Only once found, in Acts 1:3, meaning suffering, referring to
the sufferings of our Lord.
of Christ (1 Pet. 2:21; John 13:15); of pastors to their flocks
(Phil. 3:17; 2 Thess. 3:9; 1 Tim. 4:12; 1 Pet. 5:3); of the Jews
as a warning (Heb. 4:11); of the prophets as suffering
affliction (James 5:10).
one of the particulars regarding which retaliatory punishment
was to be inflicted (Ex. 21:24; Lev. 24:20; Deut. 19:21).
"Gnashing of teeth" =rage, despair (Matt. 8:12; Acts 7:54);
"cleanness of teeth" =famine (Amos 4:6); "children's teeth set
on edge" =children suffering for the sins of their fathers
abounds in all the plains and valleys of the wilderness of the
forty years' wanderings. In Isa. 50:7 and Ezek. 3:9 the
expressions, where the word is used, means that the "Messiah
would be firm and resolute amidst all contempt and scorn which
he would meet; that he had made up his mind to endure it, and
would not shrink from any kind or degree of suffering which
would be necessary to accomplish the great work in which he was
engaged." (Comp. Ezek. 3:8, 9.) The words "like a flint" are
used with reference to the hoofs of horses (Isa. 5:28).
(Heb. shemarim), from a word meaning to keep or preserve. It was
applied to "lees" from the custom of allowing wine to stand on
the lees that it might thereby be better preserved (Isa. 25:6).
"Men settled on their lees" (Zeph. 1:12) are men "hardened or
crusted." The image is derived from the crust formed at the
bottom of wines long left undisturbed (Jer. 48:11). The effect
of wealthy undisturbed ease on the ungodly is hardening. They
become stupidly secure (comp. Ps. 55:19; Amos 6:1). To drink the
lees (Ps. 75:8) denotes severe suffering.
Heb. la'anah, the Artemisia absinthium of botanists. It is noted
for its intense bitterness (Deut. 29:18; Prov. 5:4; Jer. 9:15;
Amos 5:7). It is a type of bitterness, affliction, remorse,
punitive suffering. In Amos 6:12 this Hebrew word is rendered
"hemlock" (R.V., "wormwood"). In the symbolical language of the
Apocalypse (Rev. 8:10, 11) a star is represented as falling on
the waters of the earth, causing the third part of the water to
The name by which the Greeks designated it, absinthion, means
"undrinkable." The absinthe of France is distilled from a
species of this plant. The "southernwood" or "old man,"
cultivated in cottage gardens on account of its fragrance, is
another species of it.
contest; wrestling; severe struggling with pain and suffering.
Anguish is the reflection on evil that is already past, while
agony is a struggle with evil at the time present. It is only
used in the New Testament by Luke (22:44) to describe our Lord's
fearful struggle in Gethsemane.
The verb from which the noun "agony" is derived is used to
denote an earnest endeavour or striving, as "Strive [agonize] to
enter" (Luke 13:24); "Then would my servants fight" [agonize]
(John 18:36). Comp. 1 Cor. 9:25; Col. 1:29; 4:12; 1 Tim. 6:12; 2
Tim. 4:7, where the words "striveth," "labour," "conflict,"
"fight," are the renderings of the same Greek verb.
Goodness of God
a perfection of his character which he exercises towards his
creatures according to their various circumstances and relations
(Ps. 145:8, 9; 103:8; 1 John 4:8). Viewed generally, it is
benevolence; as exercised with respect to the miseries of his
creatures it is mercy, pity, compassion, and in the case of
impenitent sinners, long-suffering patience; as exercised in
communicating favour on the unworthy it is grace. "Goodness and
justice are the several aspects of one unchangeable, infinitely
wise, and sovereign moral perfection. God is not sometimes
merciful and sometimes just, but he is eternally infinitely just
and merciful." God is infinitely and unchangeably good (Zeph.
3:17), and his goodness is incomprehensible by the finite mind
(Rom. 11: 35, 36). "God's goodness appears in two things, giving
The New Testament lays down the general principles of good
government, but contains no code of laws for the punishment of
offenders. Punishment proceeds on the principle that there is an
eternal distinction between right and wrong, and that this
distinction must be maintained for its own sake. It is not
primarily intended for the reformation of criminals, nor for the
purpose of deterring others from sin. These results may be
gained, but crime in itself demands punishment. (See MURDER
¯T0002621; THEFT ¯T0003632.)
Endless, of the impenitent and unbelieving. The rejection of
this doctrine "cuts the ground from under the gospel...blots out
the attribute of retributive justice; transmutes sin into
misfortune instead of guilt; turns all suffering into
chastisement; converts the piacular work of Christ into moral
influence...The attempt to retain the evangelical theology in
connection with it is futile" (Shedd).
This word does not occur in the Authorized Version of the New
Testament except in Rom. 5:11, where in the Revised Version the
word "reconciliation" is used. In the Old Testament it is of
The meaning of the word is simply at-one-ment, i.e., the state
of being at one or being reconciled, so that atonement is
reconciliation. Thus it is used to denote the effect which flows
from the death of Christ.
But the word is also used to denote that by which this
reconciliation is brought about, viz., the death of Christ
itself; and when so used it means satisfaction, and in this
sense to make an atonement for one is to make satisfaction for
his offences (Ex. 32:30; Lev. 4:26; 5:16; Num. 6:11), and, as
regards the person, to reconcile, to propitiate God in his
By the atonement of Christ we generally mean his work by which
he expiated our sins. But in Scripture usage the word denotes
the reconciliation itself, and not the means by which it is
effected. When speaking of Christ's saving work, the word
"satisfaction," the word used by the theologians of the
Reformation, is to be preferred to the word "atonement."
Christ's satisfaction is all he did in the room and in behalf of
sinners to satisfy the demands of the law and justice of God.
Christ's work consisted of suffering and obedience, and these
were vicarious, i.e., were not merely for our benefit, but were
in our stead, as the suffering and obedience of our vicar, or
substitute. Our guilt is expiated by the punishment which our
vicar bore, and thus God is rendered propitious, i.e., it is now
consistent with his justice to manifest his love to
transgressors. Expiation has been made for sin, i.e., it is
covered. The means by which it is covered is vicarious
satisfaction, and the result of its being covered is atonement
or reconciliation. To make atonement is to do that by virtue of
which alienation ceases and reconciliation is brought about.
Christ's mediatorial work and sufferings are the ground or
efficient cause of reconciliation with God. They rectify the
disturbed relations between God and man, taking away the
obstacles interposed by sin to their fellowship and concord. The
reconciliation is mutual, i.e., it is not only that of sinners
toward God, but also and pre-eminently that of God toward
sinners, effected by the sin-offering he himself provided, so
that consistently with the other attributes of his character his
love might flow forth in all its fulness of blessing to men. The
primary idea presented to us in different forms throughout the
Scripture is that the death of Christ is a satisfaction of
infinite worth rendered to the law and justice of God (q.v.),
and accepted by him in room of the very penalty man had
incurred. It must also be constantly kept in mind that the
atonement is not the cause but the consequence of God's love to
guilty men (John 3:16; Rom. 3:24, 25; Eph. 1:7; 1 John 1:9;
4:9). The atonement may also be regarded as necessary, not in an
absolute but in a relative sense, i.e., if man is to be saved,
there is no other way than this which God has devised and
carried out (Ex. 34:7; Josh. 24:19; Ps. 5:4; 7:11; Nahum 1:2, 6;
Rom. 3:5). This is God's plan, clearly revealed; and that is
enough for us to know.
Baptism of Christ
Christ had to be formally inaugurated into the public discharge
of his offices. For this purpose he came to John, who was the
representative of the law and the prophets, that by him he might
be introduced into his offices, and thus be publicly recognized
as the Messiah of whose coming the prophecies and types had for
many ages borne witness.
John refused at first to confer his baptism on Christ, for he
understood not what he had to do with the "baptism of
repentance." But Christ said, "'Suffer it to be so now,' NOW as
suited to my state of humiliation, my state as a substitute in
the room of sinners." His reception of baptism was not necessary
on his own account. It was a voluntary act, the same as his act
of becoming incarnate. Yet if the work he had engaged to
accomplish was to be completed, then it became him to take on
him the likeness of a sinner, and to fulfil all righteousness
The official duty of Christ and the sinless person of Christ
are to be distinguished. It was in his official capacity that he
submitted to baptism. In coming to John our Lord virtually said,
"Though sinless, and without any personal taint, yet in my
public or official capacity as the Sent of God, I stand in the
room of many, and bring with me the sin of the world, for which
I am the propitiation." Christ was not made under the law on his
own account. It was as surety of his people, a position which he
spontaneously assumed. The administration of the rite of baptism
was also a symbol of the baptism of suffering before him in this
official capacity (Luke 12:50). In thus presenting himself he in
effect dedicated or consecrated himself to the work of
fulfilling all righteousness.
The miserable fate of the wicked in hell (Matt. 25:46; Mark
3:29; Heb. 6:2; 2 Thess. 1:9; Matt. 18:8; 25:41; Jude 1:7). The
Scripture as clearly teaches the unending duration of the penal
sufferings of the lost as the "everlasting life," the "eternal
life" of the righteous. The same Greek words in the New
Testament (aion, aionios, aidios) are used to express (1) the
eternal existence of God (1 Tim. 1:17; Rom. 1:20; 16:26); (2) of
Christ (Rev. 1:18); (3) of the Holy Ghost (Heb. 9:14); and (4)
the eternal duration of the sufferings of the lost (Matt. 25:46;
Their condition after casting off the mortal body is spoken of
in these expressive words: "Fire that shall not be quenched"
(Mark 9:45, 46), "fire unquenchable" (Luke 3:17), "the worm that
never dies," the "bottomless pit" (Rev. 9:1), "the smoke of
their torment ascending up for ever and ever" (Rev. 14:10, 11).
The idea that the "second death" (Rev. 20:14) is in the case
of the wicked their absolute destruction, their annihilation,
has not the slightest support from Scripture, which always
represents their future as one of conscious suffering enduring
The supposition that God will ultimately secure the repentance
and restoration of all sinners is equally unscriptural. There is
not the slightest trace in all the Scriptures of any such
restoration. Sufferings of themselves have no tendency to purify
the soul from sin or impart spiritual life. The atoning death of
Christ and the sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit are the only
means of divine appointment for bringing men to repentance. Now
in the case of them that perish these means have been rejected,
and "there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins" (Heb. 10:26,
Kingly office of Christ
one of the three special relations in which Christ stands to his
people. Christ's office as mediator comprehends three different
functions, viz., those of a prophet, priest, and king. These are
not three distinct offices, but three functions of the one
office of mediator.
Christ is King and sovereign Head over his Church and over all
things to his Church (Eph. 1:22; 4:15; Col. 1:18; 2:19). He
executes this mediatorial kingship in his Church, and over his
Church, and over all things in behalf of his Church. This
royalty differs from that which essentially belongs to him as
God, for it is given to him by the Father as the reward of his
obedience and sufferings (Phil. 2:6-11), and has as its especial
object the upbuilding and the glory of his redeemed Church. It
attaches, moreover, not to his divine nature as such, but to his
person as God-man.
Christ's mediatorial kingdom may be regarded as comprehending,
(1) his kingdom of power, or his providential government of the
universe; (2) his kingdom of grace, which is wholly spiritual in
its subjects and administration; and (3) his kingdom of glory,
which is the consummation of all his providential and gracious
Christ sustained and exercised the function of mediatorial
King as well as of Prophet and Priest, from the time of the fall
of man, when he entered on his mediatorial work; yet it may be
said that he was publicly and formally enthroned when he
ascended up on high and sat down at the Father's right hand (Ps.
2:6; Jer. 23:5; Isa. 9:6), after his work of humiliation and
suffering on earth was "finished."
Corinthians, Second Epistle to the
Shortly after writing his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul
left Ephesus, where intense excitement had been aroused against
him, the evidence of his great success, and proceeded to
Macedonia. Pursuing the usual route, he reached Troas, the port
of departure for Europe. Here he expected to meet with Titus,
whom he had sent from Ephesus to Corinth, with tidings of the
effects produced on the church there by the first epistle; but
was disappointed (1 Cor. 16:9; 2 Cor. 1:8; 2:12, 13). He then
left Troas and proceeded to Macedonia; and at Philippi, where he
tarried, he was soon joined by Titus (2 Cor. 7:6, 7), who
brought him good news from Corinth, and also by Timothy. Under
the influence of the feelings awakened in his mind by the
favourable report which Titus brought back from Corinth, this
second epistle was written. It was probably written at Philippi,
or, as some think, Thessalonica, early in the year A.D. 58, and
was sent to Corinth by Titus. This letter he addresses not only
to the church in Corinth, but also to the saints in all Achaia,
i.e., in Athens, Cenchrea, and other cities in Greece.
The contents of this epistle may be thus arranged:
(1.) Paul speaks of his spiritual labours and course of life,
and expresses his warm affection toward the Corinthians (2 Cor.
(2.) He gives specific directions regarding the collection
that was to be made for their poor brethren in Judea (8; 9).
(3.) He defends his own apostolic claim (10-13), and justifies
himself from the charges and insinuations of the false teacher
and his adherents.
This epistle, it has been well said, shows the individuallity
of the apostle more than any other. "Human weakness, spiritual
strength, the deepest tenderness of affection, wounded feeling,
sternness, irony, rebuke, impassioned self-vindication,
humility, a just self-respect, zeal for the welfare of the weak
and suffering, as well as for the progress of the church of
Christ and for the spiritual advancement of its members, are all
displayed in turn in the course of his appeal."--Lias, Second
Of the effects produced on the Corinthian church by this
epistle we have no definite information. We know that Paul
visited Corinth after he had written it (Acts 20:2, 3), and that
on that occasion he tarried there for three months. In his
letter to Rome, written at this time, he sent salutations from
some of the principal members of the church to the Romans.
Jehovah-given. (1.) The son of King Ahaziah. While yet an
infant, he was saved from the general massacre of the family by
his aunt Jehosheba, and was apparently the only surviving
descendant of Solomon (2 Chr. 21:4, 17). His uncle, the high
priest Jehoiada, brought him forth to public notice when he was
eight years of age, and crowned and anointed him king of Judah
with the usual ceremonies. Athaliah was taken by surprise when
she heard the shout of the people, "Long live the king;" and
when she appeared in the temple, Jehoiada commanded her to be
led forth to death (2 Kings 11:13-20). While the high priest
lived, Jehoash favoured the worship of God and observed the law;
but on his death he fell away into evil courses, and the land
was defiled with idolatry. Zechariah, the son and successor of
the high priest, was put to death. These evil deeds brought down
on the land the judgement of God, and it was oppressed by the
Syrian invaders. He is one of the three kings omitted by Matthew
(1:8) in the genealogy of Christ, the other two being Ahaziah
and Amaziah. He was buried in the city of David (2 Kings 12:21).
(See JOASH ¯T0002078 .)
(2.) The son and successor of Jehoahaz, king of Israel (2
Kings 14:1; comp. 12:1; 13:10). When he ascended the throne the
kingdom was suffering from the invasion of the Syrians. Hazael
"was cutting Israel short." He tolerated the worship of the
golden calves, yet seems to have manifested a character of
sincere devotion to the God of his fathers. He held the prophet
Elisha in honour, and wept by his bedside when he was dying,
addressing him in the words Elisha himself had used when Elijah
was carried up into heaven: "O my father, my father, the chariot
of Israel and the horsemen thereof." He was afterwards involved
in war with Amaziah, the king of Judah (2 Chr. 25:23-24), whom
he utterly defeated at Beth-shemesh, on the borders of Dan and
Philistia, and advancing on Jerusalem, broke down a portion of
the wall, and carried away the treasures of the temple and the
palace. He soon after died (B.C. 825), and was buried in Samaria
(2 Kings 14:1-17, 19, 20). He was succeeded by his son. (See
JOASH ¯T0002078 [5.].)
Isaiah, The Book of
consists of prophecies delivered (Isa. 1) in the reign of Uzziah
(1-5), (2) of Jotham (6), (3) Ahaz (7-14:28), (4) the first half
of Hezekiah's reign (14:28-35), (5) the second half of
Hezekiah's reign (36-66). Thus, counting from the fourth year
before Uzziah's death (B.C. 762) to the last year of Hezekiah
(B.C. 698), Isaiah's ministry extended over a period of
sixty-four years. He may, however, have survived Hezekiah, and
may have perished in the way indicated above.
The book, as a whole, has been divided into three main parts:
(1.) The first thirty-five chapters, almost wholly prophetic,
Israel's enemy Assyria, present the Messiah as a mighty Ruler
and King. (2.) Four chapters are historical (36-39), relating to
the times of Hezekiah. (3.) Prophetical (40-66), Israel's enemy
Babylon, describing the Messiah as a suffering victim, meek and
The genuineness of the section Isa. 40-66 has been keenly
opposed by able critics. They assert that it must be the
production of a deutero-Isaiah, who lived toward the close of
the Babylonian captivity. This theory was originated by Koppe, a
German writer at the close of the last century. There are other
portions of the book also (e.g., ch. 13; 24-27; and certain
verses in ch. 14 and 21) which they attribute to some other
prophet than Isaiah. Thus they say that some five or seven, or
even more, unknown prophets had a hand in the production of this
book. The considerations which have led to such a result are
various: (1.) They cannot, as some say, conceive it possible
that Isaiah, living in B.C. 700, could foretell the appearance
and the exploits of a prince called Cyrus, who would set the
Jews free from captivity one hundred and seventy years after.
(2.) It is alleged that the prophet takes the time of the
Captivity as his standpoint, and speaks of it as then present;
and (3) that there is such a difference between the style and
language of the closing section (40-66) and those of the
preceding chapters as to necessitate a different authorship, and
lead to the conclusion that there were at least two Isaiahs. But
even granting the fact of a great diversity of style and
language, this will not necessitate the conclusion attempted to
be drawn from it. The diversity of subjects treated of and the
peculiarities of the prophet's position at the time the
prophecies were uttered will sufficiently account for this.
The arguments in favour of the unity of the book are quite
conclusive. When the LXX. version was made (about B.C. 250) the
entire contents of the book were ascribed to Isaiah, the son of
Amoz. It is not called in question, moreover, that in the time
of our Lord the book existed in the form in which we now have
it. Many prophecies in the disputed portions are quoted in the
New Testament as the words of Isaiah (Matt. 3:3; Luke 3:4-6;
4:16-41; John 12:38; Acts 8:28; Rom. 10:16-21). Universal and
persistent tradition has ascribed the whole book to one author.
Besides this, the internal evidence, the similarity in the
language and style, in the thoughts and images and rhetorical
ornaments, all points to the same conclusion; and its local
colouring and allusions show that it is obviously of Palestinian
origin. The theory therefore of a double authorship of the book,
much less of a manifold authorship, cannot be maintained. The
book, with all the diversity of its contents, is one, and is, we
believe, the production of the great prophet whose name it
Jehovah-exalted. (1.) Son of Toi, king of Hamath, sent by his
father to congratulate David on the occasion of his victory over
Hadadezer (2 Sam. 8:10).
(2.) A Levite of the family of Gershom (1 Chr. 26:25).
(3.) A priest sent by Jehoshaphat to instructruct the people
in Judah (2 Chr. 17:8).
(4.) The son of Ahab and Jezebel, and successor to his brother
Ahaziah on the throne of Israel. He reigned twelve years, B.C.
896-884 (2 Kings 1:17; 3:1). His first work was to reduce to
subjection the Moabites, who had asserted their independence in
the reign of his brother. Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, assisted
Jehoram in this effort. He was further helped by his ally the
king of Edom. Elisha went forth with the confederated army (2
Kings 3:1-19), and at the solicitation of Jehoshaphat encouraged
the army with the assurance from the Lord of a speedy victory.
The Moabites under Mesha their king were utterly routed and
their cities destroyed. At Kir-haraseth Mesha made a final
stand. The Israelites refrained from pressing their victory
further, and returned to their own land.
Elisha afterwards again befriended Jehoram when a war broke
out between the Syrians and Israel, and in a remarkable way
brought that war to a bloodless close (2 Kings 6:23). But
Jehoram, becoming confident in his own power, sank into
idolatry, and brought upon himself and his land another Syrian
invasion, which led to great suffering and distress in Samaria
(2 Kings 6:24-33). By a remarkable providential interposition
the city was saved from utter destruction, and the Syrians were
put to flight (2 Kings 7:6-15).
Jehoram was wounded in a battle with the Syrians at Ramah, and
obliged to return to Jezreel (2 Kings 8:29; 9:14, 15), and soon
after the army proclaimed their leader Jehu king of Israel, and
revolted from their allegiance to Jehoram (2 Kings 9). Jehoram
was pierced by an arrow from Jehu's bow on the piece of ground
at Jezreel which Ahab had taken from Naboth, and there he died
(2 Kings 9:21-29).
(5.) The eldest son and successor of Jehoshaphat, king of
Judah. He reigned eight years (B.C. 892-885) alone as king of
Judah, having been previously for some years associated with his
father (2 Chr. 21:5, 20; 2 Kings 8:16). His wife was Athaliah,
the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel. His daughter Jehosheba was
married to the high priest Jehoiada. He sank into gross
idolatry, and brought upon himself and his kingdom the anger of
Jehovah. The Edomites revolted from under his yoke, and the
Philistines and the Arabians and Cushites invaded the land, and
carried away great spoil, along with Jehoram's wives and all his
children, except Ahaziah. He died a painful death from a fearful
malady, and was refused a place in the sepulchre of the kings (2
Kings 8:16-24; 2 Chr. 21).
Luke, Gospel according to
was written by Luke. He does not claim to have been an
eye-witness of our Lord's ministry, but to have gone to the best
sources of information within his reach, and to have written an
orderly narrative of the facts (Luke 1:1-4). The authors of the
first three Gospels, the synoptics, wrote independently of each
other. Each wrote his independent narrative under the guidance
of the Holy Spirit.
Each writer has some things, both in matter and style,
peculiar to himself, yet all the three have much in common.
Luke's Gospel has been called "the Gospel of the nations, full
of mercy and hope, assured to the world by the love of a
suffering Saviour;" "the Gospel of the saintly life;" "the
Gospel for the Greeks; the Gospel of the future; the Gospel of
progressive Christianity, of the universality and gratuitousness
of the gospel; the historic Gospel; the Gospel of Jesus as the
good Physician and the Saviour of mankind;" the "Gospel of the
Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man;" "the Gospel of
womanhood;" "the Gospel of the outcast, of the Samaritan, the
publican, the harlot, and the prodigal;" "the Gospel of
tolerance." The main characteristic of this Gospel, as Farrar
(Cambridge Bible, Luke, Introd.) remarks, is fitly expressed in
the motto, "Who went about doing good, and healing all that were
oppressed of the devil" (Acts 10:38; comp. Luke 4:18). Luke
wrote for the "Hellenic world." This Gospel is indeed "rich and
"Out of a total of 1151 verses, Luke has 389 in common with
Matthew and Mark, 176 in common with Matthew alone, 41 in common
with Mark alone, leaving 544 peculiar to himself. In many
instances all three use identical language." (See MATTHEW
¯T0002442; MARK ¯T0002419; GOSPELS ¯T0001532.)
There are seventeen of our Lord's parables peculiar to this
Gospel. (See List of Parables in Appendix.) Luke also records
seven of our Lord's miracles which are omitted by Matthew and
Mark. (See List of Miracles in Appendix.) The synoptical Gospels
are related to each other after the following scheme. If the
contents of each Gospel be represented by 100, then when
compared this result is obtained:
Mark has 7 peculiarities, 93 coincidences.
Matthew 42 peculiarities, 58 coincidences.
Luke 59 peculiarities, 41 coincidences.
That is, thirteen-fourteenths of Mark, four-sevenths of Matthew,
and two-fifths of Luke are taken up in describing the same
things in very similar language.
Luke's style is more finished and classical than that of
Matthew and Mark. There is less in it of the Hebrew idiom. He
uses a few Latin words (Luke 12:6; 7:41; 8:30; 11:33; 19:20),
but no Syriac or Hebrew words except sikera, an exciting drink
of the nature of wine, but not made of grapes (from Heb. shakar,
"he is intoxicated", Lev. 10:9), probably palm wine.
This Gospel contains twenty-eight distinct references to the
The date of its composition is uncertain. It must have been
written before the Acts, the date of the composition of which is
generally fixed at about 63 or 64 A.D. This Gospel was written,
therefore, probably about 60 or 63, when Luke may have been at
Caesarea in attendance on Paul, who was then a prisoner. Others
have conjectured that it was written at Rome during Paul's
imprisonment there. But on this point no positive certainty can
It is commonly supposed that Luke wrote under the direction,
if not at the dictation of Paul. Many words and phrases are
common to both; e.g., compare:
Luke 4:22; with Col. 4:6.
Luke 4:32; with 1 Cor. 2:4.
Luke 6:36; with 2 Cor. 1:3.
Luke 6:39; with Rom. 2:19.
Luke 9:56; with 2 Cor. 10:8.
Luke 10:8; with 1 Cor. 10:27.
Luke 11:41; with Titus 1:15.
Luke 18:1; with 2 Thess. 1:11.
Luke 21:36; with Eph. 6:18.
Luke 22:19, 20; with 1 Cor. 11:23-29.
Luke 24:46; with Acts 17:3.
Luke 24:34; with 1 Cor. 15:5.
a contract or agreement between two parties. In the Old
Testament the Hebrew word _berith_ is always thus translated.
_Berith_ is derived from a root which means "to cut," and hence
a covenant is a "cutting," with reference to the cutting or
dividing of animals into two parts, and the contracting parties
passing between them, in making a covenant (Gen. 15; Jer. 34:18,
The corresponding word in the New Testament Greek is
_diatheke_, which is, however, rendered "testament" generally in
the Authorized Version. It ought to be rendered, just as the
word _berith_ of the Old Testament, "covenant."
This word is used (1) of a covenant or compact between man and
man (Gen. 21:32), or between tribes or nations (1 Sam. 11:1;
Josh. 9:6, 15). In entering into a convenant, Jehovah was
solemnly called on to witness the transaction (Gen. 31:50), and
hence it was called a "covenant of the Lord" (1 Sam. 20:8). The
marriage compact is called "the covenant of God" (Prov. 2:17),
because the marriage was made in God's name. Wicked men are
spoken of as acting as if they had made a "covenant with death"
not to destroy them, or with hell not to devour them (Isa.
(2.) The word is used with reference to God's revelation of
himself in the way of promise or of favour to men. Thus God's
promise to Noah after the Flood is called a covenant (Gen. 9;
Jer. 33:20, "my covenant"). We have an account of God's
covernant with Abraham (Gen. 17, comp. Lev. 26:42), of the
covenant of the priesthood (Num. 25:12, 13; Deut. 33:9; Neh.
13:29), and of the covenant of Sinai (Ex. 34:27, 28; Lev.
26:15), which was afterwards renewed at different times in the
history of Israel (Deut. 29; Josh. 1:24; 2 Chr. 15; 23; 29; 34;
Ezra 10; Neh. 9). In conformity with human custom, God's
covenant is said to be confirmed with an oath (Deut. 4:31; Ps.
89:3), and to be accompanied by a sign (Gen. 9; 17). Hence the
covenant is called God's "counsel," "oath," "promise" (Ps. 89:3,
4; 105:8-11; Heb. 6:13-20; Luke 1:68-75). God's covenant
consists wholly in the bestowal of blessing (Isa. 59:21; Jer.
The term covenant is also used to designate the regular
succession of day and night (Jer. 33:20), the Sabbath (Ex.
31:16), circumcision (Gen. 17:9, 10), and in general any
ordinance of God (Jer. 34:13, 14).
A "covenant of salt" signifies an everlasting covenant, in the
sealing or ratifying of which salt, as an emblem of perpetuity,
is used (Num. 18:19; Lev. 2:13; 2 Chr. 13:5).
COVENANT OF WORKS, the constitution under which Adam was
placed at his creation. In this covenant, (1.) The contracting
parties were (a) God the moral Governor, and (b) Adam, a free
moral agent, and representative of all his natural posterity
(Rom. 5:12-19). (2.) The promise was "life" (Matt. 19:16, 17;
Gal. 3:12). (3.) The condition was perfect obedience to the law,
the test in this case being abstaining from eating the fruit of
the "tree of knowledge," etc. (4.) The penalty was death (Gen.
This covenant is also called a covenant of nature, as made
with man in his natural or unfallen state; a covenant of life,
because "life" was the promise attached to obedience; and a
legal covenant, because it demanded perfect obedience to the
The "tree of life" was the outward sign and seal of that life
which was promised in the covenant, and hence it is usually
called the seal of that covenant.
This covenant is abrogated under the gospel, inasmuch as
Christ has fulfilled all its conditions in behalf of his people,
and now offers salvation on the condition of faith. It is still
in force, however, as it rests on the immutable justice of God,
and is binding on all who have not fled to Christ and accepted
CONVENANT OF GRACE, the eternal plan of redemption entered
into by the three persons of the Godhead, and carried out by
them in its several parts. In it the Father represented the
Godhead in its indivisible sovereignty, and the Son his people
as their surety (John 17:4, 6, 9; Isa. 42:6; Ps. 89:3).
The conditions of this covenant were, (1.) On the part of the
Father (a) all needful preparation to the Son for the
accomplishment of his work (Heb. 10:5; Isa. 42:1-7); (b) support
in the work (Luke 22:43); and (c) a glorious reward in the
exaltation of Christ when his work was done (Phil. 2:6-11), his
investiture with universal dominion (John 5:22; Ps. 110:1), his
having the administration of the covenant committed into his
hands (Matt. 28:18; John 1:12; 17:2; Acts 2:33), and in the
final salvation of all his people (Isa. 35:10; 53:10, 11; Jer.
31:33; Titus 1:2). (2.) On the part of the Son the conditions
were (a) his becoming incarnate (Gal. 4:4, 5); and (b) as the
second Adam his representing all his people, assuming their
place and undertaking all their obligations under the violated
covenant of works; (c) obeying the law (Ps. 40:8; Isa. 42:21;
John 9:4, 5), and (d) suffering its penalty (Isa. 53; 2 Cor.
5:21; Gal. 3:13), in their stead.
Christ, the mediator of, fulfils all its conditions in behalf
of his people, and dispenses to them all its blessings. In Heb.
8:6; 9:15; 12:24, this title is given to Christ. (See
originally denoted only the sea-coast of the land of Canaan
inhabited by the Philistines (Ex. 15:14; Isa. 14:29, 31; Joel
3:4), and in this sense exclusively the Hebrew name Pelesheth
(rendered "Philistia" in Ps. 60:8; 83:7; 87:4; 108:9) occurs in
the Old Testament.
Not till a late period in Jewish history was this name used to
denote "the land of the Hebrews" in general (Gen. 40:15). It is
also called "the holy land" (Zech. 2:12), the "land of Jehovah"
(Hos. 9:3; Ps. 85:1), the "land of promise" (Heb. 11:9), because
promised to Abraham (Gen. 12:7; 24:7), the "land of Canaan"
(Gen. 12:5), the "land of Israel" (1 Sam. 13:19), and the "land
of Judah" (Isa. 19:17).
The territory promised as an inheritance to the seed of
Abraham (Gen. 15:18-21; Num. 34:1-12) was bounded on the east by
the river Euphrates, on the west by the Mediterranean, on the
north by the "entrance of Hamath," and on the south by the
"river of Egypt." This extent of territory, about 60,000 square
miles, was at length conquered by David, and was ruled over also
by his son Solomon (2 Sam. 8; 1 Chr. 18; 1 Kings 4:1, 21). This
vast empire was the Promised Land; but Israel was only a part
of it, terminating in the north at the southern extremity of the
Lebanon range, and in the south in the wilderness of Paran, thus
extending in all to about 144 miles in length. Its average
breadth was about 60 miles from the Mediterranean on the west to
beyond the Jordan. It has fittingly been designated "the least
of all lands." Western Israel, on the south of Gaza, is only
about 40 miles in breadth from the Mediterranean to the Dead
Sea, narrowing gradually toward the north, where it is only 20
miles from the sea-coast to the Jordan.
Israel, "set in the midst" (Ezek. 5:5) of all other lands,
is the most remarkable country on the face of the earth. No
single country of such an extent has so great a variety of
climate, and hence also of plant and animal life. Moses
describes it as "a good land, a land of brooks of water, of
fountains and depths that spring out of valleys and hills; a
land of wheat, and barley, and vines, and fig trees, and
pomegranates; a land of oil olive, and honey; a land wherein
thou shalt not eat bread without scarceness, thou shalt not lack
any thing in it; a land whose stones are iron, and out of whose
hills thou mayest dig brass" (Deut. 8:7-9).
"In the time of Christ the country looked, in all probability,
much as now. The whole land consists of rounded limestone hills,
fretted into countless stony valleys, offering but rarely level
tracts, of which Esdraelon alone, below Nazareth, is large
enough to be seen on the map. The original woods had for ages
disappeared, though the slopes were dotted, as now, with figs,
olives, and other fruit-trees where there was any soil.
Permanent streams were even then unknown, the passing rush of
winter torrents being all that was seen among the hills. The
autumn and spring rains, caught in deep cisterns hewn out like
huge underground jars in the soft limestone, with artificial
mud-banked ponds still found near all villages, furnished water.
Hills now bare, or at best rough with stunted growth, were then
terraced, so as to grow vines, olives, and grain. To-day almost
desolate, the country then teemed with population. Wine-presses
cut in the rocks, endless terraces, and the ruins of old
vineyard towers are now found amidst solitudes overgrown for
ages with thorns and thistles, or with wild shrubs and poor
gnarled scrub" (Geikie's Life of Christ).
From an early period the land was inhabited by the descendants
of Canaan, who retained possession of the whole land "from Sidon
to Gaza" till the time of the conquest by Joshua, when it was
occupied by the twelve tribes. Two tribes and a half had their
allotments given them by Moses on the east of the Jordan (Deut.
3:12-20; comp. Num. 1:17-46; Josh. 4:12-13). The remaining
tribes had their portion on the west of Jordan.
From the conquest till the time of Saul, about four hundred
years, the people were governed by judges. For a period of one
hundred and twenty years the kingdom retained its unity while it
was ruled by Saul and David and Solomon. On the death of
Solomon, his son Rehoboam ascended the throne; but his conduct
was such that ten of the tribes revolted, and formed an
independent monarchy, called the kingdom of Israel, or the
northern kingdom, the capital of which was first Shechem and
afterwards Samaria. This kingdom was destroyed. The Israelites
were carried captive by Shalmanezer, king of Assyria, B.C. 722,
after an independent existence of two hundred and fifty-three
years. The place of the captives carried away was supplied by
tribes brought from the east, and thus was formed the Samaritan
nation (2 Kings 17:24-29).
Nebuchadnezzar came up against the kingdom of the two tribes,
the kingdom of Judah, the capital of which was Jerusalem, one
hundred and thirty-four years after the overthrow of the kingdom
of Israel. He overthrew the city, plundered the temple, and
carried the people into captivity to Babylon (B.C. 587), where
they remained seventy years. At the close of the period of the
Captivity, they returned to their own land, under the edict of
Cyrus (Ezra 1:1-4). They rebuilt the city and temple, and
restored the old Jewish commonwealth.
For a while after the Restoration the Jews were ruled by
Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah, and afterwards by the high
priests, assisted by the Sanhedrin. After the death of Alexander
the Great at Babylon (B.C. 323), his vast empire was divided
between his four generals. Egypt, Arabia, Israel, and
Coele-Syria fell to the lot of Ptolemy Lagus. Ptolemy took
possession of Israel in B.C. 320, and carried nearly one
hundred thousand of the inhabitants of Jerusalem into Egypt. He
made Alexandria the capital of his kingdom, and treated the Jews
with consideration, confirming them in the enjoyment of many
After suffering persecution at the hands of Ptolemy's
successors, the Jews threw off the Egyptian yoke, and became
subject to Antiochus the Great, the king of Syria. The cruelty
and opression of the successors of Antiochus at length led to
the revolt under the Maccabees (B.C. 163), when they threw off
the Syrian yoke.
In the year B.C. 68, Israel was reduced by Pompey the Great
to a Roman province. He laid the walls of the city in ruins, and
massacred some twelve thousand of the inhabitants. He left the
temple, however, unijured. About twenty-five years after this
the Jews revolted and cast off the Roman yoke. They were
however, subdued by Herod the Great (q.v.). The city and the
temple were destroyed, and many of the inhabitants were put to
death. About B.C. 20, Herod proceeded to rebuild the city and
restore the ruined temple, which in about nine years and a half
was so far completed that the sacred services could be resumed
in it (comp. John 2:20). He was succeeded by his son Archelaus,
who was deprived of his power, however, by Augustus, A.D. 6,
when Israel became a Roman province, ruled by Roman governors
or procurators. Pontius Pilate was the fifth of these
procurators. He was appointed to his office A.D. 25.
Exclusive of Idumea, the kingdom of Herod the Great
comprehended the whole of the country originally divided among
the twelve tribes, which he divided into four provinces or
districts. This division was recognized so long as Israel was
under the Roman dominion. These four provinces were, (1) Judea,
the southern portion of the country; (2) Samaria, the middle
province, the northern boundary of which ran along the hills to
the south of the plain of Esdraelon; (3) Galilee, the northern
province; and (4) Peraea (a Greek name meaning the "opposite
country"), the country lying east of the Jordan and the Dead
Sea. This province was subdivided into these districts, (1)
Peraea proper, lying between the rivers Arnon and Jabbok; (2)
Galaaditis (Gilead); (3) Batanaea; (4) Gaulonitis (Jaulan); (5)
Ituraea or Auranitis, the ancient Bashan; (6) Trachonitis; (7)
Abilene; (8) Decapolis, i.e., the region of the ten cities. The
whole territory of Israel, including the portions alloted to
the trans-Jordan tribes, extended to about eleven thousand
square miles. Recent exploration has shown the territory on the
west of Jordan alone to be six thousand square miles in extent,
the size of the principality of Wales.
drawn (or Egypt. mesu, "son;" hence Rameses, royal son). On the
invitation of Pharaoh (Gen. 45:17-25), Jacob and his sons went
down into Egypt. This immigration took place probably about 350
years before the birth of Moses. Some centuries before Joseph,
Egypt had been conquered by a pastoral Semitic race from Asia,
the Hyksos, who brought into cruel subjection the native
Egyptians, who were an African race. Jacob and his retinue were
accustomed to a shepherd's life, and on their arrival in Egypt
were received with favour by the king, who assigned them the
"best of the land", the land of Goshen, to dwell in. The Hyksos
or "shepherd" king who thus showed favour to Joseph and his
family was in all probability the Pharaoh Apopi (or Apopis).
Thus favoured, the Israelites began to "multiply exceedingly"
(Gen. 47:27), and extended to the west and south. At length the
supremacy of the Hyksos came to an end. The descendants of Jacob
were allowed to retain their possession of Goshen undisturbed,
but after the death of Joseph their position was not so
favourable. The Egyptians began to despise them, and the period
of their "affliction" (Gen. 15:13) commenced. They were sorely
oppressed. They continued, however, to increase in numbers, and
"the land was filled with them" (Ex. 1:7). The native Egyptians
regarded them with suspicion, so that they felt all the hardship
of a struggle for existence.
In process of time "a king [probably Seti I.] arose who knew
not Joseph" (Ex. 1:8). (See PHARAOH ¯T0002923.) The
circumstances of the country were such that this king thought it
necessary to weaken his Israelite subjects by oppressing them,
and by degrees reducing their number. They were accordingly made
public slaves, and were employed in connection with his numerous
buildings, especially in the erection of store-cities, temples,
and palaces. The children of Israel were made to serve with
rigour. Their lives were made bitter with hard bondage, and "all
their service, wherein they made them serve, was with rigour"
(Ex. 1:13, 14). But this cruel oppression had not the result
expected of reducing their number. On the contrary, "the more
the Egyptians afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew"
The king next tried, through a compact secretly made with the
guild of midwives, to bring about the destruction of all the
Hebrew male children that might be born. But the king's wish was
not rigorously enforced; the male children were spared by the
midwives, so that "the people multiplied" more than ever. Thus
baffled, the king issued a public proclamation calling on the
people to put to death all the Hebrew male children by casting
them into the river (Ex. 1:22). But neither by this edict was
the king's purpose effected.
One of the Hebrew households into which this cruel edict of
the king brought great alarm was that of Amram, of the family of
the Kohathites (Ex. 6:16-20), who with his wife Jochebed and two
children, Miriam, a girl of perhaps fifteen years of age, and
Aaron, a boy of three years, resided in or near Memphis, the
capital city of that time. In this quiet home a male child was
born (B.C. 1571). His mother concealed him in the house for
three months from the knowledge of the civic authorities. But
when the task of concealment became difficult, Jochebed
contrived to bring her child under the notice of the daughter of
the king by constructing for him an ark of bulrushes, which she
laid among the flags which grew on the edge of the river at the
spot where the princess was wont to come down and bathe. Her
plan was successful. The king's daughter "saw the child; and
behold the child wept." The princess (see PHARAOH'S DAUGHTER
¯T0002924 ) sent Miriam, who was standing by, to fetch a
nurse. She went and brought the mother of the child, to whom the
princess said, "Take this child away, and nurse it for me, and I
will give thee thy wages." Thus Jochebed's child, whom the
princess called "Moses", i.e., "Saved from the water" (Ex.
2:10), was ultimately restored to her.
As soon as the natural time for weaning the child had come, he
was transferred from the humble abode of his father to the royal
palace, where he was brought up as the adopted son of the
princess, his mother probably accompanying him and caring still
for him. He grew up amid all the grandeur and excitement of the
Egyptian court, maintaining, however, probably a constant
fellowship with his mother, which was of the highest importance
as to his religious belief and his interest in his "brethren."
His education would doubtless be carefully attended to, and he
would enjoy all the advantages of training both as to his body
and his mind. He at length became "learned in all the wisdom of
the Egyptians" (Acts 7:22). Egypt had then two chief seats of
learning, or universities, at one of which, probably that of
Heliopolis, his education was completed. Moses, being now about
twenty years of age, spent over twenty more before he came into
prominence in Bible history. These twenty years were probably
spent in military service. There is a tradition recorded by
Josephus that he took a lead in the war which was then waged
between Egypt and Ethiopia, in which he gained renown as a
skilful general, and became "mighty in deeds" (Acts 7:22).
After the termination of the war in Ethiopia, Moses returned
to the Egyptian court, where he might reasonably have expected
to be loaded with honours and enriched with wealth. But "beneath
the smooth current of his life hitherto, a life of alternate
luxury at the court and comparative hardness in the camp and in
the discharge of his military duties, there had lurked from
childhood to youth, and from youth to manhood, a secret
discontent, perhaps a secret ambition. Moses, amid all his
Egyptian surroundings, had never forgotten, had never wished to
forget, that he was a Hebrew." He now resolved to make himself
acquainted with the condition of his countrymen, and "went out
unto his brethren, and looked upon their burdens" (Ex. 2:11).
This tour of inspection revealed to him the cruel oppression and
bondage under which they everywhere groaned, and could not fail
to press on him the serious consideration of his duty regarding
them. The time had arrived for his making common cause with
them, that he might thereby help to break their yoke of bondage.
He made his choice accordingly (Heb. 11:25-27), assured that God
would bless his resolution for the welfare of his people. He now
left the palace of the king and took up his abode, probably in
his father's house, as one of the Hebrew people who had for
forty years been suffering cruel wrong at the hands of the
He could not remain indifferent to the state of things around
him, and going out one day among the people, his indignation was
roused against an Egyptian who was maltreating a Hebrew. He
rashly lifted up his hand and slew the Egyptian, and hid his
body in the sand. Next day he went out again and found two
Hebrews striving together. He speedily found that the deed of
the previous day was known. It reached the ears of Pharaoh (the
"great Rameses," Rameses II.), who "sought to slay Moses" (Ex.
2:15). Moved by fear, Moses fled from Egypt, and betook himself
to the land of Midian, the southern part of the peninsula of
Sinai, probably by much the same route as that by which, forty
years afterwards, he led the Israelites to Sinai. He was
providentially led to find a new home with the family of Reuel,
where he remained for forty years (Acts 7:30), under training
unconsciously for his great life's work.
Suddenly the angel of the Lord appeared to him in the burning
bush (Ex. 3), and commissioned him to go down to Egypt and
"bring forth the children of Israel" out of bondage. He was at
first unwilling to go, but at length he was obedient to the
heavenly vision, and left the land of Midian (4:18-26). On the
way he was met by Aaron (q.v.) and the elders of Israel (27-31).
He and Aaron had a hard task before them; but the Lord was with
them (ch. 7-12), and the ransomed host went forth in triumph.
(See EXODUS ¯T0001283.) After an eventful journey to and fro in
the wilderness, we see them at length encamped in the plains of
Moab, ready to cross over the Jordan into the Promised Land.
There Moses addressed the assembled elders (Deut. 1:1-4;
5:1-26:19; 27:11-30:20), and gives the people his last counsels,
and then rehearses the great song (Deut. 32), clothing in
fitting words the deep emotions of his heart at such a time, and
in review of such a marvellous history as that in which he had
acted so conspicious a part. Then, after blessing the tribes
(33), he ascends to "the mountain of Nebo (q.v.), to the top of
Pisgah, that is over against Jericho" (34:1), and from thence he
surveys the land. "Jehovah shewed him all the land of Gilead,
unto Dan, and all Naphtali, and the land of Ephraim, and
Manasseh, and all the land of Judah, unto the utmost sea, and
the south, and the plain of the valley of Jericho, the city of
palm trees, unto Zoar" (Deut. 34:2-3), the magnificient
inheritance of the tribes of whom he had been so long the
leader; and there he died, being one hundred and twenty years
old, according to the word of the Lord, and was buried by the
Lord "in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Beth-peor"
(34:6). The people mourned for him during thirty days.
Thus died "Moses the man of God" (Deut. 33:1; Josh. 14:6). He
was distinguished for his meekness and patience and firmness,
and "he endured as seeing him who is invisible." "There arose
not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Lord
knew face to face, in all the signs and the wonders, which the
Lord sent him to do in the land of Egypt to Pharaoh, and to all
his servants, and to all his land, and in all that mighty hand,
and in all the great terror which Moses shewed in the sight of
all Israel" (Deut. 34:10-12).
The name of Moses occurs frequently in the Psalms and Prophets
as the chief of the prophets.
In the New Testament he is referred to as the representative
of the law and as a type of Christ (John 1:17; 2 Cor. 3:13-18;
Heb. 3:5, 6). Moses is the only character in the Old Testament
to whom Christ likens himself (John 5:46; comp. Deut. 18:15, 18,
19; Acts 7:37). In Heb. 3:1-19 this likeness to Moses is set
forth in various particulars.
In Jude 1:9 mention is made of a contention between Michael
and the devil about the body of Moses. This dispute is supposed
to have had reference to the concealment of the body of Moses so
as to prevent idolatry.