Smith's Bible Dictionary

Potipherah — Pyrrhus

Potipherah

Potiph’erah, or Potiphe’rah, was priest or prince of On, and his daughter Asenath was given Joseph to wife by Pharaoh. Genesis 41:45, Genesis 41:50; Genesis 46:20. (b.c. 1715.)

Potsherd

Potsherd, also in Authorized Version “sherd,” a broken piece of earthenware. Proverbs 26:23.

Potter’s field, The, a piece of ground which, according to the statement of St. Matthew, Matthew 27:7, was purchased by the priests with the thirty pieces of silver rejected by Judas, and converted into a burial-place for Jews not belonging to the city. [ACELDAMA.]

Pottery

Pottery. The art of pottery is one of the most common and most ancient of all manufactures. It is abundantly evident, both that the Hebrews used earthenware vessels in the wilderness and that the potter’s trade was afterward carried on in Palestine. They had themselves been concerned in the potter’s trade in Egypt, Psalm 81:6, and the wall-paintings minutely illustrate the Egyptian process. The clay, when dug, was trodden by men’s feet so as to form a paste, Isaiah 41:25; 15:7; then placed by the potter on the wheel beside which he sat, and shaped by him with his hands. How early the wheel came into use in Palestine is not known, but it seems likely that it was adopted from Egypt. Isaiah 45:9; Jeremiah 18:3. The vessel was then smoothed and coated with a glaze, and finally burnt in a furnace. There was at Jerusalem a royal establishment of potters, 1 Chronicles 4:23, from whose employment, and from the fragments cast away in the process, the Potter’s Field perhaps received its name. Isaiah 30:14.

Eastern Potter.

Pound

Pound.

1. A weight. [See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.] 2. A sum of money, put in the Old Testament, 1 Kings 10:17; Ezra 2:69; Nehemiah 7:71, for the Hebrew muneh, worth in silver about $25. In the parable of the ten pounds, Luke 19:12-27, the reference appears to be to a Greek pound, a weight used as a money of account, of which sixty went to the talent. It was worth $15 to $17.

Prætorium

Prætorium (Praetorium) — (in the Revised Version translated palace), (Matthew 27:27; John 18:28; John 18:33; John 19:3) the headquarters of the Roman military governor, wherever he happened to be. In time of peace some one of the best buildings of the city which, was the residence of the proconsul or praetor, was selected for this purpose. Thus at Caesarea that of Herod the Great was occupied by Felix, (Acts 23:35) and at Jerusalem the new palace erected by the same prince was the residence of Pilate. After the Roman power was established in Judea, a Roman guard was always maintained in the Antonia. The praetorian camp at Rome, to which St. Paul refers, (Philippians 1:13) was erected by the emperor Tiberius, acting under the advice of Sejanus. It stood outside the walls, at some distance short of the fourth milestone. St. Paul appears to have been permitted, for the space of two years, to lodge, so to speak, "within the rules" of the praetorium, (Acts 28:30) Although still under the custody of a soldier.

Prayer

Prayer. The object of this article will be to touch briefly on—

1. The doctrine of Scripture as to the nature and efficacy of prayer; 2. Its directions as to time, place, and manner of prayer; 3. Its types and examples of prayer.

1. Scripture does not give any theoretical explanation of the mystery which attaches to prayer. The difficulty of understanding its real efficacy arises chiefly from two sources: from the belief that man lives under general laws, which in all cases must be fulfilled unalterably; and the opposing belief that he is master of his own destiny, and need pray for no external blessing. Now, Scripture, while, by the doctrine of spiritual influence, it entirely disposes of the latter difficulty, does not so entirely solve that part of the mystery which depends on the nature of God. It places it clearly before us, and emphasizes most strongly those doctrines on which the difficulty turns. Yet, while this is so, on the other hand the instinct of prayer is solemnly sanctioned and enforced on every page. Not only is its subjective effect asserted, but its real objective efficacy, as a means appointed by God for obtaining blessing, is both implied and expressed in the plainest terms. Thus, as usual in the case of such mysteries, the two apparently opposite truths are emphasized, because they are needful to man’s conception of his relation to God; their reconcilement is not, perhaps cannot be, fully revealed. For, in fact, it is involved in that inscrutable mystery which attends on the conception of any free action of man as necessary for the working out of the general laws of God’s unchangeable will. At the same time it is clearly implied that such a reconcilement exists, and that all the apparently-isolated and independent exertions of man’s spirit in prayer are in some way perfectly subordinated to the one supreme will of God, so as to form a part of his scheme of providence. It is also implied that the key to the mystery lies in the fact of man’s spiritual unity with God in Christ, and of the consequent gift of the Holy Spirit. So also is it said of the spiritual influence of the Holy Ghost on each individual mind that while “we know not what to pray for,” the indwelling “Spirit makes intercession for the saints, according to the will of God.” Romans 8:26, Romans 8:27. Here, as probably in all other cases, the action of the Holy Spirit on the soul is to free agents what the laws of nature are to things inanimate, and is the power which harmonizes free individual action with the universal will of God. 2. There are no directions as to prayer given in the Mosaic law: the duty is rather taken for granted, as an adjunct to sacrifice, than enforced or elaborated. It is hardly conceivable that, even from the beginning, public prayer did not follow every public sacrifice. Such a practice is alluded to in Luke 1:10 as common; and in one instance, at the offering of the first-fruits, it was ordained in a striking form. Deuteronomy 26:12-15. In later times it certainly grew into a regular service both in the temple and in the synagogue. But, besides this public prayer, it was the custom of all at Jerusalem to go up to the temple, at regular hours if possible, for private prayer, see Luke 18:10; Acts 3:1; and those who were absent were wont to “open their windows toward Jerusalem,” and pray “toward” the place of God’s presence. 1 Kings 8:46-49; Psalm 5:7; Psalm 28:2; Psalm 138:2; Daniel 6:10. The regular hours of prayer seem to have been three (see Psalm 55:17; Daniel 6:10): “the evening,” that is, the ninth hour, Acts 3:1; Acts 10:3, the hour of the evening sacrifice, Daniel 9:21; the “morning,” that is, the third hour, Acts 2:15, that of the morning sacrifice; and the sixth hour, or “noonday.” Grace before meat would seem to have been a common practice. See Matthew 15:36; Acts 27:35. The posture of prayer among the Jews seems to have been most often standing, 1 Samuel 1:26; Matthew 6:5; Mark 11:25; Luke 18:11; unless the prayer were offered with especial solemnity and humiliation, which was naturally expressed by kneeling, 1 Kings 8:54; comp. 2 Chronicles 6:13; Ezra 9:5; Psalm 95:6; Daniel 6:10, or prostration. Joshua 7:6; 1 Kings 18:42; Nehemiah 8:6. 3. The only form of prayer given for perpetual use in the Old Testament is the one in Deuteronomy 26:5-15, connected with the offering of tithes and first-fruits, and containing in simple form the important elements of prayer, acknowledgment of God’s mercy, self-dedication, and prayer for future blessing. To this may perhaps be added the threefold blessing of Numbers 6:24-26, couched as it is in a precatory form, and the short prayer of Moses, Numbers 10:35, Numbers 10:36, at the moving and resting of the cloud, the former of which was the germ of the Psalm 68th Psalm. But of the prayers recorded in the Old Testament the two most remarkable are those of Solomon at the dedication of the temple, 1 Kings 8:23-53, and of Joshua the high priest, and his colleagues, after the captivity. Nehemiah 9:5-38. It appears from the question of the disciples in Luke 11:1, and from Jewish tradition, that the chief teachers of the day gave special forms of prayer to their disciples, as the badge of their discipleship and the best fruits of their learning. All Christian prayer is, of course, based on the Lord’s Prayer; but its spirit is also guided by that of his prayer in Gethsemane and of the prayer recorded by St. John, John 17, the beginning of Christ’s great work of intercession. The influence of these prayers is more distinctly traced in the prayers contained in the epistles, see Romans 16:25-27; Ephesians 3:14-21; Philippians 1:3-11; Colossians 1:9-15; Hebrews 13:20, Hebrews 13:21; 1 Peter 5:10, 1 Peter 5:11, etc., than in those recorded in the Acts. The public prayer probably in the first instance took much of its form and style from the prayers of the synagogues. In the record of prayers accepted and granted by God, we observe, as always, a special adaptation to the period of his dispensation to which they belong. In the patriarchal period, they have the simple and childlike tone of domestic supplication for the ordinary and apparently trivial incidents of domestic life. In the Mosaic period they assume a more solemn tone and a national bearing, chiefly that of direct intercession for the chosen people. More rarely are they for individuals. A special class are those which precede and refer to the exercise of miraculous power. In the New Testament they have a more directly spiritual bearing. It would seem the intention of Holy Scripture to encourage all prayer, more especially intercession, in all relations and for all righteous objects.

Presents

Presents. [GIFT.]

President

President (sârac or sârecâ, only used Daniel 6, the Chaldee equivalent for Hebrew shôtêr, probably from sara, Zend. a “head”), a high officer in the Persian court, a chief, a president, used of the three highest ministers.

Priest

Priest. The English word is derived from the Greek presbyter, signifying an “elder” (Heb. côhên). Origin.—The idea of a priesthood connects itself in all its forms, pure or corrupted, with the consciousness, more or less distinct, of sin. Men feel that they have broken a law. The power above them is holier than they are, and they dare not approach it. They crave for the intervention of some one of whom they can think as likely to be more acceptable than themselves. He must offer up their prayers, thanksgivings, sacrifices. He becomes their representative in “things pertaining unto God.” He may become also (though this does not always follow) the representative of God to man. The functions of the priest and prophet may exist in the same person. No trace of a hereditary or caste priesthood meets us in the worship of the patriarchal age. Once and once only does the word côhên meet us as belonging to a ritual earlier than the time of Abraham. Melchizedek is “the priest of the most high God.” Genesis 14:18. In the worship of the patriarchs themselves, the chief of the family, as such, acted as the priest. The office descended with the birthright, and might apparently be transferred with it.

When established.—The priesthood was first established in the family of Aaron, and all the sons of Aaron were priests. They stood between the high priest on the one hand and the Levites on the other. [HIGH PRIEST; LEVITES.] The ceremony of their consecration is described in Exodus 29; Leviticus 8.

Dress.—The dress which the priests wore during their ministrations consisted of linen drawers, with a close-fitting cassock, also of linen, white, but with a diamond or chess-board pattern on it. This came nearly to the feet, and was to be worn in its garment shape. Comp. John 19:23. The white cassock was gathered round the body with a girdle of needle-work, in which, as in the more gorgeous belt of the high priest, blue, purple, and scarlet were intermingled with white, and worked in the form of flowers. Exodus 28:39, Exodus 28:40; Exodus 39:2; Ezekiel 44:17-19. Upon their heads they were to wear caps or bonnets in the form of a cup-shaped flower, also of fine linen. In all their acts of ministration they were to be barefooted.

Egyptian High Priest in Full Dress.

Duties.—The chief duties of the priests were to watch over the fire on the altar of burnt offering, and to keep it burning evermore both by day and night, Leviticus 6:12; 2 Chronicles 13:11; to feed the golden lamp outside the vail with oil, Exodus 27:20, Exodus 27:21; Leviticus 24:2; to offer the morning and evening sacrifices, each accompanied with a meat offering and a drink offering, at the door of the tabernacle. Exodus 29:38-44. They were also to teach the children of Israel the statutes of the Lord. Leviticus 10:11; Deuteronomy 33:10; 2 Chronicles 15:3; Ezekiel 44:23, Ezekiel 44:24. During the journeys in the wilderness it belonged to them to cover the ark and all the vessels of the sanctuary with a purple or scarlet cloth before the Levites might approach them. Numbers 4:5-15. As the people started on each day’s march they were to blow “an alarm” with long silver trumpets. Numbers 10:1-8. Other instruments of music might be used by the more highly-trained Levites and the schools of the prophets, but the trumpets belonged only to the priests. The presence of the priests on the field of battle, 1 Chronicles 12:23, 1 Chronicles 12:27; 2 Chronicles 20:21, 2 Chronicles 20:22, led, in the later periods of Jewish history, to the special appointment at such times of a war priests. Other functions were hinted at in Deuteronomy which might have given them greater influence as the educators and civilizers of the people. They were to act (whether individually or collectively does not distinctly appear) as a court of appeal in the more difficult controversies in criminal or civil cases. Deuteronomy 17:8-13. It must remain doubtful, however, how far this order kept its ground during the storms and changes that followed. Functions such as these were clearly incompatible with the common activities of men.

Provision for support.—This consisted—

1. Of one tenth of the tithes which the people paid to the Levites, i.e., one percent on the whole produce of the country. Numbers 18:26-28. 2. Of a special tithe every third year. Deuteronomy 14:28; Deuteronomy 26:12. 3. Of the redemption money, paid at the fixed rate of five shekels a head, for the first-born of man or beast. Numbers 18:14-19. 4. Of the redemption money paid in like manner for men or things specially dedicated to the Lord. Leviticus 27. 5. Of spoil, captives, cattle, and the like, taken in war. Numbers 31:25-47. 6. Of the shew-bread, the flesh of the burnt offerings, peace offerings, trespass offerings, Leviticus 6:26, Leviticus 6:29; Leviticus 7:6-10; Numbers 18:8-14, and in particular the heave-shoulder and the wave-breast. Leviticus 10:12-15. 7. Of an undefined amount of the first-fruits of corn, wine, and oil. Exodus 23:19; Leviticus 2:14; Deuteronomy 26:1-10. 8. On their settlement in Canaan the priestly families had thirteen cities assigned them, with “suburbs” or pasture-grounds for their flocks. Joshua 21:13-19. These provisions were obviously intended to secure the religion of Israel against the dangers of a caste of pauper priests, needy and dependent, and unable to bear their witness to the true faith. They were, on the other hand, as far as possible removed from the condition of a wealthy order.

Courses.—The priesthood was divided into four and twenty “courses” or orders, 1 Chronicles 24:1-19; 2 Chronicles 23:8; Luke 1:5, each of which was to serve in rotation for one week, while the further assignment of special services during the week was determined by lot. Luke 1:9. Each course appears to have commenced its work on the Sabbath, the outgoing priests taking the morning sacrifice, and leaving that of the evening to their successors. 2 Chronicles 23:8.

Numbers.—If we may accept the numbers given by Jewish writers as at all trustworthy, the proportion of the priesthood to the population of Palestine, during the last century of their existence as an order, must have been far greater than that of the clergy has ever been in any Christian nation. Over and above those that were scattered in the country and took their turn, there were not fewer than 24,000 stationed permanently at Jerusalem, and 12,000 at Jericho. It was almost inevitable that the great mass of the order, under such circumstances, should sink in character and reputation. The reigns of the two kings David and Solomon were the culminating period of the glory of the Jewish priesthood. It will be interesting to bring together the few facts that indicate the position of the priests in the New Testament period of their history. The number scattered throughout Palestine was, as has been stated, very large. Of these the greater number were poor and ignorant. The priestly order, like the nation, was divided between contending sects. In the scenes of the last tragedy of Jewish history the order passes away without honor, “dying as a fool dieth.” The high priesthood is given to the lowest and vilest of the adherents of the frenzied Zealots. Other priests appear as deserting to the enemy. The destruction of Jerusalem deprived the order at one blow of all but an honorary distinction.

Prince Princess

Prince, Princess. The only special uses of the word “prince” are—

1. “Princes of provinces,” 1 Kings 20:14, who were probably local governors or magistrates. 2. The “princes” mentioned in Daniel 6:1 (see Esther 1:1) were the predecessors of the satraps of Darius Hystaspes. The word princess is seldom used in the Bible, but the persons to which it alludes—“daughters of kings”—are frequently mentioned.

Principality

Principality. In several passages of the New Testament the term “principalities and powers” appears to denote different orders of angels, good or bad. See Ephesians 6:12.

Prisca

Pris’ca (ancient), 2 Timothy 4:19, or Priscil’la (a diminutive from Prisca), the wife of Aquila. [AQUILA.] To what has been said elsewhere under the head of Aquila the following may be added: We find that the name of the wife is placed before that of the husband in Romans 16:3; 2 Timothy 4:19, and (according to some of the best MSS) in Acts 18:26. Hence we should be disposed to conclude that Priscilla was the more energetic character of the two. In fact we may say that Priscilla is the example of what the married woman may do for the general service of the Church, in conjunction with home duties, as Phœbe is the type of the unmarried servant of the Church, or deaconess.

Prison

Prison. [For imprisonment as a punishment, see PUNISHMENTS.] It is plain that in Egypt special places were used as prisons, and that they were under the custody of a military officer. Genesis 40:3; Genesis 42:17. During the wandering in the desert we read on two occasions of confinement “in ward”—Leviticus 24:12; Numbers 15:34; but as imprisonment was not directed by the law, so we hear of none till the time of the kings, when the prison appears as an appendage to the palace, or a special part of it. 1 Kings 22:27. Private houses were sometimes used as places of confinement. By the Romans the tower of Antonia was used as a prison at Jerusalem, Acts 23:10, and at Cæsarea the prætorium of Herod. The royal prisons in those days were doubtless managed after the Roman fashion, and chains, fetters, and stocks were used as means of confinement. See Acts 16:24. One of the readiest places for confinement was a dry or partially-dry wall or pit. Jeremiah 38:6-11.

Prochorus

Proch’orus (leader of the chorus), one of the seven deacons, being the third on the list, and named next after Stephen and Philip. Acts 6:5.

Proconsul

Proconsul (for, or in place of, the consul). At the division of the Roman provinces by Augustus, in the year b.c. 27, into senatorial and imperial, the emperor assigned to the senate such portions of territory as were peaceable and could be held without force of arms. Those which he retained were called imperial, and were governed by legates and procurators. [PROCURATOR.] Over the senatorial provinces the senate appointed by lot yearly an officer, who was called “proconsul,” and who exercised purely civil functions. The provinces were in consequence called “proconsular.”

Procurator

Procurator. The Greek ἡγεμωʹν, rendered “governor” in the Authorized Version, is applied in the New Testament to the officer who presided over the imperial province of Judea. It is used of Pontius Pilate, Matthew 27, of Felix, Acts 23, Acts 24, and of Festus. Acts 26:30. It is explained under PROCONSUL that after the battle of Actium, b.c. 27, the provinces of the Roman empire were divided by Augustus into two portions, giving some to the senate and reserving to himself the rest. The imperial provinces were administered by legati. No quæstor came into the emperor’s provinces, but the property and revenues of the imperial treasury were administered by procuratores. Sometimes a province was governed by a procurator with the functions of a legatus. This was especially the case with the smaller provinces and the outlying districts of a larger province; and such is the relation in which Judea stood to Syria. The headquarters of the procurator were at Cæsarea, Acts 23:23, where he had a judgment seat, Acts 25:6, in the audience chamber, Acts 25:23, and was assisted by a council, Acts 25:12, whom he consulted in cases of difficulty. He was attended by a cohort as body-guard, Matthew 27:27, and apparently went up to Jerusalem at the time of the high festivals, and there resided at the palace of Herod, in which was the prŜtorium or “judgment hall.” Matthew 27:27; Mark 15:16; comp. Acts 23:35.

Prophet

Prophet. The ordinary Hebrew word for prophet is naÆbi, derived from a verb signifying “to bubble forth” like a fountain; hence the word means one who announces or pours forth the declarations of God. The English word comes from the Greek prophetes (προφηʹτης), which signifies in classical Greek one who speaks for another, specially one who speaks for a god, and so interprets his will to man; hence its essential meaning is “an interpreter.” The use of the word in its modern sense as “one who predicts” is post-classical. The larger sense of interpretation has not, however, been lost. In fact, the English word prophet has always been used in a larger and in a closer sense. The different meanings or shades of meanings in which the abstract noun is employed in Scripture have been drawn out by Locke as follows: “Prophecy comprehends three things: prediction; singing by the dictate of the Spirit; and understanding and explaining the mysterious, hidden sense of Scripture by an immediate illumination and motion of the Spirit.”

Order and office.—The sacerdotal order was originally the instrument by which the members of the Jewish theocracy were taught and governed in things spiritual. Teaching by act and teaching by word were alike their task. But during the time of the judges, the priesthood sank into a state of degeneracy, and the people were no longer affected by the acted lessons of the ceremonial service. They required less enigmatic warnings and exhortations. Under these circumstances a new moral power was evoked—the Prophetic Order. Samuel, himself a Levite of the family of Kohath, 1 Chronicles 6:28, and almost certainly a priest, was the instrument used at once for effecting a reform in the sacerdotal order, 1 Chronicles 9:22, and for giving to the prophets a position of importance which they had never before held. Nevertheless, it is not to be supposed that Samuel created the prophetic order as a new thing before unknown. The germs both of the prophetic and of the regal order are found in the law as given to the Israelites by Moses, Deuteronomy 13:1; Deuteronomy 18:20; Deuteronomy 17:18, but they were not yet developed, because there was not yet the demand for them. Samuel took measures to make his work of restoration permanent as well as effective for the moment. For this purpose he instituted companies or colleges of prophets. One we find in his lifetime at Ramah, 1 Samuel 19:19, 1 Samuel 19:20; others afterward at Bethel, 2 Kings 2:3; Jericho, 2 Kings 2:2, 2 Kings 2:5; Gilgal, 2 Kings 4:38, and elsewhere. 2 Kings 6:1. Their constitution and object were similar to those of theological colleges. Into them were gathered promising students, and here they were trained for the office which they were afterward destined to fulfill. So successful were these institutions that from the time of Samuel to the closing of the canon of the Old Testament there seems never to have been wanting a due supply of men to keep up the line of official prophets. Their chief subject of study was, no doubt, the law and its interpretation; oral, as distinct from symbolical, teaching being thenceforward tacitly transferred from the priestly to the prophetic order. Subsidiary subjects of instruction were music and sacred poetry, both of which had been connected with prophecy from the time of Moses, Exodus 15:20, and the judges. Judges 4:4; Judges 5:1. But to belong to the prophetic order and to possess the prophetic gift are not convertible terms. Generally, the inspired prophet came from the college of the prophets, and belonged to the prophetic order; but this was not always the case. Thus Amos, though called to the prophetic office, did not belong to the prophetic order. Amos 7:14. The sixteen prophets whose books are in the canon have that place of honor because they were endowed with the prophetic gift as well as ordinarily (so far as we know) belonging to the prophetic order.

Characteristics.—What then are the characteristics of the sixteen prophets thus called and commissioned, and intrusted with the messages of God to his people?

1. They were the national poets of Judea. 2. They were annalists and historians. A great portion of Isaiah, of Jeremiah, of Daniel, of Jonah, of Haggai, is direct or indirect history. 3. They were preachers of patriotism—their patriotism being founded on the religious motive. 4. They were preachers of morals and of spiritual religion. The system of morals put forward by the prophets, if not higher or sterner or purer than that of the law, is more plainly declared, and with greater, because now more neeeded, vehemence of diction. 5. They were extraordinary but yet authorized exponents of the law. 6. They held a pastoral or quasi-pastoral office. 7. They were a political power in the state. 8. But the prophets were something more than national poets and annalists, preachers of patriotism, moral teachers, exponents of the law, pastors and politicians. Their most essential characteristic is that they were instruments of revealing God’s will to man, as in other ways, so specially by predicting future events, and, in particular, by foretelling the incarnation of the Lord Jesus Christ and the redemption effected by him. We have a series of prophecies which are so applicable to the person and earthly life of Jesus Christ as to be thereby shown to have been designed to apply to him. And if they were designed to apply to him, prophetical prediction is proved. Objections have been urged. We notice only one, viz., vagueness. It has been said that the prophecies are too darkly and vaguely worded to be proved predictive by the events which they are alleged to foretell. But to this might be answered,

1. That God never forces men to believe, but that there is such a union of definiteness and vagueness in the prophecies as to enable those who are willing to discover the truth, while the willfully blind are not forcibly constrained to see it. 2. That, had the prophecies been couched in the form of direct declarations, their fulfillment would have thereby been rendered impossible, or at least capable of frustration. 3. That the effect of prophecy would have been far less beneficial to believers, as being less adapted to keep them in a state of constant expectation. 4. That the Messiah of revelation could not be so clearly portrayed in his varied character as God and man, as prophet, priest, and king, if he had been the mere “teacher.” 5. That the state of the prophets, at the time of receiving the divine revelation, was such as necessarily to make their predictions fragmentary, figurative, and abstracted from the relations of time. 6. That some portions of the prophecies were intended to be of double application, and some portions to be understood only on their fulfillment. Comp. John 14:29; Ezekiel 36:33.

How the prophetic gift was received.—We learn from Holy Scripture that it was by the agency of the Spirit of God that the prophets received the divine communication; but the means by which the divine Spirit communicated with the human spirit, and the conditions of the latter under which the divine communications were received, have not been clearly declared to us. They are, however, indicated. In Numbers 12:6-8 we have an exhaustive division of the different ways in which the revelations of God are made to man.

1. Direct declaration and manifestation: “I will speak mouth to mouth, apparently, and the similitude of the Lord shall he behold.” 2. Vision. 3. Dream. But though it must be allowed that Scripture language seems to point out the state of dream and of trance, or ecstasy, as a condition in which the human instrument received the divine communications, it does not follow that all the prophetic revelations were thus made. Had the prophets a full knowledge of that which they predicted? It follows from what we have already said that they had not, and could not have. They were the “spokesmen” of God, Exodus 7:1, the “mouth” by which his words were uttered, or they were enabled to view and empowered to describe pictures presented to their spiritual intuition; but there are no grounds for believing that, contemporaneously with this miracle, there was wrought another miracle, enlarging the understanding of the prophet so as to grasp the whole of the divine counsels which he was gazing into, or which he was the instrument of enunciating.

Names.—Of the sixteen prophets, four are usually called the great prophets, namely, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel, and twelve the minor prophets, namely, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. They may be divided into four groups: the prophets of the northern kingdom—Hosea, Amos, Joel, Jonah; the prophets of the southern kingdom—Isaiah, Jeremiah, Obadiah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah; the prophets of the captivity—Ezekiel and Daniel; the prophets of the return—Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi. They may be arranged in the following chronological order, namely, Joel, Jonah, Hosea, Amos, Isaiah, Micah, Nahum, Zephaniah, Habakkuk, Obadiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi.

Use of prophecy.—Predictive prophecy is at once a part and an evidence of revelation; at the time that it is delivered, and until its fulfillment, a part; after it has been fulfilled, an evidence. As an evidence, fulfilled prophecy is as satisfactory as anything can be; for who can know the future except the Ruler who disposes future events? and from whom can come prediction except from him who knows the future?

Development of Messianic prophecy.—Prediction, in the shape of promise and threatening, begins with the book of Genesis. Immediately upon the Fall, hopes of recovery and salvation are held out, but the manner in which this salvation is to be effected is left altogether indefinite. All that is at first declared is that it shall come through a child of woman. Genesis 3:15. By degrees the area is limited: it is to come through the family of Shem, Genesis 9:26, through the family of Abraham, Genesis 12:3, of Isaac. Genesis 22:18, of Jacob, Genesis 28:14, of Judah, Genesis 49:10. Balaam seems to say that it will be wrought by a warlike Isrealitish King, Numbers 24:17; Jacob, by a peaceful Ruler of the earth, Genesis 49:10; Moses, by a Prophet like himself, i.e., a revealer of a new religious dispensation. Deuteronomy 18:15. Nathan’s announcement, 2 Samuel 7:16, determines further that the salvation is to come through the house of David, and through a descendant of David who shall be himself a king. This promise is developed by David himself in the Messianic Psalms. Between Solomon and Hezekiah intervened some two hundred years, during which the voice of prophecy was silent. The Messianic conception entertained at this time by the Jews might have been that of a King of the royal house of David, who would arise and gather under his peaceful sceptre his own people and strangers. Sufficient allusion to his prophetical and priestly offices had been made to create thoughtful consideration, but as yet there was no clear delineation of him in these characters. It was reserved for the prophets to bring out these features more distinctly. In this great period of prophetism there is no longer any chronological development of Messianic prophecy, as in the earlier period previous to Solomon. Each prophet adds a feature, one more, another less, clearly: combine the feature, and we have the portrait; but it does not grow gradually and perceptibly under the hands of the several artists. Its culminating point is found in the prophecy contained in Isaiah 52:13-15 and Isaiah 53.

Prophets of the New Testament.—So far as their predictive powers are concerned, the Old Testament prophets find their New Testament counterpart in the writer of the Apocalypse; but in their general character, as specially illumined revealers of God’s will, their counterpart will rather be found, first in the great Prophet of the Church and his forerunner, John the Baptist, and next in all those persons who were endowed with the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit in the apostolic age, the speakers with tongues and the interpreters of tongues, the prophets and the discerners of spirits, the teachers and workers of miracles. 1 Corinthians 12:10, 1 Corinthians 12:28. That predictive powers did occasionally exist in the New Testament prophets is proved by the case of Agabus, Acts 11:28, but this was not their characteristic. The prophets of the New Testament were supernaturally-illuminated expounders and preachers.

Proselyte

Proselyte (a stranger, a new comer), the name given by the Jews to foreigners who adopted the Jewish religion. The dispersion of the Jews in foreign countries, which has been spoken of elsewhere [DISPERSION, THE], enabled them to make many converts to their faith. The converts who were thus attracted joined, with varying strictness, in the worship of the Jews. In Palestine itself, even Roman centurions learned to love the conquered nation, built synagogues for them, Luke 7:5, fasted and prayed, and gave alms after the pattern of the strictest Jews, Acts 10:2, Acts 10:30, and became preachers of the new faith to the soldiers under them. Acts 10:7. Such men, drawn by what was best in Judaism, were naturally among the readiest receivers of the new truth which rose out of it, and became, in many cases, the nucleus of a Gentile Church. Proselytism had, however, its darker side. The Jews of Palestine were eager to spread their faith by the same weapons as those with which they had defended it. The Idumæans had the alternative offered them by John Hyreanus of death, exile or circumcision. The Ituræans were converted in the same way by Aristobulus. Where force was not in their power, they obtained their ends by the most unscrupulous fraud. Those who were most active in proselytizing were precisely those from whose teaching all that was most true and living had departed. The vices of the Jew were engrafted on the vices of the heathen. A repulsive casuistry released the convert from obligations which he had before recognized, while in other things he was bound hand and foot to an unhealthy superstition. It was no wonder that he became “twofold more the child of hell,” Matthew 23:15, than the Pharisees themselves. We find in the Talmud a distinction between proselytes of the gate and proselytes of righteousness.

1. The term proselytes of the gate was derived from the frequently-occurring description in the law, “the stranger that is within thy gates.” Exodus 20:10, etc. Converts of this class were not bound by circumcision and the other special laws of the Mosaic code. It is doubtful, however, whether the distinction made in the Talmud ever really existed. 2. The proselytes of righteousness, known also as proselytes of the covenant, were perfect Israelites. We learn from the Talmud that, in addition to circumcision, baptism was also required to complete their admission to the faith. The proselyte was placed in a tank or pool up to his neck in water. His teachers, who now acted as his sponsors, repeated the great commandments of the law. The baptism was followed, as long as the temple stood, by the offering or corban.

Proverbs Book of

Prov’erbs, Book of. The title of this book in Hebrew is taken from its first word, mashal, which originally meant “a comparison.” It is sometimes translated parable, sometimes proverb as here. The superscriptions which are affixed to several portions of the book, in chs. Proverbs 1:1; Proverbs 10:1; Proverbs 25:1, attribute the authorship of those portions to Solomon the son of David, king of Israel. With the exception of the last two chapters, which are distinctly assigned to other authors, it is probable that the statement of the superscriptions is in the main correct, and that the majority of the proverbs contained in the book were uttered or collected by Solomon. Speaking roughly, the book consists of three main divisions, with two appendices:—

1. Chs. 1–9 form a connected didactic poem, in which Wisdom is praised and the youth exhorted to devote himself to her. This portion is preceded by an introduction and title describing the character and general aim of the book. 2. Chs. Proverbs 10-24, with the title “The Proverbs of Solomon,” consist of three parts: Proverbs 10:1-22:16, a collection of single proverbs and detached sentences out of the region of moral teaching and worldly prudence; Proverbs 22:17-24:21, a more connected didactic poem, with an introduction, Proverbs 22:17-22, which contains precepts of righteousness and prudence; Proverbs 24:23-34, with the inscription “These also belong to the wise,” a collection of unconnected maxims, which serve as an appendix to the preceding. Then follows the third division, chs. Proverbs 25-29, which, according to the superscription, professes to be a collection of Solomon’s proverbs, consisting of single sentences, which the men of the court of Hezekiah copied out. The first appendix, ch. Proverbs 30, “The words of Agur the son of Jakeh,” is a collection of partly proverbial and partly enigmatical sayings; the second, ch. Proverbs 31, is divided into two parts, “The words of King Lemuel,” vs. Proverbs 31:1-6, and an alphabetical acrostic in praise of a virtuous woman, which occupies the rest of the chapter. Who was Agur, and who was Jakeh, are questions which have been often asked and never satisfactorily answered. All that can be said of the first is that he was an unknown Hebrew sage, the son of an equally unknown Jakeh, and that he lived after the time of Hezekiah. Lemuel, like Agur, is unknown. It is even uncertain whether he is to be regarded as a real personage, or whether the name is merely symbolical. The Proverbs are frequently quoted or alluded to in the New Testament, and the canonicity of the book thereby confirmed. The following is a list of the principal passages:

Proverbs 1:16 compare Romans 3:10, Romans 3:15.

Proverbs 3:7, compare Romans 12:16.

Proverbs 3:11, Proverbs 3:12, compare Hebrews 12:5, Hebrews 12:6; see also Revelation 3:19.

Proverbs 3:34, compare James 4:6.

Proverbs 10:12, compare 1 Peter 4:8.

Proverbs 11:31, compare 1 Peter 4:18.

Proverbs 17:13, compare Romans 12:17; 1 Thessalonians 5:15; 1 Peter 3:9.

Proverbs 17:27, compare James 1:19.

Proverbs 20:9, compare 1 John 1:8.

Proverbs 20:20, compare Matthew 15:4; Mark 7:10.

Proverbs 22:8 (LXX), compare 2 Corinthians 9:7.

Proverbs 25:21, Proverbs 25:22, compare Romans 12:20.

Proverbs 26:11, compare 2 Peter 2:22.

Proverbs 27:1, compare James 4:13, James 4:14.

Province

Province.

1. In the Old Testament this word appears in connection with the wars between Ahab and Ben-hadad. 1 Kings 20:14, 1 Kings 20:15, 1 Kings 20:19. The victory of the former is gained chiefly “by the young men of the princes of the provinces,” i.e., probably of the chiefs of tribes in the Gilead country. 2. More commonly the word is used of the divisions of the Chaldæan kingdom. Daniel 2:49; Daniel 3:1, Daniel 3:30, and the Persian kingdom. Ezra 2:1; Nehemiah 7:6; Esther 1:1, Esther 1:22; Esther 2:3, etc. In the New Testament we are brought into contact with the administration of the provinces of the Roman empire. The classification of provinces supposed to need military control and therefore placed under the immediate government of the Cæsar, and those still belonging theoretically to the republic and administered by the senate, and of the latter again into proconsular and prætorian, is recognized, more or less distinctly, in the Gospels and the Acts. [PROCONSUL; PROCURATOR.] The στρατηγοιʹ of Acts 16:22 (“magistrates,” Authorized Version), on the other hand, were the duumviri or prætors of a Roman colony. The right of any Roman citizen to appeal from a provincial governor to the emperor meets us as asserted by St. Paul. Acts 25:11. In the council of Acts 25:12 we recognize the assessors who were appointed to take part in the judicial functions of the governor.

Psalms Book of

Psalms, Book of. The present Hebrew name of the book is Tehillim, “Praises”; but in the actual superscriptions of the psalms the word Tehillâh is applied only to one, Psalm 145, which is indeed emphatically a praise-hymn. The LXX entitled them ψαλμοιʹ or “psalms,” i.e., lyrical pieces to be sung to a musical instrument. The Christian Church obviously received the Psalter from the Jews not only as a constituent portion of the sacred volume of Holy Scripture, but also as the liturgical hymn-book which the Jewish Church had regularly used in the temple.

Division of the Psalms.—The book contains 150 psalms, and may be divided into five great divisions or books, which must have been originally formed at different periods. Book I is, by the superscriptions, entirely Davidic; nor do we find in it a trace of any but David’s authorship. We may well believe that the compilation of the book was also David’s work. Book II appears by the date of its latest psalm, Psalm 46, to have been compiled in the reign of King Hezekiah. It would naturally comprise, first, several or most of the Levitical psalms anterior to that date; and second, the remainder of the psalms of David previously uncompiled. To these latter the collector, after properly appending the single psalm of Solomon, has affixed the notice that “the prayers of David the son of Jesse are ended.” Psalm 72:20. Book III, the interest of which centres in the times of Hezekiah, stretches out, by its last two psalms, to the reign of Manasseh: it was probably compiled in the reign of Josiah. It contains seventeen psalms, from Psalm 73-89—eleven by Asaph, four by the sons of Horah, one (Psalm 86) by David, and one by Ethan. Book IV contains the remainder of the psalms up to the date of the captivity. There are seventeen, from Psalm 90-106—one by Moses, two by David, and the rest anonymous. Book V, the psalms of the return, contains forty-four, from Psalm 107-150—fifteen by David, one by Solomon and the rest anonymous. There is nothing to distinguish these two books from each other in respect of outward decoration or arrangement, and they may have been compiled together in the days of Nehemiah.

Connection of the Psalms with Israelitish history.—The Psalm of Moses, Psalm 90, which is in point of actual date the earliest, faithfully reflects the long, weary wanderings, the multiplied provocations and the consequent punishments of the wilderness. It is, however, with David that Israelitish psalmody may be said virtually to commence. Previous mastery over his harp had probably already prepared the way for his future strains, when the anointing oil of Samuel descended upon him, and he began to drink in special measure, from that day forward, of the Spirit of the Lord. It was then that, victorious at home over the mysterious melancholy of Saul and in the field over the vaunting champion of the Philistine hosts, he sang how from even babes and sucklings God had ordained strength because of his enemies. Psalm 8. His next psalms are of a different character; his persecutions at the hands of Saul had commenced. When David’s reign has begun, it is still with the most exciting incidents of his history, private or public, that his psalms are mainly associated. There are none to which the period of his reign at Hebron can lay exclusive claim. But after the conquest of Jerusalem his psalmody opened afresh with the solemn removal of the ark to Mount Zion; and in Psalm 24-29, which belong together, we have the earliest definite instance of David’s systematic composition or arrangement of psalms for public use. Even of those psalms which cannot be referred to any definite occasion, several reflect the general historical circumstances of the times. Thus Psalm 9 is a thanksgiving for the deliverance of the land of Israel from its former heathen oppressors. Psalm 10 is a prayer for the deliverance of the Church from the high-handed oppression exercised from within. The succeeding psalms dwell on the same theme, the virtual internal heathenism by which the Church of God was weighed down. So that there remain very few, e.g., Psalm 15-17, Psalm 19, Psalm 32 (with its choral appendage, Psalm 23), Psalm 37, of which some historical account may not be given. A season of repose near the close of his reign induced David to compose his grand personal thanksgiving for the deliverances of his whole life, Psalm 18; the date of which is approximately determined by the place at which it is inserted in the history. 2 Samuel 22. It was probably at this period that he finally arranged for the sanctuary service that collection of his psalms which now constitutes the first book of the Psalter. The course of David’s reign was not, however, as yet complete. The solemn assembly convened by him for the dedication of the materials of the future temple, 1 Chronicles 28, 1 Chronicles 29, would naturally call forth a renewal of his best efforts to glorify the God of Israel in psalms; and to this occasion we doubtless owe the great festal hymns Psalm 65-68, containing a large review of the past history, present position and prospective glories of God’s chosen people. The supplications of Psalm 69 suit best with the renewed distress occasioned by the sedition of Adonijah. Psalm 71, to which Psalm 70, a fragment of a former psalm, is introductory, forms David’s parting strain. Yet that the psalmody of Israel may not seem finally to terminate with him, the glories of the future are forthwith anticipated by his son in Psalm 72. The great prophetical ode, Psalm 45, connects itself most readily with the splendors of Jehoshaphat’s reign. Psalm 42-44, Psalm 74, are best assigned to the reign of Ahaz. The reign of Hezekiah is naturally rich in psalmody. Psalm 46, Psalm 73, Psalm 75, Psalm 76, connect themselves with the resistance to the supremacy of the Assyrians and the divine destruction of their host.

We are now brought to a series of psalms of peculiar interest, springing out of the political and religious history of the separated ten tribes. In date of actual composition they commence before the times of Hezekiah. The earliest is probably Psalm 80, a supplication for the Israelitish people at the time of the Syrian oppression. All these psalms—Psalm 80-83—are referred by their superscriptions to the Levite singers, and thus bear witness to the efforts of the Levites to reconcile the two branches of the chosen nation. The captivity of Manasseh himself proved to be but temporary; but the sentence which his sins had provoked upon Judah and Jerusalem still remained to be executed, and precluded the hope that God’s salvation could be revealed till after such an outpouring of his judgments as the nation had never yet known. Labor and sorrow must be the lot of the present generation; through these mercy might occasionally gleam, but the glory which was eventually to be manifested must be for posterity alone. The psalms of Book IV bear generally the impress of this feeling.

We pass to Book V. Psalm 107 is the opening psalm of the return, sung probably at the first feast of tabernacles. Ezra 3. A directly historical character belongs to Psalm 120-134, styled in our Authorized Version “Songs of Degrees.” Internal evidence refers these to the period when the Jews under Nehemiah were, in the very face of the enemy, repairing the walls of Jerusalem, and the title may well signify “songs of goings up upon the walls,” the psalms being, from their brevity, well adapted to be sung by the workmen and guards while engaged in their respective duties. Psalm 139 is a psalm of the new birth of Israel, from the womb of the Babylonish captivity, to a life of righteousness; Ps. 140-143 may be a picture of the trials to which the unrestored exiles were still exposed in the realms of the Gentiles. Henceforward, as we approach the close of the Psalter, its strains rise in cheerfulness; and it fittingly terminates with Psalm 147-150, which were probably sung on the occasion of the thanksgiving procession of Nehemiah 12, after the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem had been completed.

Moral characteristics of the Psalms.—Foremost among these meets us, undoubtedly, the universal recourse to communion with God. Connected with this is the faith by which the psalmist everywhere lives in God rather than in himself. It is of the essence of such faith that his view of the perfections of God should be true and vivid. The Psalter describes God as he is: it glows with testimonies to his power and providence, his love and faithfulness, his holiness and righteousness. The Psalms not only set forth the perfections of God: they proclaim also the duty of worshipping him by the acknowledgment and adoration of his perfections. They encourage all outward rites and means of worship. Among these they recognize the ordinance of sacrifice as an expression of the worshipper’s consecration of himself to God’s service. But not the less do they repudiate the outward rite when separated from which which it was designed to express. Similar depth is observable in the view taken by the psalmists of human sin. In regard to the law, the psalmist, while warmly acknowledging its excellence, feels yet that it cannot so effectually guide his own unassisted exertions as to preserve him from error. Psalm 19. The Psalms bear repeated testimony to the duty of instructing others in the ways of holiness. Psalm 32, Psalm 34, Psalm 51. This brings us to notice, lastly, the faith of the psalmists in righteous recompense to all men according to their deeds. Psalm 37, etc.

Prophetical character of the Psalms.—The moral struggle between godliness and ungodliness, so vividly depicted in the Psalms, culminates, in Holy Scripture, in the life of the Incarnate Son of God upon earth. It only remains to show that the Psalms themselves definitely anticipated this culmination. Now there are in the Psalter at least three psalms of which the interest evidently centres in a person distinct from the speaker, and which, since they cannot without violence to the language be interpreted of any but the Messiah, may be termed directly and exclusively Messianic. We refer to Psalm 2, Psalm 45, Psalm 110, to which may perhaps be added Psalm 72. It would be strange if these few psalms stood, in their prophetical significance, absolutely alone among the rest. And hence the impossibility of viewing the psalms generally, notwithstanding the historical drapery in which they are outwardly clothed, as simply the past devotions of the historical David or the historical Israel. The national hymns of Israel are indeed also prospective; but in general they anticipate rather the struggles and the triumphs of the Christian Church than those of Christ himself.

Psaltery

Psaltery. This was a stringed instrument of music to accompany the voice. The Hebrew Nêbel or nebel is so rendered in the Authorized Version in all passages where it occurs, except in Isaiah 5:12; Isaiah 14:11; Isaiah 22:24, marg.; Amos 5:23; Amos 6:5, where it is translated viol. The ancient viol was a six-stringed guitar. In the Prayer Book version of the Psalms the Hebrew word is rendered “lute.” This instrument resembled the guitar, but was wuperior in tone, being larger, and having a convex back, somewhat like the vertical section of a gourd, or more nearly resembling that of a pear. These three instruments, the psaltery or sautry, the viol, and the lute, are frequently associated in the old English poets, and were clearly instruments resembling each other, though still different. The Greek psalterium (ψαλτήριον), from which our word is derived, denotes an instrument played with the fingers instead of a plectrum or quill, the verb being used of twanging the bow-string. It is impossible to say positively with what instrument the nebel of the Hebrew exactly corresponded. From the fact that nebel in Hebrew also signifies a wine-bottle or skin, it has been conjectured that the term when applied to a musical instrument denotes a kind of bagpipe. The psalteries of David were made of cypress, 2 Samuel 6:5; those of Solomon of algum or almug trees. 2 Chronicles 9:11. Among the instruments of the band which played before Nebuchadnezzar’s golden image on the plains of Dura, we again meet with the psaltery. Daniel 3:5, Daniel 3:10, Daniel 3:15, pesantêrı̂n.

Ptolemæus

Ptolemæus (Ptolemaeus, Ptolemy) — was the common name of the Greek dynasty of Egyptian kings. PTOLEMAEUS I. SOTER, the son of Lagus, a Macedonian of low rank, distinguished himself greatly during the campaigns of Alexander; at whose death he secured for himself the government of Egypt, where he proceeded at once to lay the foundations of a kingdom, B.C. 323. He abdicated in favor of his youngest son, Ptolemy II. Philadelphus, two years before his death which took place in B.C. 283. Ptolemy Soter is described very briefly in Daniel, (Daniel 11:6) as one of those who should receive part of the empire of Alexander when it was "divided toward the four winds of heaven". PTOLEMAEUS II. PHILADELPHUS, B.C. 285-247, the youngest son of Ptolemy I., was made king two years before his fathers death, to confirm the irregular succession. The conflict between Egypt and Syria was renewed during his reign in consequence of the intrigue of his half brother Magas. Ptolemy bestowed liberal encouragement on literature and science, founding the great library and museum at Alexandria, and gathered about him many men of learning, as the poet Theocritus, the geometer Euclid and the astronomer Aratua. This reign was a critical epoch for the development of Judaism, as it was for the intellectual history of the ancient world. The critical faculty was called forth in place of the creative, and learning in some sense supplied the place of original speculation. It was impossible on the Jew who was now become us true a citizen of the world as the Greek, should remain passive in the conflict of opinions. It is enough now to observe the greatness of the consequences involved in the union of Greek language with Jewish thought. From this time the Jew was familiarized with the great types of western literature, and in some degree aimed at imitating them. A second time and in new fashion Egypt disciplined a people of God. It first impressed upon a nation the firm unity of a family and then in due time reconnected a matured people with the world from which it had been called out. PTOLEMAEUS III. EUERGETES, B.C. 247-222, was the eldest son of Ptolemy Philadelphus and brother of Berenice the wife of Antiochus II. The repudiation and murder of his sister furnished him with an occasion for invading Syria, cir. B.C. 246. (Daniel 11:7) He extended his conquests as far as Antioch, and then eastward to Babylon, but was recalled to Egypt by tidings of seditions which had broken out there. His success was brilliant and complete. He carried "captives into Egypt their gods of the conquered nations, with their princes and with their precious vessels of silver and of gold." (Daniel 11:8) This capture of sacred trophies earned for the king the name Euergetes -- "Benefactor." After his return to Egypt, cir. B.C. 243 he suffered a great part of the conquered provinces to fall again under the power of Seleucus. PTOLEMAEUS IV. PHILOPATOR, B.C. 222-205. After the death of Ptolemy Euergetes the line of the Ptolemies rapidly degenerated. Ptolemy Philopator, his eldest son, who succeeded him, was to the last degree sensual, effeminate and debased. But externally his kingdom retained its power and splendor and when circumstances forced him to action. Ptolemy himself showed ability not unworthy of his race. The description of the campaign of Raphia (B.C. 217) in the book of Daniel gives a vivid description of his character. (Daniel 11:10-12) cf. Macc. 1:1-3. After offering in the temple at Jerusalem sacrifices for the success they achieved, he attempted to enter the sanctuary. A sudden paralysis hindered his design; but when he returned to Alexandria he determined to inflict on the Alexandrine Jews the vengeance for his disappointment. He was succeeded by his only child, Ptolemy V. Epiphanes who was at the time only four or five years old. PTOLEMAEUS V. EPIPHANES, B.C. 205-181. The reign of Ptolemy Epiphanes was a critical epoch in the history of the Jews. The rivalry between the Syrian and Egyptian parties, some time divided the people, came to an open rupture in the struggles which marked his minority. In the strong language of Daniel "The robbers of the people exalted themselves to establish the vision." (Daniel 11:14) The accession of Ptolemy and the confusion of a disputed regency furnished a favorable opportunity for foreign invasion. "Many stood up against the king of the south" under Antiochus the Great and Philip III of Macedonia, who formed a league for the dismemberment of his kingdom. "So the king of the north [Antiochus] came, and cast up a mount, and took the most fenced city [Sidon], and the arms of the south did not withstand" [at Paneas B.C. 198]. (Daniel 11:14; Daniel 11:15) The Romans interfered, and in order to retain the provinces of Coele-Syria, Phoenicia and Judea, Antiochus "gave him [Ptolemy] a young maiden" [his daughter Cleopatra as his betrothed wife]. (Daniel 11:27) But in the end his policy only partially succeeded. After the marriage of Ptolemy and Cleopatra was consummated B.C. 193, (Cleopatra, did "not stand on his side", but supported her husband in maintaining the alliance with Rome. The disputed provinces, however remained in the possession of Antiochus and Ptolemy was poisoned at the time when he was preparing an expedition to recover them from Seleucus, the unworthy successor of Antiochus. PTOLEMAEUS VI. PHILOMETOR, B.C. 181-145. On the death of Ptolemy Epiphanes, his wife Cleopatra held the regency for her young son, Ptolemy Philometor, and preserved peace with Syria till she died, B.C. 173. The government then fell into unworthy hands, and an attempt was made to recover Syria. Comp. 2 Macc. 4:21. Antiochus Epiphanes seems to have made the claim a pretext for invading Egypt. The generals of Ptolemy were defeated near Pelusium, probably at the close of B.C. 171, 1 Macc. 1:16 ff; and in the next year Antiochus, having secured the person of the young king, reduced almost the whole of Egypt. Comp. 2 Macc. 5:1. Meanwhile Ptolemy Euergetes II., the younger brother of Ptolemy Philometor, assumed the supreme power at Alexandris; and Antiochus, under the pretext of recovering the crown for Philometor, besieged Alexandria in B.C. 169. By this time, however, his selfish designs were apparent: the brothers were reconciled, and Antiochus was obliged to acquiesce for the time in the arrangement which they made. But while doing so he prepared for another invasion of Egypt, and was already approaching Alexandria when he was met by the Roman embassy led by C. Popillius Laenas, who, in the name of the Roman senate insisted on his immediate retreat (B.C.168), a command which the late victory at Pydna made it impossible to disobey. These campaigns, which are intimately connected with the visits of Antiochus to Jerusalem in B.C. 170, 168, are briefly described in (Daniel 11:25; Daniel 11:30) The whole of Syria was afterward subdued by Ptolemy, and he was crowned at Antioch king of Egypt and Asia. 1 Macc. 11:13. Alexander, a rival claimant, attempted to secure the crown, but was defeated and afterward put to death by Ptolemy. But the latter did not long enjoy his success. He fell from his horse in the battle and died within a few days. 1 Macc. 11:18. Ptolemy Philometor is the last king of Egypt who is noticed in sacred history, and his reign was marked also by the erection of the temple at Leontopolis.

Ptolemais

Ptolema’is. [ACCHO.]

Ptolemee

Ptol’emee, or Ptoleme’us.

1. “The son of Dorymenes,” 1 Maccabees 3:38; 2 Maccabees 4:45; comp. Polyb. v. 61, a courtier who possessed great influence with Antiochus Epiphanes.

2. The son of Agesarchus, a Megalopolitan, surnamed Macron, 2 Maccabees 10:12, who was governor of Cyprus during the minority of Ptolemy Philometor. He afterward deserted the Egyptian service to join Antiochus Epiphanes. He stood high in the favor of Antiochus, and received from him the government of Phœnicia and Cœle-Syra. 2 Maccabees 8:8; 2 Maccabees 10:11, 2 Maccabees 10:12. On the accession of Antiochus Eupator his conciliatory policy toward the Jews brought him into suspicion at court. He was deprived of his government, and in consequence of this disgrace he poisoned himself, cir. b.c. 164. 2 Maccabees 10:13.

3. The son of Abubus, who married the daughter of Simon the Maccabee. He was a man of great wealth, and being invested with the government of the district of Jericho, formed the design of usurping the sovereignty of Judea.

Pua

Pu’a, properly Puvvah. Phuvah the son of Issachar. Numbers 26:23. (b.c. 1452.)

Puah

Pu’ah (splendid).

1. The father of Tola, a man of the tribe of Issachar, and judge of Israel after Abimelech. Judges 10:1. (b.c. 1211.)

2. The son of Issachar, 1 Chronicles 7:1, elsewhere called Phuvah and Pua.

3. One of the two midwives to whom Pharaoh gave instructions to kill the Hebrew male children at their birth. Exodus 1:15. (b.c. 1571.)

Publican

Publican. The class designated by this word in the New Testament were employed as collectors of the Roman revenue. The Roman senate farmed the vectigalia (direct taxes) and the portoria (customs) to capitalists who undertook to pay a given sum into the treasury (in publicum), and so received the name of publicani. Contracts of this kind fell naturally into the hands of the equites, as the richest class of Romans. They appointed managers, under whom were the portitores, the actual custom-house officers, who examined each bale of goods, exported or imported, assessed its value more or less arbitrarily, wrote out the ticket, and enforced payment. The latter were commonly natives of the province in which they were stationed, as being brought daily into contact with all classes of the population. The name publicani was used popularly, and in the New Testament exclusively, of the portitores. The system was essentially a vicious one. The portitores were encouraged in the most vexatious or fraudulent exactions, and a remedy was all but impossible. They overcharged whenever they had an opportunity, Luke 3:13; they brought false charges of smuggling in the hope of extorting hush-money, Luke 19:8; they detained and opened letters on mere suspicion. It was the basest of all livelihoods. All this was enough to bring the class into ill favor everywhere. In Judea and Galilee there were special circumstances of aggravation. The employment brought out all the besetting vices of the Jewish character. The strong feeling of many Jews as to the absolute unlawfulness of paying tribute at all made matters worse. The scribes who discussed the question, Matthew 22:15, for the most part answered it in the negative. In addition to their other faults, accordingly, the publicans of the New Testament were regarded as traitors and apostates, defiled by their frequent intercourse with the heathen, willing tools of the oppressor. The class thus practically excommunicated furnished some of the earliest disciples both of the Baptist and of our Lord. The position of Zacchæus as a “chief among the publicans,” Luke 19:2, implies a gradation of some kind among the persons thus employed.

Publius

Pub’lius, the chief man—probably the governor—of Melita, who received and lodged St. Paul and his companions on the occasion of their being shipwrecked off that island. Acts 28:7. (a.d. 55.)

Pudens

Pu’dens (modest), a Christian friend of Timothy at Rome. 2 Timothy 4:21. (a.d. 64.) According to legend he was the host of St. Peter and friend of St. Paul, and was martyred under Nero.

Puhites The

Pu’hites, The. According to 1 Chronicles 2:53, the “Puhites” or “Puthites” belonged to the families of Kirjath-jearim.

Pul

Pul (lord), a country or nation mentioned in Isaiah 66:19. It is spoken of with distant nations, and is supposed by some to represent the island Philæ in Egypt, and by others Libya.

Pul

Pul, an Assyrian king, and the first Assyrian monarch mentioned in Scripture. He made an expedition against Menahem, king of Israel, about b.c. 770. 2 Kings 15:19.

Pulse

Pulse (seeds) usually means peas, beans, and the seeds that grow in pods. In the Authorized Version it occurs only in Daniel 1:12, Daniel 1:16, as the translation of words the literal meaning of which is “seeds” of any kind. Probably the term denotes uncooked grain of any kind, as barley, wheat, millet, vetches, etc.

Punishments

Punishments. The earliest theory of punishment current among mankind is doubtless the one of simple retaliation, “blood for blood.” Viewed historically, the first case of punishment for crime mentioned in Scripture, next to the Fall itself, is that of Cain, the first murderer. That death was regarded as the fitting punishment for murder appears plain from the remark of Lamech. Genesis 4:24. In the post-diluvian code, if we may so call it, retribution by the hand of man, even in the case of an offending animal, for blood shed, is clearly laid down. Genesis 9:5, Genesis 9:6. Passing onward to Mosaic times, we find the sentence of capital punishment, in the case of murder, plainly laid down in the law. The murderer was to be put to death, even if he should have taken refuge at God’s altar or in a refuge city and the same principle was to be carried out even in the case of an animal.

Offences punished with death.—I. The following offences also are mentioned in the law as liable to the punishment of death:

1. Striking, or even reviling, a parent. Exodus 21:15, Exodus 21:17. 2. Blasphemy. Leviticus 24:14, Leviticus 24:16, Leviticus 24:23. 3. Sabbath-breaking. Exodus 31:14; Exodus 35:2; Numbers 15:32-36. 4. Witchcraft, and false pretension to prophecy. Exodus 22:18; Leviticus 20:27; Deuteronomy 13:5; Deuteronomy 18:20. 5. Adultery. Leviticus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:22. 6. Unchastity. Leviticus 21:9; Deuteronomy 22:21, Deuteronomy 22:23. 7. Rape. Deuteronomy 22:25. 8. Incestuous and unnatural connections. Exodus 22:19; Leviticus 20:11, Leviticus 20:14, Leviticus 20:16. 9. Manstealing. Exodus 21:16; Deuteronomy 24:7. 10. Idolatry, actual or virtual, in any shape. Leviticus 20:2; Deuteronomy 13:6, Deuteronomy 13:10, Deuteronomy 13:15; Deuteronomy 17:2-7; see Joshua 7 and Joshua 22:20 and Numbers 25:8. 11. False witness in certain cases. Deuteronomy 19:16, Deuteronomy 19:19. II. But there is a large number of offences, some of them included in this list, which are named in the law as involving the penalty of “cutting off from the people.” On the meaning of this expression some controversy has arisen. There are altogether thirty-six or thirty-seven cases in the Pentateuch in which this formula is used. We may perhaps conclude that the primary meaning of “cutting off” is a sentence of death to be executed in some cases without remission, but in others voidable—(1) by immediate atonement on the offender’s part; (2) by direct interposition of the Almighty, i.e., a sentence of death always “recorded,” but not always executed.

Kinds of punishment.—Punishments are twofold, Capital and Secondary. I. Capital. (A) The following only are prescribed by the law:

1. Stoning, which was the ordinary mode of execution. Exodus 17:4; Luke 20:6; John 10:31; Acts 14:5. In the case of idolatry, and it may be presumed in other cases also, the witnesses, of whom there were to be at least two, were required to cast the first stone. Deuteronomy 13:9; Acts 7:58. 2. Hanging is mentioned as a distinct punishment. Numbers 25:4; 2 Samuel 21:6, 2 Samuel 21:9. 3. Burning, in pre-Mosaic times, was the punishment for unchastity. Genesis 38:24. Under the law it was ordered in the case of a priest’s daughter. Leviticus 21:9. 4. Death by the sword or spear is named in the law, Exodus 19:13; Exodus 32:27; Numbers 25:7; and it occurs frequently in regal and post-Babylonian times. 1 Kings 2:25, 1 Kings 2:34; 1 Kings 19:1; 2 Chronicles 21:4, etc. 5. Strangling is said by the rabbins to have been regarded as the most common but least severe of the capital punishments, and to have been performed by immersing the convict in clay or mud, and then strangling him by a cloth twisted round the neck. (B) Besides these ordinary capital punishments, we read of others, either of foreign introduction or of an irregular kind. Among the former.

1. Crucifixion is treated elsewhere. 2. Drowning, though not ordered under the law, was practiced at Rome, and is said by St. Jerome to have been in use among the Jews. 3. Sawing asunder or crushing beneath iron instruments. 2 Samuel 12:31, and perhaps Proverbs 20:26; Hebrews 11:37. 4. Pounding in a mortar, or beating to death, is alluded to in Proverbs 27:22, but not as a legal punishment, and cases are described. 2 Maccabees 6:28, 2 Maccabees 6:30. 5. Precipitation, attempted in the case of our Lord at Nazareth, and carried out in that of captives from the Edomites, and of St. James, who is said to have been cast from “the pinnacle” of the temple. Criminals executed by law were buried outside the city gates, and heaps of stones were flung upon their graves. Joshua 7:25, Joshua 7:26; 2 Samuel 18:17; Jeremiah 22:19. II. Of secondary punishments among the Jews the original principles were,

1. Retaliation, “eye for eye,” etc. Exodus 21:24, Exodus 21:25. 2. Compensation, identical (restitution) or analogous; payment for loss of time or of power. Exodus 21:18-36; Leviticus 24:18-21; Deuteronomy 19:21. Slander against a wife’s honor was to be compensated to her parents by a fine of one hundred shekels, and the traducer himself to be punished with stripes. Deuteronomy 22:18, Deuteronomy 22:19. 3. Stripes, whose number was not to exceed forty, Deuteronomy 25:3; whence the Jews took care not to exceed thirty-nine. 2 Corinthians 11:24. 4. Scourging with thorns is mentioned Judges 8:16. The stocks are mentioned Jeremiah 20:2; passing through fire, 2 Samuel 12:31; mutilation, Judges 1:6; 2 Maccabees 7:4, and see 2 Samuel 4:12; plucking out hair, Isaiah 50:6; in later times, imprisonment and confiscation or exile. Ezra 7:26; Jeremiah 37:15; Jeremiah 38:6; Acts 4:3; Acts 5:18; Acts 12:4.

Punites The

Pu’nites, The, the descendants of Pua or Puvah, the son of Issachar. Numbers 26:23.

Punon

Pu’non (darkness), one of the halting-places of the Israelite host during the last portion of the wandering. Numbers 33:42, Numbers 33:43. By Eusebius and Jerome it is identified with Phæno, which contained the copper-mines so well known at that period, and was situated between Petra and Zoar.

Purification

Purification, in its legal and technical sense, is applied to the ritual observances whereby an Israelite was formally absolved from the taint of uncleanness. The essence of purification, in all cases, consisted in the use of water, whether by way of ablution or aspersion; but in the majora delicta of legal uncleanness, sacrifices of various kinds were added, and the ceremonies throughout bore an expiatory character. Ablution of the person and of the clothes was required in the cases mentioned in Leviticus 15:18; Leviticus 11:25, Leviticus 11:40; Leviticus 15:16, Leviticus 15:17. In cases of childbirth the sacrifice was increased to a lamb of the first year, with a pigeon or turtle-dove. Leviticus 12:6. The ceremonies of purification required in cases of contact with a corpse or a grave are detailed in Numbers 19. The purification of the leper was a yet more formal proceeding, and indicated the highest pitch of uncleanness. The rites are described in Leviticus 14:4-32. The necessity of purification was extended in the post-Babylonian period to a variety of unauthorized cases. Cups and pots and brazen vessels were washed as a matter of ritual observance. Mark 7:4. The washing of the hands before meals was conducted in a formal manner. Mark 7:3. What may have been the specific causes of uncleanness in those who came up to purify themselves before the Passover, John 11:55, or in those who had taken upon themselves the Nazarites’ vow, Acts 21:24, Acts 21:26, we are not informed. In conclusion it may be observed that the distinctive feature in the Mosaic rites of purification is their expiatory character. The idea of uncleanness was not peculiar to the Jew; but with all other nations simple ablution sufficed: no sacrifices were demanded. The Jew alone was taught by the use of expiatory offerings to discern to its fullest extent the connection between the outward sign and the inward fount of impurity.

Purim

Pu’rim (lots), the annual festival instituted to commemorate the preservation of the Jews in Persia from the massacre with which they were threatened through the machinations of Haman. Esther 9. It was probably called Purim by the Jews in irony. Their great enemy Haman appears to have been very superstitious, and much given to casting lots. Esther 3:7. They gave the name Purim, or “Lots,” to the commemorative festival because he had thrown lots to ascertain what day would be auspicious for him to carry into effect the bloody decree which the king had issued at his instance. Esther 9:24. The festival lasted two days, and was regularly observed on the 14th and 15th of Adar. According to modern custom, as soon as the stars begin to appear, when the 14th of the month has commenced, candles are lighted up in token of rejoicing, and the people assemble in the synagogue. After a short prayer and thanksgiving, the reading of the book of Esther commences. The book is written in a peculiar manner, on a roll called “the Roll” (Megillah). When the reader comes to the name of Haman, the congregation cry out, “May his name be blotted out,” or, “Let the name of the ungodly perish.” When the Megillah is read through, the whole congregation exclaim, “Cursed be Haman; blessed be Mordecai; cursed be Zoresh (the wife of Haman); blessed be Esther; cursed be all idolaters; blessed be all Israelites, and blessed be Harbonah who hanged Haman.” In the morning service in the synagoguge, on the 14th, after the prayers, the passage is read from the law, Exodus 17:8-16, which relates the destruction of the Amalekites, the people of Agag, 1 Samuel 15:8, the supposed ancestor of Haman. Esther 3:1. The Megillah is then read again in the same manner. The 14th of Adar, as the very day of the deliverance of the Jews, is more solemnly kept than the 13th; but when the service in the synagogue is over, all gave themselves up to merry-making.

Purse

Purse, a bag for money. The Hebrews, when on a journey, were provided with a bag, in which they carried their money, Genesis 42:35; Proverbs 1:14; Proverbs 7:20; Isaiah 46:6, and, if they were merchants, also their weights. Deuteronomy 25:13; Micah 6:11. This bag is described in the New Testament by the terms βαλάντιον (bag), Luke 10:4; Luke 12:33; Luke 22:35, Luke 22:36, and γλωσσοκομον (originally the bag in which musicians carried the mouth-pieces of their instruments). John 12:6; John 13:29. The girdle also served as a purse. Matthew 10:9; Mark 6:8. Ladies wore ornamental purses. Isaiah 3:24.

Put

Put. 1 Chronicles 1:8; Nahum 3:9. [PHUT.]

Puteoli

Pute’oli (sulphurous springs), the great landing-place of travellers to Italy from the Levant, and the harbor to which the Alexandrian corn-ships brought their cargoes. Acts 27:13. The celebrated bay which is now the Bay of Naples was then called “Sinus Puteolanus.” The city was at the northeastern angle of the bay. The name Puteoli arose from the strong mineral springs which are characteristic of the place. It was a favorite watering-place of the Romans, its hot springs being considered efficacious for the cure of various diseases. Here also ships usually discharged their passengers and cargoes, partly to avoid doubling the promontory of Circeium and partly because there was no commodious harbor nearer to Rome. Hence the ship in which Paul was conveyed from Melita landed the prisoners at this place, where the apostle stayed a week. Acts 28:13, Acts 28:14.—Whitney. The associations of Puteoli with historical personages are very numerous. Scipio sailed from this place to Spain; Cicero had a villa in the neighborhood; here Nero planned the murder of his mother; Vespasian gave to this city peculiar privileges; and here Adrian was buried. In the fifth century it was ravaged by both Alaric and Genseric, and it never afterward recovered its former eminence. It is now a fourth-rate Italian town, still retaining the name of Pozzuoli. The remains of Puteoli are worthy of mention. Among them are the aqueduct, the reservoirs, portions (probably) of the baths, the great amphitheatre, and the building called the temple of Serapis. No Roman harbor has left as solid a memorial of itself as this one, at which St. Paul landed in Italy.

Puteoli, Bay of Naples.