It is joined with the dative in Eom. vi. 20, ore ryap SovXoi ^re t?}? dfiapria^, eXevdepot, rJT6 Tjj BtKuioavvr}, hnt this is never found in classical Greek ; it may he best understood in the same manner as is the dative with inrijKoo'i, SoOXo?, the genitive denoting the objective relation of dependence, and the dative the moral relation of subjective surrender; cf. ver. 19, Trapea-Tria-are to, (leKri vfjicov SovXa rjj uKadapa-la, Ty BcKaioavvrj, which alone expresses, and without any redundancy, the due relation of the antecedent to the consequent; vid. Kriiger, | xlvii. 26. 2. — In Matt. xviL 26, eXevOepoi elaiv oi viol, we must supply from the context Kijvaov, or the like; cf. Dem, XXXV. 21, ■^pi^fxara iXevBepa, property free of encumbrance. 'EXevdepia, y, freedom, independence, in social and national life, opposed to BovXeia, the state of dependence ; usually denoting the absence of aU. limitations to independent action, to he lord and master of oneself, e^ovala avTOTrpajla'; ; 1 Cor. x. 29, ^ iXevdepla fj,ov = e^ecTTt, ver. 2 3. Freedom is a distinctive blessing of the economy of grace, which, in contrast with the 0. T. economy, is represented as including independence of legal restric- tions and rules of life. Gal. ii. 4, v. 1, 13 ; or, in contrast with the present subjection of the creature to the bondage of corruption, as the future state of the children of God, Eom. viii. 21, 17 Krlats iXevdeptoOijaeTai cItto tj}? SovXelag Tfi<; (j>6opdolv av Bo^a'; /uLeXXovTwv olv koivov /Mev ovofia e\7rt? 'iBiov Be (po^o^ jxev 17 irpo Xinrrj<; iX-Trk, duppo€tXet, eV iXTrlBi, 6 dporpicjv dporpiav, kuI 6 dXocbv eir eXTr/St TOV ^eTe^eiv ; Piom. iv. 1 8, irap' iXirlBa eV iXirlSi, iiria-Tevaev, where eXirk is to be takeo both times in a subjective sense, not in an objective sense first, cf. Plat. Ah. i. 105 A, eVt Tivi iXij-lBc ^Tj? ; Soph. Ant. 392, ^ iKTo uItovvtc vpdi Xoyov irepl tjj? ei; vpiv eXTTtSo?. Accordingly, God is 6eov, Acts xxiv. 15, xxiii. 6, — and therefore the full realization of salvation in all its bearings, cf 1 John iii. 2, 3 ; 2 Cor. iii 12, 18. Hence tlie prominence given to hope as outweighing tribulation, Eom. v. 3, 4, 17 6Xi^v<; virofiovrjv Karepyd^eTai, rj Se inrojiovrj ZoKifx-qv, rj Be BoKifirj eXTrlBa; Eom. xii. 12, tt] iXTrlBi xo-t- povre's, rfj dXli^eu vTrofievovre'; ; 1 Thess. i. 3, rj {nropLovrj t^? eXTr/So?. It thus embraces the entire sphere over which the results of sin have spread, Eom. viii. 20, t^ puaTaioTrjTi 57 KTicri,'; iireTajr], ov'^ etcovaa, oKKa Bia tov inroTci^avTa eV iXTriBt, cf vv. 19, 21. N. T. hope, in a word, includes the prospect of a state whei'ein all needs shall be supplied, all wants satisfied, all the hindrances of life and results of sin removed, raising upon the basis of trusted Scripture promise and the facts of redemption a future full of bliss, in contrast with the unsatisfying present. Cf Jer. xxix. 11 ; Eom. viii. 24, tj} iXwlBi ecrd)Or]fj,€v ; Acts ii. 26, 57 adp^ p,ov KaraaKrjvuiaet eV eXiriBi, cf. ver. 27. Like salvation itself, it is moral in its nature, cf Prov. xxviii. 7, eK.Ti\<; avrov ; iv. 4, eKXijdrjTe ev fiia eXTrtSt t^? KXijcrew; vficov ; Col. i. 5, ^j e^.Ti't? »; aTroKeifiivr] iijuv iv rol<; ovpavoK, — in wliich sense hope is the motive for the Christian's walk in faith and love. Col. i. 23, 57 e'Xvrts tov evayyeXiov; Titus ii. 13 ; Heb. vi. 18 ; Eom. viii. 24;"^ Gal. v. 5. In keeping with this, that upon which one fixes Lis hope, for which we hope, is called eXTTt'?, e.g. children are 5? yoveaiv eXTrt'?. Thuc. iii. 57, v/^eZ?, & AaxeSac/xoviot, rj fjt.ovt) iX-n-k. Christ also is i? iXirU tt;? So^j??, Col. i. 27 ; cf. 1 Tim. i. 1 ; 1 Thess. ii. 19, Tt? yap rjjxoiv eKirk ; Cf. Zockler, De vi etc notione vocaluli eXirlt: in N. T. (Giessen 1856). 'EXtt 1^(0, fut. iXiriw, Matt. xii. 21, from Isa. xlii. 4; Eom. xv. 12, from Isa. xi. 10. Perf. rjX-mKa = to expect, to hope ; in the Scripture sense = Sc vTi-op.ovi]'; a-rreK^e'^eaOai, Eom. viii. 25 (see under eXTrt?. Also = to fear, e.g. Soph. Ajax. 799 ; Plato, Bcp. viii. 572 E; Herod, viii. 12; Herodian, viii. 8. 3; Eurip. Ion. 348). — (I.) With a statement of the object, i.e. the blessing, which is not present to the subject, but longed for and expected with fancied or real probability = to hope for anything. Eom. viii. 24, 25, o yap ^eiret Tb<^, tL KOi. eX'TTi^et ; el Be o ov ^XeTrofiev, eXirli^ofjiev, St' vTro/novr]^ o.TreKBe'^ojjLeOa. Cf. 1 Thess. i. 3, rj vTTOfiovr] rrj'; eXTTtSo? ; 1 Cor. xiii. 7, rj ayairrt irdv-ra iXirL^ei,, — charity hopes of and for others all that can be the subject-matter of hope ; cf. Phil. i. 6 ; 2 Cor. ii. 7, etc.; 2 Cor. viii. 5. With the infinitive following, Luke vi. 34, xxiii. 8; Acts xxvi. 7 Eom. XV. 24; 1 Cor. xvi. 7 ; 2 Cor. v. 11 ; Phil. ii. 19, 23 ; 1 Tim. iii. 14; 2 John 12 3 John 14. With otl following, Luke xxiv, 21 ; Acts xxiv. 26 ; 2 Cor. i. 10, 13, xiii. 6 Philem. 22. The part. pass, to, iXTn^o/jieva, Heb. xi. 1, denotes the blessings hereafter to be revealed, so far as the Christian puts himself in relation with them. (II.) Without object = to set one's Jiope upon something, i.e. the hope of future good for- tune, 1 Tim. vi. 1 7, rjXviKevai eVt ttXovtov aS-rjXoTujTi. Thus very rarely in classical Greek ; mostly in biblical and ecclesiastical Greek only, and to denote the hope of salvation, vid. iXTri<; (cf. Luke xxiv. 21 ; Acts xxvi. 7; Eom. viii. 24, 25). So in John v. 45, eariv 6 xarriyopcov vfiwv, Ma>v(7ri ovofiari avTov edvr] eXirwva-iv, from Isa. xlii. 4. (Cf. Thuc. iii. 97, eXirlaa'^ ry Tv^fj.) Oftener with eVt followed by the dative or accusative. The latter in 1 Pet. i. lo,TeXeiw'i iXTTLaare eirl rrjv ^epofiivrjv vfuv %apiv ev aTroKaXir^ei, ''Irjaov Xpiarov (iii. 5) ; 1 Tim. v. 5, ijXTrLKev eVt tov 6eov, kuI irpocr/xevet Tal<; Beijaecnv k.t.X. With the dative, Eom. xv. 12, 67r' avrm edvq eXinova-iv (from Isa. xi. 10 =1K'T]''. Dlia WS) ; 1 Tim. iv. 10, ■tikirUap.ev eVi Bern ^wvTi., o? ia-Tiv aa)Tr]p TrdvTfcv dvOpcoTTcov, fidXicTTa TTiaTcov. Here (TWTqpia, in its fullest extent, is the object of the hope. The frequent use of the perfect in this sense is worthy of notice. In the LXX. the compound verb iireX'jri^etv occurs, 2 Kings xviii. 30 ; EXttI^o) 2 5 (3 ' Epyoi) Ps. lii. 7, cxix. 43, 49, 81. In the K T. irpoiXwli^eiv, Eph. i. 12 (distinguishing Israel from the believing Gentiles). "Epryo V, TO, work, performance, the result or object of employment, making, or work- ing (" The word had originally the digamma, and hence appears its identity with the German Wcrk and the English work" Passow, Wurterh. ; Old High German uuerah, from uuercin, " to make, to do," cf. Curtius, p. 165). As against j3ov\ij, Acts v. 38, cf. Horn. jl. ix. 374; X,0709 and the like, 2 Cor. x. 11, olol ecr/Mev rm Xoyro St.' eTna-ToXcov awovre^, Totovrot Koi 7ra/3oi/T69 Tw epyw, — a frequent antithesis admitting of various shades of con- trast; Matt, xxiii. 3 ; 1 John iii. 18 ; Hevod. iii. 135, Tavra eme koI afia cTros re koI epyov iiTolee; Titus i. 16, Oeov 6p,oXojoua t,v elSevai, toIi Be epyoL^ apvovvTai; i.e. profession and practice, saying and doing, do not correspond ; Eurip. Ale. 340, \6ya r^aav ovk epya (plXoi. Thus we understand 2 Thess. iL 1 7, o ^eo? . . . irapaKoXeaei, vfjLwv tcl^ KapBta^ koI aTTjpi^ei iv iraml epya> koX Xoyo) dyaOm, i.e. Christian profession and practice in their due connection with each other. On the other hand, Col. iii. 17, "ttuv 6 n av TroirJTe iv Xoyo) rj iv epya, iravra iv ovofiaTi Kvptov 'Irjaov, seems, according to the context, to be more appropriately explained by the analogy of Matt. xii. 36, 37. The same connection or antithesis we find in Luke xxiv. 19; Acts vii. 22. Cf. X0709 e'lBfoXov epywv, X070? cTKia epyov, M. Neander, Gnomol. 1, in Diisterdieck on 1 John iii. 18. — "Epyov denotes (according to the connection) that luork ivliich each one has to do, as in Mark xui. 34, Bov<; eKuaTtp rb epyov avrov, or that whieh each is doing or has done. The uses of the word, especially in tlie N. T., may be classified as follows : — I. (a.) Work as a single performance. Matt. xxvi. 10, epyov koXov elpydaaro elg ifie; Mark xiv. 6 ; John vii. 21, x. 32, 33 ; 1 Cor. v. 2. Especially in the plural, ra epya, e.g. TO, epya tov Xpiarov, Matt. xi. 2 ; and in the Gospel of St. John, of Christ's miracles, John V. 20, 36, vii. 3, x. 25, 32, 38, xiv. 10, 11, 12, xv. 24; epya tov Oeov, what God has brought to imss, created or done,'R&h. iii. 9, iv. 4, 10, i. 10; cf Eev. ix. 20; Acts vii. 41 ; John vi. 28, tI "TroLoip^ev 'Iva ipya^wp^eOa to. epya tov 6eov. Here t. 6eov is the gen. qiicditatis = ivories such as God does, like epya dvBpcov, yvvaiKMV = nicn^s work, women's work. On the other hand, ver. 29, to epyov tov 6eov = what God requires to have done. The question in ver. 28 implies a misapprehension of Christ's words, which He corrects in ver. 29. Regarding to, epya tov 7raTp6<; /xov, whereby Christ describes His own works (John X. 37, cf. ix. 3, 4), Leyser observes, " JSFon solum similia ct aequalia, sed eadem cum jxitre ;" cf xiv. 10, 6 Be TraTrjp iv ifiol pevwv ttokI to, epya avTO's ; v. 36, tA epya a eBooKe fjLOi 6 TraTTjp "va reXeicoao} amd. — More particularly, (&.) to. epya is used to denote the sum of those acts and 2^erformanccs wherein one and the same moral individuality is embodied, cf. 1 Pet. ii. 12, T^ KoXa epya with dvacrTpocprj KoKrj ; Matt, xxiii. 3, 5, iravTa Be to. epya avTwv nroiovcnv Trpo^ to 6ea6rjvao rot? dv6pwTroi<; ; John iii. 20, 21, iva (fiavepaiOf} avTov ra epya, oTt iv 6em iaTov elpyaap,eva; viii. 39, t^ epya tov 'A^padfi; ver. 41 ; Luke xi. 48 ; Jas. iii 13. In classical Greek some adjunct is always required, such as o-^^erXta "Epyov 257 "Epyov (Hesiod); KaKo., KoXd, ayaOd, especially Xen., also Plat., Soph., and others. So also in the K T. KoXd, Matt. v. 16 ; 1 Tim. v. 10, 25, vi. 18 ; Titus ii. 7, 14, iii. 8, 14; Heb. X. 24 ; 1 Pet. ii. 12 ; dyadd, Acts ix. 36 ; Pom. xiii. 3 ; Eph. ii. 10 ; Col. i. 10 ; 1 Tim. ii. 10, V. 10 ; 2 Tim. ii. 21, iii. 17;, Titus i. 16, iii. 1 ; Heb. xiii. 21 ; 2 Cor. ix. 8 ; epya Ta iv Si.Kaioavvrj a eTroiijaafiev, Titus iii. 5 ; irovrjpd, John iii. 1 9 ; Col. i. 21; 1 John iii. 12; 2 John 11 ; dvop-a, 2 Pet. ii. 8 ; veKpd, Heb. ix. 14, vi. 1. With a genitive, jd e. T)}? crapKo?, Gal. v. 19, opposed to o Kapwb'; tov •7rvevfjt,aro<;, ver. 22 ; dcreBda'i, Jude 15 ; Tov aKOTov<}, Rom. xiii. 12, v. 11; jj,6Tavola<; epya, Acts xxvi. 20; rd epya tov v6p,ov = works answering to the law vjJiich enjoins them., Pom. iii. 20, 28, ix. 32; Gal. ii. 16, iii. 2, 5, 1 0. The law spoken of is a vop.o'; tmp epyonv, characterized by its demanding such observances, Eom. iii. 27, in contrast with v6ju,oi irlajeco';, vid. vofiof. These performances, corresponding with the law, are called in Titus iii. 5, epya rd iv SiKaioavvrj d iTToirjcrafiev, cf. Pom. ii. 14, or simply epya, performances which as such are after the pattern of the law, cf. Rom. iii. 27. So Rom. iv. 6, ix. 11, xi. 6; Eph. ii. 9 ; 2 Tim. i. 9. Over against these performances, which lay claim to merit and recognition, or bar any such claim, graee is represented as the principle of salvation, 2 Tim. i. 9 ; Eom. xi. 6, cf. iv. 4, ix. 6. This we find in the Pauline phraseology, in which those Avorks to which Christians are called are designated not simply epya, but epya dyaOd, etc. But it is otherwise in the Epistle of James. There epya generally denotes acts in which the man proves what lie is ; and the faith in virtue of which he assures himself of future safety (ii. 1 4) is to realize itself in action, by which it becomes what it is supposed to be, ii. 22, iic rwv epyoiv 17 iria-Tii ireXeiaiOr], namely, the medium of present deliverance (ii. 25) and permanent salvation (ver. 23). Without such works faith does not exist, or ceases to exist, ii. 26, 17 it tan'; ^tupt? tmv epycov veKpd iarov. — ii. 14, 20, 21, 24. The Pauline epya differ from those St. James has in his eye, as epya vopbov from the epya ri;? 7rt(7T6£o?, cf. Heb. xi. St. James directly deals with a mistake concerning faith, which only loomed before St. Paul (Eom. vi.) as a dangerous possibility. St. James is not treating of the plan of salvation in its objective principles, vindicating it (as St. Paul in the Galatian Epistle) against opponents and doubters, or exhibiting it as in that to the Romans in its universal import ; he has to correct a practical abuse of the plan of salva- tion already known. — Elsewhere rd epya usually denotes comprehensively wliat a man is and how he acts, Eom. ii. 6, dirohmaei, eKaaro) Kara rd epya avTov ; 2 Cor. xi. 15 ; 2 Tim. iv. 14; 3 John 10; Eev. ii. 2, 5, 6 (ix. 13, not in Tisch.), xix. 22, 23, iii. 1, 2, 8, 15, xiv. 13, xvi. 11, xviii. 6, xx. 12, 13. — ra epya p.ov, Eev. ii. 26, in Christ's mouth, are contrasted with rd epya t?)? 'Iefa/3eX, ii. 22, works as they proceed from Jezebel. — (c.) Finally, epyov is also used to denote any matter or thing, any object which one may liave to do or attain; e.g. Soph. Tr. 1147, aKove rovpyov ; Oed. T. 847, tovt iarl rovpyov eli ep,k peirov; Xen. Cyr. i. 4. 24. So in 2 Tim. iv. 18, pva-erai pie 6 Kvpic; d'jrb Travro'; epyov irovTjpov. Perhaps also in 1 Tim. iii. 1 , e'i ra iTTi.a-K07rr}<; opeyerai, Ka\ov epyov iin6vfj,eL, unless epyov here be taken to denote a calling (II. &.). 2 K "Epyov 258 'Epyd^ofiai, II. TIic general object or result of doing and worhing ; an object or result whose attain- ment or realization is not accomplished by a single act, bnt by accumulated labour and continued work. Thus (a.) that whicJi is hroitght into leing or accomplished hy lahour, as, e.g., a statue or a treatise, 1 Cor. ix. 1, to epyov /j,ov vyaew icrre iv Kvpim, cf. Philem. 10 ; 1 Cor. iv. 15 ; Eom. xiv. 20, to epiyov rod 6eov, cf. Acts xiii. 41 ; Phil. i. 6, o ivap^d- fieva iv vjuv 'ipyov dyaOov ; Heb. iv. 3, to, epya, the sum total of created things. This meaning may be included under I. a., and admits of a plural ; whereas, in the instances now to be given, it occurs only in the singular, viz. (6.) = calling, occupation, 1 Thess. V. 13 ; Acts xiv. 26, xiii. 2 ; 2 Tim. iv. 5, ep'yov evayyeXoa-Tov ; Eph. iv. 12. So also in John iv. 34, "va Trotw to OiXrjfia tov 7r€ytf\|rai'Tos' P'S km TeXeLcoao) avrov to epyov ; xvii. 4, TO epyov ireXelcoaa o k.t.X. By to epyov tov Kvpiov, 1 Cor. xv. 58, xvi. 10, and the absolute to epyov. Acts xv. 38, Phil. i. 22, ii. 30, is meant labour enjoined hy and done for Christ, viz., the spreading of His gospel and the furthering of His church. Cf. epyov e')(to TovTo (TKOTrelv, Xen. Mem. ii. 10. 6 ; lepev, crov epyov, 6ve Toh deoK, Ar. Av. 862; Xen. Hell. iv. 4. 12, eSooice yap roTe ye 6 6e6<; avTOi? epyov olov ovS" ev^avTo ttot av. — (c.) In an ethical sense, oi moral conduct, to epyov, the sum of to, epya, cf. 1 Pet. i. 17, Kpiveiv KaTo, TO mdaTov epyov, with Eom. ii. 6, 09 uTroSwaei eKaaro) Kara to, epya aiirov. So 1 Cor. iii. 13, cf. v\^ 12, 14, 15 ; 1 Thess. i. 3, to epyov t?}? -TriaTeax;, as in 2 Thess. i. 11 ; Heb. vi. 10, oii yap oSi/co? o 6eb<; eTTiXaOeaOao tov epyov vfiaiv; Gal. vi. 4; Jas. i. 4, 25 ; Eev. xxii. 12. So also Eom. ii. 15, to epyov tov vofiov, i.e. all that the law demands, cf. ver. 7, toZ? KaS" virojjLovrjv epyov dyadov. With a more active meaning, efficiency, activity, which some try to give the word in Eom. ii. 1 5, the usage of Aristotle certainly corresponds ; with him epyov is not only = opiis, but also = opera ct actio ; still it is against the N. T. usage, and especially the Pauline, apart from the ypairrov of the context, which by its form and import makes this meaning inadmissible. The exposition is preferable, though not very different, which takes to epyov in this passage as the object of the law = what the law is supposed to effect or realize, — an explanation which is as much in keeping with the thought as with the context. To epyov, as well as to, epya, in this ethical sense, seems to be unknown in classical Greek. 'Epyd^ofjuai. Instead of the usual augment el in this verb, Lachm. and Tisch. read in Acts xviii. 3, r]pydi^eTo. Tisch. in Matt. xxv. 16, Mark xiv. 6, rjpydaaTo = to pro- secute, realize, or complete a work. — (I.) Without object = to be active, to labour, to do, e.g. iv TO) dfj-TreXcovt, Matt. xxi. 28 ; xxv. 16, t^ "jrevTe rdXavTa XajScov elpydaaTO iv avToi<;, did business with it, took trouble about it, cf e.g. Dem. xxxvi. 44, ev ip^nroplai Kal 'x.pvi^aa-iv ipy.; Ecclus. xxiv. 22. — Luke xiii. 14; John v. 17, ix. 4; 1 Cor. iv. 12, ix. 6 ; 1 Thess. ii. 9, iv. 11 ; 2 Thess. iii. 8, 10, 12 ; Acts xviii. 3. In Eom. iv. 4, 5, tw 6e epya^ofxeva jjLLc-do'; oil Xoyl^erai Kara 'xdpcv dXXa Kard 6(f>eiX7]iJ,a' toi Be p.r) epya^ofMevo), irtcrTevovTi he K.T.X., St. Paul might certainly have meant the word according to ordinary usage, as = to earn or merit for oneself ; but it would appear rather that he means the ideal object of ^Epyd^o/jbai 259 Apyo'; the ipiyd^eaOai, viz. the epya, in the sense in which they stand contrasted with Trio-rt? and with xa/3t9, just as Luther renders it = i!o busy oneself about works. Of. Xen. Mem. i. 2. 57, Toy's jjbev w^aOov ti TrotoCj/ra? ipyd^eaBai, e(f>rj. — The object which the verb implies is re- peated by ep'^ov more explicitly (of. Kriiger, § xlvi. 5. l) = to prosecute a work. Matt, xxvi. 1 0, ep'yov yap koKov elpydaaTo ew e/xe ; Mark xiv. 6 ; John vi. 2 8, ix. 4 ; Acts xiii. 41 ; 1 Cor. xvi. 10, to jap epyov Kvpiov ipyd^erai. — (II.) With object = to prosecute, do, accomplish something, 2 Cor. vii. 10, /xeTavoiav; 2 Thess. iii. 11, fj,7]Bev epy. dWa irepiepyd^^adai = to do nothing, but attend to trifles; Eph. iv. 28 ; Col. iii. 23 ; 2 John 8 ; John vi. 2 7, ipyd^ecrdat p,-q rrjv ^pcocriv k.t.X. :=procure for yourselves food, cf. ')(priiJMTa, dpyvpiov, /S/ov epyd^eadai ; Eev. xviii. 1 7, oVot rrjv OdXaaaav ipyd^ovTUi = to labour upon the sea, Plut., Dion. Hal., and others, of sailors and fishermen, like rrjv yriv epy. of agri- culture; cf. 1 Cor. ix. 13, TO, lepd ipy., of the temple service. 'Epyd^eaBai tI tivi, et? Tiva, 7r/309 riva = to do to a person, kukov, dyaOov, KoXd, for which in classical Greek tivd Ti. Eom. xiii. 10 ; 3 John 5 ; Gal. vi. 10. It occurs seldom with an ethical object in classical Greek, e.g. in Isocrates, epy. dperijv, aaippoa-uvrjv = to practise, as epy. Te-yvrfv, eina-TriiiTjv. In the N". T. Matt. vii. 23, rrjv dvo/iiav; Jas. ii. 9, dfiapriav; Acts x. 35, Heb. xi. 33, Jas. i. 20, hiKaioa-vvrjv; Eom. ii. 10, to dyaQov, cf. Eph. iv. 28. — LXX. Ps. V. 6, xiv. 4, XXXV. 13, t^i/ dvofilav; Ps. xv. 2, Bt,Kaio<7vvrjv. — The perf. eipyaa/Mai, in a passive meaning, John iii. 21, as often in classical Greek. — Hence in the N. T. the com- pounds KaTepyd^oiiai,, Trepiepyd^o/xai, irpoaepyd^o/Mii. 'A py6<;, 7), ov, so since Aristotle, but in Attic Greek usually o, t) ; formed from aepyo<; (as to the accent, see Kriiger, xiii. 9. 9). — (I.) Active, the opposite of evepy6<; = labourlcss, idle, inactive, unfruitful, unemployed; Matt. xx. 3, 6 ; 1 Tim. v, 13 ; Titus i. 12, Kp7JTe<; del -yJrevcrTai, kuko, Orjpia, ya(7Tepev iv Boyfiamv KaTapyi](7a^ ; Horn. iii. 3, fir) rj aTria-ria avTOiv rrjv rriaTiv tov 9eov KaTapyrjcret, ; With object of the thing again in 1 Cor. xiii. 1 1, KaTtjpyrjKa to, tov vtjttlov; xv. 24, orav KaTapyrjari Tracrav ap')(i)v ical Traaav e^ovaiav koX BvvafjLiv ; Gal. iii. 1 7, ttjv i-n-ayyeKiav ; 2 Tim. ii. 1 0, tov Bavarov. Combined with a personal object, the intensive meaning which the word has' specially for St. Paul comes out clearly, more intensive than, for instance, in the two other places in the IST. T., Luke xiii. 7, Heb. ii. 14, "va . . . KaTupyijarj tov to KpaTo<; e')(pvTa tov BavaTov, as compared with 2 Thess. ii. 8, ov o Kvpwi avaXaiaei, . . . Kal /caTapyrjcret, k.tX; 2 Tim. i. 10, KaTapy-qcravTO'i fiev tov 6av. k.tX "We might suppose that St. Paul regarded the preposi- tion as adding force to the conception (as in KaTaKo-rrTeiv, /caTaKTSLveiv, and others). With him it always denotes a complete, not a temporary or partial ceasing. Elsewhere it signifies a putting out of activity, out of power or effect ; but with St. Paul it is = to annihilate, to put an end to, to hriyig to nought ; 1 Cor. vi. 13, o 6eo^ Trjv KoiXiav kuI to, /SpcofiaTa KUTapyrjaei ; i. 28, i^eXe^aTO o Oeb'i to, fxr) ovTa, ha to, ovTa KaTapyrjari. We cannot render the passive KaTapyelaOai, especially where it has a personal subject, in a passive sense. Cf. Ezra vi. 8, eTnfie\a) KaTeuxpp.^Oa ; Gal. v. 4, KaTripyrjdr)Te airo tov XpicrTov, t?}? ■^apiTc; i^eiviaaTe ; 1 Cor. ii. 6, tcov apyovTuiv tov alS3vovaiv cftavivTcov. In the N. T. 1 Cor. xii. 6, 10, of extraordinary gifts and manifestations, which were connected with the revelation and possession of the N. T. blessing within the church. i 'E pi.6 e ia, rj, still by Schenkl derived from ept?, which, however, is not possible. It comes rather from epi6oyol Te^vai. — 'Epidevco, to .work for hire, usually in the middle, has since Aristotle been used in a bad sense of those who seek only their own in the State, who take bribes ; Aristot. Polit. v. 3, fieTa^dWovau S' ai TToXiTelai, Kal dvev ardaew; Bid re xa? ipi6eia<; wcnrep iv 'Hpaia [i^ alperaiv yap Bod TovTO eTTOLrjaav KXr]p(OTd<;, oTi rjpovvTo tov<; epidevofj,evov<;) Kal Bi' oXiycopiav ; here, accord- ingly, as in Hid. v. 2, side by side with oXiywpla, neglect, depreciation; ipideia therefore is not = bribery, " sneaking after situations of honour," but susceptibility of being bribed, corruiotibleness, selfishness. Cf. Philo, de virtutt. ii. 555, ed. Mang., ri Be afxeivov elprjvr)'^ ; elp-qvT] Be i^ riye/jLovla^ opOrjii cpueTao' r/yefiovla S' u(j}i\6veiK0'i Kal dvepldevTO<; 6p6r) fjuovrj. Cf. Hesych., 'Hpodevfievaiv' TreiKoTip/rifiev Kvpiov eh B. ; Ps. Ixvi. 1 3, elaeXevaofiat. eh tov oIkov ctov iv oXoKavTcofiacnv ; Ps. Ixxi. 1 6 ; Lev. xvi. 3 ; Heb. ix. 25, dp^iepev'? elaepxeTai eh to, ayia /car' eviavTov ev ai'/iart dXXoTpltp. This is an expression or representation familiar to us only in such connections as iv %«/?» ep^., Eom. XV. 32 ; eV XvTrrj, 2 Cor. ii. 1. The subject characterizes itself in the given manner. "Epxeo-Oao denotes an appearing or self-manifestation, and by iv the distinctive form or manner of the manifestation is specified; Matt. xxi. 32, ^X6ev yap 'Icodmrj'; Trpo? v/^a? "Ep-^ofiat, 264: "Ep-^ofxai iv oSa. SiKaLocrvvrji Koi ovic iinaTeKTaTe avrat; 1 Cor. iv. 21, eV pd^Sq> ekOm irpo'i v/jlo,'; ■fj iv dyciTrrj TrvevfiaTL Te ■7rpavTT]To<;. Thus we are to understand Matt. xvL 27, fieKXet o vLO'i Tov avdpunrov ep-^^eadat, ev ry So^rj rov iraTpo^ avrov fiera roov ayyeXcov avTov ; ver. 28, eo)? av tBcocnv tov v'l t. d. ip-^6fj,evov iv rfj /Sacr. avrov; Luke xxiii. 42 ; Matt. xxv. 31 ; Mark viii. 38 ; Luke ix. 26 ; Mark ix. 1, eco ^^- ^^> ^^^ ^^ general synonymous with eK^rjTelv toi/ 6e6v, xi. 6. Por this, cf Ecclus. i. 28, vp. rm Kvpta; in ver. 30, on the contrary, we have •n-poaipxeaOai absolutely ; ii. 1, el -rrpoaepxji BovXeveiv Kvpiw dew. — 1 Pet. ii. 4, •7rpo<; ov Trpoaepxofievot, corresponds, as the connection shows, with what is quoted in ver. 6, o -Tna-Tevcov eV aiiTa. Cf. Xen. Mem. i. 2. 38, of the disciples who attached themselves to Socrates. With 1 Tim. vi. 3, irp. vyiaivova-i.v Xoyov;, cf. Plut. Cat. min. 12, T3 TroXnela, to occupy oneself in the affairs of State. n pocr7]XvTo<;, 6, new-comer, stranger, properly an adj. Often used in the LXX. = 13, which elsewhere is = ^evo<;, irdpoiKO'i, yeiTtov {yeuopa<;, Isa. xiv. 1; Ex. xii. 1). So in Ex. xii. 48, xx. 10, xxii. 21, xxiii, 8; Ps. xciv. 6; 1 Chron. xxii. 2. In aU these 2 L HpocrrjXvTo^ 266 'Prjfia passages it simply denotes a foreigner, one who does not helong to tJie nation; cf. Ex. xxii. 21, xxiii. 9, avTol yap -KpoarfkvToi, rjre iv yfj AlyvTrray. In Matt, xxiii. 15, Acts ii. 10, vi. 5, xiii. 43, on the contrary, it denotes tJiose vjho (though not originally Israelites in the sense of Ex. xii. 48) have heen received into the fellowship of Israel, partners with the Jeius {earai axrwep koI 6 avTox^uiv ri)? 7159; cf. Isa. Ivi. 6, xli. 1; Neh. x. 28 ; Suid. ol ef eOvwv Trpoa-eX.-qXvOoTe'; kol Kara tov<; deiov; iroXiTevo/j.evoi vofiovi). Compare 2 Chron. V. 6, -Tracra crvvayayyri 'laparfX, koX ol (f>oj3ov/j,evoi Kol ol iTTKTVvrjyfMevoi, avrcov. "We cannot exactly say when the word first came to be used in this sense, probably it was at the time when edvr] (which see) received its special meaning. For a fuller account of this term, see Leyrer in Herzog's Bealencycl. xii. 237 ; Winer, Realworterl. ii. 285. E P /2, to say, of which are used the fut. ipa>, perf. eiprjica, pass. eXp-q^Lai ; in quotations the participle to elp-nixevov, Luke ii. 24; Acts ii. 16, xiii. 40; Eom. iv. 18. Cf. to, p)jjj,aTa ra ■jrpoeiprjfj.iva, Jude 17; aor. pass. ipp-^Orjv, later ippeOrjv, md Winer, § 15. Hence — 'Pr]T6<;, the verbal adj. with the signification of the participle perf. passive ; spoken, expressly named, e.g. e? ■x^povov prjrov, Herod, i. 177; v. 57, eVt priTolat., certis, dcflnitis condiiionibus (Schweigh.). The same phrase in Plato, Conviv. 213 A, Zcgg. viii. 850 A. The adv. pijTco? occurs, especially in later writers, as = expressly, to denote the literalness of the quotation ; 1 Tim. iv. 1, to Be irveviJia pr]rco probably connected with €')(q), primarily (in Homer always) with reference to place, the extreme, the most remote, Acts i. 8, xiii. 47 ; then, with reference to time, the last, generally that which concludes anything, Eev. xv. 1, etc. ; Matt. xii. 45 ; Luke xi. 2 6, to, ea'x^ara rov avOpwirov eKelvov ; cf. 2 Pet. ii. 2 ; Job viii. 7 ; Lam. i. 9. Also with reference to rank or order, generally in a bad sense, Luke xiv. 9. Of persons, ihe lowest, Mark ix. 35, el' tj? 6e\ei, Trp wto? ehai, 'iarai irdvTcov eer^aTo^ koI ■jtolvtcov hicLKovo^ ; John viii. 9 ; 1 Cor. iv. 9. Sometimes denoting a moral lowness, as in Arist. Pol. iii. 4, eaxO'TO'i SiJ^o?. So, perhaps, in a moral sense. Matt. xix. 30, xx. 16 ; Mark X. 31; Luke xiii. 30. — Special attention must be paid to the phrases eV ea-^drov tmv ^fiepav, Heb. i. 2 ; twv '^^povcov, 1 Pet. i. 20 ; evr' i<7')(ara)v tow f)^., 2 Pet. iii. 3 {al. iawTov) ; ev ecryaTw ')(p6va, Jude 1 8 (Lachm. and Tisch., eV ia'^a.Tov rov X/Jw.) ; Kaipoi ea-'^aTO';, 1 Pet. i. 5 ; al ecT')(^. rfii.. Acts ii. 17; and without the article, 2 Tim. iii. 1 7 ; Jas. V. 3. They correspond with the 0. T. Cp^'H nnnsa, which is rendered by the LXX. = eV ea'xa.Tcov tcov rjjjb., Gen. xlix. 1 ; Jer. xxx. 24 ; Ezek. xxxviii. 16 ; Hos. iii. 5 (cf. eV icryaToiv etwv, Ezek. xxxviii. 8) ; Iv raU eVp^. ij/x.., Jer. xlviii. 47 ; Isa. ii. 2 ; eV ia'^drou Twv rjfi., Jer. xxiii. 2 0, xlix. 3 9 ; Num. xxiv. 14; iir ecr^aTw rwv rjfi., Deut. iv. 30; €a'\(cnov TWV r/fi., Deut. xxxi. 29 ; cf. Isa. xli. 23, dvayjecXaTe to, k'irep')(pij,eva eV icryaTov = "iinNp, Ecclus. xlviii 24. It thus denotes the time when the development of God's plan of salvation shall come to a close, the time of the final and decisive judgment. See aldiv. (The substantival ea-y^aTov corresponds better with the 0. T. expression than does the adjective.) This conclusive character of the final time is narrowed to ia-^dTt] '^fiepa, John vi. 39, 40, 44, 54, xi 24, xii. 48. — The ea-^aTai, •^/u.epai, which in Acts ii. 17 denote the time and era there named, are referred, rather than restricted, to the time previous to Christ's second advent in 2 Tim. iii. 1 ; Jas. v. 3 ; cf. ver. 7 ; and in view of the pressing shortness of this time, John designates it (1 John ii. 18) e'cr;y;aT77 &pa. — The name which the exalted Saviour gives Himself, o tt/jcSto? kuI 6 'ia-^aTo<;, Eev. i 17, ii. 8, and without the article, xxii 13, corresponds with the name by which God desig- nates Himself, f^^i^'i, pinx, Isa. xli. 4, xliv. 6, fieTo, tuvtu ; xlviii. 1 2, eh top alwva, with reference to His creative omnipotence, because through this alone the accomplishment of salvation can be expected. "E ;\; ft), to have or to hold, " of temporary holding and of lasting possession," Passow. Hence — KaTexo, (L) to hold hack, to retain, Philem. 13 ; to limit, to hinder, Luke iv. 42 ; Eom. i. 18 ; 2 Thess. ii. 6, 7 ; /cat vijv to KaTe'^ov ol'Sare, et? to dTroKaXvtpdrjvat, avTov ev tS eavTov Kaipw' to yap /xva-Trjpiov rjBr] ivepyelTat ttj? dvofiia';, jjlovov 6 KaTe-^aiv dpTO eo)? m fiea-ov yevrjTat, (Gen. xxiv. 56). The question arises, What does the apostle mean by this hindrance of the mystery of iniquity ? In ver. 5 he reminds the Thessalouiaus of what he had told them when present with them. Now, as the description of the man of sin in vv. 3, 4 reminds us of Dan. xii, Hofmann thinks that the explanation of to KaTe- Kare'^a 269 Kare-^ai ')(pv, 6 Kare^cov must also be sought in the Book of Daniel ; and referring to Dan. x., he finds in the background of the history an active angelic power " which may be de- signated both masculine — for it is a man who speaks to Daniel — and neuter — for it is a irvevfJM," Baumgarten, Apostelgesch. § 28. It is said to denote, accordingly, " the spirit of nationalities bound together in moral order" (Hofmann, die Tieilige, Schrift N. T.'s, i. 326), " the good genius of the heathen world-power, whose it is to help on the accomplishment of God's gracious purposes in the heathen world " (Auberlen, Dan. u. Apok p. 6 7 ; cf. Hofmann, Schrifthewcis, i. 332). Even if the matter in Dan. x. be recognised, it is still very questionable whether this reference corresponds with the mind of the apostle here. In the information which he gives the Thessalonians, he recommends them to notice the time when the Karexcov will be removed. But the presence or remoteness of angelic powers could hardly be discerned save by express revelation, and the apostle does not direct their attention to anything of that kind. Besides, the spiritual background is nevertheless to correspond to the moral tottering of the world-power, so that the time of the removal of the Kare^cov and the nearness of the man of sin could not thereby be recognised. I therefore think it nearer the mark to seek for an explanation within the range of N. T. prophecy, more in harmony with the consciousness of the early church, and better suited to the design of this passage. We naturally call to mind the eschatological discourses of our Lord, and here it is important to do so all the more because our Lord Himself has to bring within its due bounds the too precipitate expectation of the end. The divine order in the world's history is insisted upon, namely, that eh "jrdvTa to, e9vr} irpairov Set Kijpv^Oi]vai, TO evayyiXiov, Mark xiii. 10 ; Matt. xxiv. 14. We must regard this divine order as itself a Ka'rk')(ov, even apart from the apostle's statement here ; and I do not see why we should not regard the same thing as to KaTe')(pv of the passage before us. This is Calvin's view. 'O KaTix, ^ijaofiai.; aor. e^Tjara \ imperf. ei^av, vid. Winer, § 80. According to Curtius and others, it is connected with the Sanscrit root gi, giv, to live, Latin vivo, Old High German quek, Middle High German quicken, to revive, and stands for hioM, akin to which is hiana, manner of living. " Zcot] is animal life, hare existence ; /Sto? {vis, vigere, vita), mental life with consciousness ; or, as Aristotle calls it in Ammon. 30, XoyiKT] i^mrj. The t,a)r) is only the antecedent condition or basis of the /Sto9. Of Vomel, Synon. p. 168, whose observation that a biography is not called fw??, but /St'o?, makes the relation between the two words very clear." Doderlein, Lat. Synon. iv. 449. More precisely, fwij is the life of quickening or motion ; ^lo<; (which is of the same stem), the life vjhich one leads, qualified life ; " 5»j?, vita qua vivimus (opposed to Odvaroi, cmodv-qcnceiv) ; ^Lo wliich does not come under tlie power of any destructive influence such as death, and a life free from the destructive effects of sin — life in the state of salvation (wherein the man is again, and in a Godlike manner, free and master of himself, see tKevdepo'^, cf. Eom. V. 17). Cf. Ecclus. xlviii. 11, Kal yap ij/iet? ^cofj ^rjcro/j^eda. Thus it occurs in John vi. 57, ^rjo-erat. Bi ifj,e; 1 John iv. 9, iva ^rjaw/j^ev St' avTov ; John vi. 51, 58, ^'^crerai et? aicova; xi. 25, 26, o "Triarevcov et? e/xe Kav aTTodavrj ^rjaerai, Kal ttS? o ^wv koI nriCTevwv 6t? e'ytie ov fiTj aiToOdvri eh tov alwva. In St. Paul's writings, Eom. i. 17, vi. 13, viii. 13, X. 5 ; 2 Cor. iv. 11, v. 15, vi. 9, xiii. 4 ; Gal. ii. 20 ; Phil i. 21 ; 1 Thess. v. 10 ; Heb. X. 38, xii. 9 ; 1 Pet. iv. 6. See ^(ujj. The o ^wv ira-r^p, John vi. 57, corresponds with this life communicated to man. In like manner the designation of Christ as the Living One, o t,&v, Luke xxiv. 5, Eev. i. 18, not only with reference to His resurrection, but to the reality of His life, over which death and corruption could have no power, cf. Eom. vi. 9 ; John vi. 57, xiv. 19; Heb. vii. 8, 25. — The participle i,(tiv, moreover, is joined with substantives of which it is not elsewhere predicated, vBwp ^wv, John iv. 10, 11, vii. 3 8 ; apTo'i, John vi. 51; "Koyia, Acts vii 3 8 ; Ovala, Eom. xii. 1 ; 6 X6jo<; tov 6eov, Heb. iv. 12; 1 Pet. i. 23; 6S09, Heb. x. 20 ; Xt^o?, 1 Pet. ii. 4, 5. In such cases, occurring in classical Greek, it denotes, to he strong and permanent, e.g. to, vo/jll/jlu fiavTeia k.tX. So, perhaps, in Heb. iv. 12. In the other texts it refers to the life which salva- tion gives, and the expression used associates this life figuratively with the things named. Cf. the substantival combination, vhwp ftar)? k.tX., under ^w??. With Acts vii. 38, cf. Deut. xxxii. 47, ovj(i \6yo<; Kevo<; ovtot9 vofiov. So kutu crdpKa t,rjv, Eom. viii. 12, 13, cf. eV aapKi, Gal. ii. 20 ; Phil. i. 22 ; iv Koajxa, Col. ii. 20 ; ev toI's p-eKeaiv k.tX., Col. iii. 7 ; eV Ty ajiapTia, Eom. vi. 2 ; eV iriaTei, Gal ii. 20; but eic iricr- Teo)? i/qv, Heb. x. 38, Eom. i. 17, Gal iii. 11, cf. ver. 12 (Luke xii. 15), is not to be reckoned, for in these places ^rjv has the meaning given in (I.) (&.). Still, according to the analogy of the main text in the Hebrew, Hab. ii 4, ew Trio-Tea)? is to be joined with the verb and not with BiKaio';, not only in Heb. x. 38, where this admits of no doubt, but in the other passages ; because, even if it were grammatically allowable to join it with the noun, it would still be extremely difficult, and no logical reason requiring such a combination could be made out. Cf. also Gal iii. 12, where ^rjv iv toZ? tov vofiov 6/3701?, is contrasted with ^rjv e'/c Tn'o-Tew?, ver. 11. — We find ^'qv joined with an ethical dative (cf. Kriiger, § xlviii. 6, as in Eom. vii. 2) in Liike xx. 38 ; Eom. vi. 10, 11, xiv. 7, 8 ; 2 Cor. V. 15 ; Gal. ii 19 ; 1 Pet. ii 24. Cf. Dem. Ixxx. 26, 01 ovk ala^vvovTai ^iXlinrat ffSi'Te? Kal ov Trj kavrwv TraTpihi,; Dion. Hal. iii. 18 (in Tholuck on Eom. xiv. 7, 8), ev(7ej3e<; jjukv Trpdyfia Troieire, & iralBei, rai varpl ^(Svrei Kal oCBev dvev t?)? ifxr)'; yvwiitit BiaTrpaTTOfMevoL The context must show of what kind the ethical relation of the life is in the given case. We find the compound dva^dto, to live again, in Luke xv. 24, 32, cf. Zati> 2? 2 Za)77 above (I.) (&.) ; Eom. vii. 9, xiv. 9 ; Eev. xx. 5 ; oyovito of redemption is everywhere apparent ; e.g. in the contrast between life and condemnation, John T. 24 ; and aTrdoXeia, iii. 15, 16 ; opyr) 6eov, iii 36, but especially in the connec- tion between hfe and the future resurrection, v. 29, vi. 40. C£ the passages cited above. There remain still to be named the combinations /3t/S\o9 ^m^?, Phil. iv. 3 ; Eev. iii. 5, xui. 8, xx. 15 ; 0i^\iov ?., Eev. xvii. 8, xx. 12, xxi. 27 (opposed to Kpiae(oou, which is the more correct spelling, but less frequently used), animal, Heb. xiii. 1 1 ; 2 Pet. ii. 12; Jude 1 0. Properly a living creature ; and this essential meaning — which also occurs elsewhere still in profane Greek, where ^uov, a post- Homeric word, generally signifies living creature, and only in special instances a beast, 6r]plov = animal, as embracing all living beings — must be retained in the Eevelation, where four ^wa are represented as being between God's throne and those of the elders which surround it, Eev. iv. 6-9, v. 6, 8, 11, 14, vi. 1, 3, 5-7, vii. 11, xiv. 3, XV. 7, xix. 4, the description given of which, iv. 6-8, resembles that of the ni'H in Ezek. i. 5 sqq. ; the cherubim in Ezek. x., cf. Ps. xviii. 1, xcix. 1, Ixxx. 2 ; 1 Sam. iv. 4 ; 2 Sam. vi. 2 ; 2 Kings xix. 15. They are named " living creatures " here and in Ezek. i. on account of the life which is their main feature. They are usually the signs and tokens of majesty, of the sublime majesty of God both in His covenant relation and in His rela- tion to the world (for the latter, see Ps. xcix. 1), and therefore it is that they are assigned so prominent a place, though no active part, in the final scenes of sacred history, Eev. vi. 1—7. The a^Dpearance of four represents the concentration of all created life in this world, the original abode of which. Paradise, when life had fallen to sin and death, was given over to the cherubim. They do not, like the angels, fulfil the purposes of God in relation to men ; they are distinct from the angels, Eev. v. 11. We are thus led to conclude that they materially represent the ideal pattern of the true relation of creation to its God. Cf. Biihr, Symholik des Mos. Cultus, i. 340 sqq. Also Hofmann, Sclirifthew. i. 3 6 "i sqq. ; Kurtz in Herzog's ReaUncycl. ii. Z (0 ojovem, to give birth to living creatures. In general also = to vivify, to make alive. Thus opposed to davarow, 1 Sam. ii. 6, Kvpioi; Oavarol koX ^woyovei, Kardyei et? dBov teal dvayei. 2 Kings v. 7 = n^n, Piel. In the N. T. 1 Tim. vi. 13, 'n-apajyeWo) cov ivQ)TrLov Tov Oeov tov ^(ooyovovvTO's to, iravra, with reference to the preceding admoni- tion, eTTiXa^ov TTJi alwvlov ^o)?5? ; cf Neh. ix. 6. Then in a weakened sense, in the LXX., to leave alive, to let live = n'^r\, in Piel, Ex. i. 17, 18, 22; 1 Kings xx. 31 ; Hiphil, Judg. viii. 19. In the N. T. Acts vii. 19, Luke xvii. 33, o? eav dirdkeay, ^woyovrjo-ei avT't]v (sc. TTjv ^jrv^i^v) = to retain life ; cf the parallels in Matt, xvi, 25 = ado^eiv rfjv ffr. ; X, 3 9 = evpiaKeiv ; John xii. 2 5, rrjv ■^. el^ ^oorjv al. chvXdo'O'eip, ZcoowoLea 275 ' Hfiipa ZmoTToiea, to make alive, to vivify, Jolin vi. 63, to nrvevfid ianv to ^woirotow ; 1 Cor. XV. 45 ; 2 Cor. iii. 6. For the most part in the N". T. of raising; the dead to life, 1 Cor. XV. 22, 36 ; Eom. iv. 17, viii. 11 ; 1 Pet. iii. 18 ; John v. 21. Generally in a soteriological sense, answering to the Pauline connection between BiKaioavvr} and fw??, Gal. iii. 21, el yap iBodr] vofio<; 6 Bvvdfievo'i ^aoTroiriaai, outw^ e« vofiov av yv r] hmaLoavvq. The law promised life, ver. 1 2, but did not give it. From this universally to be acknow- ledged fact, St. Paul argues what was necessary with reference to justification. Cf. 2 Cor. iii. 6, TO yap ypd/x/Ma airoiCTelvei, to 8e irvevfia ^(aoirotel; vid. ypdpLp^a. See Job xxxvi. 6, o Kvpioi . . . acre^rj ov jirj i^cDOiroiriarj, Kal Kpifxa tttco^mv Bwcrei,. Z eo), to seethe, to bubble, connected with ^?jXo?, zeal, with the German Gischt, of boiling water, of the roaring and foaming of the sea, of the fermentation of wine, etc. Aristotle explains ^e|rv;)^po? el, oiJTe feo-To?; ver. 16 ; cf, Luke xii 49, xxiv. 32 ; Matt. xxiv. 12. H 'H fie pa, 17, the day, Eev. viii. 12 ; Luke vi. 13 ; and often qualitatively in distinc- tion from the night, and quantitatively as a division of time. Also sometimes used of a longer space of time, yet simply as a more vivid designation, e.g. Aristot. Rhct. ii. 12, 13, concerning the aged, elal Be ^iKo^woi Kal fioKiaTa eVt tTj TeXevTala rjfiepa. Elsewhere only in poetical language. In the N. T. we might take the expression rifx.epa a-ooT7]pia,-n •yap rjiMspa hrj\a) Matt. vii. 22 ; Luke x. 12 ; 2 Thess. i. 10 ; 2 Tim. i. 12, 18, iv. 8. Absolutely, 17 vi^epa, 1 Thess. v. 4 ; 1 Cor. iii. 13 ; Heb. x. 25 ; cf. 1 Cor. iv. 3, "va . . . avaicpiOw . . . viro av6pwiTW7)<; ripuepa'; ; in contrast with this rjij,. icvpiov, vid. ver. 4. For eaxarai, rjp,., see '4a')(a-To<;. While, for some, this day is the terrible end, to be anticipated with dread, for others (the oppressed people of God in the 0. T.) it is the hoped-for beginning of a new and better state, of a new order of things. This latter aspect, how- ever, is comparatively seldom dwelt upon, see Isa. Ixi. 2 ; Zech. xiv. 7 ; cf. Ezek. xui. 5 ; Jer. XXV. 29, xlix. 12 ; Ezek. ix. 6. But in Eph. iv. 30 it is called rjp^epa a-n-oXvTpwcrea^ lor the church of Jesus Christ, cf. Luke xxi. 8. In that day Christ is to be judge (Matt, vii. 22) ; by Him the resurrection of the dead wUl be accomplished, John vi. 39, 40, 44, 54 ; cf. John v. 27 ; He on this day will appear in the glory of the Father (the Father of our Lord Jesus Clirist = nin'', see Kvpioi), Matt. xvi. 27. This day is therefore called ^ Tj/M. TOV Kvpiov rjfiwv, 1 Cor. i. 8 ; tov Kvp. 'Irjaov, 2 Cor. i. 14; 77/tt. 'Ir}<70v Xpia-Tov, Phil. L 6 ; XpuaTov, Phil. i. 1 ; Luke xvii. 30,^ rip,. 6 vm tov uvOp. a-n-oKoXinrTeTai ; cf. ver. 31 ; Matt. xxiv. 36, 42, 44, 50 ; Luke xxi. 34, cf vv. 27, 28, xvii. 24, answering to the irapovaia (which see). In this designation, however, we discover a difference between the day spoken of in the 0. T. and that mentioned in the N. T. In the latter, the element of hope preponderates, and the distinction between rip,epa tov Kvpiov and ■^p.epa tov Kvpiov 'Hfiipa 211 0eos 'Ir](rov Xpia-Tov is analogous to that between the two lines of prophecy, the one connect- ing itself with the stem of David, the other looking towards the coming of Jehovah. — The rjfiepai, rov vlov tov av6p., Luke xvii. 22-26, cannot, as the connection shows, refer to the days of His earthly life. One might be tempted to take ver. 22 as referring to the time when the irapovaia should begin, but ver. 26 obliges us to fix upon a time previous to this ; for as the r^jxepa on which Noah entered into the ark (ver. 2 1) is distinct from the ri/Mepai<; N&e, so the day of the Son of man is distinct from the daps of the Son of man. The days of the Son of man denote a time defined by the still impending, as well as by the actually present, -irapovaia. — In John viii. 56, 'A^paap, rjn, life, from "'n, living. We must, however, notice Hupfeld's observation (on Pa. viii. 6) : " DTi^K, like" W, is contrasted with man Qif^^ and D'lX), with reference to His power and His position, especially in the expression ^''^ ^] 7^?, Hos. si. 9 ; or ?i< t Eev. vii. 12, xix. 5. In explanation of this, cf. Acts xxvii. 23, tov 6eov ov el/j,i, & koX Xarpevoo, dyyeXo'i, and Eev. xxi. 3, avTo^ 6 6eo? etrrat fier avTcov 6eb<; avT&v. Expression is given to the connection wherein the person stands to God and God to him, so that both exist for each other, c£ Phil. iii. 19 ; Matt, xxii 32, ovk euTip 6 6eoTrov. It is more strictly correct for us, as has hitherto been held, to argue, with Beck (on Eom. ix. 5, p. 24), from the i'W9 Beov the Xj3t(7T09 6e6Trov. As to Tit. ii. 13, irpoa-Be'^oiJ.evoi, ttjv jxaKa- piav eXirlZa icaX iiri^dveiav tjj? h6^r)<; tov /ieyaXov 6eov koI (7(OTr}po<; '^/xwv ^Iija-ov XptaTov, the question arises whether the two genitives attached to Bo^rj^, tov /jieryaXov 6eov koI cra>Trjpo<; 'Ir]a-ov XpiaTov, denote two subjects with one article, or one subject. Both are possible. Even when two subjects are thus joined, the article belonging to the second may be omitted. It is incorrect (as was stated in the first edition) that this cannot be proved 0609 280 0eo? with reference to the N. T. ; cf. not only passages such as Matt. xvi. 21, xx. 18, xxvi. 17 xxvii. 3, 41, but also, e.g., Acts xv. 22, apart from the omission of the second article in other ways. Col. ii. 22; Luke xiv. 23, i. 6; Mark xii. 33; Eev. v. 12, wliich is more frequently the case in profane Greek than in the K T. If, accordingly, in general it may be regarded as possible even in our text that God and Christ may be thus dis- tinguished, and that the predicate God may not be given to Christ, the question arises further, whether a more definite result can be obtained by an examination of those cases where, as a rule, the article must be repeated, and where it cannot be repeated. The article miost be repeated (1) when a confounding of the two subjects has to bo avoided. Acts xxvi. 30, avea-TT) 6 /SacriAev? kuI 6 rjye/jioov; 1 Cor. iii. 8, o (pvrevuiv Be KoX 6 "TTOTi^av ev ela-iv; cf Jas. iv. 12, eh eo-rlv 6 vo)j,odeT7j<; koI Kpirrj<;; (2) when some qualifying word is put to one substantive which is not to be applied to the other, Mark vi. 21, TOK fiejio'Taaiv avrov Koi xot? ■^ikidp'xoi'! Kal Tot? Tr/sturot? tj^9 PaXtXata? ; this, however, is not without a few rare exceptions, cf. 1 Tim. iv. 6 with Col. ii. 8. As to 2 John 9, 7ra? 6 irpoa.'ywv koI fir) [xevcov, the article cannot here be repeated, because firi cannot be regarded as a limitation to fievav, but fj,r] /j,iva>v is one conception in itself, and is the second predicate of the same subject. — On the other hand, the article must not be repeated (1) when a plurality of conceptions (as in 2 John 9) are predicated of one and the same subject, cf John xxi. 24, 6 fiaprvpwv irepl tovtwv koi ypdylrai; Tavra; Mark vi. 3, 6 TeKTwv, 6 VJ09 Mapia<; dBeX(fio<: Be 'laKw^ov ; Luke vi. 49, 6 Be dicovaarripoepei, OeojjLaj^elv, — with reference to the laws of soil and climate, which must be attended to in agriculture. Oeofiaxof, fighting against God, only in Acts v. 39. O e6'7TV€V(7To<;, prompted by God, divinely inspired. 2 Tim. iii. 1 6, vaaa ypa^rj 0. In profane Greek it occurs only in Plut. de placit. philos. v. 2, oveipoi Oeoirveva-Toi {/car avdyKTfv yivovrat), opposed to (pvaiKoi. The formation of the word cannot be traced to the use of -n-vea), hwt only of ip,i7veai. Cf. Xen. Hell. vii. 4. 32, T-qv aperrjv 6eo<; fiev efnrvevaa^v')(ri, irvevixa), that we must not identify the man with his Ufa, as we do in the case of the lower animals. Man and the life of man are not identical, and hence the relationship between the irvevixa and death described iu Eom. viii. 2 ; 2 Cor. iii. 7, 8. Apart from redemption, death triumphs universally over man, Eom. v. 14, ifiacrlXevcrev 6 6dvaTo<; eirl toO? k.tX., cf. vi. 9, Odvaro^ avrov ovKeri Kvpievei ; but man's relation to hfe is the reverse of this ; vid. ^wrj. The power of sin shows itself in death ; Eom. V. 21, ijSacriXevcrev rj d/iapria iv tw davdro) ; 1 Cor. xv. 56, to Kevrpov rov Oavdrov 7] dixapTM. Man's life, forfeited to sin, encounters its results, Eom. vii 5, rd iradrniaTa Twv djxapTLMV . , . ivepjelTo ev toI<; puekeauv rj/jicov et? to icapiro<^opr)aai rm Oavdrq) ; vi. 16. In a word, it is not an isolated occurrence or fact merely, it is also a staifc, just as life is a state, — it is the state of man as liable to judgment. It is the antithesis of that eternal life which God had purposed for man, and which man may yet obtain through Christ ; see Eom. vi. 23 ; 1 John iii. 14-16 ; the opposite of life as blessing and salvation; cf. 2 Cor. iii. 7, 8, where there is the antithesis of 6dvaTo<; and Trvevfjua. So also, e.ff., Matt. iv. 16 (from Isa. ix. 1, cf. Jer. ii. 6), tow KadT)fj.evot,<; iv % Oav. John v. 24, ft9 Kplaiv ovK ep'^erai dWd /j.eTa^efi7]K€V e'/c tov OavdTOV et? t^i/ ^coi]v. Cf. Eom. vii. 10, evpedrj jxoi rj ivTo\rj r) el's ^corjv avTT] els OdvaTov. Hence we find that, according to the context, the reference is either (a) to death as the objective sentence and punishment appointed fur man, or (b) to death as the state in which man is as condemned through sin OdvaTOi 28 § 'Adavaa-u The former we find in John viii. 51, ddvarov ov firj Oewpria-rj et? tov aluva; ver. 52, ou fj,7) yevarjTM OavaTov. Eom. V. 12, 14, 17, 21, vi. 21; 1 Cor. xv. 21, 26, 54-56; 2 Cor. ii. 16, iii. 7, vii. 10 ; 2 Tim. i. 10 ; Heb. ii. 14, 15 ; Jas. i. 15 ; Acts ii. 24 ; Eom. vi. 9 ; 1 John v. 16, 17, a/xapria ttjoo? 6dv., sin on account of which the person becomes amenable to judgment, and can no more, or not again, receive the saving blessing of life. Cf John xi. 4; Eom. vi. 16, vii. 10; Num. xviii. 22, dfiapria 6avaTri^opo<; = '!vxh Xtpn. Jas. ii. 8. — The latter we find in John v. 24 ; 1 John iii. 14; Eom. vii. 10, 13, 24, viii. 2, 6. — Death being understood in this sense, the full and final reaUzation of salva- tion is represented as consisting in the removal of death, 1 Cor. xv. 26, eVp^aro? exdpo'j KaTapyelrai, 6 6dvaTo<;, cf Eev. xxi. 4, o 6dv. ovic earai 'in; and redemption consists in freedom from the sentence of death (Eom. v. 1 2-1 4, vi. 2 3), or from the fear of death (Heb. ii. 14, 15), cf. Eom. viii. 2. Just the same relationship is represented between death and the gospel revelation in Luke ii. 26, Matt. xvi. 28, and parallel passages. 6dvaTo<; does not occur in biblical Greek with the commonly recognised meaning, " a state of moral and spiritual insensibility or deadness." We allow that this meaning might give weight and clearness in a certain manner to some of the passages already quoted, e.g. Eom. vi. 16, 17, vii. 10, 11, viii. 6 ; 2 Cor. ii. 16, iii. 6, 7 ; but this seeming profundity would only be the deadening of the keenness and point of the expressions ; vid. ve/cp6<;. As to 1 Tim. v. 6, vid. OvrjaKco. (III.) 'O 6dvaTo, which fundamentally denotes violent movement ; and from this (according to Curtius, p. 233) spring three modifications: " (1) to rush, to rouse ; (2) to fume, to incense; (3) to sacrifice. The mental import of the word comes figuratively from 1." Connected with the Sanscrit clMi, to shake, to enfiame, dhiimas, smoke, and with the German Bunst, vapour, fumes, Ovfiot signifies life in its activity and excitement, Plat. Crat. 419 E, 6vfM)<; Se aTrb tjJ? 6vaea)<; koI ^eaea><; t^? i^u^^? e'^^oL av tovto rovvofia. First in a physical sense = breath of life, e.r/. Homer, 11. xiii. 654, ro /xev XItts Ovfio'i. Then of every excitation of life in free action = spirit, courage ; in repelHng opponents = wrath ; in desire = impulse, longing, see Lexicons. Tittm. Syn. p. 132, " quum Ovfioi projoiHe ipsum animum dcnotet, a spiritu, qitcm exhalamus, dcindc ad omnem animi vchcmcntiorem impetum transfertur, quasi cxlmlatio vchem.cntior." It is used in a very comprehensive sense by Homer and the tragic poets to denote thought and feehng throughout the psychical as well as the physical life ; but in Plato, Thucydides, and later writers, its use is limited to the ebullition of wrath, the outgo of courage, and excitement of feeling generally. So likewise by the LXX., who render ^t?, non and nn. Job xv. 13, Prov. xviii. li = excited feclinfi, by Bvfio^, cf Ps. vi. 8 ; Ecclus. xxvi. 28. In the N. T. only = wrath, Luke iv. 28 Acts xix. 28 ; Heb. xi. 27. Side by side with other affections, 2 Cor. xii. 20 ; G-al. v. 20 Rev. xii. 12, xv. 1. With opdakp,odv, cf. Matt. v. 29 ; 1 Pet. iv. 2, avOpwvoav iin- 6v/xiat, in antithesis with BeKTjfia Oeov, cf. 2 Pet. iii. 3, Kara ra? t'Sta? aiireov eVt^u/xta? 7ropev6jj.evot ; Jude 16, 18. In these cases it denotes the lusting of a will which is not in conformity with God's will ; cf. 1 John ii. 17, o koct/xo? -jrapdyeTai Kal rj eTrodvfiia avrov' 6 Be 'rroLcbv to dekr^iia tov Oeov; Titus ii. 12, al KoafiiKal eV. ; Jas. i. 14, ^ ISla eV. ; 2 Tim. iv. 3 ; Eph. iv. 22, al eV. t?}? a^raTT;?. Further, eiriOvfjuia, answering to the moral nature of man everywhere presupposed, is used, when it stands alone, of the desire of sinful lust, a use anticipated in Wisd. iv. 12 ; Ecclus. xviii. 30, xxiii. 5. So first in the plural, Eom. xiii. 1 4, ttj? aapKo'; Trpovoiav fj,rj iroLelaOe eh i'nb6vfi[a<; ; Titus iii. 3, Bov- XevovTe'i eTTidvfiiais Kal '^Boval<; Trot Kt'Xat? ; 1 Pet. i. 14, al nrpoTepov iv rfj aJ6v •jrvevp.aTt, 3iti nn n23D niT'^'iN; Ecclus. i. 23, ecr)? Kaipov dvOe^ejai, p.aKp66vjxo<;, Kal varepov avrw dvaBwaei evcppoavvr], in antithesis with ver. 22, 6vjxo<} dBiKO'i. In the N. T. the adverb only occurs, Acts xxvi. 3, p.aKpodvfico'; aKovaai p,ov. MaKpodviiia 289 Ma/cpo0vfieo) MaKpoOvjiia, 17, patience, likewise rare ia profane Greek; Menand. Fr. 19, dv9pa}'7ro<; wv p/qhiiroTe ttjv aXvirlav alrov irapa Oecov, aWa ttjv fiaKpodvfMiav ; Plut. Lucull. xxxii. 3, /laKpoOvfXLav ifi^aXecrOai rat? ■^V')(a2<; ; xxxiii. 1, aperrjv puev iireSelKvuTO koI fxaKpodufiiav r/yefiovo'; dyadov = stctlfastncss. — (I.) In this sense = patience or endurance, Isa. Ivii. 1 5, oXijoyfrv-xpLi StSou? p,aKpo6vfiiav, koo StSov? ^arjv crvvTeTpififievoi'; ttjV KapBtav ; cf. Job vii. 16, ou lyap et? rbv al&va ^>]crojj.ai, "va fxaKpodvixrjaai ; 1 Macc. viii. 4, KareKparrjaav tov tottov Trai'To? rfj ^ovKfi avT&jz' koX rrj p,aKpo0v/j,ia,. So in the N. T. synonymous witli virofxovri, Col. i. 11, hwap^ovfievoi, Kara to KpaToi t^? §0^779 avrov ei? iraaav inrofiovrjv kol iiaKpoQvfxiav ; Heb. vi. 12, p-ip/qjal tcov Bia Tricrreco^ koI /j,a/cpo- 6v/iia<; KKrjpovofiovvTwv TCL'i e'7rayye\ia<; ; cf. x. 36, v'TTofiovrj'; e'^ere '^pelav, Iva to ffeXrjfia TOV 6eov TfOLrjaavTe'; KOfiicrTjade ttjv eTrayyeKiav ; Jas. v. 10, vTroBeiyfia ttJ? KaKowadeia^ Kol Tfj<; fi,aKpodvp,ia<; ; 2 Tim. iii. 10. — (II.) Opposed to opyt], ^uytte}?, and synonymous with TTyoaoTi??, patience in one's bearing towards others, Prov. xxv. 1 5, iv fiaKpodvp-la evoBla ^acrCKevai ; Ecclus. v. 11, yivov Ta'xp'i ^v aKpodaei aov, koI iv fiaKpo9vfi[a ^Oeyyov a-TTOKpiaLv. So in the N". T. Gal. v. 22, fJ,aKpo9vfila, ^^pijo-roTTj?, ayadaxrvvq ; Eph. iv. 2, yuera 'ira.cr7]<; Ta'rTei,vo<^pocrvvr) ; Heb. vi. 15, p.aKpo6vp,rjaav dvafievei p,aKpo9vp.a)V o SeaTroTr]<; fiiypt tov KaTavTrj- aavTa'i avTov? Trpo? eKirXripaiaLv dpapTiaiv KoXdcrei. So Matt, xviii. 26, 29 ; 2 Pet. iii. 9. — (IV.) To tarry, to delay. For this meaning, comp. Jer. xv. 15, Kvpie, p,v'qa97]Tl p^v Kal i'TrlaKeyfrai /J,e Kal d9w(oa6v p,e cnvo toiv KaTaSicoKOVTcov pe, p/rj eh piaKpo9vpi(av — 'ni^?."'^ ''^Oi?'!^ '^r;^, for which another reading has p,7j eh p,aKpo9vp,iav aov Xa/Sj?? pus. So Luke xviii. 7, Be ^eo? ov p.r] Troirjay ttjv eKBiKTjcnv tSiv eKXeKT&v ai/Tov tcov ^ocovtcov avTm 2 MaKpoBvfieo) 290 Qua fjfxepa'i Kol vvKTb<;, koI iMaKpo9v/j,wv (Lachm., Tisch., Cod. Sin. fiaKpodufjueT) eV airot? ; cf. ver. 4j Koi ovk ijdeXev em -y^povov. The explanation of eV avTol<;, which refers it not to the ixXeKTol, but to their avriSiKoi, and somewhat awkwardly borrowed from Ecclus. xxxii. 2 2, is too forced ; the combination fiaKpodv/xeiv eVt rivi, moreover, does not neces- sarily signify to have patience luith some one, cf. Jas. v. 7, o 'yeapyb'; eKSey^erao rbv Tlfiiov KapTTov tt)'; 7%, /MaKpoOvfioov e'K avTw, eiB? Xd^rj Trpoiinov Kal 8-\]nfjiov. It is the divine liaKpodvfiia which seems jSpa^Tt}'; with reference to the elect waiting for help, the two being placed in antithesis in 2 Pet. iii. 9, and co-ordinated together in Ecclus. xxxii. 22. As to the thing meant, see Eev. vi. 10. V G), to offer, to sacrifice, see 6vii6<;. In a ritualistic sense, primarily = to smoke or hum incense; as Aristarch on Homer, II. ix. 219, observes, Ovco in Homer is never crcpd^ai,, but dvfiodaai. (Pape). Cf Acts Am. 42. Thence generally = to offer, of bloody and unbloody offerings, and only in a derived sense it means to slay, Luke xv. 23, 27, 30 ; Acts X. 13, xi. 7 ; Matt. xxii. 4; to kill, John x. 10, cf. Eurip. Iph. T. 1332, ^/^et Qvovaa Qr\Kvwa>v KadicnarM to, Trpoi tov deov, Xva irpoa^epy Bcopd re ical 6v tov Xoyov. dvcrta ecTTe vfiei';. Similarly 4 Mace. vii. 8, toik; lepovp- yovvTa<; tov vojjiov lBlq> aXfiari. Cf. Plat. Legg. vi. 774 E, oXKtj irepl to, ToiavTa lepovpyia. — Later used of the ritual of the Lord's Supper, Zonar. ad Can. 1 2 Sardic., lepovpyelv Koi 'irpoa](piov for r)(j)lT]v or ^(j>iovv, Mark i. 34, xi. 16, a^et?, Eev. ii. 11, for d(p('r]<;, from the theme 'EI2, cf. Tt.6el<; for Ti6rj 7) fit, to send away, to dismiss, to set free, synonymous with ekevdepow, Matt. iv. 11, xix. 14, and often. Herod, v. 39, 'yvvalKa aj>ievM, to put away a ivife; 1 Cor. vii. 11-13. In general, to leave anything, to free oneself therefrom, to let alone. Matt, iv. 20, Ttt BlKTva; v. 24, a^6? e/cet to Baypov aov; xix. 27 ; Heb. vi. 1, etc. See Lexicons. The hiUical phrase, d(f)ievat to.? d/xa/DTtas, irapaiTTWfiaTa, to forgive sins, occurring also in the same sense without object, is analogous to the profane Greek idiom, but differs also in form from it. In profane Greek we find as a rule that dtpdvai is used in the cor- responding sense with the accusative of the person, dipievai rivd, to express the discharge or acquittal of an accused ; because, either with or without the judicial sentence, the charge falls to the ground, or the punishment is remitted, and the guilty person is dealt with as if he were innocent. Cf. Plat. Bep. v. 451 B, dtjjlefiev ere wcrirep (povov KaOapov eivai,; Plut. Alex. 13, dcfyrfKev avTov TratrT?? ahla';. (ATToXveiv nvd Tiva is found as often with the same meaning, aTraXKaaaeiv, e.g. Dem. xxxvi. 25, d(j>rJKe KaldTn]XK.a^e. The synonym crvyyiyvaxTKeiv Tivi Ti emphasizes the change of feeling.) So in the LXX. Gen. iv. 13, fiei^cov r) alrla fj.ov tov djteOrjval p,e; Gen. xviii. 26, cf. ver. 24; 1 Mace. x. 29. On the other hand, d^ievai tivI ti occurs more frequently in the LXX., and always in the W. T. It is also to be found in Herodotus, e.g. vi. 30, d(prJKev av avrm ttjv alrlrjv; vui. 140. 11, el /Sao"t\6i;? ye o fieya^ jjbovvoiai, vfuv 'EXX'yjvav rai; dfiapTdBa<; ctTrtets edeXet, cjil\o<} yeveadai] cf. 140. 1, 'Adrjvaloicri ra? dfiaprdBa's ra? e^ eKelvwv ii ifie yevofieva'; irdaai fieTLT^ixi. This phrase not only better represents the Hebrew = xba, Ps. xxv. 1 8, xxxii. 1, 5, 6, Isa. xxxiii. 24, Gen. 1. 17, Ex. xxxii. 32 = n^D, Lev. iv. 20, v. 10, 13, Num. xiv. 19, Isa. Iv. 7, but differs from the former in not leaving open the possibility of actual innocence; whence dtpiivai is often used in combination with propitiation or "Acjii-niJLi 297 "A^ecTK atonement, cf. Lev. iv. 20, Isa. xxii. 14 = 1B3. In the religious sense the expression does not occur in profane Greek, while it is used in biblical Greek almost exclusively with this signification, answering to the meaning of afj^aprla, and opposed to Xoyl^ecrOai TO, irapaTTToiiiaTa k.t.X., 2 Cor. v. 19, Eom. iv. 8; to Kpareiv xa? djjb., John xx. 23. Cf Luke xxiii. 34, a(^€? avroh, with Acts vii. 59, /j,r] crrijcrrj'; avrol^ ravrriv rrjv dfi. Synonymous with KoXvTrreiv Trjv dp,., Eom. iv. 8, Ps. xxxii. 1 ; Xwiv rivd, Matt. xvi. 19. For the thing, cf. Mic. vii. 19 ; Isa. xxxviii. 17; especially Jer. 1. 20. The expression denotes, then, where it does not stand for social proceedings, the abrogation of the divine legal claims upon man (cf. vttoSoko^, also Mark xi. 25, d^iere el ti ex^Te Kara rtz/o?; Luke xi. 4, dcf>iep,ev vavrl 6(f)eiXovTi), the remission of the amends due or of the punish- ment due for imperfect, sinful conduct, — that is, deliverance from suffering the divine judgment; hence Mark ii. 7, rk Bvvarai, d(f>i,evai dpLapriai el firj eh 6 6eo^ ; ver. 10, eVi TTj? 7779 dUvat, tivI ti, and to, ocpeLXijpara, Matt. vi. 12; cf. oj>eCKrjv, Matt. xviiL 32 ; to Bdveiov, xviii. 27 ; ra TrapaTrT(op,aTa, Matt. vi. 14, 15, Mark xi. 25, 26 ; ras dp,aprca<;, Luke v. 20, xi. 4 ; John xx. 23 ; 1 John i. 9, ii. 12. Cf Matt. xii. 31, 32 ; Mark iii. 28, iv. 12 ; Acts viii. 22, el dpa dcped^a-erat r} eTrlvoia ttj? Kap8iaiQ}i>Tai a-ov al dp,.; ver. 6 ; Mark ii. 5, 7, 9, 10 ; Luke v. 21, 24, vii. 47-49 ; Johnxx. 23 ; Eom. iv. 7. — (IIL) Without accusative of the thing, d(f>i,evai rtvi, to forgive a person, to forego the legal claim against him, Matt. vi. 12, 15, xviii. 21, 35 ; Luke xi. 4. Of the divine forgiveness, Matt. vi. 14; Luke xxiii. 34, a^e? atirot?; Jas. v. 15, dcfted^a-erat aiiTw. Without either personal or other object, Mark xi. 26, el he vp,eh ovk dcplsTe. "A (j)ecr i<;, rj, discharge, setting free, e.g. of a prisoner, putting away of a wife (Ex. xviii. 2), starting a racehorse, etc., cf. d(f)ecri,'; vButcov, Joel i. 20 ; Lam. iii. 47; 6aXdcrar](;, 2 Sam. xxii. 16. In the other passages of the LXX. and in aU passages of the N. T., only (I.) = Setting free, remission ; in LXX. mostly with reference to the year of jubilee = in'j, Ezek. xlvi. 17, Lev. xxv. 10, Isa. Ixi. 1 = n^tpip, Deut. xv. 1, 2, 9, xxxi. 10. An explanatory rendering of the Hebrew byi\ Lev. xxv. 28, 30, 40, 50, xxvii. 17, xviii. 21, 23, 24. In the N. T. Luke iv. 19, KTjpv^ai aljQj.aKaiTOi'; deaiv . . . dTToa-TelXac red paver pevov^ iv d 'Traprjaofiev ovSevl vavap- yeeiv = to allow; Aristoph. i^aw. 699, t^ fxlav ravTTjV irapelvai, ^vp,^opav alTovfiivoi'i ; Philostr. 517. 39, (Vcttj? ylveTai pivqcnKaKiav re avrai Trapetvai koI 6pelaovrM ical ov fir) irapff to, afiapr-iffiara avT&v. Of the remission of taxes it is used exactly like diivai, is = to remit punish- ment, irapievav = to leave unpunished, did not the latter appear to exclude the judicial cognition; while Dion. Hal. Ant. Bom. vii. 37 (see irdpeoK), favours the meaning a remis- sion of punishment, which implies the judicial cognition of the case in point. — On the whole, however, the word cannot be used as a synonym of d^dvai. TI dpecT i<;, rf, letting pass, ' relaxation. The meaning, remission of punishment (see ■TrapiTffii), occurs only in Dion. Hal. Ant. Bom. vii. 37, t^i/ fiev oXoa^eprf irdpeatv ov^ evpovro, ttjv 8' et? x,P°'^°^ oaov rj^iovv dva^oXrfv eXa^ov, where the subjoined adjective only strengthens the contrast between remission and respite. For the rest, this pas- sage decidedly shows that the word also in Piom. iii. 25 denotes not a temporary and conditional, but actual and full, remission of punishment, hib, ttjv trdpeabv twv ■n-po'ye'yo- voTwv dfiaprrffidrav iv rff dvo-yri tou d^ov. The word appears to have been chosen here instead of the more common dcfjeaK, only because the latter represents the characteris- tically ISr. T. salvation, which differs from the corresponding 0. T. and pre-N". T. remission of punishment, in that this latter is traceable solely to the divine patience, whereas every sort of collision with God's righteousness is abolished in the N. T. forgiveness of sins, cf. ver. 26 ; 1 John i. 9. Not 7rdpecn<;, but the dvo^v tov deov, is the characteristic of the former forgiveness ; still this long-suffering of God did not at all leave open the possibility of a later punishment, as some have supposed Trapecrt? to imply, but was exercised in view of the future sacrificial death of Christ. In order simply that this anticipatory forgiveness of sins might not be confounded with the final judicial remission of punishment, Paul chooses the less used word. Cf. Heb. ix. 15 with ver. 22, x. 18, Acts xvii. 30,Wisd. xi. 23. Xw(r}iJ,l 299 SvvirjfU H vv iT] fit, strictly, to bring together, e.g. in hostile sense = to set people against one another. Then and generally confined to the sphere of mental perception = to hear, notice, perceive, recognise, understand, etc. By keeping in mind the origin of this use of the word, we shall find out its root-idea. Xwlr^iio must strictly denote the collecting together of the single features of an object into a whole, so that avvievai expresses the opposite idea to the Hebrew 113, to which it answers almost universally in the LXX. (more rarely = b^E', jn*, HNi) ; J^ia, strictly = to separate, to divide ; cf. 1 Kings iii. 9, tov (Tvvievai ava fiiaov ayaOov Kal Kamv. This appears, e.g., from what Arist. Mh. Nic. vi. 11 says of the crweo-t?, that it is simply KpiTiKrj, whereas (ppovticni; is einraKTiKri (cf. Eph. V. 17, yLt^ iyivea6e a^pove';, aXKa ffvvievre yap avTwv rj KapBla Trevayprofievrj ; viii. 17, ovTTO) voelre, ovhe avvleTe ; Tre'irapQyiJiivnv 6%€Te tvjv KapBiav vixwv; Acts xxviii. 27, Kal ttj KapBla avvcoaiv, Kal iTriaTp^fcoaiv. In profane Greek, avveaK alone is used with a similar moral' signification ; whereas, in biblical Greek, o-uz/ero?, aavveTO'?, are also used in the same manner. Without an object only seldom, e.g. Theogn. 904, ol avviivTe';, the intel- ligent, cf TT-a? yiyvihaKwv, " every sensible man." In the N. T. Eom. iii. 11 ; 2 Cor. x.°12'; Acts vii. 25 ; Mark viii. 21, cf Wisd. vi. 1 ; Tob. iii. 8. Also Matt. xiii. 51, xvi. 12, xvii. 13 ; Luke ii. 50 ; Acts vii. 25, (II.) Weakened form = to notice, heed, hear. Not thus in K T. ^ Cf Neh. viii. 8, avvTiKiv \ao<; h ttj dvayvwaei; ver. 12, a-vvi^Kev iv rot? Xo7ot? oh iyvwpiaev avToh^to ligtan to. Seldom used in conjunction with other besides perceptible objects. Job xxxi. 1, Ol" avv^ao) iwl irdpOevov. 5'weffW 300 ^Affvvero^ X vvea i<;, rj, intelligence, insight into anything, Eph. iii. 4, hvvaade vofjaat rrjv (Tvveaiv fiov iv tS /jLVcrTTjpiai rov Xpc<7Tov ; 2 Tim. ii. 7, voei b Xiyeo' Bwaei yap croi 6 Kvpio^ crvvetTiv iv Tracriv. Without the sphere or object being assigned = understanding, cleverness, as shown, e.g., in quickness of apprehension; Luke ii. 47, e^iatavTo . . . iirl rfj crvvicrei koI Tat? dwoKpiaeaiv avTov, Col. i. 9 ; generally = acuteness ; 1 Cor. i. 19, cnzoKm rrjv aocpoav tSiv (70(f)o!)v, Kol rrjv crvvecriv twv awercbv adeTrjaai; cf. Aristot. Eth. Nic. vi. 11, according to which it exactly = evcrvvecria ; Ecclus. iii. 29, Kaphia avverov StavoTjd^aerai, irapa^oKriv ; Job xii. 20, crwecTi? irpecr^vTepaiv = matured insight ; according to Aristot. I.e. it is = judg- ment, 7] (Tvveah ecTTiv . . . irepl wv airoprjaeiev av ri,<; koI ^ovKevcrauro (cf. Eth. Nic. iv. 4, TO fiovXevofievov, oTrep iarlv crvveaea)'; iroKiruKri'i epyov), the intelligent, penetrating con- sideration preceding decision and action ; the understanding of the matter in hand ; hence in profane Greek a synonym for conscience, vid. (TvvetS7]a-i,<; ; cf Matt. xii. 3 3, where ayairav e^ 0X179 Trj<; avveaem^ answers to the e« '^v'^rj'; of the original passage, vid. "^vx^- The love of a well-pondered and duly considered resolution, which determines the whole person, is meant, the love which clearly understands itself. Connected with this is the religious moral force of aiiveai<; (as also of cro^ia) peculiar to Holy Scripture ; cf Prov. ix. 10, apxh cro4>ia<; (f)6^o<; Kvptov Koi /SovXtj aylcov avveai<;; Col. i. 9, "va TrXrjpcodi^re ttjv iTrijvwcriv rov OeXrjfiaro'; avrov iv irdcrr; crocfiia kol crvvecret "TrvevfiaTiKjj, irepiiraTrjaai vfid^ K.T.X. ; Col. ii. 2 ; cf. Deut. iv. 6, koI ^vkd^eaOe kol iroiiqaeTe (sc. ra BiKauofiara k.t.\., ver. 5), OTt aiirrj rj aoou avTov rjpcoLov Ihpvadfievoi, Ovcriycri avTov iXdcTKovTai,. But that in general the word meant to worship, colore Deos, " indicates that goodwill was not conceived to be the original and natural condition of the gods, but something that must first be earned ; " Nagelsbach, Nachhomer. Thcol. i. 37; cf. Xen. Cyrop. vii. 2. 19, irdfiiroXKa Be dvcov i^iXaadfirjv TTore avTov, namely, in order to incline Apollo to deliver an oracle. The word is also so used of men, to do them homage, even = lorc), answer to the construction in classical Greek. Else- where it is never joined with the accusative (or dative) of the person whose goodwill or favour is to be won, i.e. God is never the object of the action denoted ; it never means to con- ciliate God. Only the following constructions are used: («.) i^(Xda-K€v; Sol. 12, IXaa/jioh Ttal aal Kadapfxoh Kal IBpiicreai, KaTopyidcra^ Koi KaSoaLutcra'i rrjv iroXw ; Camill. 7, deSiv fiTJvi's iXaafiov koX '^apiGjrfpiccv Zeojievr). Now Christ in like manner, 1 John ii. 2, iv. 10, is called tXocr/Lio?, as it is He by whom, as a sacrifice, sin is covered, i.e. expiated. This is in accordance with the usage of the LXX., who translate O'lS?, i\aafj,6<}, Lev. xxv. 9, Num.- v. 8, or e^iXaaii6<;, Lev. xxiii. 27, 28 {Kaeapiafi6<;, Ex. xxix 36, xxx 10). Cf Ezek. xliv. 27 = nxtsn ; Num. xxix. 11, DnQSn nstsn = t6 -Tvepl t?5? d/j^apTla^ Tr]Tiqpi,o<;, BpaaTi]pi.o<;, etc.), never occurs at all in profane Greek, and in ecclesiastical Greek only very late, and seldom. Earely also in Josephus, e.g. Antt. xvi. 7. 1, iXaaTrjpiov iivrjfjM,; in the LXX. only in two places, see below, in which, however, it may still be construed as a substantive. Judging by the formation of the word, to iXaaTTjpiov, like anpoarripiov, hmaaTrjpLov, Kadccrrrjpiov, dvfiiarijpiov, 6vai,a(7Ti]piov, may be a nomen loci = place of conciliation, of expiation; hence Hesych. dvcnaaTrjpiov. Cf. Curtius, Griech. ScJmlgr. § 345. From profane authors only two passages are quoted, Dio Chrys. i. 355 (2d century a.d.), and Menand. Uxc. Hist. 352. 16 (7th century A.D.), in which it is analogous to ^apiari^piov = expiatory gift; so that at all events the opinion that i\. is in classical Greek a current term for expiatory sacrifices cannot be justified. Only once, as it seems, does it occur in this sense in Jos. Mace. 1 7, Sta tov a"uaTo<; r&v evae^cov eKeivcov xal tov 'CKacnrjpiov tov Oavdrov avrSiv 17 Oeia irpovoM top 'la^parfk TrpoicaKwOevra Siiaaxre. The LXX., on the contrary, use it always as a nomen loci, and, indeed, as = nnaa, Ex. xxv. 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, xxxi. 7, xxxv. 12, xxxvii. 7, 8, 9 ; Lev. xvi 2, 13, 14, 15 ; Num. vii. 89. (In the other passages, excepting 1 Chron. xxviii. 11, the LXX. have not translated the Hebrew word at all, to say nothing of the word KaTaireTaa-iMi used Ex. xxvi. 34, xxx. 6, xxxix. 35, xl. 20.) = nnw, Ezek. xliii, 14, 17, 20 (the border of the altar, which, ver. 20, was to be sprinkled with the blood of the sacrifice, as in the Mosaic ritual the Capporeth). It can only be regarded as an expansion of this expres- sion when in two passages, Ex. xxv. 17, xxxvii. 6, iXaa-T'^piov is used as an adjectival (? cf. Ex. xxx. 35, eXacov ^(^plafia ayiov; cf. Plato, Phaedr. 260 B, Xoyo'; e-Traivo^), to iXacr- Tt]piov eiridefjia, where we are told what is the material of which the mercy-seat (Capporeth) was made. (Perhaps we may say, too, that the forms, termed nomina loci by Curtius, ought to be traced back to adjectives denoting helonging to and ministering to, whose neuters then acquired a place in usage especially as nomina loci.) 1 Chron. xxviii. 11 also shows that to IX. is used by the LXX. as a name of place ; for nnsan n''a is not trans- lated by olKCi TOV IXaa-TrjpLov, which might appear to be a strong tautology, but by oIko'; tov i^tXaa-fjiov. The Capporeth (explained also by Levy, Chald. Worterh., as place of expiation) is the expiatory covering, not only of the ark containing the law, but, Ex. xxx. 6, of the law itself, — the covering of the ark, with the law therein, — and serves to receive the atoning blood, and to accomplish its object. Not till it is on the Capporeth is it what it is meant to be, propitiation, Lev. xvii. 11, xvi. 14, 15. — Accordingly, lXaaTt]piov will be 2 Q 'iXacrrripiov 306 'AvuTTrj/ii = nnsa not only in Heb. ix. 5, but also in Eom. iii. 25 ; and as regards, in particular, this latter passage, ov {XpocrTov) irpoedeTo 6 Oecx; IXaa-Tripiov, it must be noted that, according to Ex. XXV. 22 and Lev. xvi. 2, the Capporeth is the central seat of the saving presence and f'racious revelation of God ; so that it need not surprise that Christ is designated tXao-TJ?- piov, as He can be so designated, when we consider that He, as high priest and sacrifice at the same time, comes eV rm tS/o) a"naTi,, and not as the high priest of the 0. T., eV a'Ciia-Ti aXXoTpia, which he must discharge himself of by sprinkling on the Capporeth. The Capporeth was so far the principal part of the Holy of Holies, that the latter is even termed "the House of the Capporeth" (1 Chron. xxviii. 11), cf 1 Elings vi. 5, T'3'n =ri''3 nnssn, Targum. Philo caUs the Capporeth avfi/SoXov rr}^ iXea tov 6eov Sum/xew?. — UpoTlBecdai, moreover, could hardly be used of the propitiatory offering. "la-TTjfn, (I.) transitively, pres., impf , fut., aor. 1 = to place. — (II.) Intransitively, perf., pluperfect, 2d aor. = to stand. Hence — 'Av iaTT) fii, (I.) transitively, and, indeed, (a.) with reference to a position to be changed = to set up, to raise /rom a seat, a bed, etc. Also = to wake out of sleep, synony- mous with eyelpeiv, which was usual in Attic Greek, Xen. Cyrop. viii. 8. 20 ; also to raise or to wake up the dead, e.g. Xen. Cyneg. i. 6, ^A(TKKr)Tno<; . . . erw^ev aviardvai fiev redvewraij, vo(rovvTa<; Se IdaOai; Hom. II. xxiv. 551. 756, etc. So in the N. T., John vi. 39, 40, 44, 54; Acts ii. 24, 32, xiii. 33, 34, xvii. 31, ix. 41. The equally common use in the N. T. of iyeipeiv, to denote to raise from the dead, is unknown in profane Greek. — (b.) Without reference to change of place or posture = to set up, to put in a place, to cause some one to come forward; e.g. fjidprvpa dvaaTr^aaaOai, to cause a witness to come forward; tlvo, eVi rrjv KaTTjyoplav tovo';, to cause any one to ajipear as complainant, Plut. Marcell. 27. So corresponding with the Hebrew Ci^jpn in Acts iii. 22, vii. 37, ■irpoj>rjT7jv; iii. 26, vfuv irpojTov dvacrTi^(Ta<; 6 Oec; tov TralBa avrov dveaTeukev avTov k.t.X. The synonymous ijeipeiv is not used in profane Greek with a personal object. Matt. xxii. 24, (nripfia aviar. = to call forth, cf. Deut. xxv. 5 ; Ezra ii. 63 ; Neh. vii. 65. (II.) Intransitively = to stand up, and that, too, (a.) with reference to a change of position, Matt. ix. 9, Luke iv. 16, etc.; from sleep, Mark i. 35 ; of convalescents, Luke iv. 39, vi. 8. Cf. Plat. Lach. 195 C, €k t?}? voaov dvaarTJvai. Of the dead = to rise again, to return to life, Herod, iii. 62. 4, el ol Te6vea>re<; dveareaa-i; II. xxi. 56. So in the N. T., and, indeed, e/c veKpwv, Matt. xvii. 9 ; Mark vi. 14, ix. 9, 10, xii. 25; Luke xvi. 31, xxiv. 46 ; John xx. 9 ; Acts x. 41, xvii. 3 ; Eph. v. 14. (Cf. Plat. Phaed. 72, eo-rt Tw ovTi Kal TO ava^maKsaQat, Koi eK t&v redvecoTCOv tov<; fwi'Tct? yiyveadai kuI Ta? twv re6veo}T(ov yjrv^a'i elvai, Kal -vah fiev y cuyadah afiecvov, rat? Se KaKaii; Kaiciov . . . where, however, Plato's meaning is not far from the ck veKp&v dvaar^vai, in Mark ix. 9, 10 ; cf. Conv. 179 C, evapid/XTjTOf; B^ riaiv eSoa-av tovto to op'!JTov TO ird6o<; {quis rer. div. Hacr. 510 sqq., ed. Mang.) ; Hid. 511, rojSe Trpo- avepkv a-7]fjieloi<; KaOiardvai; Soph. Ant. 653, i^evS?} 7' ip,avjov ov KaTacrrijaco -TToXet. Further, such a supposition leaves unexplained phrases like Isocr. 2 11 C, iiriirovov tov ^lov Kadi- aTavai = to make one's life miserable, as also the use of the passive as synonymous with 'ylr/vea-Qat,, e.g. Eurip. Androm. 385 sq., koI Xa'^pva-d t dffXla Kal firj \a')(pvaa BvcTTUvrj^ KaduTTafiai, (which is not to be confounded with the present middle). Compare, too, the corresponding use of the intransitive senses, e.g. Soph. Oed. Col. 356, (f>vXa^ Be fiov Tria-Tr) KaTea-TTj^. The choice of the expression in Eom. v. 19 rather arose, partly from its not being simply the moral quality that is referred to, but, above aU, the thence resulting situation of those who are sinners (cf. ver. 18, which serves as foundation for ver. 19), partly from regard to the influence exercised from another quarter, especially to the idea of BiKaicoa-c<;, inasmuch as it is a iJt,eTddevovTai pXdcrTai irepia-aal, /MeydXai twv yvr]amv XcoySat, a? KadaipovcTb Kai aTroTefivovai Tvpovoia twv dvayKalwv ol yeoipyovvTe^' ovt(0 Ta> dXydei Kal urva) ^L(p Trapavi^Xa-^ev 6 KaTe'^evafievo^ Kal TeTVfpco/xevo'i, ov P'S'^pi' TavTy; Trj<; yfj,epa'i KaOalpco SI? Kadapi^oi ovSeli; evprjTai, 760)^709, 09 rrjv ^Xa^epav eTrljivaiv avToi'i pi^aof aireno'^e. Plat. Eld. iii. A, ripici.^ eKKadaipei tow twv vecov ra? ^d(na<; hia^deipovTa6vov iicdOrfpe; 35, diTiKveeTai, e's to,'; ^dpSi,<; dvfjp (7Vfiv BbBovTe'i St/ca? ; cf. Legg. 872 E, tov 'yap kolvov piav6evTo<; a'tpaTc; ovk eXvai KdOapcnv dXKrjv, ovBe eKTrXvTov iOeXeiv ylyveadai to piavOev, irplv ecrK, and therewith of the purification of the conscience. KaOapl^eiv, therefore, in itself is equivalent to d], purity, freedom from the jxlaa-fjia of guilt. Heb. ix. 1 3, tov? KeKoivwp.ivov; d'yid^eu •Trpb's ttjv t^? <; 7repi,Ka6dp/j.aTa is generally read. Josephus, Bell. Jnd. iv. 4. 3, t^ ddvpfiuTa koI KaOdp/iaTU t'^? Xfupaf oX?;? . . XeXTjOoTXix; Trapeicr- eppevcrav eh t7}v lepav iroXiV XycTCbi St' inrep^oXrjv dcre/STjfidTOJV fiia[vovTe ; Eom. vi. 19, TrapeaTijcraTe rd ixeKrj vfiatv Bov\a rfj aKadapala. The same contrast is in 1 Thess. iv. 7, where it denotes more specially (b.) lasciviousness, unohastity. So also wherever it is conjoined with iropveia (who7xdom) ; daekyeia (dissoluteness?) 'AKadapala is the genus of which iropveia is a species ; Eph. v. 3, iropveia Be Kal aKadapala irdaa ; iv. 19, eavrovi irapeBwKav rfj daekyela el ovSeiro} ovSeU eTedrj ; Heb. viii. 13, iv too Xeyetv Kaovrjv •Tre-TrdXalaiKev rrjv irpcoTTjv. The same antithesis to TrpaJTo? occurs in Eev. xxi. 1 ; Isa. xliii. 18, 19. — 1 John ii. 7, ovk ivroXrjv Kaivrjv ypdcfia) iipJlv, dXX' ivToXrjv -iraXaiav, rjv ei^ere dm dp'^i)^ ; ver. 8 ; 2 John 5 ; John xiii. 34. Thus Kai.v6<; denotes what is new, inasmuch as it has not previously existed, or as, in contrast with what has previously existed, it takes the place thereof; and, indeed, primarily, (I.) with predominant reference to time. It is so used in the passages quoted, and in Matt. xiii. 52, Kawd, koI jraXaid. From the relation of the new to what preceded there results, (II.) in particular, a qualita- tive difference, — the difference of the new, as the better, from the old, as the worse, as that which is spoiled, etc., which is supplanted by the new. The Kaivov corresponds also to the erepov, to the qualitatively different, whereas veov may stand side by side with the aXKo, the numerically different, because it does not express opposition to what already exists (though it does not of itself denote the numerically new.) Cf. Plat. Apol. 24 0, 6T€pa Bai/j,ovia Kaivd; Xen. Cyrop. i. 6. 38, ol fiovaiKol ou^ oh av ixddaxri,, ToyTot? fxovov ■^uvTai, dXXa Kal dXXa via TreipSiVTav iroielv. — iv Tot's jjbOvaiKoh to, via Kal dvOrjpa evBoKi/xei. From the N. T. cf. Kaiv^ Bi.Ba'^jj, Mark i. 27, Acts xvii. 19, with eTepov eiiayye- Xiov o OVK e<7Tiv dXXo, Gal. i. 6, 7. According to this, one might have expected in Acts xvii. 21, r) Xeyeiv i? ukovuv ti KaivoTspov, rather vecoTepov, just as Demosthenes, in 2 S Kaiv6<; efnrpoadev. As Delitzsch remarks on the passage, it appears as the active of avaKacvova-dat, 2 Cor. iv. 1 6, Col. iii. 1 ; but it does not therefore refer to the action of the teacher and pastor, but to divine action ; cf. the foregoing participles and vv. 7, 8. 'Ery Kaiv t^co, besides in the LXX. and N. T., only in Poll Onom. i. 11, dyaXfia eyKaiviaao rS> 6ea> (about 180 A.D.). As used in the LXX., it corresponds (I.) to t^'^in^ to renew, 1 Sam. xi. 14, t^z^ ^aa-iXetav; 2 Chron. xv. 8, to dva-cacrTijpiop ; Ps. li. 12, Trvevfia £v9e^ iyKaivta-ov ev Tot? i, only in the passive and in Paul's writings. Not, it seems, used either in profane or patristic .Greek ; the latter employs dvaKaovl^eiv instead, cf. Barnab. 6, eVet ovv avaKaiviaa'; rifid^ iv t§ cKpecret twv djjiapTiwv, i'rrovqaev ■^fid<; dWov tvttov, (u? 'ttulSuov 'iyew ttjv '<^v)(r)v, co? av he dvaTrXaa-a-o/Mevov; ainov '^prjaOai, see Passow, Worterb. ; Kaipov fxeTaXa/jijSdveiv, Acts xxiv. 2 5 ; Kaip. e'^eiv, to have a suitable, convenient time. Gal. vi. 10; Heb. xi. 15, cf. Plut. Zucull. 16. The M'ords Kaipw BovXeveiv, Piom. xii. 11 (where Pteceived text, Lachm. Tisch. read Kvpim), taken in this sense, are unobjec- tionable. — Specially frequent are the adverbial expressions ev Kaipa>, at the right time, Xen. Anab. iii. 1. 39, and often. Matt. xxiv. 45 ; Luke xii. 42, xx. 10 ; 1 Pet. v. 6, cf. Job xxxix. 18 ; Ps. i. 3 ; also simply Kaipm (as in Thucyd. iv. 59, and often). Matt. xii. 1 (Luke XX. 10, Tisch.). Cf 2 Thess. ii. 6, iv rw eavrov Kaipm. Also ivpo'i Kaipov, at the right, the convenient time, when it is convenient, as it suits; Luke viii. 13, tt/do? Kaipov TTiarevovcnv (1 Cor. vii. 5?). Cf Soph. Aj. 38, tt/jo? Kaipov ttovco; Plat. Legg. iv. 708 E, 17/30? K. Xeryeiv ; Herod, i. 30, to? ol Kara Kaipov rjv ; Plut. Lueull. 16, Kara Kaipov r/Keiv ; Job xxxix. 18 ; Eom. v. 6, ert . For the thing meant, cf. Luke xxii. 1 5, irpo TOV fie iraOelv. Further, in Luke xxi. 8, 6 Kaipm Tjjy iKev, of the time, toward which all yearning and hope were directed, which alone can come under consideration ; so also Eev. i. 3, xxii. 10, o Kaipo'i iyyv'i iariv, — that is, the time of the second coming of the Lord. Cf. 2 Chron. xxi. 19, where Kaipo'j is used to denote the close of a period of time. Then k. Zeicro';, evTrp6crheKTo<;, 2 Cor. vi. 2, of the N. T. time of grace, vid. Se^ro?. K. ea-xcbTO'i, 1 Pet. i. 5 ; o «. ovto<;, opposed to alwv ip^ofievoi, Mark x. 3 ; Luke xviii. 3 0. — Gal. vi. 9, Kaipm ryap ISiw depiaofiev, special time, distinguished from other times, as edvop6vifio'i ; PhQ. iii 2, KaKol ipyaTdi,. Especially is /ca/co? used by Homer, Herodotus, Xenophon, and others, in contrast to ea&x6v iral^aiv reXos dBrjXov ol reXevTo, KaKMavKov, et/coTW? dv iBoKsi •trovripo'; elvai, el Be avTO<; eraxjjpovcbv BiereKei, ttcos dv BtKaiw; rfj'; ovk evovarj^ avrw KaKia<; alriav e'^oi,. In this general sense, also, it is not exactly rare in the LXX., cf. 1 Kings xiii. 33 = ny-j •j-i'i ; Jer. ii. 19 = naB^D; 1 Chron. xxi. 8, Jer. xvi. 18 =tll' ; Ps. xxxvi. 5, lii. 3 = V1, cf. Gen. vi. 5, iirXTjOvvdrjaav at kukiui Tbiv dvOpatTTCov. So in Acts viii. 22, jj.eTavotjaov dvo t^? KaKLa<; aov ravrrj^ ; 1 Cor. xiv. 20, fj,rj iraiBua ylveaOe Tal<; ^peaiv, dXXa rfj KaKia vrjTTid^ere; v. 8 ; 1 Pet. ii. 16, firj ft)? iTTiKoXv/ifia eyovret t^5 kukui^ ttjv ekevOepiav, dXtC &>? 6eov BovXol; Jas. i. 21. (II.) The combination in Tit. iii. 3, iv KaKia Kal (pdova Bidyeiv ; Col. iii. 8, op7]fiia dpOrjTw dj) vjiSiv <7vv Trdcrrj KaKia, suggests the meaning, malevolence, which would also be suitable in Eom. i. 29 and 1 Pet. ii. 1 ; but there is no example whatever of the usage in profane Greek ; cf. Ps. lii. 3. Compare, however, kukIu, as a special degree of wicked- ness, in Aristotle, Bhct. i. 9 ; see under e/coucrtcu?. It is perversity as social vice, Wisd. ii. 21 ; Ecclus. xxv. 19. Cf. KaKo? = ill-disposed ; in KaKoeo, Acts xiv. 2. (III.) Evil, misfortune, plague, Amos iii. 6 ; Ecclus. xix. 6 ; 1 Mace. vii. 23, x. 46 ; 2 Mace. iv. 47, vi. 3, vii. 31. In profane Greek only in later writers; ^xaKoTr]^ in Homer, who is unacquainted with Kavla. In the K T. Matt. vi. 34. K a K 6 a, to do harm or evil to any one, to ill-treat, to plague, to injure. Acts vii. 6, 19, xii. 1, xviii. 10 ; 1 Pet. iii. 13. In the sense, to jnit one into a had humour cifj-ainst any one, to irritate, as in Acts xiv. 2, iKaKcocrav ra? T/^-vp^a? twv iOv&v Kara twv dBeX^wv. It cannot be shown to occur in profane Greek. Cf., however, Joseph. Antt. xvi. 1. 2, KaKovv Kal rrj'; evvola'; ^? etxei" fit? toii? 7ra/Sa? dipaipetv. The passive, Ps. cvi. 32, eKaKcodij Mcovar]'; Bt avTov<;, otl TrapeirlKpavav to Trvevfia avTov (p^^"? ^1}^), cannot be compared, for it means here, as also frequently in profane Greek, to he plagued, to he in evil ease. — KaKwcri,^ = distress. Acts vii. 34. KaKovpyot, 6, evil-doer; Luke xxiii. 32, 33, 39; 2 Tim. ii. 9; properly an adjective = deceitful, treacherous. " In the style of the Attic courts, the name embraces the XaiToBvTai, dvBpaTroBiaTai, KkeiTTal, in general robbers and murderers, against whom the aTrarfwyq was applied," Passow. Doderlein {Lat. Syn. ii. 141) calls attention to the cir- Ka/covpyoi; 329 'EyKaKeco cumstance that the accentuation suggests the derivation KUKoii opyijv, and not KaKo^ epya, iu which latter case KaKovpyo'j ought to be accentuated like ayadovpy6vTm KaKorjOeCa to koKov a-ircoadjjLevoi, BtrjveKa)<; Se et? to (j^avXov iKvevovTe^ ; vii. 3, roll' (fytKwv Tivei} KUKoijdeia TrvKvorepov rjfuv irapaKei/Mevoi avviireiaav ij/xas k.t.X. Of. Plut. de Hcrodoti malignitate. KaKOTToiia, to do evil, and that, too, in the moral sense, 3 John 11; cf. 1 John iii. 6, afiapTavcov ; 1 Pet. iii. 17. Equivalent to, todomischicf, to do evil, v/ith a. Tehvence, at the same time, to the moral objectionableness of that which for another is evil, Mark iii. 4 ; Luke vi. 9 ; see dyadoiroielv. That the moral character of the mode of action is here primarily to be considered, is clear from the absence of the object, which must bo specified if the reference were solely to the harm done. The word occurs in both senses in profane Greek. In the LXX. only in the latter = Vnj}., T^ nw. Kajc IT o i,6<;, pernicious, injurious, in the moral sense = evil-doing, hehaving ill ; it is rarely used in profane Greek, cf. Aristot. Eth. Nicom. iv. 9, oi KaKol fiev ovv SoKovcnv elvai ovSe oinof ov yap KaKoiroioi elaiv, r}p,apT7)p,evot, he. On the contrary, in the single passages of the LXX. Prov. xiL A, ywr) KaKowow^, opposed to avSpela; xxiv. 19, firj yaZpe eVt KaKOTroioK, /j,7iBe ^ijXov dfiapTaXov';, as also in the N. T. John xviii. 30, 1 Pet. ii. 12, 14, iii. 16, in a moral sense, corresponding to KaKo-jroiew. Only in 1 Pet. iv. 15, fir] yap Tt? vfiwv TraayeTeo co? (povev;, r] /cXeTTT?;?, rj KaKOwowi, rj &)? dXkoTpioeTiiaico-rrox,^lcrev iv Tm dpTa ; Isa. vii. 16, ai^' 17? crii iyKaKfi'i ; LXX. rjV cry (po^fj. In the passage from Polybius it denotes moral behaviour ; in the other passages' quoted it is 2 T 'EyKOKeco 330 Ka\ea> = to be pained hy a thing, not to te able to endure it (/ca/co?, toseless, without courage, faint- hearted), whicli may be either a physical, a psychical, or a moral weakness. 'E K Ka K ea>, Eeceived text, instead of iyKaKelv, which see. Only in the K T. and in ecclesiastical Greek. According to Hesych. = virepKaKetv, which also cannot be proved. According to Suidas = irepiKaKelv, which Polybius used in the sense of, to be in the midst of misfortune, to be unfortunate, to be desperate. Oecum. on 2 Cor. iv. 1, ovk eKKaKov/jieu rovTeariv ovk dTrayopevo/u.ev tt/jo? ra? 0\li{rei'i /cal tov<; Treipaafioi)'; koX roiii kivSvvov} ; LXX. airoKaKelv = HSJ ; Jer. xv. 9, aireKaKriaev rj ■^v)(r) ainrji;, on which Hesych., eireKpavOrj. 'Ave^iKaKoviov ; 1 Pet. ii. 9, rov e« o-kotov; v/xa? KaXecravTo^ eh to davfiaa-Tov avrov (^cj? ; ver. 21, eh tovto, namely, to exercise patience by welldoing and suffering; iii. 9, eh tovto iKXrjOt^Te, Xva evXoylav KXrjpovofii^a-rjTe ; v. 10, KoXecra'i vfj,d<; eh ttjv alcoviov avTov Bo^av iv XpoaTm ^Itjctov. The combination with iirl is synonymous, only that thus both condition and aim are indicated at the same time ; Gal. V. 1 3, eV eXevdepla eKXr)9r)Te ; 1 Thess. iv. 7, ov ryap eKoXecrev ij/aa? o Oeb oIk.). The passive, Heb. xi. 16, ov iirai.cr'^weTai avrov^ 6 deo<; i-TTLKoXeladai, avTcov. Of the surnames of single persons. Acts i. 23, iv. 36, x. 5, 18, 32, xi. 13, xii. 12, 25, xv. 22 (in Matt. x. 3 Tisch. omits, it; in Lnke xxii. 3 he reads Ka\,ovp.€vov). — Acts xv. 1 7^ e'si' obc firticeKKrjTai, to ovofjid fiov (from Amos ix. 12, Dn''!?J{ ^af «^ip: IK'S, cf. 2 Chron. vii. 14; especially 2 Sam. vi. 2, of the ark of God, 6(^' ^1^ eTreKKrjd-r} to ovofia tov Kvpiov) ; to be understood as in Deut. xxviii. 9,10; Jer. xiv. 9, vii. 10, 11 ; Isa. Ixiii. 19, xlviii. 1 ; Gen. xlviii. 16. II a p a K a\ea>, to call hither, towards, to speak to, to speak cheerfully to, " every kind of speaking to, which is meant to produce a particular effect " (Hofmann's Schri/theweis, ii. 2. 1 7). — (I.) To call some one, that he may do something = to beg, (a.) with specifica- tion of the substance of the petition introduced by \iya>v, Matt. viii. 5, 31, etc. ; or by a conjunction, JW, Matt. xiv. 36 ; Mark v. 10, etc. ; oVtu?, Matt. viii. 34; Acts xxv. 2 .; by means of the infinitive, Mark v. 17 ; Luke viii. 41, etc. ; by the accns. with the infinitive. Acts xiii. 42, xxiv. 4. — Philem. 10, trapaKaXSi ae Trepl tov ifiov tbkvov. (h.) Without speci- fication of the thing sought. Matt, xviii. 3 2, xxvi. 5 3 ; Philem. 9 ; Acts xvi. 3 9 ; Luke xv. 2 8. (II.) To call on any one, to call him hither in order to say something to him, to use persuasion, and, indeed, (a.) to admonish, followed by the imperative. Acts ii. 40 ; 1 Cor. iv. 16; 1 Thess. v. 14; Heb. xiii. 22 ; 1 Pet. ii 11, v. 1 ; Jude 3; with following infinitive. Acts xi. 23, xiv. 22 ; Piom. xii. 1, xv. 30, xvi. 17 ; 2 Cor. ii. 8, vi. 1 ; Eph. iv. 1 ; Phil. iv. 2 ; 1 Thess. iv. 10 ; 1 Tim. ii. 1 ; Titus ii. 6 ; Heb. xiii. 19 ; 1 Pet. V. 12; cf. 1 Thess. iii. 2; 1 Thess. ii. 11, eh to TreptiraTelv v/j,a<;. With following tW, 1 Cor. i. 10, xvi. 15; 1 Thess. iv. 1 ; 2 Thess. iii. 12. Without specification of content,?, tt. rtm. Acts xv. 32, xvi. 40, xx. 2 ; 2 Cor. x. 1 ; 1 Thess. v. 11 ; 1 Tim. v. 1 ; Col. iv. 8 ; Eph. vi. 22 ; 2 Thess. ii. 17 ; Heb. iii. 13 ; tt. tiv^ iv tlv!., 1 Thess. iv. 18 ; Titus i. 9 ; tI, Luke iii. 18. The passive, 1 Cor. xiv. 31 ; Col. ii. 2. Without object, in Eom. xii. 8 ; 2 Cor. v. 20 ; 1 Tim. vi. 2 ; 2 Tim. iv. 2 ; Titus i. 9, ii. 15 ; Heb. x. 25. (5.) = to encourage, to cheer up, to comfort, 1 Thess. iii. 2 ; 2 Thess. ii. 1 7 ; 2 Cor. i. 4, ii. 7, vii. 6 (Matt. ii. 18, v. 4; Luke xvi. 25 ; Actsxx. 12 ; 2 Cor. i. 4, 6, vii. 7, 13 ; 1 Thess. iii. 7). With 1 Cor. iv. 13, ^aa-(prj/j,ovfievoi, TrapaKaXovfiev, we may compare 2 Mace, xiii. 23, Tovi 'lovSaiov; TrapeKaXecrev ^ to use good words, i.e. to persuade. This, however, scarcely exhausts the force of the expression; for the apostle seems to oppose to the unchristian ^aai^fjLelv the Christian irapaKaXelv of his office and calling. IlapaKaXelv, namely, in most of the passages quoted, is the technical term for a specific kind of Chris- tian teaching, namely, that in which beseeching (cf. 2 Cor. v. 20), admonition, and comfort HapaKoXeco 337 TIapaK\,r)ro<; predominate ; perhaps the connection with KoKelv ought not to be overlooked ; 1 Thesa. ii. 11, "TrapaKoKovvTe^ . . . ical •jrapa/ivdovfievot Kal fiaprvpo/jievoi, ; 2 Thess. iii. 12, Trap- ayiyiWofiev Kal •KapaKokovp.ev; Acts ii. 40, StefbapjiipeTo koX irapeKoKei, ; 1 Pet. v. 12, •jrapaKoKwv Kal iiTLfiapTvpwv ; Luke iii. 18, irapaKaXuiv evTjyyeXi^eTo. According to 1 Cor. xiv. 31, Acts xv. 32, it belongs, like BiSdaKeiv and arrjpl^eiv, to the domain of prophecy, and is like this a special charisma (Eom. xii. 8), though it does not appear to have manifested itself separately as such. The design of TrapaKaXetv, besides, first of aU, gain- ing the hearer, was to confirm him, 1 Thess. iii. 2 ; 2 Thess. ii. 17 (conjoined with aTTjpl- ^etv). LXX. Deut. iii 2 8 ; Isa. xxxv. = Y^^ ; Job iv. 3 = Pjn. E-jwouragement, cheering up, 2 Cor. vii. 6, d TrapaKaX&v roii'i TaTreivovi ; Heb. x. 25; 2 Thess. ii. 17. Cf. the combination with %a/3a, 2 Cor. vii. 13, xiii. 11 ; 1 Thess. iii. 7, 9. Hence = to cheer up, to console, Isa. xxxv. 3. Whilst BLSda-Keiv appeals to the intellect, vapaKaXelv appeals to the will ; according to Titus i. 9, to be distinguished from iXey^eiv. As a characteristic element of the promise and proclamation of salvation, it aims at winning, not breaking the wiE Cf. Isa. xL l=nn3; xli. 27, m ^l'?'? ^'>m-\'''?^'IepovaaX^fi irapaKaXeaw ek oSov. Cf. the irapaKaXelv of Wisdom, Prov. vui. 4, Hebrew Nip. The word does not occur in John's writings, nor in Galatians, James, 2 Peter. — av/MirapaKaXetv, at the same time to comfort, encourage, Eom. i. 11, av/MwapaKXTjQrjvai, ifie, parallel with eh to arrj- pi')(6r)vai viJ,a {comforter) in Job xvi. 2 by irapd- /cXijTo?, where the LXX. has TrapaKXijrap, and Syramachus Trapijyopaiv ; but their peculiar application of the word, moreover, may have been due quite as much to the age at which they wrote (the first half of the second century a.d.), or to their Christian surroundings, the active rendering of Trapa/cXjyTo? as = o TrapaKaXoov having begun to obtain a footing among Christians (vid. Suicer). This latter usage was due to the fact that, on the one hand, precisely the doctrine of the Holy Spirit was then least understood ; on the other hand, that it was natural to regard the advocate of the helpless, needy, and troubled UeTijii as his consolation or comforter. The example adduced from Philo in favour of deriving •jrapdicXriTO'i from the active TrapaKaXeiv proves nothing, for nrapdKXrjTo's there also clearly means intercessor, Philo, de mund. crcctt. p. 4 (5), ovZevl he TrapaKX-ijTq) . . . /movo) Se eavrm ■X^prjaa/Mevoi o 6eo<; eyvto Belv evepyerelv k.t.X. n a paKXr) a- iv Be eva iroXvTi,ixov /juip- yapLTTjv). Cf. Xen. Mem. iii 1. 9, Biayi/^vaiaKeiv to re kuXov dpyvpiov Kal to Ki^Brfkov. — Of Kapvo';, opposed to a-airpo^, Matt. iii. 10, vii. 17-19, xiL 33 ; Luke iii. 9, vi. 43; BevBpov, Matt. xii. 33 ; Luke vi. 43 ; aireppia. Matt. xiii. 24, 27, 37, 38 ; cf. xiii. 48 ; olvo^, John ii. 10 = costly, valuable ; 1 Tim. iii. 1, et rt? eTnaKoirfjii opejeTat, KaXov epyov eiTuOvfiei ; iii. 13, /3a9ij,o^ KaX6<; ; vi. 19, OefieXiov KaXov; 2 Tim. i. 14, KaXrj irapadriKr] \ Jas. ii. 7, KaXbv ovofia ; Heb. xiii. 9, KaXov /SefiaiovaOai r^y KapBiav ; Matt. xxvi. 1 0, epyov KaXov ; Mark xiv. 6. (6.) In the moral sphere ; excellent, noble, worthy of recognition, spotless, becoming, well-suited, beautiful, good. An aesthetic designation of what is morally good, very fre- quently used by classical writers, especially by Plato ; cf. to KaXov, of virtue, opposed to alcT'Xpov, disgraceful, to ala-'^pov, disgrace, synonymously with ovei,Bo<;. Cf et? KdXXo(i ^r/v, 6 el<; KdXXo<; ^io^, Xen. Gyrop. viii. 1. 33 ; Ages. ix. 1, of the manifestations of am^poavvr] and Sf/tatocrwi? ; see ISTagelsbach, iVacttom. Theol. y. 2. 60. Whilst BiKaio^ expresses a simply legal judgment, KaX6<; reflects the satisfactory, agreeable impression made by what is good as it manifests itself Cf. Horn. Od. xx. 24, oi 'i], as in 1 Pet. ii. 1 2, dva(TTpoi\oao(f)ia Xoywv, ol e-^ovrai i'x^iBvr]'; dypicorepov. On the other hand, the Hebrew ^^^, is never trans- lated Kaphia; the passages cited for this. Gen. xxxiv. 3 and Lam. iii. 21, are owing to a mistake. ISTow, although the biblical 3?, Kaphia, in its full meaning — as we shall show further on — corresponds more to the profane '^v'^'^, still there was sufficient ground for employing Kaphia to express that which was meant by 3?. For the range of the Hebrew E'fiJ, to which in Greek ■^vxfj alone corresponds, differs so widely from the ideas connected vjith ■^vj(fj, that utter confusion would have been the consequence of the unlimited employment of "^vy^r) as a rendering of 3P. Not only does 37^ KapSia, in the Bible, never, like E'BJ, yfrv^T], denote the personal subject itself, indeed it could not do so ; but precisely that which in profane Greek is ascribed to the soul, — i|r. dyadij, opO-q, BoKaia, ewouy, e5 (jipovovaa ; dyaOo<;, 7rov7]po<; ttjv "^vj^v, — is, in the Bible, ascribed to the heart alone, and cannot be otherwise, cf Ps. h. 12, Ixiv. 7, ci. 4; 1 Kings iii. 6, ix. 4; Feb. ix. 8 ; Job xi. 13 ; Ps. xxiv. 4, Ixxiii. 1 ; Prov. xxii. 11 ; Eom. ii. 5 ; 1 Tim. i. 5 ; Heb. iii. 12, X. 22; Matt. v. 8; Luke viii. 15 ; 2 Pet. ii. 14, KapBlav yeyvfivaafiivr] irXeove^lai^, cf. Isocr. ii. 11, TTjv yfrvxvv yvjj,vd^€a-dai,. The usage of the apocr3rphal Book of Wisdom alone foUows that of profane Greek, viii. 19, ■ylrv^fi's Be eka')(pv dyadrj^; cf ii. 22, ■\lrvxal dfji'j)/jboi, ; vii. 27, -^v^al oaiai, {yjrv)(r]v BiKalav, in 2 Pet. ii. 8, is not to be confounded there- with). According to biblical representations, the soul is not to be measured by attributes, because moral qualities do not belong to its substance, but are strictly its accidents, attri- butable to the heart as the seat and direct organ of the soul; see below. Of Prov. KapSla 345 KapSia xxi. 10, ■^v^T] dae/3ovi, not a'cre/S?;?. (At the same time, it is already clear here how very important the idea of the heart is in connection with biblical views of life.) Further, when we iind, finally, that ^b — apart from the passages in which by abstract generalization the reflective personal pronouns are used in the same way as they are for ^!!i?, t^'^^o ^^'^ — is rendered by tidvoM in Lev. xix. 17 ; ITum. xv. 39 ; Deut. vii 17 ; Gen. xvii. 17, xxiv. 45, xxvii. 41, xxxiv. 3, xlv. 26 ; Ex. ix. 21, xxxv. 34; Deut. xxviii. 28, xxix. 18 ; Josh. v. 1 ; Job i. 5 ; Isa. xiv. 13 ; cf. Gen. vi. 6, viii. 21 = Biuvoeiv ; Ex. vii. 23 ■—voC?, — no rule can be deduced therefrom for the cases in which a reflective activity is ascribed to the heart. For there are just as many, if not more, passages in which KupBla is used in the same combinations. Comp. e.g. Gen. xxxiv. 3 with Isa. xl. 2, Deut. viii. 5, 17, 1 Sam. xxvii 1, and other places (in Ex. xxxv. 10, (to^o<; rfj Biavoia is a doubtful reading instead of cro(f). t. KapBla used in the other places). But it is with this trans- lation as it was with that through yfrvxv — it was more natural, on the whole, for a Greek, in thinking and speaking, to separate the reflective power from the heart. It may appear strange, however, that the LXX. translators were never led astray to render E'W by vovi or Bmvom. In all this we see the energy of the spirit of the Bible, compelling the LXX. to retain KapBca, a word which was relatively obsolete, and to give it a new force. That mention is, on the whole, much more rarely made of the heart in the N. T. than in the O. T., is due mainly to the circumstance that the reflexive personal pronouns are much more frequently employed where in Hebrew the more concrete 3? would stand, e.g. in 2 Cor. ii. 1 ; Matt. ix. 3, xvi. 7, 8, xxi. 25, 38, etc.; cf. Ex. iv. 14; Num. xvi 28, xxiv. 1 3 ; Esth. vi. 6 ; Ps. xxxvi. 2. KapBia denotes, then, (I.) the heart; (a.) simply as the organ of the tody, 2 Sam. xviii. 14 ; 2 Kings ix. 24 ; (b.) as the seat of life, wMch chiefly and finally participates in all its affections. Judg. xix. 5, a-Trjpujov r-qv KapBlav aov ^frw/im dpTov, cf. ver. 8. In Ex ix 14, i^airoaTeXXco TrdvTa to avvavTrip,aTd fiov et? ttjv KapBiav aov, the point is, that the plagues to come, in distinction from those that were past, would directly affect the life of Pharaoh and his people ; cf Job ii. 4-6. Cf. also the LXX. rendering of Ps. xxviii 7, ''3? 'OV}] = dveOaXev fj adp^ fiov. This mode of speech, however, involves also a decided reference to the fact that the heart as the seat of life is the centre of the collec- tive hfe of the person, and as such is influenced by all the affections of life. Cf. 1 Kings XXL 7, ^?? ^i?!! ^'!)?"''9?> 4"^^ dpTov Kal aeavTov 'yevov ; Acts xiv. 17, ifj/imfXav Tpocftr}'; Kal €v<^po(Tvvrj<;Ta) KapBla avrov diro twv dvOpcliiroov oWoLwdriaerai, Kal 2 X Kaphia 346 KapUa KapSla Brjplov SoS-^aerai, avrm, — a passage from -which we first clearly learn that the heart, as the seat and main organ of the life, is in particular — (II.) The seat and centre of man's personal life, in %Yhich the distinctive character of the human ^^i and nil manifests itself; which, on the one hand, concentrates the. personal life of man in aU its relations, — the unconscious and the conscious, the voluntary and the involuntary, the physical and spiritual impulses, sensations, and states ; and, on the other hand, is the immediate organ by which man lives his personal life ; compare for both the principal passage, Prov. iv. 23, rrjpei, arjv Kaphiav Ik /yap tovtccv e^oBot ^w?;? ; Ps. Ixix. 33, iic^7jTi]craTe tov 6eov km i^rjaeaOe, Hebrew t^?^?? ''']'''!. Accordingly, it is not surprising that in some passages and expressions KapSia is used as parallel both to ■\jrvxv and to 7rvev/ia, — to the latter even more prominently than to the former. The ■^vxv, the subject of life, whose principle is the "jrvev/ia, has in KapBia its immediate organ, concentrating and mediating all its states and activities, and therefore occupies a position between the two, irvevfia — ^Irvxii — KapSta. And further, it is the heart, as the organ concentrating, and the medium of all states and activities, in which the wevfia, the distinctive principle of the i^vx/ii has the seat of its activity. Accordingly, on the one hand, the emotions of joy, sorrow, etc., are ascribed both to the heart and the soul; comp. Prov. xii. 25, KapBiav rapdaffei ; Ps. cxix. 21 ; Job xxxvii. 1 ; Ps. cxliii. 4; John xiv. 1, 27, /a^ rapacrcricrOco vficuv r] KapBia, with John xii. 27, 5? "^v^ij fiov TerdpaKrai ; Acts xv. 24; Gen. xli. 8, irapaxSv V '^^XV avTov; Ps. vL 4, Ixxxvi. 4, evcjipaivov ttjv ■>^v'x^v tov BovXov aov; civ. 16, eii^paiveo Kaphlav; Acts xiv. 17; Ps. xxii. 27, ^■^a-ovrat. ai KapBiai avToov; Prov. iii. 22, iva ^rjcryr] •^v^v (TOV. Purther, c£ the parallelism, Ps. xciv. 19, /cara to irKfjOo'; twv oBvvcov fiov iv rf] KapBia jjlov al irapaKkricrei'; crov i]v(ppavav rrjv -ilruT^iji/ fxcv ; Prov. xxvii. 9, p,vpoi<{ KaX o'lvoi'i Kal 6vfiLd/j,acnv repTrerai KapBia, KaTapprjiyvvrai, Be vtto crv/MTTTafjidTaiv "yjrvxv ', ii. 10, iav yap e\£r} r) ao(pLa el<; ttjv crrjv Bidvoiav (3?), fj Be ata6r}aL<; rrj a^ '^v')(ri KaXrj elvau Bo^ri k.t.X. With respect to the emotional life, a review of the usage shows this distinction, namely, that the immediate desire, which makes its appearance in the form of a natural instinct, is ascribed to the soul (p]^B, e-mdvixia, of the heart, only in Ps. xxi. 3 ; LXX. ■^vxn, cf. Ptom. i. 24:; elsewhere only of the soul, Isa. xxvi. 8 ; Ps. x. 3 ; cf Deut. xii. 15, 20, 21, xviii. 6 ; 1 Sam. xxiii. 30 ; Jer. ii. 24.— Prov. xxi. 10 ; Job xxiii. 13 ; Mic. vii 1 ; 1 Sam. ii. 16 ; 2 Sam. iii. 21, etc.), cf Ps. Ixxxiv. 3, xlii. 3 ; whereas the desire cherished with consciousness and expressed with will, reflective volition, and resolve, activity of thought, is ascribed to the heart. Cf Tnm^ 3^ N^D, Esth. vii. 5 ; Eccles. viii. 11, ix. 3. Cf further, Ps. xxxvii 4, xxviii. 3, Ixvi 18 ; Jer. iii. 17, et alia. (Ps. xiii 3, ew? Ttz/o? drjao/xai /3ouXa? iv ■^v^fj fJiov, oBvva'i iv KapBia fiov 7]p,epa<;, is not to be confounded with the expression in 1 Cor. iv. 5, al jSovXal twv KapBi&v ; in Ps. xiii. they are the mani- fold involuntary thoughts, plans, etc., which arise within man, and which not tOl afterwards claim reflection.) Vid. Oehler in Herzog's Beal-Encycl. vi 15, etc., under " Herz." — The relation of the heart to the soul is clearly expressed in Jer. iv. 19, ra aladrjT'^pia t?}? KapBia'i fiov fxaifidaaei, (jovTecmv dopv^eiTai) ■^ •^vyrj i^ov (= '37 nil'p nPiniK)- cnrapdaa-eTai KapSia 347 KapSia r) KapZia fiov ov aiM'n-^crofiai,, on (pcovrjv aaXTTi/yyo'; rjKOVcrev 7} yjrv^i] /jlov ; Ps. xxiv. 4, KaOapo^ rfj KaphLa, o? ovk eka^ev eVl jiaralui ttjv ■^Irv^rjv ainov ; Jas. iv. 8, wyviauTe Kap- Bia<; S/'\|rii%ot; cf. Jer. vi. 16, ayvia-fiov rfi ■^v)(fi; Luke ii. 35. When heart and soul are spoken of in the Bible aa conjoining, especially in a religious respect, it is not a combina- tion of two synonymous expressions for the purpose of gaining force, but as, for example, in the passage w^aTrav tov deov i^ oXtj^ tj;? /capSta? [Stav.] Kal ef 6\i]6Bpa . . . fit) airoa-T'^Toyaav (oi Xoiyoi) a-TTo T7j<; KapBla'; aov ; 1 Chron. xxviii 9, BovXeve Tw Oe^ iv KapBla reXeta koX ■>^vxv dekovcyrj (nssq B'S^ai Di^B^ lb, cf. Isa. xlii. 1) ; Deut. xi. 18. Cf. also 1 Sam. ii. 35, where God says, iravTa tu iv rfj KapBia fiov — all that I intend — kuI to, iv rfj '^v^v H'Ov — all that I must demand, to which I am impelled by myself — iroLrjaei,. Further, cf. Deut. vi. 6, Josh. xxii. 5, where 3? = BiAvom gives pro- minence to the element of reflection, intention, and consciousness in the conduct. (The passages in question are Deut. iv. 9, 29, x. 12, xi. 13, xiii. 4, xxvi. 16, xxx. 2, 6, 10 ; Josh. xxiiL 14; 1 Sam. ii. 35 ; 1 Kings ii. 4, viii. 48 ; 2 Kings xxiii 3, 25 ; 1 Chron. xxii. 19, xxviii. 9 ; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 31, vi. 38, xv. 12, xxviii. 9 ; Jer. xxxii 41.) On the other hand, we find heart and spirit used as parallels, or in the closest connec- tion with each other. For as the personal life (of the soul) is conditioned by the spirit and mediated by the heart, the activity of the spirit must be specially sought in the heart ; accordiagly it is possible to attribute to the heart what properly and in the last instance belongs to the spirit. As the spirit is specially the divine principle of life, and is therefore particularly employed where manifestations, utterances, states of the religious, God-related life come under consideration, we can understand why religious life and conduct pertain mainly to the heart. — Spirit and heart are parallelized, e.g., in Ps. xxxiv. 19, (rvvTerptfi/xevot rrjv KapBlav . . . raTreivol rm ttv.; Ii. 19, Ova-la Ta> 6ea> irvevjJM a-wT€Tpi/j,fjLivov, KapBlav a-vvTeTpifi/j,ev7jv Kal TeTaTreiva/j.ivrjv 6 Oeo<; ovk i^ovBevcoaei ; Ixxviii. 9, yevea yTti ov KarevOvvev iv ttj KapBla avTrj<;, Kal ovk iTrta-Ttodrj /leTo, tov 6eov TO TTv. avTrj<; (Ezek. xiii. 3, nn = KapBla; cf. Jer. xxiii. 16, 26, etc.). Further, in one case we find ascribed to the spirit what in another case is ascribed to the heart ; cf. Acts xix. 21, eOero iv t& -jrvev/xaTi, with Acts xxiii. 11, ^ irpoOecri,'; ttj? KapBla<:; 2 Cor. ix. 7. — 1 Thess. ii. 17, airopcpavtcrdevTei; acj} vficov . . . TrpoacoTrq) ov KapBla; Col. ii. 5, ry aapKl aireifu . . . rm irvevfiaTi crvv v/mv el/j,l. It is of chief importance to recognise the heart as the seat of the activity of the Spirit, of the divine principle of life, vid. 1 Pet. iii. 4, o KpvTTTO'; Trj<; KapBia'i dvOpcoTTO'}, iv tw a^Oapra tov Trpaeo^ nal •fjav^lov Tn/ev/xaro? ; Eom. ii. 29, which is also at once the seat of the Holy Ghost {yid. rrvevfia) ; Ps. H. 11 ; Eph. iii. 16, 17 ; Rom. v. 5, rj ajaTTT] tov deov eKKS'^yTai, iv rat? KapBlai,<; rjfi&v Bia Trj/evynaxos TOV BoOevTO'i Tj/uv ; Gal. iv. 6, i^airea-TeCKev o 6eo