di'-za-hab, diz'-a-hab di-za-habh; Septuagint Katachrusea, literally, "abounding in gold"): The name occurs in a list apparently intended to fix definitely the situation of the camp of Israel in the plains of Moab (Dt 1:1). No place in the region has been found with a name suggesting this; and there is no other clue to its identification. Some names in the list are like those of stations earlier in the wanderings. Thinking that one of these may be intended Burckhardt suggested Mina edh-Dhahab, a boat harbor between Ras Mohammad and `Aqaba. Cheyne gets over the difficulty by accepting a suggestion of Sayee that Di-zahab corresponds to Me-zahab (Gen 36:39); this latter he then transforms into Mitzraim, and identifies it with the North Arabian Mucri (Encyclopedia Biblica, under the word). The changes, however, seem greater than can be justified.
W. Ewing
di'-a-dem: There are seven Bible references to the diadem, four in the Old Testament and three in the New Testament. The Hebrew words do not mark any clear distinctions.
(1) tsaniph, tsanoph, tsaniphah (all from tsanaph, primarily "to wrap," "dress," "roll") mean a headdress in the nature of a turban or piece of cloth wrapped or twisted about the head. The word is also rendered "hood," "mitre." Job 29:14: "My justice was as a robe and a diadem" (RVm, "turban"); Isa 62:3: "a royal diadem in the hand of thy God."
(2) tsephirah, means "a crown," "diadem," i.e. something round about the head; Isa 28:5 "a diadem of beauty, unto the residue of his people."
(3) mitsnepheth, means an official turban or tiara of priest or king, translated also "mitre." Ezek 21:26: "Remove the mitre, and take off the crown."
(4) diadema, the Greek word in the New Testament for "diadem," means "something bound about the head." Found 3 t, all in Rev 12:3: "a great red dragon .... and upon his heads seven diadems" (the King James Version "crowns"); Rev 13:1: "a beast .... and on his horns ten diadems"; 19:11,12: "a white horse .... and upon his head are many diadems."
See CROWN .
William Edward Raffety
di'-al, a'-haz:
1. Hezekiah's Sickness and the Sign
2. The Sign a Real Miracle
3. The "Dial" a Staircase
4. Time of Day of the Miracle
5. Hezekiah's Choice of the Sign
6. Meaning of the Sign
7. The Fifteen "Songs of Degrees"
1. Hezekiah's Sickness and the Sign:
One of the most striking instances recorded in Holy Scripture of the interruption, or rather reversal, of the working of a natural law is the going back of the shadow on the dial of Ahaz at the time of Hezekiah's recovery from his illness. The record of the incident is as follows. Isaiah was sent to Hezekiah in his sickness, to say:
"Thus saith Yahweh, the God of David thy father, I have heard thy prayer, I have seen thy tears: behold, I will heal thee; on the third day thou shalt go up unto the house of Yahweh. .... And Hezekiah said unto Isaiah, What shall be the sign that Yahweh will heal me, and that I shall go up unto the house of Yahweh the third day? And Isaiah said, This shall be the sign unto thee from Yahweh, that Yahweh will do the thing that he hath spoken: shall the shadow go forward ten steps, or go back ten steps? And Hezekiah answered, It is a light thing for the shadow to decline ten steps: nay, but let the shadow return backward ten steps. And Isaiah the prophet cried unto Yahweh; and he brought the shadow ten steps backward, by which it had gone down on the dial of Ahaz" (2 Ki 20:5-11). And in Isa 38:8, it is said, "Behold, I will cause the shadow on the steps, which is gone down on the dial of Ahaz with the sun, to return backward ten steps. So the sun returned ten steps on the dial whereon it was gone down."
The first and essential point to be noted is that this was no ordinary astronomical phenomenon, nor was it the result of ordinary astronomical laws then unknown. It was peculiar to that particular place, and to that particular time; otherwise we should not read of "the ambassadors of the princes of Babylon, who sent .... to inquire of the wonder that was done in the land" (2 Ch 32:31). It is impossible, therefore, to accept the suggestion that the dial of Ahaz may have been improperly constructed, so as to produce a reversal of the motion of the shadow at certain times. For such a maladjustment would have occasioned the repetition of the phenomenon every time the sun returned to the same position with respect to the dial. The narrative, in fact, informs us that the occurrence was not due to any natural law, known or unknown, since Hezekiah was given the choice and exercised it of his own free will, as to whether a shadow should move in a particular direction or in the opposite. But there are no alternative results in the working of a natural law. "If a state of things is repeated in every detail, it must lead to exactly the same consequences." The same natural law cannot indifferently produce one result, or its opposite. The movement of the shadow on the dial of Ahaz was, therefore, a miracle in the strict sense of the term. It cannot be explained by the working of any astronomical law, known or unknown. We have no information as to the astronomical conditions at the time; we can only inquire into the setting of the miracle.
It is unfortunate that one important word in the narrative has been rendered in both the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) by a term which describes a recognized astronomical instrument. The word "dial" (ma'aloth) is usually translated "degrees," "steps," or "stairs," and indeed is thus rendered in the same verse. There is no evidence that the structure referred to had been designed to serve as a dial or was anything other than a staircase, "the staircase of Ahaz." It was probably connected with that "covered way for the sabbath that they had built in the house, and the king's entry without," which Ahaz turned "round the house of Yahweh, because of the king of Assyria" (2 Ki 16:18 the Revised Version, margin). This staircase, called after Ahaz because the alteration was due to him, may have been substituted for David's "causeway that goeth up," which was "westward, by the gate of Shallecheth" (1 Ch 26:16), or more probably for Solomon's "ascent by which he went up unto the house of Yahweh" which so impressed the queen of Sheba (2 Ch 9:4).
4. Time of Day of the Miracle:
At certain times of the day the shadow of some object fell upon this staircase, and we learn from both 2 Ki and Isa that this shadow had already gone down ten steps, while from Isa we learn in addition that the sun also was going down. The miracle therefore took place in the afternoon, when the sun moves on its downward course, and when all shadows are thrown in an easterly direction. We are not told what was the object that cast the shadow, but it must have stood to the west of the staircase, and the top of the staircase must have passed into the shadow first, and the foot of the staircase have remained longest in the light. The royal palace is understood to have been placed southeast of the Temple, and it is therefore probable that it was some part of the Temple buildings that had cast its shadow down the stairway in full view of the dying king, as he lay in his chamber. If the afternoon were well advanced the sun would be moving rapidly in altitude, and but little in azimuth; or, in other words, the shadow would be advancing down the steps at its quickest rate, but be moving only slowly toward the left of those who were mounting them. It may well have been the case, therefore, that the time had come when the priests from Ophel, and the officials and courtiers from the palace, were going up the ascent into the house of the Lord to be present at the evening sacrifice; passing from the bright sunshine at the foot of the stairs into the shadow that had already fallen upon the upper steps. The sun would be going straight down behind the buildings and the steps already in shadow would sink into deeper shadow, not to emerge again into the light until a new day's sun had arisen upon the earth.
5. Hezekiah's Choice of the Sign:
We can therefore understand the nature of the choice of the sign that was offered by the prophet to the dying king. Would he choose that ten more steps should be straight-way engulfed in the shadow, or that ten steps already shadowed should be brought back into the light? Either might serve as a sign that he should arise on the third day and go up in renewed life to the house of the Lord; but the one sign would be in accordance with the natural progress of events, and the other would be directly opposed to it. It would be a light thing, as Hezekiah said, for the shadow to go forward ten steps; a bank of cloud rising behind the Temple would effect that change. But no disposition of cloud could bring the shadow back from that part of the staircase which had already passed into it, and restore it to the sunshine. The first change was, in human estimation, easily possible, "a light thing"; the second change seemed impossible. Hezekiah chose the seemingly impossible, and the Lord gave the sign and answered his prayer. We need not ask Whether the king showed more or less faith in choosing the "impossible" rather than the "possible" sign. His father Ahaz had shown his want of faith by refusing to put the Lord to the test, by refusing to ask a sign, whether in the heaven above or in the earth beneath. The faith of Hezekiah was shown in asking a sign, which was at once in the heaven above and in the earth beneath, in accepting the choice offered to him, and so putting the Lord to the test. And the sign chosen was most fitting, Hezekiah lay dying, whether of plague or of cancer we do not know, but his disease was mortal and beyond cure; he was already entering into the shadow of death. The word of the Lord was sure to him; on "the third day" he would rise and go up in new life to the house of God.
But what of the sign? Should the shadow of death swallow him up; should his life be swiftly cut off in darkness, and be hidden until a new day should dawn, and the light of a new life, a life of resurrection, arise? (Compare Jn 11:24.) Or should the shadow be drawn back swiftly, and new years be added to his life before death could come upon him? Swift death was in the natural progress of events; restoration to health was of the impossible. He chose the restoration to health, and the Lord answered his faith and his prayer.
We are not able to go further into particulars. The first temple, the royal palace, and the staircase of Ahaz were all destroyed in the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, and we have no means of ascertaining the exact position of the staircase with respect to Temple or palace, or the number of the steps that it contained, or the time of the day, or the season of the year when the sign was given. It is possible that if we knew any or all of these, a yet greater significance, both spiritual and astronomical, might attach to the narrative.
7. The Fifteen "Songs of Degrees":
Fifteen years were added to the life of Hezekiah. In the restoration of the second temple by Herod fifteen steps led from the Court of the Women to the Court of Israel, and on these steps the Levites during the Feast of Tabernacles were accustomed to stand in order to sing the fifteen "songs of degrees" (Pss 120 through 134). At the head of these same steps in the gateway, lepers who had been cleansed from their disease presented themselves to the priests. It has been suggested that Hezekiah himself was the compiler of these fifteen "songs of the steps," in thankfulness for his fifteen years of added life. Five of them are ascribed to David or as written for Solomon, but the remaining ten bear no author's name. Their subjects are, however, most appropriate to the great crises and desires of Hezekiah's life. His great Passover, to which all the tribes were invited, and so many Israelites came; the blasphemy of Rabshakeh and of Sennacherib's threatening letter; the danger of the Assyrian invasion and the deliverance from it; Hezekiah's sickness unto death and his miraculous restoration to health; and the fact that at that time he would seem to have had no son to follow him on the throne--all these subjects seem to find fitting expression in the fifteen Psalms of the Steps.
E. W. Maunder
di'-a-mund.
di-an'-a (Artemis "prompt," "safe"): A deity of Asiatic origin, the mother goddess of the earth, whose seat of worship was the temple in Ephesus, the capital of the Roman province of Asia. Diana is but the Latinized form of the Greek word Artemis, yet the Artemis of Ephesus should not be confused with the Greek goddess of that name.
She may, however, be identified with the Cybele of the Phrygians whose name she also bore, and with several other deities who were worshipped under different names in various parts of the Orient. In Cappadocia she was known as Ma; to the Syrians as Atargatis or Mylitta; among the Phoenicians as Astarte, a name which appears among the Assyrians as Ishtar; the modern name Esther is derived from it. The same goddess seems to have been worshipped by the Hittites, for a female deity is sculptured on the rocks at Yazili Kaya, near the Hittite city of Boghazkeui. It may be shown ultimately that the various goddesses of Syria and Asia Minor all owe their origin to the earlier Assyrian or Babylonian Ishtar, the goddess of love, whose chief attributes they possessed. The several forms and names under which she appears axe due to the varying developments in different regions.
Tradition says that Diana was born in the woods near Ephesus, where her temple was built, when her image of wood (possibly ebony; Pliny, NH, xvi. 40; Acts 19:35) fell from the sky (see also ASTRONOMY , sec. I, 8 (2)). Also according to tradition the city which was later called Ephesus was founded by the Amazons, and Diana or Cybele was the deity of those half-mythical people. Later when Ephesus fell into the possession of the Greeks, Greek civilization partly supplanted the Asiatic, and in that city the two civilizations were blended together. The Greek name of Artemis was given to the Asiatic goddess, and many of the Greek colonists represented her on their coins as Greek. Her images and forms of worship remained more Asiatic than Greek Her earliest statues were figures crudely carved in wood. Later when she was represented in stone and metals, she bore upon her head a mural headdress, representing a fortitled city wall; from it, drapery hung upon each side of her face to her shoulders. The upper part of her body was completely covered with rows of breasts to signify that she was the mother of all life. The lower arms were extended. The lower part of the body resembled a rough block, as if her legs had been wrapped up in cloth like those of an Egyptian mummy. In later times her Greek followers represented her with stags or lions standing at her sides. The most renowned of her statues stood on the platform before the entrance to her temple in Ephesus. As the statues indicate, she impersonated the reproductive powers of men and of animals and of all other life.
At the head of her cult was a chief priest, originally a eunuch who bore the name and later the title Megabyzos. Under him were priests known as Essenes, appointed. perhaps from the city officials, for but a single year; it was their duty to offer the sacrifices to the goddess in behalf of the city. Other subordinate classes of priests known as Kouretes, Krobatai and Hilroi performed duties which are now obscure. The priestesses were even more numerous, and, probably from their great numbers, they were called Melissai or bees; the Ephesian symbol therefore which appears commonly upon the coins struck in the city, is a bee. The Melissai, which in the early times were all virgins, were of three classes; it is no longer known just what the special duties of each class were. The ritual of the temple services consisted of sacrifices and of ceremonial prostitution, a practice which was common to many of the religions of the ancient Orient, and which still exists among some of the obscure tribes of Asia Minor.
The temple of Diana was not properly the home of the goddess; it was but a shrine, the chief one, devoted to her service. She lived in Nature; she was everywhere wherever there was life, the mother of all living things; all offerings of every possible nature were therefore acceptable to her; hence, the vast wealth which poured into her temple. Not only was she worshipped in her temple, but in the minute shrines or naoi which were sometimes modeled after the temple. More frequently the shrines were exceedingly crude objects, either of silver or stone or wood or clay. They were made at Ephesus by dependents of the temple, and carried by the pilgrims throughout the world. Before them Diana might also be worshipped anywhere, just as now from the soil of the sacred Mesopotamian city of Kerbela, where the sons of Ali were martyred, little blocks are formed and are carried away by the Shiah Moslems that they may pray upon sacred ground wherever they may be. The makers of the shrines of Diana formed an exceedingly large class among whom, in Paul's time, was Demetrius (Acts 19:24). None of the silver shrines have been discovered, but those of marble and of clay have appeared among the ruins of Ephesus. They are exceedingly crude; in a little shell-like bit of clay, a crude clay female figure sits, sometimes with a tambourine in one hand and a cup in the other, or with a lion at her side or beneath her foot. Though the shrines were sold as sacred dwelling-places of the goddess, that the pilgrims who carried them to their distant homes, or buried them in the graves with their dead, might be assured of her constant presence, their real purpose was to increase the temple revenues by their sale at a price which was many times their cost. With the shrines of Diana may be compared the household gods of clay found in abundance among the ruins of the earlier Babylonian cities, especially those cities in which temples to the goddess Ishtar stood.
E. J. Banks
di-as'-po-ra.
See DISPERSION .
dib'-la (dibhlah, "circle"; Deblatha): The name occurs only in Ezek 6:14 (the King James Version "Diblath"), and the place has not been identified. If the reading is correct it may possibly be represented by Dibl, a village in Upper Galilee, South of Tibnin. But more likely it is a scribal error for Riblah.
dib'-la-im, dib-la'-im (dibhlayim, "two cakes"): A native of Northern Israel and father of Gomer, the wife of Hosea (Hos 1:3).
dib'-lath.
See DIBLAH .
dib-la-tha'-im.
See ALMON-DIBLATHAIM .
di'-bon (dibhon, "washing"; Daibon):
(1) A city of Moab captured by the Amorites (Nu 21:30), and held by them at the invasion by Israel. It was taken and given to the tribe of Gad, whence it is called Dibon-gad (Nu 32:34; 33:45). In Josh 13:17 it is reckoned to Reuben. Along with other cities in the territory North of the Arnon, Dibon changed hands several times between Moab and Israel. Mesha claims it (MS), and in Jer 48:18,22 it is named among the cities of Moab. The form of the name, Dimon, in Isa 15:9, may have been given to make it resemble the Hebrew dam, "blood," to support the play upon words in the verse (HDB, under the word). It is represented by the modern Dhiban, about 4 miles North of Aroer (`Ara`ir), on the line of the old Roman road. The ruins that spread over two adjacent knolls are of no importance: walls, a tower, cistern, etc. Near Dibon the famous Moabite Stone was found.
(2) A town in Judah, occupied after the exile (Neh 11:25). It may be the same as Dimonah (Josh 15:22); unidentified.
W. Ewing
dib'-ri (dibhri, "eloquent" (?)): A Danite, whose daughter Shelomith married an Egyptian. Their son was "cut off" (stoned) for blasphemy (Lev 24:11).
See GAMES .
dik'-shun-a-riz: A dictionary is a word-book or a list of words arranged in some fixed order, generally alphabetical, for ready reference, and usually with definitions or longer treatises. The vocabulary or glossary is a mere list of words, often without definitions; the Lexicon or dictionary of language (words or concepts) has bare definitions, and the alphabetical encyclopedia or dictionary of knowledge or information (objects, things, subjects, topics, etc.) has longer treatises, but they are all dictionaries: the alphabetical order being the main essential in modern use. There is, however, historically no good reason why the dictionary should not be logical or chronological. The earliest use of the word as quoted by Murray's Dictionary (Joh. de Garlandia, circa 1225) was of a collection of words classified and not alphabetical. So, too, almost the earliest use in English (J. Withal's Dictionarie, 1556) was of a book of words classified by subjects. A book like Roget's Thesaurus, which is a list of classified words without definition, or a systematic encyclopedia of treatises like Coleridge's unfortunate experiment, the Encyclopedia Metropolitana, is a dictionary in the historic sense. The earliest books usually quoted in the lists of Biblical dictionaries were also in fact classified or chronological, and not alphabetical (Eusebius' Onomasticon; Jerome's De viris illustribus). Classified word lists, syllabaries, etc., of pre-alphabetic times, as well as in Chinese and other non-alphabetic languages of today, are of course also non-alphabetic, but strictly dictionaries.
In pre-alphabetic times the dictionaries include, besides the syllabaries of which there were many examples in Assyria, Babylonia, Egypt, Cyprus, etc., and the word lists proper, chronological lists of kings and various classified lists of tribute, and of astronomical or other objects. They include, in short, all the many lists where the material is grouped round a series of catchwords.
The alphabetical dictionary began with the alphabet itself, for this is a list of names of objects. The earlier alphabetical dictionaries were sometimes called alphabets. In a sense the alphabetical acrostics are dictionaries rather than acrostics, and Ps 119, where considerable material is grouped under each letter of the alphabet, comes rather close to the dictionary idea.
So long as the quantity of literary material remained small, there was very little need for the development of the alphabetical dictionary, and the examples are rather few, the Lexicon of Suidas being perhaps the most noteworthy. With the immense increase in literary material there was a rapidly growing appreciation of the advantage of alphabetical arrangement, over the chronological or the systematic, in all cases where the object is to refer to a specific topic, rather than to read a book through or survey many topics with reference to their relation to one another. The number of alphabetical dictionaries of knowledge increased rapidly with the growth of learning from the 13th century; now it has become legion and there are few subjects so narrow that they cannot boast their dictionary of information.
The earliest Bible dictionary is usually counted the Eusebius, Onomasticon of Eusebius, a geographical encyclopedia; then came Jerome's De nominibus hebraicis, and his De viris illustribus (chronological). The more noteworthy steps in the history of Bible dictionaries are represented by the names of Alsted, Calmet, Winer, Kitto, William Smith, Fairbairn, Schenkel. The best recent dictionaries among the larger works are the Encyclopedia Biblica, standing for the extreme higher critical wing; Hastings, representing the slightly less radical; and this present International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, which represents a growing distrust of the extreme positions of the 19th century higher critics. All of these are on a large scale and stand for the latest and best scholarship, and the same quality is reflected in at least two of the recent single-volume dictionaries, A Standard Bible Dictionary (M. W. Jacobus), and the single-volume Hastings' dictionary. Both of these in tendency stand between Cheyne's Encyclopedia Biblica and this dictionary, Hastings facing rather toward Cheyne, and Jacobus toward this present work.
The John Crerar Library list of encyclopedias forms an excellent guide to the literature of general encyclopedias within its scope, which includes chiefly technology and physical and social sciences, but includes among its reference books very admirably chosen first-reference dictionaries to language, history, fine arts, and even philosophy and religion.
Kroeger, Alice B. Guide to the Study and Use of Reference Books, 2nd edition, Boston, 1908, is an admirable introduction. Its select lists and bibliographical references supplemented by the John Crerar and other reference library lists will give complete orientation.
Following is a list of previous dictionaries:
BIBLICAL DICTIONARIES
Ayre, J. Treasury of Bible Knowledge. London, 1866.
Barnum, Samuel W. A Comprehensive Dictionary of the Bible. New York: Appleton, 1867.
Barr, John. A Complete Index and Concise Dictionary of the Holy Bible. New York: Methodist Book Concern, 1852.
Bastow, J. A. Biblical Dictionary. London, 1848, 3 volumes; condensed edition, London, 1859; 4th edition, 1877.
Beck, J. C. Vollstand. bibl. Worterbuch. Basel, 1770, 2 volumes.
Besser, H. Bibl. Worterbuch. Gotha, 1866.
Bible Cyclopaedia, The. London: Parker, 1841.
Bost, J. A. Dictionnaire de la Bible. Paris, 1865.
Bourazan, F. A. Sacred Dictionary. London: Nisbet, 1890.
Brown, John. A Dictionary of the Holy Bible. Edinburgh, 1768, 4th edition; London: Murray, 1797; American edition, from the 12th Edinburgh edition, New York: Harper, 1846.
Calmet, A. Dict. historique, critique, chronologique, geographique et litteral de la Bible. Paris, 1719.
Calmet, Augustine. Dictionary of the Holy Bible. 5th edition, revised and enlarged, 5 volumes, London: Holdsworth, 1829; new edition, London: Bohn, 1847; abridged by Buckley, new edition, London: Routledge, 1862.
Cassell's Bible Dictionary. Illustrated with nearly 600 engravings; London and New York, 2 volumes: Cassell, 1866; new edition, 1869.
Cheyne, T. K. and Black, J.S. Encyclopedia Biblica. London, 1899-1903, 4 volumes.
Conder, F. R. and C. R. A Handbook to the Bible. London: Longmans, 1879; 2nd edition, 1880, New York: Randolph, no date (1880).
Dalmasius, J. A. Dictionarium manuale biblicum. Aug. Vind., 1776, 2 volumes.
Davis, J. D. Dictionary of the Bible. Philadelphia, 1898; new edition, 1903.
Eadie, John. A Biblical Cyclopaedia. London: Rel. Tr. Soc., 1848; 14th edition, London: Griffin, 1873.
Easton, M. G. Illustrated Bible Dictionary. London: Nelson; New York: Methodist Book Concern, 1893.
Fairbairn, Patrick. The Imperial Bible Dictionary. London: Blackie, 1866, 2 volumes.
Farrar, John. A Biblical and Theological Dictionary. London: Mason, 1852; new edition, London: Wesl. Conf. Off., 1889.
Faussett, A. R. The Englishman's Bible Encyclopedia. London: Hodder, 1878. Republished with title. Bible Cyclopaedia, Critical and Expository. New York: Funk, 1891.
Gardner, J. Christian Encyclopedia. Edinburgh, no date
Gebhardt, G.L. Biblisches Worterb. Lemgo, 1793-96, 3 volumes.
Goodhue, W. and Taylor, W. C. Pictorial Dictionary of the Holy Bible. London, 1843, 2 volumes.
Granbery, John C. Bible Dictionary. Nashville: So. Meth. Pub. Soc., 1883.
Green, S. Biblical and Theol. Dictionary. London, 1840, 1860.
Guthe, H. Kurzes Bibelworterbuch. 1903.
Hagen. Lexicon biblicum. Paris, 1905-, 4 volumes (Roman Catholic).
Hamburger. Realencyklopadie fur Bibel und Talmud. New edition 1896-97; 2 volumes and 4 supplementary volumes (Jewish point of view).
Hamburger, J. Biblisch-talmudisches Worterbuch. Strelitz, 1866.
Hastings. Dictionary of the Bible. Edinburgh and New York, 1898-1902, 4 volumes and supplementary vol, 1904. 1-vol edition, 1909.
Hastings, James, and others. Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels. New York: Scribner; Edinburgh: Clark, 1906-8, 2 volumes.
Haupt, C. G. Bibl. Real-Encyklopadie. Quedlinb., 1820-27, 3 volumes.
Hezel, W. F. Biblisches Real-Lexikon. Leipzig, 1783-85, 3 volumes.
Hoffmann, A. C. Allgem. Volks-Bibellexikon. Leipzig, 1842.
Hunter, R. Concise Bible Dict. London: Cassell, 1894.
Inglis, James. Bible Text Cyclopaedia. London: Houlston, 1861; new edition, Rel. Tr. Soc., 1865, Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1877.
Jacobus, M. W. A Standard Bible Dictionary. New York: Funk, 1909.
Jones, William. The Biblical Cyclopaedia; or Dictionary of the Holy Scriptures. London: Wightman, 1840; new edition, Tegg, 1847; revised, 1873.
Kitto, John. Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature. 3rd ed., edition Alexander, Edinburgh, 1862-65, 3 volumes (best edition of Kitto), and after.
Krehl. Neutestamentl. Handworterbuch. Gottingen, 1857.
Lawson, J. P. Bible Cyclopaedia. London, 1849, 3 volumes.
Leun, F. G. Bibl. Encyklopadie. Gotha, 1793-98, 4 volumes.
Macbean, A. Dictionary of the Bible. London, 1779.
Macpherson, John. The Universal Bible Dictionary. London: Hodder, 1892.
Malcom, Howard. New Bible Dictionary. Boston: Gould; New York: Sheldon, 1852.
Malcom, H. Dictionary of the Bible. London, 1854.
Oetinger, F. C. Biblisches Worterb. Stuttgart, 1849.
Oliver, P. Scripture Lexicon. Birmingham, 1784; London, 1843.
Otho, J. H. Lex. Rabbinico-philologicum. Geneva, 1675.
Rand, W. W. A Dictionary of the Holy Bible. New York: Am. Tr. Soc., no date (1859); rev. edition, 1886.
Ravanel, P. Bibliotheca Sacra. Geneva, 1660.
Rawson, A. L. The Bible Handbook, for Sunday Schools. 4th edition, New York: Thompson, 1870.
Rechenbergius, A. Hierolexicon reale collectum. Leipzig und Frankfort, 1714, 2 volumes.
Rice, Edwin W. People's Dictionary of the Bible. Philadelphia: Am. S.S. U., 1893.
Riehm and Bathgen. Handworterbuch des biblischen Altertums. Bielefeld, 1893-94, 2 volumes.
Roberts, Francis. Clavis Bibliorum. 1675.
Robinson, E. Dictionary of the Bible. New York: Worthington, 1879.
Schaff, Philip. A Dictionary of the Bible. Philadelphia: Am. S.S. U., 1880; 5th edition, 1890.
Schenkel. Bibel Lexikon. 1869-75, 5 volumes.
Schneider, M. C. F. Worterb. ub. d. Bibel. Leipzig, 1795-1817, 4 volumes.
Simon, Richard. Grand dictionnaire de la Bible. Lyons, 1693.
Smith, W. Dictionary of the Bible. London, 1860-63, 3 volumes; 2nd edition, Smith and Fuller, 1893.
Smith, W. Dictionary of the Bible. Boston, no date, 4 volumes.
Smith, W. Bible Dictionary. Acme edition, New York: Alden, 1885.
Vigouroux. Dictionnaire de la Bible contenant tous les noms de personnes, de lieux .... mentionnes dans les s. Ecritures. Paris, 1895-.
Vollbeding, J. C. Bibl. Worterb. Berlin, 1800-1805, 3 volumes.
Watson, R. Biblical and Theol. Dictionary. London, 1831; New York, also Nashville.
Wahl, C. A. Bibl. Handworterb. Leipzig, 1828, 2 volumes.
Walbrecht, C. L. Biblisch. Worterbuch. Gottingen, 1837.
Westcott, A., and Watt, J. Concise Bible Dictionary. London: Isbister, 1893.
Wilson, T. Complete Christian Dictionary. London, 1661.
Winer, G. B. Biblisches Realworterb. 3rd edition, 1847-48, 2 volumes (still useful).
Zeller, H. Biblisches Worterb. Stuttgart, 1855-58, 2 volumes.
Other recent one-volume dictionaries are: Angus (1907), Bevis (1900); Gamble (1906), Ewing (1910), Hyamson (1907), Piercy (1908).
3. General Religious Encyclopedias:
Next in importance for Bible students to the Bible dictionaries are the general dictionaries of religious knowledge. Many of the more recent of these, such as the Hauck edition of RE, the new Sch-Herz, Jew Encyclopedia, the Catholic Encyclopedia, and in general all the larger and some of the smaller recent ones have articles of real importance for Bible study, often better than some of the specific Bible dictionaries.
GENERAL THEOLOGICAL DICTIONARIES
Abbott, Lyman. A Dictionary of Religious Knowledge. New York: Harper, 1875.
Addis, William E. A Catholic Dictionary. New York: Cath. Pub. Soc. Co., 1884; 4th edition, revised, London: Paul, 1893.
Aschbach. Kirchenlexikon. n.p. 1846-51, 4 volumes.
Benham, William. Dictionary of Religion. London and New York: Cassell, 1887.
Buchberger. Kirchliches Handlexikon. Munchen, 1907 (short but comprehensive).
Buck, Charles. A Theological Dictionary. Enlarged by Dr. Henderson. London: Tegg, 1847; American edition, revised and enlarged by George Bush; Philadelphia: Desliver, no date
Ceccaroni, A. Dizionaro ecclesiastico illustrato. Milano.
Dwight, H. O., Tupper, H. O., Jr. and Bliss, E. M. The Encyclopedia of Missions. New York, 1904.
Eadie, J. The Ecclesiastical Encyclopedia. London: Griffin, 1847; new edition, 1875.
Eden, Robert. The Churchman's Theological Dictionary. 2nd edition, London: Parker, 1846; new edition, 1859.
Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, The; or, Dictionary of the Bible. Rev. edition, Philadelphia: Claxton, 1870.
Farrar, John. An Ecclesiastical Dictionary. London: Mason, 1853, revised, 1871.
Gardner, James. The Christian Encyclopedia. London: Groombridge, 1854; new edition, 1858.
Glaire, J. B. Dictionnaire universel des sciences eccl~esiastiques. Paris, 1868, 2 volumes.
Herbermann, Pace, Pellen, Shahan and Wynne. Catholic Encyclopedia. New York, 1906-, 15 volumes.
Herzog. Realencyclopadie fur protestantische Theologie u. Kirche. 1853-68, 21 volumes; 3rd ed., edition Hauck, 1896-1908, 21 volumes, translation New York, 1908-(best of all the ecclesiastical dictionaries).
Herzog, J. J. A Protestant, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Encyclopedia. Vols I and II. Philadelphia: Lindsay, 1858-60.
Holtzmann and Zopffel. Lexikon fur Theologie und Kirchenwesen. 2nd edition, Brunswick, 1888 (Prot).
Jackson, Samuel Macauley. Concise Dictionary of Religious Knowledge and Gazetteer. New York: Christian Lit. Co., 1890, 1891; 3rd edition, New York: Maynard, 1893.
Jackson, S. M. The New Schaff-Herzog. New York: Funk, 1908, sq. (good and modern).
Jewish Encyclopedia. New York, 1901-6, 12 volumes (most scholarly).
Lichtenberger, F. Dict. des sci. eccl. Paris, 1877-82, 15 volumes (French Protestant).
McClintock, John and Strong, James. Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature. 10 volumes. New York: Earper, 1867-81. With supplements in 2 volumes, 1890.
Marsden, J. B. A Dictionary of Christian Churches and Sects. London: Bentley, 1857.
Migne. Encycl. theologique. Paris, 1844-75 (over 100 special lexicons).
Moroni. Dizionario di erudizione storico-ecclesiastica. Venice, 1840-79, 103 volumes, and Index, 6 volumes.
Among the older ones the huge encyclopedia of Migne, which is a classified series of alphabetical dictionaries, and the Moroni, with its 109 volumes, are still of great usefulness to the scholar on out-of-the-way topics, not so much for Biblical topics but at least for Biblical related matters.
Perthes. Handlexikon fur evangelische Theol. Gotha, 1890-1901, 3 volumes.
Robinson, John. Theological, Biblical and Ecclesiastical Dictionary. London: Whittaker, 1815; 4th edition, 1835.
Schaff, Philip and Jackson, Samuel Macauley. A Religious Encyclopedia. New York: Christian Lit. Co., 1882; 3rd edition, New York: Funk, 1891. Together with an Encyclopedia of Living Divines, etc.
Schaffer. Handlexikon der kath. Theologie. Ratisbon, 1881-91, 3 volumes.
Schiele. Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Tubingen, 1909-, 5 volumes.
Shipley, Orby. A Glossary of Ecclesiastical Forms. London: Rivingtons, 1871.
Staunton, William. An Ecclesiastical Dictionary, New York: Prot. Ep. S.S. U., 1861.
Vacant and Mangenot. Dictionnaire de theologie catholique. Paris, 1903-.
Wetzer and Welte. Kirchenlexicon. Freiburg, 1847-60; 2nd edition, 1880-91, 13 volumes, and index, 1903 (Roman Catholic scientific best).
4. Dictionaries of Comparative Religion:
The monumental dictionary in this class superseding all others is Hastings' Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, but Forlong has served a useful purpose and some of the special dictionaries like Roscher are quite in the same class with Hastings.
COMPARATIVE RELIGION
Balfour, E. Cyclopaedia of India, and of East and South Asia. 3rd edition, London, 1885, 3 volumes.
Beale, Th. W. Oriental Biographical Dictionary. Calcutta, 1881; London, 1894.
Brewer, E. C. Dictionary of Phrase and Fable. London, 1905.
Encyclopedia of Islam. London: Luzac.
Forlong, J. G. R. Faiths of Man; a Cyclopaedia of Religions. London, 1906, 3 volumes.
Hastings, James. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics. Edinburgh, Clark; New York, Scribner, 1908-.
Hazlitt, W. C. Faiths and Folklore; a Dictionary of National Beliefs. London, 1905.
Hughes, T. P. Dictionary of Islam. London, 1885.
5. Denominational Dictionaries:
The admirable Jewish and Catholic encyclopedias mentioned above, like the Methodist M'Clintock and Strong, belong rather to general than denominational encyclopedias, but the Catholic dictionaries of Addis and of Thien are denominational in the same sense as those of the Episcopal, Lutheran, etc., churches, mentioned below, among which perhaps the best executed example is the Lutheran Encyclopedia of Jacobs.
DICTIONARIES OF DENOMINATIONS
Addis, W. E. A Catholic Dictionary, 3rd edition, New York, 1884.
Benton, A. A. The Church Cyclopaedia. Philadelphia, 1884.
Burgess, G. A. Free Baptist Cyclopaedia. Chicago: Free Bapt. Cyclop. Co., 1889.
Cathcart, Wm. The Baptist Encyclopedia. Philadelphia, 1881, 2 volumes.
Catholic Encyclopedia. New York, 1907 and following. See General Religious Encyclopedias.
Hook, Walter F. A Church Dictionary. Philadelphia: Butler, 1853; 7th edition, Tibbals, 1875.
Jacobs, H. E. and Haas, J. A. W. The Lutheran Cyclopedia. New York, 1905.
Jewish Encyclopedia. See General Theological Encyclopedias.
Nevin, A. Encyclopedia of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America. Philadelphia, 1884.
Simpson, M. Cyclopaedia of Methodism. Philadelphia, 1878.
Thein, J. Ecclesiastical Dictionary. New York, 1900 (Roman Catholic).
SPECIAL DICTIONARIES: ANCIENT AND MEDIAEVAL HISTORY
Blunt, J. H. Dictionary of Sects, Heresies, etc. London, 1892.
Blunt, J. H. Dictionary of Doctrinal and Historical Theology. Philadelphia, 1870.
Brewer, E. C. A Dictionary of Miracles. Philadelphia, 1884.
Brodrick, M. Concise Dictionary of Egyptian Archaeol. London, 1902.
Cabrol. Dictionnaire d'archeologie chretienne et de liturgie. Paris, 1907-.
Chevalier, Ul. Repertoire des sources hist. du moyen-age. Bio-bibliog. Paris, 1905-7.
------Repertoire des sources historiques du moyen-age. Topo-bibliog. Montbeliard, 1894-1903, 2 volumes.
Fabricius, J. A. Bibliotheca latina mediae et infimae aetatis. Patavii, 1754, 6 volumes in 3.
Julian, J. edition A Dictionary of Hymnology. New York, 1892.
Kraus. Real-Encyklopadie der christlichen Alterthumer. Freiburg i. Br., 1882-86, 2 volumes.
Lee, F. G. A Glossary of Liturgical and Ecclesiastical Terms. London, 1877.
Martigny. Dictionnaire des antiquites chretiennes. 2nd edition, Paris, 1877.
Pauly. Realencyk. der klass. Altertumswissenschaft. Stuttgart, 1842-66, 6 volumes; edition Wissowa, 1894 and later.
Roscher, W. H. Lexikon der griechischen und romischen Mythologie. Leipzig, 1884-1902, 5 volumes.
Smith, Wm. Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology. Boston, 1849, 3 volumes.
Smith, Wm. Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography. Boston, 1854-57, 2 volumes.
Smith, Sir William, Wayte, William, and Marindin, G. E. Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities. 3rd edition, enlarged London: Murray; Boston: Little, 1890-91, 2 volumes.
Smith, W. and Cheetham, A Dictionary of Christian Antiquities. Boston, 1875-1880, 2 volumes.
Smith, W. and Wace, H. A Dictionary of Christian Biography. Boston, 1877-87, 4 volumes; abridged edition by Wace and Piercy, 1911.
Stadler and Helm. Heiligenlexikon. 1858-82, 5 volumes.
Wolcott, Mackenzie E. C. Sacred Archaeology. London: Reeve, 1868.
What has been said of general religious encyclopedias applies almost equally to Biblical articles in the good general encyclopedias. Among these the Encyclopedia Britannica, of which a new edition appeared in 1911, is easily first, and has maintained through its many editions a high standard. The previous edition was edited by Professor Robertson Smith, who gave a peculiarly high quality of scholarship to its Biblical articles, while at the same time rather tingeing them with extreme views. Among the British encyclopedias, Chambers' is still kept up to a high standard. The recent American editions include the New International, the Nelson, and the Americana, the former, perhaps, contributing most on Bible matters. The annual supplement to the International gives a useful resume of the progress of Biblical archaeology during each year.
UNIVERSAL ENCYCLOPAEDIAS
America and England
Adams, Charles Kendall. Universal Cyclopaedia and Atlas. New York: Appleton, 1905, 12 volumes.
American Cyclopaedia. New York, 1858-63, 16 volumes; new edition, 1873-76 ("Appleton's encyclopedia").
Chambers, Ephraim. Cyclopaedia. London, 1728.
Chambers' Encyclopedia. London, 1860-68, 10 volumes; new edition, 1901.
Colby, Frank Moore. Nelson's Encyclopedia. (circa 1905-6), 12 volumes.
Encyclopedia Americana. New York: The Americana Co. (circa 1903-4), 16 volumes.
Encyclopedia Britannica. 1771; 9th edition, 1875-89, 29 volumes and Index, sup., 11 volumes, Index and atlas, 1902-3; 11th edition, Cambridge, England, 1910-11, 28 volumes.
Gilman, D. C. New International Encyclopedia. New York: Dodd, 1907 (circa 1902-7), 20 volumes.
Hunter. Encyclopaedic Dictionary. London, New York, 1879-88, 7 volumes.
Johnson's New Universal Encyc. New York, 1874-78, 4 volumes; new edition, 1893-95, 8 volumes.
Knight. English Cyclopedia. London, 1854-73, 27 volumes, and 4 supplementary volumes.
New International Year Book. New York: Dodd, 1908-.
Rees. New Encyclopedia. London, 1802-20. 45 volumes.
Schem. Deutsch-amerikanisches Konversations-Lex. New York, 1870-74.
Smedley (Coleridge?). Encyclopedia Metropolitana. 1818-45, 30 volumes (classed with some alphabetical sections).
France
Bayle. Dict. historique et critique. Rotterdam, 1695-97 (very widely circulated).
Berthelot, Derenbourg and others. La grande encyclopedie. See below.
Corneille, Thomas. (Dict.) Paris, 1694.
Dictionnaire de la conversation et de la lecture. 1851-58, 16 volumes.
Diderot and D'Alembert. Encyclopedic. Paris, 1751-52, 28 volumes; 5 sup. volumes, Amsterdam, 1776-77; 2 volumes Index, Paris, 1780. (Also Voltaire, Rousseau, etc. This is in the history of dictionary encyclopedias "the encyclopedia" paragraph excellence and epoch-making in the history of "free thought." Many editions; 1st edition, 30,000 copies.)
Encyclopedie des gens du monde. 1833-45, 22 volumes.
Encyclopedie du XIXe siecle. 1837-59, 75 volumes; 3rd edition, 1867-72. Continues as Annuaire encyc.
Encyclopedie moderne. 1846-51; new edition, 1856-72, 30 volumes, 12 sup. volumes, atlas, 2 volumes.
Furetiere. (Dict.) Rotterdam, 1690.
Grande encyclopedic. Paris: Lamirault, 1885-1903, 31 volumes (known as Lamirault's).
Larousse. Diet. univ., 1865-90; 17 volumes; new edition, 1895.
------. Dict. complet illustre. 129th edition, 1903.
Moerin. Grand dict. historique. Lyons, 1674.
Nouveau Larousse illustre. Paris, 1898-1904, 8 volumes.
Panckoucke and Agasse. Encyclopedie methodique. Paris, 1782-1832, 166 volumes, text, 51 volumes, illus. (classed -alphabetic method like Migne).
Germany
Allgemeine Realencyklopadie fur das katholische Deutschland. 1846-49, 13 volumes; 4th edition, 1880-90.
Brockhaas. Konversationslexikon. 14th edition, 1901 (B. and Meyer are the standard German encyclopedias).
Ersch and Gruber. Allgemeine encyklopadie. 1813-90, 99 plus 43 plus 25 volumes (scholarly and exhaustive; many articles are complete treatises).
Herder. Konversationslexikon. Freiburg, 1853-57, 5 volumes; 3rd edition, 1901-8, 8 volumes (Roman Catholic; high grade).
Hubner. Reales-, Staats-, Zeitungs-und Konversations-Lexikon; 31st edition, Leipzig, 1824-28.
Jablonski. Lexikon .... Leipzig, 1721.
Koster and Roos. (Encyc.) Frankfort, 1778-1804, 23 volumes (stops at "Kinol").
Krunitz (and others). Oekonomisch-technolog. Encykl. Berlin, 1773-1858, 242 volumes.
Ludewig, Y. J. von. Grosses, vollstandiges, Universal-Lexikon. Leipzig, 1731-54, 68 volumes ("Zedler," which was publisher's name; most admirable and still useful; on account of the vast number of topics it often serves when all other sources fail).
Meyer. Konversations-lexikon. Leipzig, 1840-52, 37 volumes; 6th edition, 1902, 20 volumes; 7th edition, abridged, 1907, 6 volumes (Meyer and Brockhaus are the standard German encyclopedias).
Pierer. Universallexikon. 7th edition, 1888-93, 12 volumes.
Spamer. Illustriertes Konversationslexikon. 1869-79, 8 volumes, supplementary volumes, 1879-82; 2nd edition, 1884-91.
Zedler. Universal-Lexikon. See Ludewig above.
Italy
Berri. Enciclopedia popolare economica. Milan, 1871. Coronelli. Biblioteca universale. Venice, 1701, 7 volumes (incomplete).
Lessona and Valle. Dizionario universale. Milan, 1874-83.
Nuova encic. popolare italiana. Turin, 1841-51, 14 volumes; 6th edition, 1875-89, 25 volumes, sup., 1889-99.
Piccola enciclopedia Hoepli. Milan, 1891.
Netherlands
De algemeene Nederlandsche Encyclopedic. Zutphen, 1865-68, 15 volumes.
Lobel. (Encyc.) Amsterdam, 1796-1810 ("first enc according to modern ideas").
Mollerup. Nordisk Konversationsleksikon. 3rd edition, Copenhagen, 1883-94.
Nieuwenhuis Woordenboek. Leyden, 1851-68.
Sijthoff. Woordenboek voor Kennis en Kunst. Leyden, 1891.
Winkler Prins. Geillustreerde Encyclopedie. Amsterdam, 1905, sq. 3rd edition
Russia and Poland
Meijer. Konversationsleksikon. 1889-94.
Brockhaus and Efron. Entciklopedicheskij Slovai. Petersburg, 1890-1902, 35 volumes.
Jushakow. Boljsaja Enciklopedija. Petersburg, 1899.
Sikoroski, Warsaw, 1890.
Orgelbrand. Encjklopedya Powszechna. Warsaw, 1859-68, 28 volumes.
Scandinavia
Blangstrup. Store Illustererede Konversationsleksikon. Copenhagen, 1891-1901, 12 volumes.
Johnsen, Norsk Haandbog. 1879-88.
Nordisk Familjsbok; Konversationslexikon. Stockholm, 1876-99, 20 volumes.
Salmonsen. Store Illustrerede Konversationsleksikon. Kjobenhavn, 1893-1907, 18 volumes.
Spain and Portugal
Diccionario Popular Hist. Geogr. Mytholog. Biograph. Lisbon, 1876-90, 16 volumes.
Enciclopedia Universal Illustrada Europeo-Americana. Barcelona, 1907-(Catholic).
Costa. Diccionario Universal Portuguez.
Lemos. Enciclopedia Portugueza Illustrada. 254 numbers to 1903.
Mellados. Enciclopedia moderna. Madrid, 1848-51, 34 volumes; 3 volumes of charts.
Montaner y Simon. Diccionario Encic Hispano-Americano. Barcelona, 1887-99, 25 volumes.
Other
Arabian Encyc. Discontinued when it reached the 9th vol, Beirut, 1876-87.
Enciclop. Romana. Herrmannstadt, 1896-1903, 3 volumes (Rumanian).
Kober. Slovnik Nancny. Prague, 1860-87, 12 volumes.
Otto. Ottuv Slovnik Nancny. Prague, 1888-1901, 17 volumes.
Pallas Nagy Lexikona. Budapest, 1893-97, 16 volumes; sup. 1900.
7. Dictionaries of Philosophy:
The dictionaries of philosophy often bear on Bible study almost as much as the religious dictionaries. Baldwin's Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology, which is the most comprehensive work, is also very full in its bibliographical reference, and has in volumes III and IV a colossal bibliography of philosophy continued and kept up to date in the Psychological Index. The dictionary of Eisler is on the historical principle and of very great importance in interpreting the doctrines of Biblical theology.
DICTIONARIES OF PHILOSOPHY
Baldwin, J. M. Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology, New York, 1901 and following.
Eisler, R. Philosophisches Worterbuch. Berlin, 1904, 2 volumes; new edition, 3 volumes.
Frank. Dictionnaire des sciences philosophiques. 3rd edition, 1885.
8. Dictionaries of Art and Music:
The dictionaries of architecture often treat of Egyptian Babylonian, and sometimes Palestinian matters. The dictionaries of painting, engraving, music, etc., have less direct matter but are important and necessary in view of the fact that so large a part of the best work is on Biblical themes.
ART
Architectural Publication Society. Dictionary of Architecture. London, 1852-92, 6 volumes.
Bryan, Michael. Bryan's Dictionary of Painters and Engravers. New edition London: Bell, 1903-5, 5 volumes.
Champlin, John Denison, Jr. Cyclopedia of Painters and Painting. New York: Scribner, 1892 (circa 1885-87), 4 volumes.
Clement, Mrs. Clara Erskine Handbook of Christian Symbols.
Gwilt, Joseph. Encyclopedia of Architecture. New edition London: Longmans, 1888.
James, Ralph N. Painters and Their Works. London, 1896.
Muller, Hermann Alexander. Allgemeines Kunstlerlexicon. 3rd edition Frankfurt a. M., 1895-1901, 5 volumes.
Nagler, G. K. Neues allgemeines Kunstlerlexikon. 2. Aufl. Linz., 1904-7, volumes 1-10.
Seubert. Allgemeines Kunstlerlex. Frankfurt, 1879, 3 volumes.
Sturgis, Russell. Dictionary of Architecture and Building. New York: Macmillan, 1901, 3 volumes.
Thieme, Ulrich, and Becker, Felix. Allgemeines Lexikon der bildenden Kunstler. Leipzig, 1907.
Viollet-le-Duc, Eugene Emmanuel. Dictionnaire raisonne de l'architecture. Paris, 1868, 10 volumes.
MUSIC
Baker, Theodore. Biographical Dictionary of Musicians. New York: Schirmer, 1900.
Champlin, John Denison, Jr. Cyclopedia of Music and Musicians. New York: Scribner, 1893.
Eitner, R. Biog-bibliog. Lexikon d. Musiker. Leipzig, 1900-4, 10 volumes.
Fetis, Frantsois Joseph. Biographie universelle des musiciens. 2nd edition Paris, 1860-66, 8 volumes; 2nd sup. 1875-81.
Grove, George. Dictionary of Music. London: 1878-89, 4 volumes and supplements, 2nd edition by J. A. Fuller Maitland, 1905.
Kornmuller. Lexikon der kirchlichen Tonkunst. 2nd edition Ratisbon, 1891-95, 2 volumes.
Mendel and Reissmann. Musikalisches Konversations-lexikon. Berlin, 1870-83, 12 volumes and supplements.
Riemann, Hugo. Musik-Lexikon. 4th edition, 1894.
------. Dictionary of Music. London (1899).
Many of these bear occasionally or indirectly on Biblical topics.
9. Dictionaries of Social Science:
SOCIAL SCIENCES
Birkmeyer. Encykl. der Rechtswissenschaft. Berlin, 1901.
Bliss, William Dwight Porter. New Encyclopedia of Social Reform. New York: Funk, 1908.
Bluntschli. Deutsches Staatsworterbuch. 1857-70, 2 volumes; new edition, 1869-74, 3 volumes.
Bruder. Staats-Lexikon of the Gorres Society. Freiburg i. Br., 1889-97, 5 volumes; 4th ed., edition Bachem, 1908-(Roman Catholic).
Buisson, F. Dictionnaire de pedagogie. Paris, 1882, 4 volumes.
Conrad, J. Handworterbuch der Staatswissenschaften. Jena, 1898 sq. 3rd edition to Vol XVIII (1911).
Conrad, Elster, Lexis and Loening. Handworterbuch der Staatswissenschaften. 1889-98, 6 volumes; 2 sup. volumes.
Cyclopaedia of Temperance and Prohibition. New York: Funk, 1891.
Elster. Worterbuch der Volkswirtschaft, 1808, 2 volumes; 2nd edition, 1907-.
Fay and Chailley. Nouveau dict. d'economie politique. Paris: 1891-92, 2 volumes.
Holtzendorff, F. von. Encyk. der Rechtswissenschaft. 6th edition, 1903-.
Lalor, J. J. Cyclopaedia of Political Science. New York, 1889-90, 3 volumes.
Palgrave, R. H. I. Dictionary of Political Economy. London, 1894-96, 3 volumes.
Reichesberg. Handworterbuch der schweizer. Volkswirtschaft. 1901.
Rotteck and Welcker. Staatslex. Altona, 1835-44, 15 volumes; 3rd edition, 1856-66, 14 volumes.
Schmid, K. A. Encyclopadie d. Erziehungswesens. Gotha.
Sonnenschein, W. S. Cyclopaedia of Education, arr. and edition by A. W. Fletcher, Syracuse, 1899.
Wagener, H. Staats-und Gesellschafts-Lex. Berlin, 1859-68, 26 volumes.
10. Dictionaries of Geography:
The modern gazetteers are indispensable for identifications.
MODERN GAZETTEERS
Chisholm, George Goudie. Longmans' Gazetteer of the World. London, 1902.
Hunter, W. W. Imperial Gazetteer of India. London, 1881, 9 volumes.
Lippincott's New Gazetteer. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1906.
Ritter's geographisch-statistisches Lexikon. 9. umgearb. Aufl. Leipzig, 1905-6. 2 volumes.
Vivien de Saint Martin, Louis. Nouveau dictionnaire de geographie universelle. Paris, 1879-95, 7 volumes.
11. Biographical Dictionaries:
The great modern biographical dictionaries, although of little use for Scripture names, are of much value to the Biblical student for the writings on Biblical subjects, and in the case of ancient biography, of much value for contemporary persons in other lands.
MODERN BIOGRAPHY
Aa, Anton Jacobus van der. Biographisch Woorden-boek der Nederlander. Haarlem, 1876-78, 21 volumes.
Academie royale de Belgique. Biographie nationale. Bruxelles. 1866-1907, volumes 1-19.
Allgemeine deutsche Biographie. Leipzig: 1875-1906, 52 volumes.
Allgemeine deutsche Biographie. Leipzig: Duncker, 1875-1900, 45 volumes.
Allibone, S. A. A Critical Dictionary of English Literature. Philadelphia, 1870-72, 3 volumes; 1891, 2 volumes.
Appleton's Cyclopaedia of American Biography, edition by J. G. Wilson. New York: Appleton, 1888-1900, 7 volumes.
Biografiskt Lexikon ofver namnkunnige svenske Man. Stockholm, 1874, 23 volumes.
Biographisches Jahrbuch und deutscher Nekrolog. Berlin, 1897-1906, 9 volumes.
Bricka, Carl Frederik. Dansk biografisk Lexikon. 1887-1905, 19 volumes.
Century Cyclopedia of Names, edition by B. E. Smith. New York: Century Co. (circa 1894).
Dictionary of National Biography, edition by Leslie Stephen. London: Smith; New York: Macmillan, 1885-1900, 63 volumes.
Feller, F. X. de. Biographie universelle ou dictionnaire historique. Paris, 1847-50, 8 volumes in 4.
Giles, Herbert Allen. A Chinese Biographical Dictionary. London: Quaritch, 1898.
Glasius, B. Godeleerd Nederland. 1851-56, 3 volumes.
Hoefor, Ferdinand. Nouvelle biographie universelle. Paris: Didot, 1852-66, 46 volumes.
Hofberg, Herman. Svenskt biografiskt Handlexikon. Stockholm, 1906, volumes 1-2.
Joecher, C. G. Allgemeines Gelehrten-Lexikon. Leipzig, 1750-51.
Lamb's Biographical Dictionary of the United States. Boston, 1900-1903, 7 volumes.
Michaud, Joseph Frantsois. Biographie universelle. Paris, 1842-65, 45 volumes.
National Cyclopaedia of American Biography. New York: White, 1892-1906, 13 volumes.
Schaff and Jackson. Encyclopedia of Living Divines and Christian Workers. New York, 1887.
Vapereau, L. G. Dictionnaire universel des litterateurs. Paris, 1876.
Vapereau. Dictionnaire des contemporains. Paris, 1858; 6th edition, 1893; supplements, 1895.
------. Dictionnaire des litterateurs. 1876; 2nd edition, 1884.
Wurzbach, C. von. Biographisches Lexikon Oesterreichs. 1856-91, 60 volumes.
------. Biographisches Lexikon des Kaiserthums Oesterreichs. Wien: Zamarski, 1856-91, 60 volumes.
The lexicons of the Biblical languages and versions are treated under the head of the respective languages. The chief dictionaries in English are the great Murray and the encyclopaedic Century. The best one-vol dictionaries are perhaps the Standard and the last edition of Webster.
DICTIONARIES OF LANGUAGE
Brown, F., Driver, S. R., Briggs, C. A. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Boston, 1906.
Thayer, J. H. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. New York, 1887; corrected edition, 1889.
Century-Dictionary, an Encyclopedic Lexicon. New York: Century Co. (circa 1889-1901), 6 volumes.
Murray, James Augustus Henry. New English Dictionary on Historical Principles. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1888-.
Standard Dictionary of the English Language. New York: Funk.
Stormonth's Dictionary of the English Language. New York: Scribner, 1899.
Webster, Noah. International Dictionary of the English Language. Springfield (Mass.), 1891 (circa 1864-90); new edition, 1909.
Worcester, Joseph Emerson. Dictionary of the English Language. New edition, enlarged Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1891.
The article, "Dictionary" in the new Encyclopedia Britannica (11th edition) (11th edition) covers the whole matter of dictionaries of language with extraordinary fullness.
E. C. Richardson
did'-a-ke.
See LITERATURE ,SUB-APOSTOLIC .
di-drak'-ma: Two drachmas.
did'-i-mus (Didumos, i.e. "twin"): The surname of THOMAS (which see).
(muth, gawa`; apothnesko, teleutao): "To die," etc., is of very frequent occurrence, and in the Old Testament is generally the translation of muth, meaning perhaps originally, "to be stretched out" or "prostrate." "To die," should be the consequence of eating the forbidden fruit (Gen 2:17; compare 20:7; 2 Ki 1:4,6). "Die" is commonly used of natural death (Gen 5:8; 25:8). It is used also of violent death (Gen 26:9,11; Ex 21:20); punitive (Ex 19:12; 21:12,14; 28:43; Nu 4:15; Ezek 3:1:8 ff); as the result of willfulness or indifference (Prov 10:21; 15:10; 19:16). To die "the death of the righteous" is something to be desired (Nu 23:10).
In the New Testament the word for "to die," etc., is generally apothnesko, "to die off or away," used of dying in all forms: of natural death (Mt 22:24); of violent death (Jn 11:50,51; 19:7; Acts 25:11); of the death of Christ (Jn 12:33); of death as the consequence of sin (Jn 8:21,24; Rom 8:13); teleutao, "to end (life)," also occurs several times (Mt 15:4); thnesko, "to die," occurs once (Jn 11:21), and apollumi, "to destroy" (Jn 18:14); in Acts 25:16 (Textus Receptus) we have eis apoleian, "to destruction."
Figurative Use:
The figurative use of "to die" is not frequent, if indeed it ever occurs. In 1 Sam 25:37 it may be equivalent to "faint," "His heart died within him, and he became as a stone," but this may be meant literally. In Am 2:2 it is said that Moab "shall die," i.e. perish as a nation. Paul describes the condition of the apostles of Christ as "dying, and behold, we live" (2 Cor 6:9), and says, "I die daily" (1 Cor 15:31), but the references may be to exposure to death. When in Rom 7:9 he says, "When the commandment came .... I died," he may mean that it rendered him liable to death. In Rom 6:2 we have "we who died to sin," i.e. in Christ, and in our acceptance of His death as representing ours; similarly we read in 2 Cor 5:14, "One died for all, therefore all died" (Revised Version (British and American)), i.e. representatively, and in Col 2:20 "if ye died with Christ"; 3:3, "for ye died," the Revised Version (British and American) (in Christ). Compare 2 Tim 2:11; 1 Pet 2:24.
Of the changes in the Revised Version (British and American) may be mentioned "abode" for "died" (Gen 25:18, margin "or settled, Hebrew fell"); "he that is to die" for "worthy of death" (Dt 17:6); "died" for "are dead" (Jn 6:49,58, and the American Standard Revised Version 8:52,53); "though he die" for "were dead" (Jn 11:25); "many died" for "were dead" (Rom 5:15); "died for nought" for "in vain" (Gal 2:21); "when his end was nigh" for "died" (Heb 11:22). Of special importance are the changes from "be, are, were, dead" in Rom 6:2,7,8; 2 Cor 5:14; Col 2:20; 3:3; 2 Tim 2:11, and "having died" for "being dead" in 1 Pet 2:24, as bringing out the truth that in the sight of God all men died in Christ.
See also DEATH .
W. L. Walker
di'-et ('aruchah, "prescribed"): A daily allowance or portion of food, as that given by King Evil-merodach to Jehoiachin, king of Judah (Jer 52:34 the King James Version; compare 2 Ki 25:30).
(qur, "to dig", chathar; diorusso, "to dig through"): "I have digged (dug) and drunk strange waters" (2 Ki 19:24). In his campaigns on foreign soil, where the enemy had stopped up the watersprings, Sennacherib would at once dig fresh wells for his armies. "They dig through houses" (Job 24:16; Mt 6:19,20 margin). Walls of eastern houses are often made of mud or clay, and frequently have no windows; and as the threshold of a Syrian house is sacred, the thief breaks in through the wall (see Trumbull, The Threshold Covenant).
M. O. Evans
dig'-ni-tiz, dig'-ni-ti (Hebrew marom, se'eth, gedhullah): Rank or position, not nobility or austerity of personal character or bearing, is denoted by this word in its Old Testament occurrences (Gen 49:3; Est 6:3; Eccl 10:6; Hab 1:7). In 2 Pet 2:10; Jude 1:8, "dignities" (doxai) are angels, lofty spiritual beings, possible objects of blasphemy; compare the context in both passages.
di'-ke (dike, "justice"): The avenging justice of God personified as a goddess (Acts 28:4).
See JUSTICE .
dik'-la (diqlah, "place of palms"): One of the "sons" of Joktan (Gen 10:27; 1 Ch 1:21). Perhaps a south-Arabian tribal or place-name connected with a palm-bearing district.
dil'-e-an (dil`an, "cucumber"): A town in the Shephelah of Judah named with Migdal-gad and Mizpeh (Josh 15:38, the English Revised Version "Dilan"), which lay probably on the North of Lachish and Eglon. It has not been identified.
DILIGENCE; DILIGENT; DILIGENTLY
dil'-i-jens, dil'-i-jent-li: This word is used in various senses in our English Bibles.
In Ezr 5:8, "with diligence" means "with care"; in Ezr 6:12; 7:17, "with speed," "speedily"; in Prov 4:23 "watchfulness"; in Dt 4:9; 6:17; 19:18; Ps 77:6; Prov 27:23; Isa 55:2; Mic 7:3, "with care," "scrupulously," "earnestly." Sometimes it means "early" "with haste" (Job 8:5; Prov 8:17). It may mean "industrious," "exacting" (Prov 10:4; 12:27; 22:29).
The American revisers have rendered "diligence" for various words in the King James Version, e.g. for "business" in Rom 12:11; "giving diligence" for "endeavoring" (Eph 4:3); "give diligence" for "study" (2 Tim 2:15,), for "labor" (Heb 4:11); "diligently" for "carefully" (Phil 2:28; Heb 12:17); "be diligent in" for "meditate upon" (1 Tim 4:15). It is well also to remember that the Old English meaning of diligence is "with love," from diligo, "to love."
G. H. Geberding
See ANISE .
di-min'-ish: the Revised Version (British and American) has retained nearly all passages of the King James Version where "to diminish" is used. Some of these uses have become obsolete: Dt 4:2, "neither shall ye diminish from it." "Diminish" generally means "to reduce," "to lessen." In this sense it is employed in Ezek 5:11 from the Hebrew gara`, literally, "to shear." The picture of shearing the beard, expressing degradation and loss of manhood, may underlie this passage.
dim'-na (dimnah, "dung"; Damna): A city of the Merarite Levites in the territory of Zebulun (Josh 21:35). The name is probably a clerical error for Rimmon.
di'-mon, di-mo'-na.
See DIBON .
di'-na (dinah, "justice"): The daughter of Jacob and Leah, whose violation by Shechem, son of Hamor, caused her brothers, especially Simeon and Levi, to slay the inhabitants of Shechem, although they had induced the Shechemites to believe, if they would submit to circumcision, Shechem, the most honored of all the house of his father, would be permitted to have the maiden to whom his soul clave for wife (Gen 34:1-31). The political elements of the story (compare Gen 34:21-23 and 30) suggest a tribal rather than a personal significance for the narrative.
Nathan Isaacs
di'-na-its (dinaye'): A people mentioned in Ezr 4:9, as settled in the city of Samaria by Osnappar (Assurbanipal). The identification is uncertain.
din'-ha-ba, din-ha'-ba (dinhabhah): The royal city of Bela, son of Beor; king of Edom (Gen 36:32; 1 Ch 1:43). There may be a resemblance in the name of Hodbat et-Teneib. about 8 miles East of Heshbon; but this is in the land of Moab, and probably much too far to the North. No satisfactory identification has been proposed.
din'-er (ariston; Mt 22:4; Lk 11:38 (the Revised Version, margin "breakfast"); 14:12; compare Ruth 2:14; Jn 21:13): In oriental as in classical lands it was customary, in ancient times, as now, to have but two meals in the day, and the evidence, including that of Josephus, goes to show that the second or evening meal was the principal one. The "morning morsel," as the Talmud calls it, was in no sense a "meal." The peasant or artisan, before beginning work, might "break (his) fast" (Jn 21:12,15) by taking a bit of barley bread with some simple relish, but to "eat (a full meal) in the morning" was a reproach (Eccl 10:16). The full meal was not to be taken until a little before or after sunset, when the laborers had come in from their work (Lk 17:7; compare the "supper time" of 14:17). The noon meal, taken at an hour when climatic conditions called for rest from exertion (the ariston of the Greeks, rendered "dinner" in English Versions of the Bible, Mt 22:4; Lk 11:38, the Revised Version, margin "breakfast"), was generally very simple, of bread soaked in light wine with a handful of parched corn (Ruth 2:14), or of "pottage and bread broken into a bowl" (Bel and the Dragon 33), or of bread and broiled fish (Jn 21:13). Many, when on journey especi content with one meal a day, taken after sunset. In general, eating at other times is casual and informal; evening is the time for the formal meal, or feast.
See MEALS .
George B. Eager
di-o-nish'-i-a (Dionusia, "festivals of Dionysus" (Bacchus)): The rural (vintage) Dionysia were celebrated in the month of Poseideon (19th day), which is roughly our December. The celebration consisted of feasts, processions, songs and (sometimes) scenic performances. The Ascolia formed one of the most prominent features. After sacrificing a goat to the god, they filled the wine-skin with wine, made it slippery on the outside with oil, and then tried to hop on it with one leg. Whoever fell down furnished great sport for the spectators, but if anyone succeeded in maintaining an upright position to the end, he was declared victor. The demarch conducted the festival, the expenses of which were paid by the deme.
The Lenea were celebrated on the 12th of Gamelion (January) in Athens, and later in Ionia in Asia Minor. At this festival also the new wine was tasted. A procession was formed and they marched through the city, indulging in all sorts of jesting and buffoonery, to attend the pantomimic performances.
The Anthesteria (Flower-Feast) came in the month of Anthesterion (February), when the first flowers appeared. This festival resembled somewhat our Christmas. On the first day (11th of the month) the wine-cask was opened; on the second was the feast of pitchers. Wine was drunk, and contests in trumpet-playing were held. At the drinking contest everybody was permitted to make as much merriment as he pleased. There was also a mystic marriage of the king archon's wife to Dionysus (compare the marriage of the Doges of Venice to the sea). On the third day they offered pots filled with vegetables to Hermes, Conductor of the Dead. This day was sacred to the gods of the nether world and to the spirits of the departed (All Souls' Day); and the people celebrated Persephone's resurrection and reunion with the god.
The Greater, or City Dionysia, were held in Elaphebolion (March) as a spring festival. This is the most important of all the Dionysia (for us), since practically all the great tragedies of Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides were performed in conjunction with this festival. All the demes took part. They accompanied the ancient image of Dionysus Eleutherios (from Eleutherae in Boeotia, one of the first places in which the worship of the god was established in Greece), as it was carried in solemn procession from the Lenaeon (the original center of his cult in Athens) to a small temple in the Ceramicus in the northwestern part of the city, while choruses of men and boys sang the dithurambos (the ancient hymn to Dionysus). Crowned with the vine and dressed in unusual costumes, they greeted the god with loud shouts of joy.
The festival was revived with great pomp by the Pisistratidae. In theater of Dionysus all the people beheld an imposing rehearsal of their great achievements. Even the poorest and humblest were given an opportunity to see and hear the contests between the professional rhapsodists, who recited Homer, between choruses specially trained to sing the dithyrambs, and between poets, whose great dramatic productions were presented for the first time. The state set aside a special fund for the purchase of tickets for those who were too poor to buy for themselves. Comedies, tragedies and satyr dramas were presented after elaborate preparation and at a great expenditure of money. The prize, a bronze tripod, was erected with an appropriate inscription on the Street of Tripods. The awarding of prizes to the victors concluded the festival.
The quinquennial festival at Brauron in Attica was also celebrated with extraordinary license and merriment. The city of Athens sent delegates regularly to attend the festival.
There were also Dionysiac clubs in Athens at the time of the Peloponnesian War. These had peculiar doctrines and observances. They had their foundation in Orphic mysticism. The members refrained from eating the flesh of animals. They possessed holy scriptures and had peculiar propitiatory rites. The Dionysiac religious observance continued as a state cult down to 366 AD.
See BACCHUS .
J. E. Harry
di-o-nish'-i-us (Dionusios, surnamed "the Areopagite"): One of the few Athenians converted by Paul (Acts 17:34). We know nothing further about him (see AREOPAGUS ). According to one account he was the first bishop of the church at Athens; according to another he suffered martyrdom in that city under Domitian. We are even told that he migrated to Rome and was sent to Paris, where he was beheaded on Montmartre (Mount of the Martyr). The patron saint of France is Denys; compare the French "Denys d'Halicarnasse" (Dionysius of Halicarnassus). The mystical writings which were circulated in the Middle Ages and are still extant, are pronounced by the best authorities to be forgeries, and date from a period not earlier than the 5th century.
J. E. Harry
di-o-ni'-sus (Dionusos): The youngest of the Greek gods. In Homer he is not associated with the vine. In later Greek legend he is represented as coming from India, as traversing Asia in a triumphal march, accompanied by woodland beings, with pointed ears, snub noses and goat-tails. These creatures were called satyrs. The vine was cultivated among European-Aryans first in Thrace, and here Dionysus is said to have established his worship first in Europe. Then the cult of Dionysus passed down through the Balkan peninsula to Thebes; and in the localized form of the myth the deity was born here--son of Zeus and Semele.
"Offspring of Zeus on high
..........................
Thou that carest for all
Who on Bacchus in Italy call
And in Deo's sheltered plain
Of Eleusis lord dost reign,
Whither worshippers repair!
O Bacchus that dwellest in Thebes,
On whose broad and fertile glebes
Fierce warriors from the dragon's teeth rose,
Where Ismenus softly flows,
The city that Semele bare!"
--Sophocles, Antigone.
Among all the Greek deities none appealed more vividly to the imagination than Dionysus. Greek tragedy is a form of worship, the ritual cult of the god of wine, who makes the initiate wise and the ungodly mad. Dionysus speaks most strongly to the sense and to the spirit at the same time. There is nothing monotonous in the Dionysiac legend; it is replete with both joy and sorrow--in some aspects it is a "passion" in others a triumph. All the passion plays of the world (even the Oberammergau Schauspiel) are in the ancient spirit. One Dionysus after another has been substituted, but from the first there has been a desire on the part of the devotee to realize his god vividly with thrilling nearness, to partake of his joys and sorrows and triumphs in his manifold adventures. In the early myths Dionysus was one of the lesser gods; he is mentioned only twice in the Iliad and twice in the Odyssey; but he is always represented as being more nearly akin to man than the great august deities of Olympus. He is a man-god, or god-man. To the inhabitants of the vine-clad slopes of Attica, to which his cult had been brought from Phrygia through Thracian Boeotia, he was particularly dear. At their vintage feasts last year's cask of wine was opened; and when the new year brought life again to the vines, the bountiful god was greeted with songs of joyful praise. The burial of the wine in the dark tomb of the jars through the winter, and the opening of these jars at the spring festival symbolized the great awakening of man himself, the resurrection of the god's worshippers to a fuller and more joyous life. The vine was not the only manifestation of the god--oil and wheat were also his; he was the god of ecstasy, the giver of physical joy and excitement, the god of life, the god of certain laws of Nature, germination and extinction, the external coming into being and the dying away of all things that are, fructification in its widest aspect whether in the bursting of the seed-grain that lies intreasured in the earth, or in the generation of living creatures. Hence, the prominence given to the phallus in the solemn processions in honor of the god.
Nicanor (2 Macc 14:33) and Antiochus Epiphanes (2 Macc 6:7) thought that the cult of Dionysus would not be objectionable to the Jews. Ptolemy Philopator branded the Jews with an ivy-leaf (3 Macc 2:29), which was sacred to Dionysus.
See also BACCHUS .
J. E. Harry
di-os-ko-rin'-thi-us: A certain (unidentified) month (2 Macc 11:21).
di-os'-ku-ri (Dioscouroi; in Acts 28:11, the King James Version Castor and Pollux, the Revised Version (British and American) THE TWIN BROTHERS; in margin, "Dioscuri"): The sign of the ship on which Paul sailed from Melita to Syracuse and Rhegium. The Dioscuri (i.e. sons of Zeus), Castor and Pollux, are the two chief stars in the constellation of the Twins. Some 4,000 years BC they served as pointers to mark the beginning of the new year by setting together with the first new moon of springtime. The constellation of the Twins was supposed to be especially favorable to sailors, hence, ships were often placed under the protection of the twin gods.
E. W. Maunder
di-ot'-re-fez (Diotrephes): A person mentioned in 3 Jn 1:9,10 as contentiously resisting the writer's authority and forbidding others from exercising the Christian hospitality which he himself refused to show. The words "who loveth to have the preeminence, among them" may indicate that he was a church official, abusing his position.chief stars in the constellation of the Twins. Some 4,000 years BC they served as pointers to mark the beginning of the new year by setting together with the first new moon of springtime. The constellation of the Twins was supposed to be especially favorable to sailors, hence, ships were often placed under the protection of the twin gods.
Priests when offering a sin offering were required to dip a finger into the blood of the sacrificed bullock and "to sprinkle of the blood seven times before Yahweh" (compare Lev 4:6, et al.). See also the law referring to the cleansing of infected houses (Lev 14:51) and the cleansing of a leper (Lev 14:16). In all such cases "to dip" is "to moisten," "to besprinkle," "to dip in," the Hebrew Tabhal, or the Greek bapto. See also ASHER . In Ps 68:23 "dipping" is not translated from the Hebrew, but merely employed for a better understanding of the passage: "Thou mayest crush them, dipping thy foot in blood" (the King James Version "that thy foot may be dipped in the blood"). Rev 19:13 is a very doubtful passage. the King James Version reads: "a vesture dipped in blood" (from bapto, "to dip"); the Revised Version (British and American) following another reading (either rhaino, or rhantizo, both "to sprinkle"), translates "a garment sprinkled with blood." the Revised Version, margin gives "dipped in."
See also SOP .
A. L. Breslich
di'-fath (diphath): A son of Gomer, son of Japheth, son of Noah (1 Ch 1:6), called RIPHATH (which see) in the corresponding genealogy in Gen 10:3.
dis-a-lou': "To disallow" as used in the Scriptures means either "to oppose," "not permit" (Hebrew no', Nu 30:5,8,11), or "to reject" (Greek apodokimazo, literally, "to consider useless," 1 Pet 2:4,7 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "rejected").
dis-a-nul'.
See ANNUL .
dis-a-point': "To disappoint" may be used transitively or intransitively. In the former case it naturally has a more forceful meaning. Therefore the Revised Version (British and American) changes the translation of the King James Version wherever "disappoint" is used with an object: Job 5:12, "frustrateth"; Ps 17:13, "confront him," the Revised Version, margin "forestall"; Judith 16:6, "brought them to nought"; but the Revised Version (British and American) retains "disappoint" where the person wh disappoints is not expressed. Compare Prov 15:22.
di-zurn': Five Hebrew words are thus translated: bin, yadha`, nakhar, ra'ah and shama`. It may simply mean "observe" (bin), "I discerned among the youths" (Prov 7:7); or discriminating knowlege, "A wise man's heart discerneth time and judgment" (Eccl 8:5, yadha`); "He discerned him not, because his hands," etc. (Gen 27:23, nakhar); "Then shall ye return and discern between the righteous and the wicked" (Mal 3:18, ra'ah); "So is my lord the king to discern good," etc. (2 Sam 14:17, shama`). In the New Testament the words anakrino, diakrino and dokimazo are thus translated, expressing close and distinct acquaintance with or a critical knowledge of things. Used in 1 Cor 2:14 the King James Version of "the things of the spirit of God"; in 1 Cor 11:29 of "the (Lord's) body" in the sacrament; in Mt 16:3 of "the face of the heaven"; in Heb 5:14 of a clear knowledge of good and evil as the prerogative of a full-grown man. See also next article.
Henry E. Dosker
di-zurn'-inz, (diakriseis pneumaton, "judicial estimation," "through judgment or separation"): Occurs in 1 Cor 12:10 as being one of the gifts of the Spirit. The Greek word occurs in Heb 5:14; and Rom 14:1: "But him that is weak in faith receive ye, yet not for decision of scruples." This translation scarcely expresses the meaning, which Thayer has freely rendered, "not for the purpose of passing judgment on opinions, as to which one is to be preferred as the more correct." Taking these three passages together it is evident that the Greek term which is rendered "discerning" means a distinguishing or discriminating between things that are under consideration; hence, the one who possessed the gift of "discernings of spirits" was able to make distinction between the one who spoke by the Spirit of God and the one who was moved by a false spirit. This gift seems to have been exercised chiefly upon those who assumed the role of teachers, and it was especially important in those days, because there were many false teachers abroad (see 2 Jn 1:7; Acts 20:29,30).
See also SPIRITUAL GIFTS .
A. W. Fortune
di-si'-p'-l:
(1) Usually a substantive (mathetes, "a learner," from manthano, "to learn"; Latin discipulus, "a scholar"): The word is found in the Bible only in the Gospels and Acts. But it is good Greek, in use from Herodotus down, and always means the pupil of someone, in contrast to the master or teacher (didaskalos). See Mt 10:24; Lk 6:40. In all cases it implies that the person not only accepts the views of the teacher, but that he is also in practice an adherent. The word has several applications. In the widest sense it refers to those who accept the teachings of anyone, not only in belief but in life. Thus the disciples of John the Baptist (Mt 9:14; Lk 7:18; Jn 3:25); also of the Pharisees (Mt 22:16; Mk 2:18; Lk 5:33); of Moses (Jn 9:28). But its most common use is to designate the adherents of Jesus. (a) In the widest sense (Mt 10:42; Lk 6:17; Jn 6:66, and often). It is the only name for Christ's followers in the Gospels. But (b) especially the Twelve Apostles, even when they are called simply the disciples (Mt 10:1; 11:1; 12:1, et al.). In the Acts, after the death and ascension of Jesus, disciples are those who confess Him as the Messiah, Christians (Acts 6:1,2,7; 9:36 (feminine, mathetria); Acts 11:26, "The disciples were called Christians"). Even half-instructed be-lievers who had been baptized only with the baptism of John are disciples (Acts 19:1-4).
(2) We have also the verb, matheteuo, "Jesus' disciple" (literally, "was discipled to Jesus," Mt 27:57); "Make disciples of all the nations" (the King James Version "teach," Mt 28:19); "had made many disciples" (the King James Version "taught many," Acts 14:21); "every scribe who hath been made a disciple to the kingdom of heaven" (the King James Version "instructed," Mt 13:52). The disciple of Christ today may be described in the words of Farrar, as "one who believes His doctrines, rests upon His sacrifice, imbibes His spirit, and imitates His example."
The Old Testament has neither the term nor the exact idea, though there is a difference between teacher and scholar among David's singers (1 Ch 25:8), and among the prophetic guilds the distinction between the rank and file and the leader (1 Sam 19:20; 2 Ki 6:5).
G. H. Trever
dis'-i-plin (mucar): In the King James Version only in Job 36:10, where it refers to moral discipline, the strenuous cultivation of the righteous life; the Revised Version (British and American) "instruction." the Revised Version (British and American) in 2 Tim 1:7 has "discipline" for a Greek word (sophronismos) meaning "sobering"; in 2 Tim 3:16 margin, for Greek paideia, "instruction." In classic Greek paideia means "education," mental culture. Through the influence of the Septuagint, which translates the Hebrew mucar by paideia, the meaning of "chastisement" accompanies paideia in the New Testament. Compare Heb 12:5,7,8,11.
See CHASTISEMENT ; and for ecclesiastical discipline seeCHURCH .
dis-kum'-fit, dis-kum'-fi-tur (hum, mehumah): These words are now obsolete or at least obsolescent and are confined in Biblical literature wholly to the Old Testament. The meaning in general is "to annoy," "harass," "confuse," "rout" and "destroy." The most common usage is that based upon the root meaning, "to trouble" or "annoy," sometimes to the point of destruction (Josh 10:10; Jdg 4:15; 1 Sam 7:10; 2 Sam 22:15).
The King James Version errs in the translation in Isa 31:8, where the meaning is obviously "to become subject to task work" or "to place a burden upon one." There seems also to be an unwarranted use of the word in Nu 14:45, where it means rather "to bruise" or "strike." The purest use is perhaps in 1 Sam 14:20, where the statement is made that "every man's sword was against his fellow, and there was a very great discomfiture."
Walter G. Clippinger
dis-kors': In the Revised Version (British and American) of Acts 20:7,9, the translation of Greek dialegomai (the King James Version "preach"), elsewhere rendered, according to the implications of the context, "reason" or "dispute," as Acts 17:2; 19:9 (the King James Version "disputing," the Revised Version (British and American) "reasoning"); Jude 1:9.
dis-kuv'-er: In modern usage the word "discover" signifies "to get first sight or knowledge of," "to ascertain," or "to explore." Such usage appears in 1 Sam 22:6 of the discovery of David's hiding-place, where the Hebrew uses yadha`. In the King James Version the word "discover" often occurs in a sense now archaic or even obsolete. (Note in the cases cited below the Hebrew word is galah, except Jer 13:26 (chashaph, "to make bare") and Hab 3:13 (`arar, "to make naked").) (1) "To exhibit," "uncover" (or "betray"), in which examples the English Revised Version also reads with the King James Version "discover"; the American Standard Revised Version "uncover" (Ex 20:26; Job 12:22; Isa 57:8 ("discovered thyself" the King James Version and the English Revised Version); Jer 13:26; Lam 2:14; Hos 7:1; Nah 3:5). (2) "To cause to be no longer a covering," "to lay bare" (2 Sam 22:16 the King James Version). (3) "To bring to light," "disclose" (1 Sam 14:8,11 (the English Revised Version with the King James Version "discover")). (4) "To unmask" or "reveal oneself" (Prov 18:2 the King James Version). (5) "To take away the covering of" (Isa 22:8 the King James Version). (6) "To lay bare" (Hab 3:13). In Ps 29:9, the King James Version reads: "The voice of the Lord .... discovereth the forests," where the Revised Version (British and American) reads, "strippeth the forests bare," i.e. "strippeth the forests of their leaves" (Perowne, The Psalms, I, 248); "strippeth bare the forests" (Briggs, Psalms, I, 251, 253).
In the New Testament (the King James Version), the word "discover" occurs as a translation of the Greek anaphanantes in Acts 21:3, and for katenooun in Acts 27:39, where the Revised Version (British and American) reads in the first instance "had come in sight of," and in the latter case "perceived."
W. N. Stearns
dis-krep'-an-siz, bib'-li-kal:
By this term should be understood substantial disagreements in the statements of Biblical writers. Such disagreements might subsist between the, statements of different writers or between the several statements of a single writer. Contradictions of Biblical views from extra-Biblical sources as history, natural science, philosophy, do not fall within the scope of our subject.
2. Criticism versus Doctrine of Inerrancy:
Observant Bible readers in every age have noted, with various degrees of insight, that the Scriptures exhibit manifold interior differences and contrasts. Differences of literary form and method have ever seemed, except to those who maintained a mechanical theory of inspiration, wholly natural and fitting. Moreover, that there was progress in the Biblical revelation, especially that the New Testament of Jesus Christ signifies a vastly richer revelation of God than the Old Testament, has been universally recognized. In fulfilling the law and the prophets Christ put a marked distance between Himself and them, yet He certainly affirmed rather than denied them. The Christian church has ever held to the essential unity of the Divine library of the Holy Scriptures. Moreover, the evangelical churches have recognized the Bible as "the only and sufficient rule of both faith and practice." Indeed, in the generation following the Reformation, the strictest and most literal theory of inspiration and inerrancy found general acceptance. Over against such a body of presuppositions, criticism, some generations later, began to allege certain errors and discrepancies in the Bible. Of course the orthodox sought to repel all these claims; for they felt that the Bible, whatever the appearances might seem to indicate, must be free from error, else it could not be the word of God. So there came with criticism a long period of sturdy defense of the strictest doctrine of Biblical inerrancy. Criticism, however, kept on its way. It has forced the church to find a deeper and surer ground of confidence in the authority of the Bible as the witness to God's self-revelation to man. In our day the church has for the most part overcome the notion that the certainty of the saving grace of God in Christ stands or falls with the absolute inerrancy of each several statement contained in the Bible. Still there remains, and doubtless ever must remain, a need of a clear understanding of the issue involved in the allegation--along with other "human limitations"--of Biblical discrepancies.
Alleged discrepancies pertain (1) to statements of specific, concrete facts, and (2) to the utterance of principles and doctrines. Under the first head fall disagreements respecting numbers, dates, the form and order of historical events, records of spoken words, geography, natural history, etc. Under the second head fall disagreements respecting moral and religious truths, the "superhistorical" realities and values. Our inquiry resolves itself into three parts: (1) to determine whether there be discrepancies, of either or both sorts, in the Bible; (2) to obtain at least a general understanding of the conditions and causes that may have given rise to the discrepancies, real or apparent; (3) to determine their significance for faith.
4. Alleged Discrepancies Pertaining to Facts:
As to the first point, it should be observed that apparent inconsistencies may not be real ones; as so often in the past, so again it may come about that the discovery of further data may resolve many an apparent contradiction. On the other hand, the affirmation a priori that there can be and are no real discrepancies in the Bible is not only an outrage upon the human understanding, but it stands also in contradiction to the spirit of freedom that is of faith. Besides, it should not be overlooked that the discoveries of modern historical and archaeological research, which have tended to confirm so many Biblical statements, seem just as surely to reveal error in others. In any event we must bow to reality, and we may do this with fearless confidence in "the God of things as they are." But are there real discrepancies in the Bible? It is no part of the present plan to attempt the impossible and at all events useless task of exhibiting definite statistics of all the alleged discrepancies, or even of all the principal ones. Passing by the childish folly that would find a "discrepancy" in mere rhetorical antitheses, such as that in Prov 26:4,5 ("Answer not a fool," and "Answer a fool according to his folly"), or instances of merely formal contrariety of expression, where the things intended are manifestly congruous (e.g. Mt 12:30; Lk 11:23 contrasted with Mk 9:40; Lk 9:50: "He that is not with me is against me," "He that is not against us is for us"), it will serve our purpose to notice a few representative examples of real or apparent discrepancy. The chronologies of Kings and Chronicles are inconsistent (compare CHRONOLOGY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT ). The genealogies in Gen 46; Nu 26; 1 Ch 2:7 show considerable variations. The two lists of exiles who returned with Zerubbabel (Ezr 2; Neh 7:6 ff) show many discrepancies, including a marked difference in the enumeration. The accounts of the creation in Gen 1 and 2 (compare CREATION )--to take an example dependent upon the results of modern criticism--are mutually independent and in important particulars diverse. But the center of interest in our inquiry is the gospel history. Since Tatian and his Diatessaron in the 2nd century, the variations and contrasts in the Gospels have not only been noted and felt, but many have striven to "harmonize" them. After all, however, there remain some irreducible differences. The Gospels, generally speaking, do not give us ipsissima verba of Jesus; in reporting His discourses they show many variations. In so far as the essential meaning is the same in all, no one speaks of discrepancies; but where the variation clearly involves a difference of meaning (e.g. Mt 12:39,40 and Lk 11:29,30), one may say that at least a technical discrepancy exists. In recording sayings or events the evangelists manifestly do not always observe the same chronological order; Lk, e.g. records in wholly different connections sayings which Mt includes as parts of the Sermon on the Mount (e.g. the Lord's Prayer, Mt 6:9 ff; Lk 11:1-4; compare JESUS CHRIST ;CHRONOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT ). We have two distinct genealogies of Jesus (Mt 1:1-16; Lk 3:23 ff; compare GENEALOGY ). We may even note that Pilate's superscription over the cross of Jesus is given in four distinct forms. Here, however, the discrepancy is not real except in the most technical sense, and is worth mentioning only to show that the evangelists' interest does not lie in a mere objective accuracy. That a perfect agreement as to the significance of an event exists where there are undeniable discrepancies in external details may be illustrated by the two accounts of the healing of the centurion's servant (Mt 8:5 ff; Lk 7:1 ff). Of enormously greater interest are the various accounts of the appearances of the risen Christ. If a complete certainty as to the form and order of these events is necessary to faith, the case is not a happy one, for the harmonists have been unable to render a perfect account of these matters (compare JESUS CHRIST ;RESURRECTION ). Turning from the Gospels to apostolic history, we meet some real problems, e.g. how to relate Paul's autobiographical notes in Gal 1 with the accounts in Acts.
5. Alleged Discrepancies Pertaining to Doctrine:
The discrepancies thus far noted pertain to historical matters, and not one of them involves the contradiction of a fact in which faith is interested. But are there also real or apparent discrepancies in matters of doctrine? Many scholars maintain, for instance, that the ideal of the prophets and that of the priestly class stand in a relative (not absolute) opposition to each other (compare, e.g. Isa 1:11; Mic 6:8 with the ritualism of Lev and Dt). Or, to turn to the New Testament, some would assert--among them Luther--that James stands in opposition to Paul in respect to faith and works (compare Jas 2:17 ff in contrast with Gal 2:16 and many other passages in Paul). But particular interest attaches to the problem of Christ's attitude toward the Old Testament law. His "but I say unto you" (Mt 5:22 and passim) has been interpreted by many as a distinct contradiction of the Old Testament. Another question of acute interest is the agreement of the Johannine picture of Jesus with that of the Synoptists.
It can scarcely require proof that some of these alleged discrepancies are not such at all. For example, Jesus' attitude toward the Old Testament was one of profound reverence and affirmation. He was perfectly conscious that the Old Testament law represented a stage in the Divine education of mankind. His "but I say unto you" was not a denying of the degree of advancement represented by the Old Testament law, but a carrying out of the principle of the law to its full expression (compare LAW ;FULFIL ). Of course, the Divine education of Israel did not mean the mere inculcation of the truth in a fallow and hitherto unoccupied soil. There was much superstition and error to be overcome. If then one should insist that the errors, which revelation was destined to overcome, still manifest themselves here and there in the Old Testament, it may be replied that at all events the one grand tendency of Divine revelation is unmistakably clear. An idea is not "Scriptural" simply by virtue of its having been incidentally expressed by a Biblical writer, but because it essentially and inseparably belongs to the organic whole of the Biblical testimony. In the case of James versus Paul the antithesis is one of emphasis, not of contradiction of a first principle. And as for the variations in the gospel history, these do not deserve to be called real discrepancies so long as the Gospels unite in giving one harmonious picture and testimony concerning the personal life and the work and teaching of Jesus. Even from this point of view, John, though so much more theological, preaches the same Christ as the Synoptists.
As to the conditions under which discrepancies may arise, it may suffice, first, to call attention to the general law that God in revealing Himself to men and in moving men by His Spirit to speak or write, never lifts them out of the normal relations of human intelligence, so far as matters of history or science are concerned. It is their witness to Himself and His will which is the result of revelation and inspiration. Their references to history and Nature are not therefore in any sense super-human; accordingly they have no direct authority for faith (compare REVELATION ;INSPIRATION ). On this basis the divergences of human traditions or documents as exhibited in different genealogies, chronologies and the like are natural in the best sense and wholly fitting. As for the rest, errors of copyists have played a part.
7. Their Significance for Faith:
Faith, however, has no interest in explaining away the human limitations in God's chosen witnesses. It is God's way to place the heavenly "treasure in earthen vessels" (2 Cor 4:7). It seems that God has purposely led the church to see, through the necessity of recognizing the human limitations of the Bible, just where her faith is grounded. God has made Himself known through His Son. The Scriptures of the New Testament, and of the Old Testament in preparation for Him, give us a clear and sufficient testimony to the Christ of God. The clearness and persuasive power of that testimony make all questions of verbal and other formal agreement essentially irrelevant. The certainty that God has spoken unto us in His Son and that we have this knowledge through the Scripture testimony lifts us above all anxious concern for the possible errors of the witnesses in matters evidently nonessential.
LITERATURE.
Besides the literature noted under REVELATION and INSPIRATION, see J. W. Haley, An Examination of the Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible, Andover, 1873; M. S. Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, New York, 1883; Kahler, Zur Bibelf rage, Leipzig, 1907.
J. R. Van Pelt
dis'-kus (diskos, "the summons of the discus," 2 Macc 4:14 margin, "to the game of the discus," the King James Version "the game of discus"): The discus was a round stone slab or metal plate of considerable weight (a kind of quoit), the contest of throwing which to the greatest distance was one of the exercises in the Greek gymnasia, being included in the pentathlon. It was introduced into Jerusalem by Jason the high priest in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, 175-164 BC, in the Palaestra he had formed there in imitation of the Greek games. His conduct led to his being described in 2 Macc 4:13,14 as that "ungodly man" through whom even the priests forsook their duties to play at the discus. A statue of a discobolos (discus-thrower) is in the British Museum. From discus we have the words "disc," "dish," "desk."
See GAMES .
W. L. Walker
di-zez', di-zez'-iz (chalah, choli; nosos): Palestine, from its position and physical conditions, ought to be a healthy country. That it is not so depends on the unsanitary conditions in which the people live and the absence of any attempts to check the introduction or development of zymotic diseases. The number of marshes or pools is fairly small, and the use of active measures to destroy the larvae of mosquitos might easily diminish or abolish the malarial fevers which now prevail all over the country. The freeing of Ismailieh and Port Said from these pests is an object-lesson in sanitation. When one examines the conditions of life in towns and villages all over the country, the evidences of the ravages of these fevers and their sequelae appear on every hand as they affect all ages from infancy to middle age, and one meets but few individuals of extreme old age. The absence of any adequate system of drainage and the pollution of the water supplies are also factors of great importance in preserving this unhealthiness.
In ancient times it was regarded as healthier than Egypt, as it well might be, hence, the diseases of Egypt are referred to as being worse than those of Palestine (Dt 7:15; 28:60; Am 4:10). The sanitary regulations and restrictions of the Priestly Code would doubtless have raised the standard of public health, but it is unlikely that these were ever observed over any large area.
The types of disease which are referred to in the Bible are those that still prevail. Fevers of several kinds, dysentery, leprosy, intestinal worms, plague, nervous diseases such as paralysis and epilepsy, insanity, ophthalmia and skin diseases are among the commonest and will be described under their several names. Methods of treatment are described under MEDICINE; PHYSICIAN. The word "disease" or "diseases" in the King James Version is changed to "sickness" in the Revised Version (British and American) in 2 Ki 1:2; 8:8; Mt 9:35, and left out in Jn 5:4; while in Mt 8:17 "sicknesses" is replaced by "diseases." the Revised Version (British and American) also changes "infirmity" in Lk 7:21 to "diseases," and in Ps 38:7 "a loathsome disease" is changed to "burning."
Alex. Macalister
See EYES ,DISEASES OF THE .
The rendering in English Versions of the Bible in some connections of three Hebrew and one Greek word. The qe`arah of Ex 25:29; 37:16; Nu 4:7 was apparently a kind of salver, in this case of gold, for holding the loaves of the "presence bread." The same word represents the silver "platters" (Nu 7:13 ff) brought by the princes as a dedication gift. The cephel of Jdg 5:25 was a large bowl, so translated in Jdg 6:38. "Lordly dish" is literally, "bowl of (fit for) nobles." The tsallachath of 2 Ki 21:13; Prov 19:24; 26:15 (last two the King James Version "bosom" after the Septuagint) refers probably to the wide, deep dish in which the principal part of the meal was served. Of somewhat similar form may have been the trublion Septuagint for qe`arah) mentioned in connection with the Passover meal (Mt 26:23; Mk 14:20).
Benjamin Reno Downer
di'-shan, di'-shon (dishan, dishon, "antelope," "pygarg"): A Horite clan, mentioned as the youngest "son" and elsewhere as the "grandson" of Seir. The form Dishon occurs several times in the list of Horite clans, together with many other totem names (Gen 36 passim; 1 Ch 1:38,41). See Gray,HPN , 89.
dis-on'-es-ti: Only in 2 Cor 4:2, the King James Version rendering of Greek aischune; the King James Version elsewhere and the Revised Version (British and American) uniformly, "shame."
dis-o-be'-di-ens, (marah; apeitheo, parakouo): The word used chiefly in the New Testament has the general meaning of a lack of regard for authority or rulership. The stronger meaning of actual stubbornness or violence is perhaps conveyed in the Old Testament (1 Ki 13:26; Neh 9:26; compare 1 Ki 13:21).
In the New Testament there seem to be two rather clearly defined uses of the word, one objective and practical, the other ethical and psychological. The first refers more to conduct, the second to belief and one's mental attitude toward the object of disobedience. To the first belong such passages as refer to the overt act of disobedience to one's parents (Rom 1:30; 2 Tim 3:2). Illustrating this more fully, the translation according to the King James Version of 1 Tim 1:9 is given as "unruly" in the Revised Version (British and American). By far the greater emphasis, however, is placed upon the distinctly ethical quality in which disobedience is really an attitude of the mind and finds its essence in a heart of unbelief and unfaithfulness (1 Pet 2:7,8; Eph 2:2; 5:6; Col 3:6). In the latter three references "children (sons) of disobedience" are mentioned, as if one should become the very offspring of such an unhappy and unholy state of mind. The classic phrase of New Testament literature (Acts 26:19) contains both the practical and the ethical aspects. Paul's convictions were changed by the vision and his conduct was made to conform immediately to it.
Walter G. Clippinger
dis-or'-der-li (ataktos): The word is found four times in the Epistles to the Thess (1 Thess 5:14; 2 Thess 3:6,7,11), "Withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly."; "We behaved not ourselves disorderly."; "We hear of some that walk among you disorderly." The word is a military term and has reference to the soldier who does not keep the ranks (inordinatus, Liv). Then it refers to people who refuse to obey the civil laws, and thus it gets its meaning, "disorderly." It points to members in the early church, who, by their lives, became a reproach to the gospel of Christ (compare 1 Thess 4:11,12).
Henry E. Dosker
dis-pach': Occurs Tobit 7:8 in the sense of dispatch of business, "Let this business be dispatched" (the Revised Version (British and American) "finished"); 2 Macc 12:18, "before he had dispatched anything" (the Revised Version (British and American) "without accomplishing"); The Wisdom of Solomon 11:19 (20) in the sense of finishing, destroying, "dispatch them at once" (the Revised Version (British and American) "consume"); 2 Macc 9:4 "dispatch the journey" (katanuein), which may mean "finish it q Revised Version (British and American) spells "despatch."
dis-pen-sa'-shun: The Greek word (oikonomia) so translated signifies primarily, a stewardship, the management or disposition of affairs entrusted to one. Thus 1 Cor 9:17, the King James Version "A dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me," the Revised Version (British and American) "I have stewardship entrusted to me." The idea is similar in Eph 3:2 parallel Col 1:25 (the Revised Version, margin "stewardship"). In Eph 1:10 God's own working is spoken of as "dispensation."
See BABEL ;DISPERSION ;TABLE OF NATIONS .
dis-pur'-shun, (diaspora):
1. Golah and Dispersion
2. Purpose of Dispersion
3. Causes of Dispersion
4. Extent of Dispersion
5. The Eastern Dispersion
6. The Egyptian Dispersion
7. Testimony of Aramaic Papyri
8. Jewish Temple at Syene
9. Theories of the Syene Settlement
10. Importance of the Discovery
11. A New Chapter of Old Testament History
12. Alexandrian Judaism
13. The Jews and Hellenism
14. The Septuagint
15. Early Evidence of a Jewish Community
16. The Dispersion in Syria
17. In Arabia
18. In Asia Minor
19. Among Greeks Proper
20. The Roman Dispersion
21. Jews and Pompey
22. Jews and the First Caesars
23. Influence of Jews in the Early Roman Empire
24. Jews in Italy, Gaul, Spain and North Africa.
25. The Numbers of the Dispersion
26. Jewish Proselytism
27. Internal Organization
28. Unity of the Jewish People
29. Dispersion Influenced by Greek Thought
30. The Dispersion a Preparation for the Advent of Christ
31. The Dispersion an Auxiliary to the Spread of the Gospel
The Dispersion is the comprehensive designation applied to Jews living outside of Palestine and maintaining their religious observances and customs among the Gentiles. They were known as the Golah (Aramaic Galutha'), the captivity--an expression describing them in relation to their own land; and the Diaspora, the Dispersion, an expression describing them in relation to the nations among whom they were scattered. On a notable occasion Jesus said, "Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I am, ye cannot come. The Jews therefore said among themselves, Whither will this man go that we shall not find him? Will he go unto the Dispersion among the Greeks, and teach the Greeks?" (Jn 7:34,35).
In 2 Maccabees certain priests of Jerusalem are represented as praying to God: "Gather together our Dispersion, set at liberty them that are in bondage among the heathen" (2 Macc 1:27; compare 2 Esdras 2:7; Jas 1:1; 1 Pet 1:1). The thought of such a Dispersion as a punishment for the disobedience of the people finds frequent expression in the Prophets: Hosea (9:3), Jeremiah (8:3; 16:15, etc.), Ezekiel (4:13), and Zechariah (10:9). And it appears also in the Deuteronomic Law (Dt 28:25; 30:1). That the Dispersion of the Jews was for the benefit of the Gentiles is a conception to which expression is given in utterances of psalmists and prophets (Ps 67; Mic 5:7, etc.). It is found also in the Apocrypha Baruch, a work belonging to the 1st century AD: "I will scatter this people among the Gentiles, that they may do good to the Gentiles" (1:7).
The causes of the Dispersion most obvious to the student of Old Testament history were the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities, when the king of Assyria carried Israel away into his own land and placed them in Halah, and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes (2 Ki 17:5 ff); and when in the reign of Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, Judah was carried away into Babylonia (2 Ki 24:14). See CAPTIVITY . But there were other captivities which helped to scatter the children of Abraham. Ptolemy I of Egypt (322-285 BC) by his expeditions to Palestine and his capture of Jerusalem added largely to the Jewish population of Alexandria. Antiochus the Great of Syria (223-187 BC) removed from the Jewish communities in Mesopotamia and Babylon 2,000 families and settled them in Phrygia and Lydia (Josephus, Ant, XII, iii, 4). Pompey after his capture of Jerusalem in 63 BC carried off hundreds of Jews to Rome, where they were sold as slaves, but, afterward, many of them obtained their freedom and civic rights.
There was, besides, a voluntary emigration of Jewish settlers for purposes of trade and commerce into the neighboring countries, and especially into the chief cities of the civilized world. The successors of Alexander, and their successors in turn, encouraged immigration into their territories and the mingling of nationalities. They needed colonists for the settlements and cities which they established, and with the offer of citizenship and facilities for trade and commerce they attracted many of the Jewish people.
"In this way," says Philo, "Jerus became the capital, not only of Judea, but of many other lands, on account of the colonies which it sent out from time to time into the bordering districts of Egypt, Phoenicia, Syria, Coele-Syria, and into the more distant regions of Pamphylia, Cilicia, the greater part of Asia Minor as far as Bithynia, and the remotest corners of Pontus. And in like manner into Europe: into Thessaly, and Boeotia, and Macedonia, and Aetolia, and Attica and Argos, and Corinth, and into the most fertile and fairest parts of the Peloponnesus. And not only is the continent full of Jewish colonists, but also the most important islands, such as Euboea, Cyprus, and Crete. I say nothing of the countries beyond the Euphrates. All of them except a very small portion, and Babylon, and all the satrapies which contain fruitful land, have Jewish inhabitants" (Philo, Leg ad Caium, 36).
About the middle of the 2nd century BC the Sibylline Oracles could say of the Jewish people: "Every land and every sea is full of thee" (3:271). About the same period the Roman Senate, being anxious to extend protection to the Jews, had a circular letter written in their favor to the kings of Egypt, Syria, Pergamum, Cappadocia and Parthia, and to a great number of provinces, cities and islands of the Mediterranean, where presumably there was a larger or smaller number of Jews (1 Macc 15:15 ff). It is no surprise, therefore, to read that for the Feast of Pentecost at Jerusalem, there were present after the ascension of Jesus: "Parthians and Medes and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, in Judea and Cappadocia, in Pontus and Asia, in Phrygia and Pamphylia, in Egypt and the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and sojourners from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabians" (Acts 2:9-12).
The Eastern Dispersion, caused by the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities, seems to have increased and multiplied, and to have enjoyed a considerable measure of liberty, and of prosperity. When the return from the captivity took place Under Zerubbabel, it was only a small proportion of the exiles who sought a home again in the land of their fathers. Nor did the numbers who accompanied Ezra from Babylon greatly diminish the exiles who remained behind. In the time of Christ, Josephus could speak of the Jews in Babylenia by "innumerable myriads" (Ant., XI, v, 2). He also tells us of the 2,000 Jewish families whom Antiochus transferred from Babylon and Mesopotamia to Phrygia and Syria. Of the peculiarities of the Jews as a people living apart and observing their own customs and arousing the ill-will of the neighbors, we have a glimpse in the Persian period in the Book of Est (3:8). Babylonia remained a focus of eastern Judaism for centuries, and from the discussions in rabbinical schools there were elaborated the Talmud of Jerusalem in the 5th century of our era, and the Talmud of Babylon a century later. The two chief centers of Mesopotamian Judaism were Nehardea, a town on the Euphrates, and Nisibis on the Mygdonius; an affluent of the Chaboras, which were also centers of Syrian Christianity.
The Egyptian Dispersion is of special interest and importance, and recent discoveries have thrown unexpected light upon it. As far back as the days of Sheshenq, the founder of the 22nd Dynasty, the Shishak of 1 Ki 14:25 f; 2 Ch 12:2 f, who invaded Palestine in the 10th century BC, and engraved on the South wall of the great Temple of Karnak the names of many districts and cities he had captured, prisoners of war and hostages may have been carried off to Egypt by the conqueror. At a later time Jewish mercenaries are said to have fought in the expedition of Psammetichus II against Ethiopia, to which expedition belong the famous inscriptions of Abu Simbel (594-589 BC). So we learn from the well-known Letter of Aristeas. But the clearest and best-known example of a settlement of Jews in Egypt is that connected with the prophet Jeremiah. When Gedaliah, the governor of Judea, after the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC, had been treacherously murdered, the depressed and dispirited remnant under Johnnan, the son of Kareah, resolved to take flight into Egypt, against the counsel of Jeremiah. A host of fugitives, including Jeremiah and his friend Baruch, accordingly set out thither, and settled at Migdol and Tahpanhes and Noph (Memphis), and in the country of Pathros in upper Egypt (Jer 43; 44). It was in Egypt with those fugitives that Jeremiah ended his life. Many of the fugitives were taken prisoners by Nebuchadrezzar on one of his latest expeditions to the west, and were transported to Babylon (Josephus, Ant, X, ix, 7; compare Jer 43:8 f).
7. Testimony of Aramaic Papyri:
Of this colony of Jews it is natural to see a strong confirmation in the recent discovery of Aramaic papyri at Assouan, the Syene of the ancients. The papyri were the contents of a deed box of a member of a Jewish colony in upper Egypt, and the deeds refer to house property in which Jews are concerned. Here then at Assouan, about 470 BC is a colony of Jews who have acquired houses and other property, and have become bankers and money lenders, within a century of the death of Jeremiah. In the papyri there is evidence of the existence of a tribunal of the Hebrews, a court where cases could be decided, as fully recognized by law as any of the other courts, Egyptian or Persian, for Egypt, "the basest of kingdoms," was then subject to a Persian suzerain. Most significant of all, Yahweh is acknowledged as the God of the Jews, and the existence of a chapel and even of an altar of sacrifice is beyond all doubt. Evidently these Jews in Egypt did not consider that an altar of Yahweh could not stand anywhere else than at Jerusalem, or that outside Jerusalem the worship of the synagogue was the only worship of the God of their fathers. These facts are rendered still more striking when we regard them as a fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy: "In that day there shall be five cities in the land of Egypt that speak the language of Canaan, and swear to Yahweh of hosts; one shall be called the city of destruction. In that day there shall be an altar to Yahweh in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at the border thereof to Yahweh" (Isa 19:18,19). These papyri give information similar to that which the clay tablets discovered at Nippur give regarding the house of Murashu Sons (see CAPTIVITY ) about the same time--the time when Ezra was setting out from Babylon to restore at Jerusalem the worship of the temple which Zerubbabel had rebuilt. It was just about a century from the time that Jeremiah had gone down to Egypt that we have the first of these deeds, and it was the grandfathers, or great-grandfathers, of the persons concerned whom he had accompanied thither so much against his will.
These papyri were discovered in 1904, and a year or two later, additional papyri were discovered in a mound which stands on the site of the ancient Elephantine or Yeb, an island in the Nile, on the frontier also. One of these papyri contains a petition from the Jewish colony in Elephantine addressed to Bagohi (called Bagoas by Josephus, Ant, XI, vii, 7), the Persian governor of Judah, about 408 BC. They ask for assistance to enable them to rebuild the temple of Yahweh in Elephantine, which had been destroyed at the instigation of the priests of the rain-headed Egyptian god Khnub, who had a temple in the fortress of Yeb or Elephantine. This Jewish temple had been erected to Yahweh at least 125 years before and had been spared by Cambyses in 525 BC when he destroyed all the temples erected to the gods of Egypt. The destruction of the temple at Yeb occurred in the 14th year of Darius, 411 BC. It contained an altar for burnt sacrifice, and there were gold and silver vessels in which the blood of sacrifice was collected. The head of the college of priests presenting this petition is Jedoniah, a name found in an abbreviated form in Jadon (Neh 3:7).
9. Theories of the Syene Settlement:
An attempt has been made to show that the bearers of these Hebrew names were descended from the captivity of the Northern Kingdom. It is suggested that they had come into Egypt with the Persian army under Cambyses from their adopted homes in Assyria and the cities of the Medes and had obtained possessions on the southern frontier of Egypt. Names believed to point to the Northern Kingdom, like Hosea and Menahem, occur very frequently, but this is too narrow a foundation for such a theory, and the Israelite origin of the Syene colonists is not established (JQR (1907), 441 ff). There is more to be said in favor of the view that they were the descendants of a Jewish military colony. That Jewish mercenaries fought in the campaigns of the Pharaohs we have already seen. And that Elephantine was an important garrison town on the frontier is also certain. Josephus (Ant., XIV, vi, 2) mentions a Jewish military colony holding a post at Pelusium in the century before Christ, and this might be a similar garrison stationed at the opposite extremity of the land in the 5th century. Such a garrison would attract Jews engaged in business and in the occupations of civil life, and so a distinct Jewish community would be formed. It has even been suggested that the tidings of the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem furnished the motive to these Egyptian Jews to build the temple and rear the altar of burnt offering which the heathen priests of Khnub had destroyed.
10. Importance of the Discovery:
While the petition to the religious authorities at Jerusalem indicates that the priests of Elephantine regarded their temple as dependent upon the temple at Jerusalem, it is significant. that they were also, as is shown in their letter, in communication with Delaiah and Shelemiah the sons of Sanballat, the governor of Samaria. That this was Nehemiah's enemy (Neh 4:1; 6:1, etc.) is impossible, for he lived nearly a century earlier. But the association with descendants of his, themselves Samaritans, gives a schismatical appearance to the position of the Elephantine temple. The existence of this temple with its priesthood, its altar of sacrifice, and its offerings, from 500 years BC, is an important fact in the history of the Dispersion. It was meant to keep those Jewish exiles true to the religion of their fathers and in religious fellowship with their brethren in Palestine. For a like purpose the Temple of Onias at Leontopolis was erected in the early years of the Maccabean struggle. Onias had to flee from Jerusalem with a number of priests and Levites, and for the aid he rendered to Ptolemy Philometor, the king of Egypt, he received a gift of land upon which he built a temple like to the Temple at Jerusalem. Professor Flinders Petrie believes he has discovered this temple of Onias IV at Tel el-Yehudiyeh (Hyksos and Israelite Cities, 31). The discovery confirms the account given of the temple by Josephus, who is our only authority for its erection (Ant., XIII, iii, 2; XIV, viii, 2).
11. A New Chapter of Old Testament History:
The Elephantine-Syene papyri have added a new and valuable chapter to Old Testament history. We know now of a Jewish temple in Egypt which certainly reaches 400 years further into antiquity than the temple of Onias IV at Leontopolis, and we obtain important information as to the relations of its priesthood with the leaders of the Jerusalem Jews and the Samaritans. We know now from unbiased authorities that the Jewish settlements in the Valley of the Nile are much older than has hitherto been believed. We have valuable confirmation not only of the notices in the Book of Jeremiah, but also of the statements in the later Hellenistic literature. Moreover, it is now shown that the skepticism which has prevailed in some quarters as to the very existence of any considerable Egyptian Dispersion before the time of Alexander the Great is unwarranted (Peters, Die judische Gemeinde von Elephantine-Syene, 50 f; Schurer, GJV4, III, 19 f) .
What exactly were the fortunes of this Jewish community at a later time, no record has yet been found to tell. Possibly it decayed in course of time, for Herodotus who visited Egypt about 450 BC makes no mention of it and found no Jews in sufficient numbers to attract his attention. It was undoubtedly with the founding of Alexandria in 332 BC that the flourishing period of Judaism in Egypt commenced. Alexander the Great had hastened from the field of victory at Issus 333 BC, through Syria by way of Tyre, the siege of which occupied him some months, showing clemency to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and severity to the recalcitrant inhabitants of Gaza till by its eastern gate he entered Egypt and took possession of the land of the Pharaohs. The Jews appear to have been friendly to Macedonian conquest, and in Alexander's new city they received the rights of citizenship and two quarters all to themselves. That they were restricted to their own quarters does not appear, and in the time of Philo, at the commencement of the Christian era, they had synagogues and places of prayer in all parts of the city. Alexander died in 323 BC but the favor which he had accorded to the Jews was continued by the Ptolemies who succeeded to his Egyptian empire. The first Ptolemy, Lagi or Soter (322-285 BC), increased the Jewish population of Alexandria by raids into Palestine on which he brought back a large number of captives, both Jews and Samaritans. Other Jews, hearing of his liberality and of the prosperity of their coreligionists, were attracted to Egypt and settled in Alexandria of their own accord (Josephus, Ant, XII, i, 1). Under their own ethnarch they enjoyed great prosperity and had full religious liberty. The principal synagogue of the city was on a scale of great magnificence. In the reign of Ptolemy Philometor (182-146 BC) they were allowed to set up the temple at Leontopolis, as we have already noticed. In the time of Philo the Jewish colony in Egypt was considered to number a million.
It was in Alexandria that the Jews first came so powerfully under the influence of Hellenism, and here that the peculiar Greco-Jewish philosophy sprang up of which Philo was the most notable representative. The same soil was eminently favorable to early Christianity which had from the end of the 2nd century onward its greatest teachers and their learned catechetical school.
See ALEXANDRIA .
The great monument of Hellenistic Judaism, which had its chief seat in Alexandria, is the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament, which became such a powerful praeparatio evangelica, and was the Bible of the Apostles and the first Christians, even of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. It is ascribed in the Letter of Aristeas to the interest of Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285-247 BC) in a proposal to secure a copy of the Jewish Law in an accessible translation for the famous Royal Library. It is more likely that as familiarity with their Hebrew tongue diminished in their new surroundings, the need of an intelligible version of the Law to begin with was felt, and Jewish hands were set to work to produce it. In course of time the rest followed, but from the tradition of its being the work of 70 or 72 translators it is known as the Septuagint.
See SEPTUAGINT .
15. Early Evidence of a Jewish Community:
The question has been raised whether too much has not been made of a Jewish community in Alexandria so early, and it has been asserted that we can scarcely speak of a Jewish Dispersion anywhere before the Maccabean period in the second half of the 2nd century BC. The evidence as we have seen points to the existence of Jewish communities continuously from the days of Jeremiah. Papyri prove the presence of Jews in Egypt, not only in the towns but in country districts from a comparatively early period. A remarkable inscription has recently come to light showing that at Schedia, some 20 miles from Alexandria, there existed a Jewish community which had built a synagogue and dedicated it to the honor of Ptolemy III Euergetes (247-222 BC) and his queen Berenice. If such a community was organized in the little town of Schedia at that date, we can well believe the cosmopolitan city of Alexandria to have had a considerable Jewish community at a still earlier date.
When we turn to Syria, we find large numbers of Jews, notwithstanding the hatred of Greeks and Syrians. Josephus (BJ, VII, iii, 3) says that it is the country which has the largest percentage of Jewish inhabitants, and Antioch among the towns of Syria had the preeminence. In Damascus, which seems to have had a Jewish quarter or Jewish bazaars in the days of Ahab (1 Ki 20:34 and Burney's note at the place), the Jewish population was numbered by thousands. From Galilee and Gilead and the region of the Hauran, Judas Maccabeus and his brother Jonathan brought bodies of Jews, who were settlers among a pagan population, for safety to Judea (1 Macc 5).
Even in Arabia Judaism had considerable footing. Edward Glaser, who prosecuted valuable archaeological researches in Arabia (see Hilprecht, Recent Researches in Bible Lands, 131 ff), professes to have found Himyaritic inscriptions of the 4th and 5th centuries of our era which are monotheistic and therefore Jewish, but there is still uncertainty as to this. In the beginning of the 6th century a Jewish king actually reigned in Arabia, and because of his persecution of the Christians he was attacked and overthrown by the Christian king of Abyssinia.
Of the widespread distribution of the Dispersion in Asia Minor there is abundant testimony, not only in the texts of the apostles, but in classical and early Christian literature and in the epigraphic literature which has been accumulating for the last 30 years. At Pergamum, in Lydia, in Karia, at Magnesia, at Tralles, at Miletum, in Cappadocia, Bithynia, and Pontus, considerable Jewish communities existed at the beginning of the Christian era. At Smyrna the Jews played a prominent part in the death of Polycarp 155 AD, being especially zealous in heaping up fagots upon the fire that consumed the martyr. In his Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia Sir William Ramsay mentions numerous indications found on inscriptions of Jewish settlers, and his chapter on "The Jews in Phrygia" focuses the results of his inquiries (op. cit., 667 ff; compare 649 ff). He has also made it extremely probable that long before Paul's day there was a strong body of Jews in Tarsus of Cilicia, and he holds that a Jewish colony was settled there as early as 171 BC. "The Seleucid kings," he says, like the Ptolemies, "used the Jews as an element of the colonies which they founded to strengthen their hold on Phrygia and other countries." But it is difficult to trace out the profound influence they exerted in the development of their country from the fact that they adopted to such an extent Greek and Roman names and manners, and were thus almost indistinguishable. At Laodicea and Hierapolis there have been found many evidences of their presence: for example, at the latter place an inscription on a gravestone tells how the deceased Publius Aelius Glycon mortified a sum of money to provide for the decoration of his tomb every year at the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
The Dispersion among the Greeks proper had attained to considerable dimensions in the time of Christ. Philo, as noticed above, mentions Thessaly, Boeotia, Macedonia, Aetolia, Attica, Argos, Corinth and the fairest and most fertile parts of the Peloponnesus as having Jewish inhabitants. Inscriptions recovered from Delphi and elsewhere relating to the manumission of slaves in the 2nd century BC contain the names of Jews (Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, 325 f). In Sparta and Sicyon, Jews lived in the days of the Maccabees (1 Macc 15:23). At Philippi we know from Acts 16:16 there was a proseuche, or place of of prayer, and at Thessalonica, Berea, Athens, Corinth there were synagogues in Paul's time. On the islands of the Greek archipelago and the Mediterranean there were Jews. Cyprus, the home of Barnabas, had a large Jewish population; and Euboea and Crete are named by Philo as Jewish centers. Rhodes has the distinction of having produced two opponents of Judaism in the first half of the 1st century BC. Clearchus of Soli, a disciple of Aristotle, introduces in one of his dialogues a Jew from Coele-Syria, Hellenic not in speech only but in mind, representing him as having come in his travels to Asia Minor and there conversed with Aristotle. Such an experience may have been rare so early; the incident may not be fact, but fiction; yet such as it is it tells a tale of the spread of Judaism.
The relations of Rome with the Jewish people lend special interest to the Dispersion there. Jews do not appear to have been settled in Rome before the Maccabean period. There is a certain pathos in the appeal made to the Roman state by Judas Maccabeus, amid the difficulties that were gathering round his position, for "a league of amity and confederacy" with the Roman people (1 Macc 8:17-32). His brother and successor, Jonathan, followed this up later (1 Macc 12:1-4,16). And in 140 BC Simon sent a delegation which concluded a treaty, offensive and defensive, with Rome, which was duly intimated by the Senate to their allies in various countries, especially of the East. During the stay of the mission at Rome its members seem to have made attempts at religious propagandism, and the praetor Hispalus compelled them to return to their homes for attempting to corrupt Roman morals by introducing the worship of Jupiter Sabazius which is no doubt the Roman interpretation of the Lord of Hosts (Yahweh Sabaoth). But ere long in Rome, as in Alexandria, they formed a colony by themselves, occupying Trastevere, the Transtiberine portion of the city, together with an island in the Tiber. Their prosperity grew with their numbers. When Cicero in 59 BC was defending Flaccus he speaks of gold being sent out of Italy, and all the provinces, to Jerusalem, and there was present among his listeners a large body of Jews interested in the case.
When Pompey had captured Jerusalem in 63 BC, he brought back with him to Rome a number of Jewish captives. They were sold as slaves, but many of them received their freedom and rights to citizenship. When Julius Caesar, who was a great patron and protector of the Jews, was assassinated, they wept over him for nights on end.
22. Jews and the First Caesars:
Augustus protected and encouraged them. Tiberius, however, adopted repressive measures toward them, and 4,000 Jews were deported by him to Sardinia while others were driven out of the city. With the downfall of Sejanus, the unworthy favorite of Tiberius, this repressive policy was reversed and they were allowed to return to Rome. Claudius again devised measures against them (circa 50 AD), and they were banished from the city. They had, however, so multiplied and they had attained such influence that it was impossible to get rid of them altogether.
23. Influence of Jews in the Early Roman Empire:
Their customs and religious observances brought down upon them the scorn of Juvenal and others, while Empire their faith and worship had attractions for the thoughtful and the superstitious.
"The Jews from the time of the first Caesar," says Sir Samuel Dill, "have worked their way into every class of society. A Jewish prince had inspired Caligula with an oriental ideal of monarchy. There were adherents of Judaism in the household of the great freedmen of Claudius, and their growing influence and turbulence compelled that emperor to expel the race from his capital. The worldly, pleasure-loving Poppea had, perhaps, yielded to the mysterious charms of the religion of Moses. But it was under the Flavians, who had such close associations with Judea, that Jewish influences made themselves most felt. And in the reign of Domitian, two members of the imperial house, along with many others, suffered for following the Jewish mode of life" (Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius, 84).
In recent excavations, which have laid bare much of subterranean Rome, many Jewish tombs have been examined and have yielded much additional knowledge of the conditions of Jewish life in the capital of the Caesars. Probably Jews gracing Pompey's triumph after his Syrian campaign, 61 BC, made the first Roman catacombs similar to those on Jewish hillsides and especially round Jerusalem; and in these Jewish catacombs pagans and Christians were never laid.
24. Jews in Italy, Gaul, Spain and North Africa:
In Italy, apart from Roman and Southern Italy, where they were widely spread, the number of Jews at the beginning of our era was not large. In Southern Gaul they were numerous and in Spain they were numerous and powerful. In North Africa there were Jewish communities in many centers, and Cyrene was the home of a large and flourishing Jewish population.
25. The Numbers of the Dispersion:
It is not easy to form a trustworthy estimate of the Jewish population of the world in the times of Christ. Harnack reckons up four or four and a half millions (Expansion of Christianity, I, 10) within the Roman Empire. The Judaism of the Dispersion would at least be several times more numerous than the Judaism of Palestine.
The question has been discussed how far the Jews of the Dispersion recruited their ranks by proselytism. That they should maintain a propaganda on behalf of their ancestral faith would only be in keeping with the character of their religion as a religion of revelation. Although they had to live within "the hedge of the Law" to protect them against the corruptions and idolatries of the Gentiles, there was nevertheless at the heart of Judaism a missionary purpose, as we see from the universalism of the Psalms and the Prophets. Judaism was burdened with a message which concerned all men, to the effect that there was one God, holy and spiritual, Creator of heaven and earth, who had committed to the family of Abraham in trust for the world His Law. To witness for the Living God, and to proclaim His Law, was the chief element of the Jewish propaganda in the Roman empire, and their system of proselytism enabled them to gain adherents in numbers. In this the Old Testament Scriptures and the observance of the Sabbath were important factors, and enabled them to win the adherence of intelligent and educated people.
That the Jews of the Dispersion had an internal organization with courts of their own, having considerable jurisdiction, not only in spiritual but in civil affairs, there is no doubt. This would only be in accordance with the analogy of their constitution as seen in the New Testament, and of their commercial organization in many lands to this day.
28. Unity of the Jewish People:
In all the lands of their Dispersion the Jews never lost touch with the land of their fathers, or Jerusalem, the city of the Great King. The bond of unity was maintained by the pilgrimages they made from all the countries where they were scattered to their three great national feasts; by the payment of the half-shekel toward the services of the Temple as long as it stood; and by their voluntary submission, so long as they had a national polity, to the decrees of the great Sanhedrin.
29. Dispersion Influenced by Greek Thought:
That Judaism was influenced in its Dispersion by contact of the larger world of life and thought in which the Jews had their place outside of Palestine we can see by the example of Alexandria. It was there that it felt most powerfully the penetrating and pervasive influence of Greek thought, and the large apocryphal and apocalyptic literature which sprang up there is one of the most notable results. "The Alexandrian Jew was in reality both a Jew and a Greek; he held the faith of Yahweh and sincerely worshipped the God of his fathers, but he spoke the Greek language, had received a Greek education, and had contracted many Greek ideas and habits. Still those in his position were Jews first, and Greeks afterward, and on all `The fundamentals' were in thorough sympathy with their Palestinian brethren" (Fairweather, From the Exile to the Advent, 109 f).
30. The Dispersion a Preparation for the Advent of Christ:
The Jewish people thus widely distributed over the Roman world with their monotheism, with their Scriptures, and with their Messianic hopes, did much to prepare the way for the advent of the Redeemer who was to be the fulfillment of Jewish expectation and hope. It was due to the strange and unique influence of Judaism and to the circulation of the glowing visions of Israel's prophets among the nations, that there was so widespread an expectation, mentioned by Tacitus, by Suetonius and by Josephus, that from Judea would arise a Ruler whose dominion would be over all. It is now believed that Virgil's conception of the Better Age which was to be inaugurated by the birth of a child was derived from Isaiah's prophecies. And not only did the Jewish Dispersion thus prepare the way for the world's Redeemer in the fullness of the time, but when He had come and suffered and died and risen and ascended, it furnished a valuable auxiliary to the proclamation of the gospel. Wherever the apostles and the first preachers traveled with the good news, they found Jewish communities to whom they offered first the great salvation.
31. The Dispersion an Auxiliary to the Spread of the Gospel:
The synagogue services lent themselves most effectively to the ministry of Paul and his colleagues, and it was to the synagogue that they first repaired in every city they visited. Even to this day this preservation of "the dispersed of Israel" is one of the marvels of the Divine government of the world, proving the truth of the word of God by one of the earliest prophets: "I will sift the house of Israel among all the nations, like as grain is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least kernel fall upon the earth" (Am 9:9).
LITERATURE.
Schurer, GJV4, III, 1 ff; Harnack, Expansion of Christianity, I, 1-40; Fairweather, Background of the Gospel and From the Exile to the Advent; Jewish Encyclopedia, article "Diaspora"; Sayce and Cowley, Aramaic Papyri Discovered at Assuan; Oestcrley and Box, Religion and Worship of the Synagogue.
T. Nicol.
dis-po-zish'-un diatagai): Only in Acts 7:53, "received the law by the disposition of angels," where it bears the meaning of "administration"; the Revised Version (British and American) "as it was ordained by angels."
dis-pu-ta'-shun: In Acts 15:2, the Revised Version (British and American) reads "questioning" for the King James Version "disputation" (Greek suzetesis). In Rom 14:1, the King James Version "doubtful disputations" becomes in the Revised Version (British and American) "decision of scruples" (Greek diakriseis dialogismon, literally, "discussions of doubts"). The Greek in neither case implies what the word "dispute" has come to mean in modern English, but rather "to discuss" or "argue."
dis'-taf (pelekh): This word occurs once in Prov 31:19; "spindle" is found in the same passage. In the Revised Version (British and American) the meanings of the two words have been exchanged.
See SPINNING .
dis-til': Only found twice in the English Bible (Dt 32:2; Job 36:27), in both cases in its original meaning of "to fall in drops," as dew or rain (derived through French from Latin de, "down," stillo, "to drop"). It does not occur in its later technical sense, for the process we call distilllation was not known in ancient times.
dis-tinkt'-li: Only Neh 8:8, "They read in the book, in the law of God, distinctly." Probably the better rendering is the Revised Version, margin "with an interpretation," i.e. translating into Aramaic. The Hebrew word is a participle of the verb parash = "to make distinct." The corresponding Aramaic word occurs in Ezr 4:18 = "plainly" the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American), better "translated" the Revised Version, margin.
dich: The word is used indiscriminately in the King James Version to represent at least three different ideas: a conduit or trench (2 Ki 3:16); a reservoir or cistern; or simply a pit or hole in the ground. In the Revised Version (British and American) this distinction is observed more carefully. Compare Job 9:31; Ps 7:15 ("pit"), and Isa 22:11 ("reservoir"), the former meaning a pit or any similar place of destruction or corruption; the latter a reservoir or cistern of water. The New Testament usage (Mt 15:14 the King James Version) corresponds somewhat with the former. See also 2 Ki 3:16 ("trenches").
di'-verz, di-vurs', di-vur'-si-tiz: "Divers" meaning "various," "different in kind," is now obsolete and used only as a synonym of "several," i.e. more than one. The distinction between "divers" and "diverse" in the King James Version seems to be that the former is the wider term, the latter being restricted to the meaning of "different in kind," while "divers" is also used to express difference of number. the Revised Version (British and American) retains "diverse" in all instances but changes "divers" nearly everywhere, except where it has the meaning "several." Compare Mt 24:7; Lk 21:11; Heb 9:10, and others. It is hard to understand why the Revised Version (British and American) retains "divers" as a translation of poikilos, in Mt 4:24 Mk 1:34, et al., because poikilos certainly cannot have the meaning "several" but "different in kind," and the idea expressed in these passages is not that some of the people had several diseases but that different people had different kinds of diseases. The same is true in Heb 13:9 where "divers" does not refer to number but to various kinds of teaching. Heb 2:4 and Jas 1:2 rightly change the reading of the King James Version "divers" to "manifold."
In other passages the Revised Version (British and American) changes "divers" to "diverse," and thus renders the idea of the original text "different in kind." Compare Dt 25:13 f; Prov 20:10,23. Other passages are changed the better to render the original text: Dt 22:9, "two kinds of seed"; Jdg 5:30, "dyed"; 2 Ch 30:11, "certain men"; Mk 8:3 and Acts 19:9, "some." the King James Version reads. in all these passages "divers." the Revised Version (British and American) changes the King James Version Heb 1:1 "at sundry times and in divers manners," an expression often found in Old English, to "by divers portions and in divers manners."
"Diversities" is found twice as translation of diairesis, literally, "distribution" (1 Cor 12:4 ff), but the Revised Version (British and American) changes the King James Version, 1 Cor 12:28, "diversities" to "divers kinds," as translation of gene, "kinds."
A. L. Breslich
di'-vez.
See LAZARUS .
di-vid': It is difficult to decide whether ragha` (Job 26:12; Isa 51:15; Jer 31:35) should be rendered "to stir up" or "to still." The Hebrew has both meanings. Some render "He causes the sea to tremble." the Revised Version (British and American) reads "to stir" in text and "to still" in margin, while the King James Version has "to divide" in all three cases. 2 Ch 35:13, "carried them quickly" (the King James Version "divided them speedily"). Since cholaq, may mean either "to distribute" or "to be smooth," Hos 10:2 reads "their heart is divided" in the text, but offers "smooth" in margin (the King James Version "divided"). The Greek orthotomeo, means "to cut straight," hence, the more literal translation of 2 Tim 2:15, "handling aright the word of truth" (note "holding a straight course in the way of truth" or "rightly dividing the word of truth"; the King James Version "rightly dividing").
A. L. Breslich
div-i-na'-shun:
1. Definition
2. Kinds of Divination
3. Fundamental Assumption in Divination
4. Legitimate and Illegitimate Divination
5. The Bible and Divination
6. Modes of Divination Mentioned in the Bible:
Those Approved and Those Condemned
7. Terms Used in the Old Testament in Connection with Divination
8. Divination and Prophecy
LITERATURE
Divination is the act of obtaining secret knowledge, especially that which relates to the future, by means within the reach almost exclusively of special classes of men.
Of this there are two main species: (1) artificial, (2) inspirational, or, as it was called in ancient times (Cicero, Lord Bacon, etc.), natural divination. Artificial divination depends on the skill of the agent in reading and in interpreting certain signs called omens. See AUGURY . In inspirational or natural divination the agent is professedly under the immediate influence of some spirit or god who enables the diviner to see the future, etc., and to utter oracles embodying what he sees. Among the Romans artificial divination prevailed almost exclusively, the other having vogue largely among the Greeks, a proof surely of the more spiritual trend of the Greek mind. Yet that great Roman, Cicero, in his memorable treatise on Divination, says he agrees with those who take cognizance of these two distinct kinds of divination. As examples of inspirational divination he instances men dreaming or in a state of ecstasy (De Divinatione, i. 18). But though Cicero arranges diviners according to their pretentions, he does not believe in any superhuman communication. Thus he explains dreams on psychological principles much as modern psychologists would (op. cit. ii.63 ff). As a matter of fact Cicero was an atheist, or at least an agnostic.
The Latin word divinatio was confined almost exclusively to divination by outward signs, though its etymology (deus, "god") suggests that it denoted originally the other kind--that due to the inspiration of superhuman beings. Chrysippus (died at Athens 207 BC), though himself a Greek philosopher, defines the word in a way which would have commanded the approval of nearly every Roman, including Cicero himself who gives it. "Divination," Cicero makes him say (op. cit. ii.63), is "a power in man which foresees and explains those signs which the gods throw in his way." The Greeks were, on the other hand, a more imaginative and emotional people, and with them inspirational divination held much the larger place. The Greek (mantis) bears a close resemblance to the Old Testament prophet, for both claimed to be inspired from without and to be superhumanly informed. The Greek term for divination (he) mantike (= he mantike techne) has reference to the work of the mantis, and it hardly ever means divination of the lower sort--that by means of signs.
3. Fundamental Assumption in Divination:
Underlying all methods of divination there lay the belief that certain superhuman spiritual beings (gods, spirits) possess the secret knowledge desired by men, and that, on certain conditions,, they are willing to impart it.
(1) The word "divination" itself, from deus, "god," or divus, "pertaining to god," carries with it the notion that the information obtained came from deity. Similarly the Greek mantike implies that the message comes to the mantis from gods or spirits by way of inspiration.
(2) Astrology, or astromancy, is but one form of divination and it rests upon the ultimate belief that the heavenly bodies are deities controlling the destinies of men and revealing the future to those who have eyes to see. According to the Weltanschauung or conception of the universe advocated by Hugo Winckler, Alfred Jeremias (see The Old Testament in the Light of the East) and others, terrestrial events are but shadows of the celestial realities (compare Plato's doctrine of ideas). These latter represented the mind of the gods (see ASTROLOGY secs. 1,2).
(3) On hepatoscopy, or divining from the liver, see below, 6, (2), (c).
(4) It can be proved that among the ancient peoples (Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, etc.) the view prevailed that not only oracles but also omens of all kinds are given to men by the gods and express the minds of these gods.
4. Legitimate and Illegitimate Divination:
Among the ancient Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks and Romans the diviner stood in the service of the state and was officially consulted before wars and other great enterprises were undertaken. But among these and other ancient peoples certain classes of diviners were prohibited by the government from exercising their calling, probably because they were supposed to be in league with tile gods of other and hostile nations. The gods of a people were in the beliefs of the time the protectors of their people and therefore the foes of the foes of their proteges. It is on this account that witchcraft has been so largely condemned and punished (see WITCHCRAFT ). Necromancy is uniformly forbidden in the Old Testament (see Lev 19:31; Dt 18:11; Isa 8:19; 19:3), probably on account of its connection with ancestor worship. But among other ancient peoples it was allowed and largely practiced. Note that the Hebrew words translated (Dt 18:11) "consulter with a familiar spirit" and "wizards" denote alike such persons as seek oracles from the spirits of the dead (see the present writer's Magic, Divination, and Demonology among the Hebrews, 85 ff). The early Fathers believed that in the divination of heathenism we have the work of Satan who wished to discredit the true religion by producing phenomena among pagan races very similar to the prophetical marvels of the chosen people. This of course rests on a view of the Old Testament prophet which makes him a "predicter" and little if anything more.
See PROPHECY .
The attitude of the Bible toward divination is on the whole distinctly hostile and is fairly represented by Dt 18:10 f, where the prophet of Yahweh is contrasted with diviners of all kinds as the only authorized medium of supernatural revelation. Yet note the following:
(1) Balaam (Nu 22 through 24) was a heathen diviner whose words of blessing and of cursing were believed to have magical force, and when his services are enlisted in the cause of Yahwism, so that, instead of cursing he blessed Israel, there is not a syllable of disapproval in the narrative.
(2) In Isa 3:2 diviners are ranked with judges, warriors and prophets as pillars of the state. They are associated with prophets and seers in Jer 27:9; 29:8; Ezek 22:28 (compare 13:6-9; 12:24). It is true that the prophets and diviners mentioned in these passages use utter falsehoods, saying peace where there is none; all the same the men called prophets and diviners are classed together as similar functionaries.
Pure Yahwism in its very basal principle is and must ever have been antagonistic to divination of every kind, though inspirational divination has resemblances to prophetism and even affinities with it. Why then does the Bible appear to speak with two voices, generally prohibiting but at times countenancing various forms of divination? In the actual religion of the Old Testament we have a syncretism in which, though Yahwism forms the substructure, there are constituents from the religions of the native aborigines and the nations around. The underlying thought in all forms of divination is that by employing certain means men are able to obtain knowledge otherwise beyond their reach. The religion of Israel made Yahweh the source of that knowledge and the prophet the medium through which it came to men. We have an analogous example of syncretism resulting in the union of opposite elements in ancient Zarathustraism (Zoroastrianism) which, though in its central principle inconsistent with divination by omens, yet took on from the native Turanian cults of Persia certain forms of divination, especially that by lot (see Lenormant, La Divination, 22 ff). Nor should it be forgotten that the Bible is a library and not a book, and where so many writers, living at widely separated times, have been at work it is natural to look for diversity of teaching, though no one can deny that in fundamental matters Bible authors are wonderfully consistent.
6. Modes of Divination Mentioned in the Bible:
For modes of divination in vogue among the ancient Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, etc., see the relevant works and dictionary articles. The species of divination spoken of in the Bible may be arranged under two heads: (1) those apparently sanctioned, and (2) those condemned in the Bible.
Those Approved and Those Condemned:
(1) Methods of Divination Tacitly or Expressly Sanctioned in the Bible.
(a) The following are instances of inspirational divination:
(i) The case of Balaam has already been cited. He was a Moabite and therefore a heathen soothsayer. His word of blessing or of curse is so potent that whether he blesses or curses his word secures its own realization. So far is his vocation from being censured that it is actually called into the service of Yahweh (see Nu 22 through 24).
(ii) To dreams the Bible assigns an important place as a legitimate means of revealing the future. Such dreams are of two kinds:
(aa) Involuntary or such as come unsought. Even these are regarded as sent for guidance in human affairs. The bulk of the dreams spoken of in the Bible belong to this class: see Gen 20:3,1 (Abimelech); 28:2 f; 31:10-14 (Jacob); 37:5-9 (Joseph; see ASTRONOMY , sec. II, 6); 40:5-21 (Pharaoh's butler and baker); 41:1-35 (Pharaoh); Jdg 7:9-14 (Gideon and an unnamed man); Dan 1:17 (Daniel had understanding of dreams); Dan 2:1-49 (Nebuchadnezzar's dream and its interpretation by Daniel); Mt 1:20; 2:13 f,19 f (Joseph, husband of Mary the virgin); 27:19; see also Jer 23:25 ff, where the lawfulness of prophetic dreams is assumed (compare 23:32, where "lying dreams" imply genuine ones). In the document usually ascribed by modern critics to the Elohist (E), dreams bulk largely as the above examples serve to show. Among the Babylonians belief in the significance of dreams gave rise to a science (oneiromancy) so elaborate that only special interpreters called seers (singular, baru) were considered able to explain them (see Lenormant, op. cit., 143, for examples).
(bb) The other species of dreams consists of such as are induced by what is called "incubation," i.e. by sleeping in a sacred place where the god of the place is believed to reveal his secrets to the sleeper. Herodotus (iv.172) says that the Nasamonians, an Egyptian tribe, used to practice divination by sleeping in the graves of their ancestors. The dreams which then came to them were understood to be revelations of their deified ancestors. See Herod. i.181 for another instance of incubation in Nineveh. We have a reference to this custom in Isa 65:4 ("that sit among the graves"), where Yahweh enters into judgment with the Jews for their sin in yielding to this superstition. Solomon's dream (1 Ki 3:5-15) came to him at the high place of Gibeon.
(b) But the Bible appears in some places to give its approval to some kinds of artificial or (as it may be called) ominal divination.
(i) Sortliege or divination by lot. The use of the lot as a means of ascertaining the will of Deity is referred to at least without expressed censure, and, as the present writer thinks, with tacit approval, in many parts of the Bible. It was by lot that Aaron decided which of the two goats was to be for Yahweh and which for Azazel (Lev 16:7-10). It was by lot that the land of Canaan was divided after the conquest (Nu 26:56 ff; Josh 18; 19). For other Biblical instances see Josh 7:14 (Achan found out by lot); 1 Ch 6:54 ff; 24:5 ff; 25:8 f; 26:13 f; Est 3:7 ("They cast Pur, that is, the lot"; see Century Bible in the place cited.); Neh 10:34; 11:1; Jon 1:7 ("The lot fell upon Jonah"); Mt 27:35; Acts 1:26. In the URIM AND THUMMIM (which see), as explained by modern scholars, the same principle is applied, for these two words, though etymologically still obscure, stand for two objects (pebbles?), one denoting yes or its equivalent, and the other number Whichever the high priest took from his ephod was believed to be the answer to the question asked. In all cases it is taken for granted that the lot cast was an expression and indication of the Divine will.
See AUGURY ,IV , 3.
(ii) Hydromancy, or divination by water. In Gen 44:5 Joseph is represented as practicing this kind of divination and not a word of disapproval is expressed.
See AUGURY ,IV , 2.
(iii)We read in the Old Testament of other signs or omens which are implicitly approved of, thus Jdg 6:36-40 (Gideon's fleece); 1 Sam 14:8-13 (Jonathan decides whether or not he is to attack the Philistines by the words which he may happen to hear them speak).
(2) Modes of Divination Condemned.
The following methods of divination are explicitly or implicitly condemned in the Old Testament:
See ASTROLOGY .
(b) Rhabdomancy, or the use of the divining rod, referred to apparently in Hos 4:12 (which may be paraphrased: "My people ask counsel of a bit of wood, and the rod made thereof answers their questions"); Ezek 8:17 ("They put a rod (EV "the branch") to their nose").
(c) By an examination of the liver of animals; see Ezek 21:21. This mode of divining, hepatoscopy, as it is has been called, was very widespread among the Babylonians, Greeks, Romans, etc., of the ancient world, and it is still in vogue in Borneo, Burma and Uganda. We have no evidence that it was practiced among the Israelites, for in the above passage it is the king of Babylon (Nebuchadnezzar) who is said to have "looked in the liver."
Opinions differ as to how the state of the liver could act as an omen. Jastrow says the liver was considered to be the seat of life, and that where the liver of the animal sacrificed (generally a sheep) was accepted, it took on the character of the deity to whom it was offered. The soul of the animal as seen in the liver became then a reflector of the soul of the god (see EB ,XX , 102 f). On the other hand, Alfred Jeremias says that in the view of the ancient Babylonians the lines and forms of the sheep's liver were regarded as reflecting the universe and its history (The Old Testament in the Light of the Ancient East, I, 61). Neither of these explanations is made probable by its advocates.
(d) By teraphim (compare TERAPHIM ); see 1 Sam 15:23; Ezek 21:21; Zec 10:2.
(e) Necromancy, or consulting the dead; see Lev 19:31; 20:6; Dt 18:11; Isa 8:19; 19:3; see above.
(f) Divination through the sacrifice of children by burning (see Dt 18:10). The context makes it almost certain that the words translated "that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire" (EV; but read and render "that burns his son or his daughter in the fire") refer to a mode of obtaining an oracle (compare 2 Ki 3:27). The Phoenicians and Carthaginians sacrificed their children to Kronos in times of grave national danger or calamity (Porphyry Apud Euseb. Praep. Ev. iv.64,4; Diod. Sic. xx.14).
7. Terms Used in the Old Testament in Connection with Divination:
These are examined in detail in T. Witton Davies' Magic, Divination, and Demonology among the Hebrews and Their Neighbors. See also the article "Divination" in Encyclopedia Biblica by the same writer. The following brief notes must suffice here.
(1) kecem, generally rendered "divination," is a general term for divination of all kinds. In Ezek 21:21 (26) it stands for divination by arrows while in 1 Sam 28:8 it is used of divination through the medium of an 'obh ("familiar spirit"). On the derivation of the word see EB , article "Magic," section 3.
(2) me`onen, probably from a Semitic root (compare Arabic `anna) which denotes to emit a hoarse nasal sound such as was customary in reciting the prescribed formula (seeCHARM ). For "oak of the me`onim" see AUGUR'S OAK . Some say the word means one who divines from the clouds, deriving from `anan, "a cloud," though nothing in the context suggests this sense, and the same remark applies to the meaning "one who smites with the evil eye," making the term a denominative from `ayin, "eye." The usual rendering in the King James Version is plural "observers of times" and in the Revised Version (British and American) "them that practice augury" (Dt. 18:10,14).
(3) The verb nichesh, of which lichesh, is but a variant, is probably a denominative from nachash, "a serpent" (l and n interchange in Hebrew), denoting "to hiss," "to whisper" (like a serpent), then "to utter divinatory formulas." As it is used for so many kinds of divination, W. R. Smith concludes that it came to be a general term for divine. The participle of this verb is translated "enchanter" in Dt 18:10, the cognate verb, "to use enchantments" in Lev 19:26; 2 Ki 21:6; 2 Ch 33:6, and the corresponding noun "enchantment" in Nu 23:23; 24:1.
(4) gazerin, literally, "cutters," i.e. such as kill (in Arab, the cognate verb = "to slaughter") for the purpose of examining the liver or entrails as omens. Perhaps the etymology implies "sacrifice," animals being sacrificed as an appeal to deity. The word occurs only in Dan (2:27; 4:7 (4); 5:7,11), and is translated "soothsayers." Some think they were "astrologers," the etymology in that case referring to the dividing of the heavens with a view, by casting the horoscope, to forecasting the future.
(5) 'ashshaph (the King James Version "astrologer," the Revised Version (British and American) "enchanter"), occurs only in Dan in the Hebrew (1:20; 2:2) and in the Aramaic (2:10; 4:4 (7), etc.) parts of the book. The term is probably taken from the Babylonian and denotes a magician and especially an exorcist rather than a diviner.
(6) kasda'im, the same word as the Greek (Chaldaioi) (English Verisons, "Chaldeans"), denotes in Dan (1:4, etc.) where alone it occurs, not the people so designated but a class of astrologers. This usage (common in classical writers) arose after the fall of the Babylonian empire, when the only Chaldeans known were astrologers and soothsayers. See further,MAGIC . For "spirit of divination" (Acts 16:16) see PYTHON ;PHILIPPI .
Inspirational divination and Old Testament prophecy have much in common. Both imply the following conditions: (1) the primitive instinct that, craves for secret knowledge, especially that relating to the future; (2) the belief that such knowledge is possessed by certain spiritual beings who are willing on certain terms to impart it; (3) such secret knowledge is imparted generally to special classes of men (rarely women) called diviners or (Bab) seers and prophets.
Many anthropologists (Tylor, Frazer, etc.) and Old Testament scholars (Wellhausen, W. Robertson Smith, etc.) consider prophecy to be but an outgrowth and higher form of divination. The older theologians almost to a man, and a goodly number of moderns, take precisely the opposite view, that divination is a corruption of prophecy. Probably neither view is strictly true. Sometimes in human life we find evidences of progress from lower to higher. Sometimes the process is the very reverse. It is important to take notice of the differences as well as the resemblances between the diviner and the prophet.
(1) The Old Testament prophet believes in a personal God whose spokesman he considers himself to be. When he spoke or wrote it was because he was, at least professedly, inspired and informed by Yahweh. "Thus says Yahweh," was the usual formula with which he introduced his oracles. The Greek and Roman mantis, on the other hand, worked himself up to the necessary ecstatic state by music, drugs (intoxicants, etc.), sacrificial smoke and the like. Sometimes it has been thought a sufficient means of divination to swallow the vital portions of birds and beasts of omen. It was believed that by eating the hearts of crows, or moles, or of hawks, men took into their bodies the presaging soul of the creature (Frazer, Golden Bough (NOTE: Separation, distinction: "I will put a division (the Revised Version, margin "sign of deliverance") between my people and thy people" (Ex 8:23). The Hebrew word here is pedhuth =" ransom," "redemption" (compare Ps 111:9), but the reading is doubtful. The King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) follow Septuagint, Syriac and Vulgate, which render "set a distinction," perhaps on the basis of a different reading from that of our Hebrew text.), II, 355).
(2) The mantis practiced his art as a remunerative occupation, charging high fees and refusing in most cases to ply his calling without adequate remuneration. The local oracle shrines (Delphi, Clavis, etc.) were worked for personal and political ends. The Old Testament prophet, on the other hand, claimed to speak as he was bidden by his God. It was with him a matter of conviction as to what lives men ought to live, what state of heart they should cultivate. So far from furthering his own material interests, as he could by saying what kings and other dignitaries wished to hear, he boldly denounced the sins of the time, even when, as often, he had to condemn the conduct of kings and the policy of governments. Look, for example, at Isaiah's fearless condemnation of the conduct of Ahaz in summoning the aid of Assyria (Isa 7 ff), and at the scathing words with which Jeremiah censured the doings of the nation's leaders in his day (Jer 9:36, etc.), though both these noble prophets suffered severely for their courage, especially Jeremiah, who stands out as perhaps the finest recorded example of what, in the face of formidable opposition, the religious teacher ought ever to be. Of Micaiah ben Iralab, King Ahab of Israel said, "I hate him; for he doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil." What reward did this prophet have for his fidelity to his conscience and his God? Imprisonment (1 Ki 22:1-35). Had he pleased the king by predicting a happy, prosperous future that was never to be, he would have been clothed in gorgeous robes and lodged in a very palace.
LITERATURE.
In addition to the references above and the full bibliography prefixed to the present writer's book named above (Magic, etc.), note the following: Bouche-Leclercq, Histoire de la divination dans l'antiquite; E. B. Tylor, Primitive Culture 3, I, 78-81; 117-33; II, 155; J. G. Frazer, Golden Bough 2, I, 346; II, 355; III, 342, et passim, and the articles in the principal Bible dictionaries.
T. Witton Davies
See PUNISHMENTS .
di-vin, di-vin'-er.
See AUGURY ;ASTROLOGY ;DIVINATION .
di-vizh'-un: Used in English Versions of the Bible in the following senses:
(1) A separate body of people (a) of the tribal divisions of Israel (Josh 11:23; 12:7; 18:10); (b) of sections of a tribe, "the divisions of Reuben" (Jdg 5:15,16 the King James Version; but the Revised Version (British and American) rightly substitutes "the watercourses of Reuben"; in Job 20:17 the same word is rendered "rivers"); (c) of the (late) organization of priests and Levites into classes or families who ministered in the temple in rotation; translated "courses" generally in the King James Version, and always in the Revised Version (British and American) (1 Ch 24:1; 26:1,12,19; Neh 11:36; compare 2 Ch 35:5). Much prominence is given by the Chronicler to the 24 classes of priests, singers, and doorkeepers, who served in turns in the temple (compare Lk 1:5,8).
(3) In the New Testament, dissension, disunion, schism (Lk 12:51; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 3:3 the King James Version, omitted the Revised Version (British and American); 1 Cor 1:10; 11:18; Gal 5:20).
D. Miall Edwards
see DIVORCE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT ;DIVORCE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
to apostasiou): The Scripture doctrine of divorce is very simple. It is contained in Mt 19:3-12.
We are not called upon to treat of divorce in the Mosaic legislation (Dt 24:1-4). That was passed upon by Jesus in the above discussion and by Him ruled out of existence in His system of religion. After Jesus had spoken as above, the Mosaic permission of divorce became a dead letter. There could not be practice under it among His disciples. So such Old Testament divorce is now a mere matter of antiquarian curiosity.
It may be of interest in passing to note that the drift of the Mosaic legislation was restrictive of a freedom of divorce that had been practiced before its enactment. It put in legal proceedings to bar the personal will of one of the parties. It recognized marriage as a social institution which should not be disrupted without reference to the rights of society in it. In this restrictive character "the law is become our tutor to bring us unto Christ" (Gal 3:24). But here, as in numerous other instances, Christ went behind the enactments to primitive original principles whose recognition would make the law of none effect, because no practice was to be permitted under it. Thus the Old Testament is disposed of.
Of course what Jesus said will dominate the New. In fact, Jesus is the only author in the New Testament who has treated of divorce. It has been thought that Paul had the subject in hand. But we shall find on examination, further along, that he did not. We need then look nowhere but to Mt 19 for the Scripture doctrine of divorce.
True, we have other reports of what Jesus said (Mk 10:2-12; Lk 16:18). But in Mt 19 we have the fullest report, containing everything that is reported elsewhere and one or two important observations that the other writers have not included. Luke has only one verse where Matthew has ten. Luke's verse is in no necessary connection with context. It seems to be a mere memorandum among others of the spiritual or ethical teachings of Christ. Luke however caught the gist of the whole teaching about divorce in recording the prohibition to put away one wife and marry another. The records in Mt 19 and Mk 10 cover one and the same occasion. But there is nothing in Mark that is not in Matthew; and the latter contains nearly a third more of text than the former. There is nothing, however, essential in Matthew that is not in Mark, save the clause "except for fornication." That exception will be treated further along. We seem to be justified then in saying that the total doctrine of the Scripture pertaining to divorce is contained in Mt 19.
Attention must be called to the fact that, in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:27-32), Jesus treated of divorce, and that in every essential particular it agrees with the elaboration in Mt 19. Jesus there as plainly as in the argument with the Pharisees put Moses' permission of divorce under ban; as plainly there declared the putting away of one partner to marry another person to be adultery. This may also be noticed, that the exception to the absolute prohibition is in the text of the Sermon on the Mount.
We have then a summary of the New Testament doctrine of divorce stated by Christ Himself as follows: "Whosoever shall put away his wife, except for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery" (Mt 19:9). This puts Him in line with the ideal of the monogamic, indissoluble family which pervades the whole of the Old Testament.
It may be well here to treat of the exception which Christ made in His rule to the indissolubility of marriage. It is very widely maintained in the Christian church that there should be no divorce for any cause whatever. This position is in plain contradiction to Christ's teaching in Mt 15 and Mt 19. One of the grounds adduced for this denial of divorce in case a partner is guilty of adultery is that Luke and Mark do not record the exception. It is a difficult matter to invade the psychology of writers who lived nearly two thousand years ago and tell why they did not include something in their text which someone else did in his. Neither Luke nor Mark were personal disciples of the Lord. They wrote second hand. Matthew was a personal disciple of Christ and has twice recorded the exception. It will be a new position in regard to judgment on human evidence when we put the silence of absentees in rank above the twice expressed report of one in all probability present--one known to be a close personal attendant.
This may be said: Matthew's record stands in ancient manuscript authority, Greek and also the Versions. And on this point let it be noted that the testimony of the manuscripts was up before the English and American Revisers, and they have deliberately reaffirmed the text of 1611 and given us the exception in Christ's rule in each place (Mt 5:32; 19:9). This makes the matter as nearly res adjudicata as can be done by human wisdom.
Let us consider the rationality of the exception. That feature has had scant attention from theologians and publicists, yet it will bear the closest scrutiny. In fact it is a key to much that is explanatory of the basic principle of the family. To begin with, the exception is not on its face an after-thought of some transcriber, but was called out by the very terms of the question of the Pharisees: "Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?" This plainly called for a specification from Jesus of exceptions which he would allow to the rule against divorce. It is fortunate that the Pharisees asked the question in the form they did, for that put on Jesus the necessity of enumerating such exceptions as he would allow. He mentioned one, and but one in reply. That puts the matter of exceptions under the rule in logic: Expressio unius-exclusio alterius. All other pretenses for divorce were deliberately swept aside by Christ--a fact that should be remembered when other causes are sought to be foisted in alongside this one allowed by Christ. The question may come up, Whose insight is likely to be truest?
Why, then, will reason stand by this exception? Because adultery is per se destructive of monogamic family life. Whoever, married, is guilty of adultery has taken another person into family relation. Children may be born to that relation--are born to it. Not to allow divorce in such case is to force an innocent party in marriage to live in a polygamous state. There is the issue stated so plainly that "the wayfaring man need not err therein," and "he who runs may read," and "he who reads may run."
It is the hand of an unerring Master that has made fornication a ground for divorce from the bond of matrimony and limited divorce to that single cause. Whichever way we depart from strict practice under the Savior's direction we land in polygamy. The society that allows by its statutes divorce for any other cause than the one that breaks the monogamic bond, is simply acting in aid of polygamy, consecutive if not contemporaneous.
Advocates of the freedom of divorce speak of the above view as "the ecclesiastical." That is an attempt to use the argument ad invidiam. The church of Christ held and holds its views, not because ecclesiastics taught it, but because Christ taught it, and that in His teaching we have a statement out from the righteousness, wisdom, insight and rationality of the all-wise God.
Paul is the only other New Testament author besides Christ who has been supposed to treat of divorce. But a careful examination of Paul's writing will disclose the fact that he has nowhere discussed the question--for what cause or causes a man might put away his wife, or a woman her husband, with liberty of marriage to another person. If Paul has treated of divorce at all it is in 1 Cor 7. But even a careless reading of that chapter will disclose the fact that Paul is not discussing the question for what causes marriage might be disrupted, but the question of manners and morals in the relation. Paul has not modified Christ in any respect. It has been supposed that in 7:15 Paul has allowed divorce to a believing partner who has been deserted by one unbelieving, and so he has been sometimes understood as adding desertion to the exception Christ made as cause for divorce.
But Paul has not said in that verse or anywhere else that a Christian partner deserted by a heathen may be married to someone else. All he said is: "If the unbelieving departeth, let him depart: the brother or the sister is not under bondage (dedoulotai) in such cases: but God hath called us in peace." To say that a deserted partner "hath not been enslaved" is not to say that he or she may be remarried. What is meant is easily inferred from the spirit that dominates the whole chapter, and that is that everyone shall accept the situation in which God has called him just as he is. "Be quiet" is a direction that hovers over every situation. If you are married, so remain. If unmarried, so remain. If an unbelieving partner deserts, let him or her desert. So remain. "God hath called us in peace." Nothing can be more beautiful in the morals of the marriage relation than the direction given by Paul in this chapter for the conduct of all parties in marriage in all trials.
Many reasons might be given why Paul could not have given liberty of remarriage, besides the one that he did not in his text; but attention should be called to the fact that such an assumption of authority in divorce would soon have brought him into conflict with the Roman government. Paul's claim that he was a Roman citizen was of some value to himself. Would not some Roman citizen have claimed to scrutinize pretty closely Paul's right to issue a decree of divorce against him because he had "departed" from a wife who had become a Christian? There would be two sides to such divorces. Would not Paul, careful, shrewd, politic as he was, have known that, and have avoided an open rupture with a government that did not tolerate much interference with its laws? That neither Paul nor anyone else ever put such construction upon his language, is evidenced by the fact that there is no record in history of a single case where it was attempted for 400 years after Paul was in his grave, and the Roman Empire had for a century been Christian. Then we wait 400 years more before we find the suggestion repeated. That no use was ever made of such construction of Paul in the whole era of the adjustment of Christianity with heathenism is good evidence that it was never there to begin with. So we shall pass Paul as having in no respect modified the doctrine of divorce laid down by Christ in Mt 19.
3. Remedies for Marriage Ills:
In all civilized countries the machinery of legislation and law can always be open for removal or relief of troubles in marriage without proceeding to its annulment. If a father is cruel to his children, we do not abolish the parental relation, but punish the father for his cruelty. If he deserts his children, we need not assist him to rear other children whom he can desert in turn, but we can punish him for his desertion. What can be done by law in case of parent and child can be done in case of husband and wife. By putting in absolute divorce (frequently for guilty and innocent alike) we invite the very evils we seek to cure. We make it the interest of a dissatisfied party to create a situation that a court will regard as intolerable, and so he or she may go free.
Then by affording an easy way out of the troubles of married life we are inviting carelessness about entering marriage. We say by divorce statutes to a young woman: "If your husband deserts you, you may have another. If he is cruel, you may have another. If he fails to support you, you may have another. If he is drunken, you may have another. If he is incompatible or makes you unhappy, you may have another"--and yet others beyond these. When an easy road is thus made out of marriage, will there be proper caution about entering into marriage? By just as much as a crevice for relief of the miseries of married life is opened by divorce, by so much the flood gates are opened into those miseries. The more solemnly society is impressed that the door of marriage does not swing outward as well as inward the more of happiness and blessing will it find in the institution.
See FAMILY .
C. Caverno
di-vors':
1. Subordinate Position of Woman:
Woman, among the Hebrews, as among most nations of antiquity, occupied a subordinate position. Though the Hebrew wife and mother was treated with more consideration than her sister in other lands, even in other Semitic countries, her position nevertheless was one of inferiority and subjection. The marriage relation from the standpoint of Hebrew legislation was looked upon very largely as a business affair, a mere question of property. A wife, nevertheless, was, indeed, in most homes in Israel, the husband's "most valued possession." And yet while this is true, the husband was unconditionally and unreservedly the head of the family in all domestic relations. His rights and prerogatives were manifest on every side. Nowhere is this more evident than in the matter of divorce. According to the laws of Moses a husband, under certain circumstances, might divorce his wife; on the other hand, if at all possible, it was certainly very difficult for a wife to put away her husband. Unfortunately a double standard of morality in matters pertaining to the sexes is, at least, as old as Moses (see Ex 7 through 11).
2. Law of Divorce: Deuteronomy 24:1-4:
The Old Testament law concerning divorce, apparently quite clear, is recorded most fully in Dt 24:1 ff. A perusal of the commentaries will, nevertheless, convince anyone that there are difficulties of interpretation. The careful reader will notice that the renderings of the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) differ materially. the King James Version reads in the second part of Dt 24:1: "then let him write a bill," etc., the Revised Version (British and American) has "that he shall write," etc., while the Hebrew original has neither "then" nor "that," but the simple conjunction "and." There is certainly no command in the words of Moses, but, on the other hand, a clear purpose to render the proceeding more difficult in the case of the husband. Moses' aim was "to regulate and thus to mitigate an evil which he could not extirpate." The evident purpose was, as far as possible, to favor the wife, and to protect her against an unceremonious expulsion from her home and children.
As already suggested, marriage among the Hebrews, as among most Orientals, was more a legal contract than the result of love or affection. It would be, however, a great mistake to assume that deep love was not often present, for at all times the domestic relations of the Hebrew married couple have compared most favorably with those of any other people, ancient or modern. In its last analysis it was, nevertheless, a business transaction. The husband or his family had, as a rule, to pay a certain dowry to the parents or guardians of the betrothed before the marriage was consummated. A wife thus acquired could easily be regarded as a piece of property, which, without great difficulty, could be disposed of in case the husband, for any reason, were disposed to rid himself of an uncongenial companion and willing to forfeit the mohar which he had paid for his wife. The advantage was always with the husband, and yet a wife was not utterly helpless, for she, too, though practically without legal rights, could make herself so intolerably burdensome and hateful in the home that almost any husband would gladly avail himself of his prerogatives and write her a bill of divorcement. Thus, though a wife could not divorce her husband, she could force him to divorce her.
4. Divorce Applicable Only to Wives:
The following words of Professor Israel Abrahams, Cambridge, England, before "the Divorce Commission" (London, November 21, 1910), are to the point: "In all such cases where the wife was concerned as the moving party she could only demand that her husband should divorce her. The divorce was always from first to last, in Jewish law, the husband's act." The common term used in the Bible for divorce is shilluach 'ishshah, "the sending away of a wife" (Dt 22:19,29). We never read of "the sending away of a husband." The feminine participle, gerushah, "the woman thrust out," is the term applied to a divorced woman. The masculine form is not found.
The Mosaic law apparently, on the side of the husband, made it as difficult as possible for him to secure a divorce. No man could unceremoniously and capriciously dismiss his wife without the semblance of a trial. In case one became dissatisfied with his wife, (1) he had to write her a BILL OF DIVORCEMENT (which see) drawn up by some constituted legal authority and in due legal form. In the very nature of the case, such a tribunal would use moral suasion to induce an adjustment; and, failing in this, would see to it that the law in the case, whatever it might be, would be upheld. (2) Such a bill or decree must be placed in the hand of the divorced wife. (3) She must be forced to leave the premises of her former husband. Divorce was denied two classes of husbands: (1) The man who had falsely accused his wife of antenuptial infidelity (Dt 22:13 ff), and (2) a person who had seduced. a virgin (Dt 22:28 f). In addition, a heavy penalty had to be paid to the father of such damsels.
It is probable that a divorced wife who had not contracted a second marriage or had been guilty of adultery might be reunited to her husband. But in case she had married the second time she was forever barred from returning to her first husband, even if the second husband had divorced her or had died (Dt 24:3 f). Such a law would serve as an obstacle to hasty divorces.
Divorces from the earliest times were common among the Hebrews. All rabbis agree that a separation, though not desirable, was quite lawful. The only source of dispute among them was as to what constituted a valid reason or just cause.
6. Grounds of Divorce (Doubtful Meaning of Deuteronomy 24:1):
The language in Dt 24:1 ff has always been in dispute. The Hebrew words, `erwath dabhar, on which a correct interpretation depends, are not easy of solution, though many exegetes, influenced possibly by some preconceived notion, pass over them quite flippantly. The phrase troubled the Jewish rabbis of olden times, as it does Jewish and Christian commentators and translators in our day. the King James Version renders the two words, "some uncleanness," and in the margin, "matter of nakedness." The latter, though a literal translation of the Hebrew, is quite unintelligible. the Revised Version (British and American) and the American Standard Revised Version both have: "some unseemly thing." Professor Driver translates the same words "some indecency." The German the Revised Version (British and American) (Kautzsch) has "etwas Widerwartiges" ("something repulsive"). We know of no modern version which makes `erwath dabhar the equivalent of fornication or adultery. And, indeed, in the very nature of the case, we are forced to make the words apply to a minor fault or crime, for, by the Mosaic law, the penalty for adultery was death (Dt 22:20 ff). It is, however, a question whether the extreme penalty was ever enforced. It is well known that at, and some time before, the time of our Saviour, there were two schools among the Jewish rabbis, that of Shammai and that of Hillel. Shammai and his followers maintained that 'erwath dabhar signified nothing less than unchastity or adultery, and argued that only this crime justified a man in divorcing his wife. Hillel and his disciples went to the other extreme. They placed great stress upon the words, "if she find no favor in his eyes" immediately preceding `erwath dabhar (Dt 24:1), and contended that divorce should be granted for the flimsiest reason: such as the spoiling of a dish either by burning or careless seasoning. Some of the rabbis boldly taught that a man had a perfect right to dismiss his wife, if he found another woman whom he liked better, or who was more beautiful (Mishnah, GiTTin, 14 10). Here are some other specifications taken from the same book: "The following women may be divorced: She who violates the Law of Moses, e.g. causes her husband to eat food which has not been tithed. .... She who vows, but does not keep her vows. .... She who goes out on the street with her hair loose, or spins in the street, or converses (flirts) with any man, or is a noisy woman. What is a noisy woman? It is one who speaks in her own house so loud that the neighbors may hear her." It would be easy to extend the list, for the Mishna and rabbinic writings are full of such laws.
From what has been said, it is clear that adultery was not the only valid reason for divorce. Besides, the word adultery had a peculiar significance in Jewish law, which recognized polygamy and concubinage as legitimate. Thus a Hebrew might have two or more wives or concubines, and might have intercourse with a slave or bondwoman, even if married, without being guilty of the crime of adultery (Lev 19:20), for adultery, according to Jewish law, was possible only when a man dishonored the "free wife" of a Hebrew (Lev 20:10 ff).
Divorcement, Bill of:
This expression, found in Dt 24:1,3; Isa 50:1; Jer 3:8 is the translation of the Hebrew cepher kerithuth. The two words, literally rendered, signify a document or book of cutting off, i.e. a certificate of divorce given by a husband to a wife, so as to afford her the opportunity or privilege of marrying another man. The Hebrew term is rendered by the Septuagint biblion apostasion. This is also found in the New Testament (Mk 10:4). Mt 5:31 has "writing of divorcement" in English Versions of the Bible, but Mt 19:7 the King James Version has "writing," while the Revised Version (British and American) and the American Standard Revised Version have "bill." The certificate of divorce is called geT, plural giTTin, in the Talmud. There is an entire chapter devoted to the subjects in the Mishna It is not positively known when the custom of writing bills of divorcement commenced, but there are references to such documents in the earliest Hebrew legislation. The fact that Joseph had in mind the putting away of his espoused wife, Mary, without the formality of a bill or at least of a public procedure proves that a decree was not regarded as absolutely necessary (Mt 1:19). The following was the usual form of a decree:
"On the____day of the week____in the month____in the year____from the beginning of the world, according to the common computation in the province of____I____the son of____by whatever name I may be known, of the town of____with entire consent of mind, and without any constraint, have divorced, dismissed and expelled thee____daughter of____by whatever name thou art called, of the town who hast been my wife hitherto; But now I have dismissed thee____the daughter of____by whatever name thou art called, of the town of____so as to be free at thy own disposal, to marry whomsoever thou pleasest, without hindrance from anyone, from this day for ever. Thou art therefore free for anyone (who would marry thee). Let this be thy bill of divorce from me, a writing of separation and expulsion, according to the law of Moses and Israel.
____, the son of____, witness
Spiritual Application.
The Hebrew prophets regarded Yahweh not only as the father and king of the chosen people, and thus entitled to perfect obedience and loyalty on their part, but they conceived of Him as a husband married to Israel. Isaiah, speaking to his nation, says: "For thy Maker is thy husband; Yahweh of hosts is his name" (54:5). Jeremiah too makes use of similar language in the following: "Return, O backsliding children, saith Yahweh; for I am a husband unto you" (3:14). It is perfectly natural that New Testament writers should have regarded Christ's relation to His church under the same figure. Paul in 2 Cor says: "I am jealous over you with a godly jealousy: for I espoused you to one husband, that I might present you as a pure virgin to Christ" (11:2); see also Mt 9:15; Jn 3:29; Rev 19:7. Any unfaithfulness or sin on the part of Israel was regarded as spiritual adultery, which necessarily broke off the spiritual ties, and divorced the nation from God (Isa 1:21; Ezek 16:22; Rev 2:22).
See also MARRIAGE .
LITERATURE.
Amram, Jewish Law of Divorce according to the Bible and Talmud, London, 1897; Abrahams, Jewish Life in the Middle Ages, London, 1896; Mackie, Bible Manners and Customs, London, 1898; The Mishna, Translated into English, De Sola and Raphall, London, 1843; Benzinger, Hebraische Archdalogie, Freiburg, 1894; Nowack, Lehrbuch der hebraischen Archdologie, 1894.
W. W. Davies