International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

Debt; Debtor — Dictionaries

Debt; Debtor

Debt; Debtor - det, det'-er: It is difficult nowadays to think of debt without associating with it the idea of interest, and even usury. Certain it is that this idea is associated with the Old Testament idea of the word, at least in the later period of Old Testament history. This is true of the New Testament entire. The Hebrew word (neshi) always carries with it the idea of "biting interest" (compare 2 Kings 4:7). The Greek words daneion (Matthew 18:27), and opheile (Matthew 18:32), may point only to the fact of indebtedness; the idea of interest, however, is clearly taught in the New Testament (compare Matthew 25:27).

Quite extensive legislation is provided in the Old Testament governing the matter of debt and debtors. Indebtedness and loaning had not, however, the commercial aspect among the Jews so characteristic of the nations surrounding Palestine. Indeed the Mosaic legislation was seemingly intended to guard against just such commercialism. It was looked upon as a misfortune to be in debt; it indicated poverty brought on probably by blighted harvests; consequently those in debt were to be looked upon with pity and dealt with in leniency. There must be no oppression of the poor under such circumstances (Exodus 22:25; Deuteronomy 23:19-20; Ezekiel 18:18). Even where a pledge is given and received, certain restrictions are thrown around it, e.g. the creditor must not take a mill, nor a necessary garment, nor a widow's ox, etc., in pledge (Exodus 22:25-27; Deuteronomy 24:6, 10-13; Job 22:6; Amos 2:8). And further, the pledge is to be restored in some instances "before the sun goeth down" (Exodus 22:26-27), and in all cases full redemption in the seventh and jubilee years (Nehemiah 10:31, etc.). The Jews were strictly exhorted to take no interest at all from their own nation (Exodus 22:25; Deuteronomy 23:19-20). Strangers, however, might be charged interest (ibid.). A devout Jew would not lend money to another Jew on interest.

It would seem that as Israel came into contact with the surrounding nations, debt became increasingly a commercial matter. The Mosaic laws regarding clemency toward the poor who were compelled for the time being to become debtors were utterly disregarded, and the poor were oppressed by the rich. An illustration of the severity with which debtors came to be dealt with is to be found in 2 Kings 4:1-7, in which, because of the inability of a widow to pay a small debt contracted by her dead husband, the woman complains to the prophet that the creditors have come to sell her two children in order that the debt might be paid. Strangely the prophet, while helping the widow by miraculously multiplying the oil in order that the debt might be paid, says nothing by way of condemnation of such conduct on the part of the creditors. Are we to understand by this that commercialism had already so powerful a grip upon Israel that even to a prophet the practice had come to seem proper, or at least expected? The debtor himself or his family might be sold for debt, or the debtor might become a slave for a certain length of time until the debt was paid (Leviticus 25:39, 47; Isaiah 50:1). So oppressive had the commercial system in Israel become that the debtor cursed the creditor and the creditor the debtor (Jeremiah 15:10). Sometimes debtors were outlawed, as in the case of the men who came to David in the cave of Adullam (1 Samuel 22:2). That the matter of borrowing and lending had assumed very grievous proportions is evident from the very sharp warnings concerning the matter in the Book of Prov (1 Samuel 6:1; 11:15; 20:16, etc.).

The teaching of the New Testament on this subject is confined very largely to the parables of our Lord. Some think that the expression, "Owe no man anything" (Romans 13:8), is an absolute warning against indebtedness. Quite a noticeable advance in the matter of debts and debtors is noticed as we enter the time of the New Testament. We read of bankers, exchangers, moneychangers, interest, investments, usury (Matthew 25:16-27; John 2:13-17). The taking of interest does not seem to be explicitly condemned in the New Testament. The person of the debtor, as well as his family and lands, could be seized for non-payment of debt (Matthew 18:21-26). Indeed, the debtor was often cast into prison and tormented because of non-payment (Matthew 18:30, 34). That compassion and leniency should be exercised toward those in debt is the clear teaching of Christ in the parables of the Unmerciful Servant (Matthew 18:23-35) and the Two Debtors (Luke 7:41-43).

Figurative: Debt and debtor are used in a moral sense also as indicating the obligation of a righteous life which we owe to God. To fall short in righteous living is to become a debtor. For this reason we pray, "Forgive us our debts" (Matthew 6:12). Those who are ministered to in spiritual things are said to be debtors to those who minister to them (Romans 15:27). To make a vow to God is to put one's self in debt in a moral sense (Matthew 23:16-18; the Revised Version, margin "bound by his oath"). In a deeply spiritual sense the apostle Paul professed to be in debt to all men in that he owed them the opportunity to do them good (Romans 1:14).

The parables of Jesus as above named are rich with comforting truth. How beautiful is the willingness of God, the great and Divine Creditor, to release us from our indebtedness! Just so ought we to be imitators of the Father in heaven who is merciful.

William Evans

Decalogue

Decalogue - dek'-a-log.

See TEN COMMANDMENTS.

Decapolis

Decapolis - de-kap'-o-lis (Dekapolis): The name given to the region occupied by a league of "ten cities" (Matthew 4:25; Mark 5:20; 7:31), which Eusebius defines (in Onomastica) as "lying in the Peraea, round Hippos, Pella and Gadara." Such combinations of Greek cities arose as Rome assumed dominion in the East, to promote their common interests in trade and commerce, and for mutual protection against the peoples surrounding them. This particular league seems to have been constituted about the time of Pompey's campaign in Syria, 65 BC, by which several cities in Decapolis dated their eras. They were independent of the local tetrarchy, and answerable directly to the governor of Syria. They enjoyed the rights of association and asylum; they struck their own coinage, paid imperial taxes and were liable to military service (Ant., XIV, iv, 4; BJ, I, vii, 7; II, xviii, 3; III, ix, 7; Vita, 65, 74). Of the ten cities, Scythopolis, the ancient Bethshean, alone, the capital of the league, was on the West side of Jordan. The names given by Pliny (NH, v.18) are Scythopolis (Beisan), Hippos (Susiyeh), Gadara (Umm Qeis), Pella (Fahil), Philadelphia (`Amman), Gerasa (Jerash), Dion (Adun?), Canatha (Qanawat), Damascus and Raphana. The last named is not identified, and Dion is uncertain. Other cities joined the league, and Ptolemy, who omits Raphans, gives a list of 18. The Greek inhabitants were never on good terms with the Jews; and the herd of swine (Mark 5:11 ff) indicates contempt for what was probably regarded as Jewish prejudice. The ruins still seen at Gadara, but especially at Kanawat (see KENATH) and Jerash, of temples, theaters and other public buildings, attest the splendor of these cities in their day.

W. Ewing

Decay

Decay - de-ka': Although this word is still in good use in both its literal sense, of the putrefaction of either animal or vegetable matter, and its derived sense, denoting any deterioration, decline or gradual failure, the Revised Version (British and American) has replaced it by other expressions in Leviticus 25:35; Ecclesiastes 10:18; Isaiah 44:26; Hebrews 8:13; in some of these cases with a gain in accuracy of translation. In Nehemiah 4:10 (kashal, "to be feeble," "stumble") the Revised Version (British and American) retains "is decayed"; in Job 14:11 (charebh, "to be dried up") the American Standard Revised Version substitutes "wasteth," and in John 11:39 the American Standard Revised Version has "the body decayeth" instead of the more literal translation offensive to modern ears (ozei, "emits a smell").

F. K. Farr

Decease, in New Testament

Decease, in New Testament - de-ses' (teleutao, "to come to an end," "married and deceased" (Matthew 22:25)): With thanato, "death," "die the death" (Matthew 15:4; Mark 7:10, the Revised Version, margin "surely die"). Elsewhere the word is translated "die" (Matthew 2:19; 9:18; Mark 9:48 and often; Hebrews 11:22, the Revised Version (British and American) "end was nigh").

Also the substantive, exodos, "exodus," "exit," "departure," "his decease which he was about to accomplish" (Luke 9:31, the Revised Version, margin "departure"); "after my decease" (2 Peter 1:15, the Revised Version, margin "departure").

Decease, in the Old Testament and Apocyphra

Decease, in the Old Testament and Apocyphra - de-ses' (rapha', plural repha'im, "ghosts," "shades," is translated by "dead," "dead body," and "deceased" in both the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American)): The word seems to mean "soft," "inert," but its etymology is uncertain (see REPHAIM). The various writers of the Old Testament present, as is to be expected on such a subject, different conceptions of the condition of the deceased. In the beginning probably a vague idea of the continuation of existence was held, without the activities (Isaiah 59:10) and the joys of the present life (Psalms 49:17). They dwell in the "land of forgetfulness" (Job 14:21; Psalms 88:5; compare Isaiah 26:14), they "tremble" of cold (Job 26:5), they totter and "stumble at noonday as in the twilight" (Isaiah 59:10), their voice is described as low and muttering or chirping (Isaiah 8:19; 29:4), which may refer to the peculiar pitch of the voice of the spirit medium when a spirit speaks through him. (The calling up of the dead, which was strictly forbidden to Israel (Leviticus 19:31; 20:27) is referred to in 1 Samuel 28:13 and perhaps in Isaiah 14:9.) The deceased are separated from their friends; love and hatred have both ceased with them (Ecclesiastes 9:5-6); "There is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in Sheol" (Ecclesiastes 9:10). The deceased are unable to praise Yahweh (Psalms 6:5; Psalms 88:10-12; Isaiah 38:18; Baruch 2:17; Sirach 17:27, 28). Nor does there seem to have been at first an anticipation of reward or punishment after death (Psalms 88:10; Sirach 41:4), probably because the shades were supposed to be lacking the organs by which either reward or punishment could be perceived; nevertheless they are still in the realm of God's power (1 Samuel 2:6; Psalms 86:13; 139:8; Proverbs 15:11; Isaiah 7:11; Hosea 13:14; Amos 9:2; Tobit 13:2).

Gradually the possibility of a return of the departed was conceived (Genesis 5:24; 2 Kings 13:21; Psalms 49:15; 73:24; 86:13; Hosea 13:14; Wisdom of Solomon 3:1-7; 13, 14; 18, 19; 10:14). Even here it is often more the idea of the immortality of the soul than that of the resurrection of the body, and some of these passages may be interpreted as allegorical expressions for a temporal rescue from great disaster (e.g. 1 Samuel 2:6); nevertheless this interpretation presupposes the existence of a deliverance from the shadows of Sheol to a better life in the presence of Yahweh. Some passages refer clearly to such an escape at the end of the age (Daniel 12:2; Isaiah 26:19). Only very few of the Old Testament believers reached the sublime faith of Job (Isaiah 19:25, 25) and none the blessed expectation taught in the New Testament, for none but Christ has "brought life and immortality to light" (2 Timothy 1:10; John 5:28-29).

The opinion that the dead or at least the newly buried could partake of the food which was placed in graves, a custom which recent excavations have clearly shown to have been almost universal in Palestine, and which is referred to in Deuteronomy 26:14 and Tobit 4:17, was soon doubted (Sirach 30:18), and food and drink prepared for the funeral was henceforth intended as the "bread of comfort" and the "cup of consolation" for the mourners (Jeremiah 16:7; 2 Samuel 3:35; Ezekiel 24:17). Similarly the offering and burning of incense, originally an homage to the deceased, became a relief for the mourner (2 Chronicles 16:14; 21:19; Jeremiah 34:5). See also Wisdom of Solomon 3:2; 7:6; Sirach 38:23, and articles on CORPSE; DEATH; HADES; SHEOL.

H. L. E. Luering

Deceit

Deceit - de-set' (mirmah; (dolos): The intentional misleading or beguiling of another; in Scripture represented as a companion of many other forms of wickedness, as cursing (Psalms 10:7), hatred (Proverbs 26:24), theft, covetousness, adultery, murder (Mark 7:22; Romans 1:29). The Revised Version (British and American) introduces the word in Proverbs 14:25; 2 Thessalonians 2:10; but in such passages as Psalms 55:11; Proverbs 20:17; 26:26; 1 Thessalonians 2:3, renders a variety of words, more accurately than the King James Version, by "oppression," "falsehood," "guile," "error."

Deceivableness; Deceive

Deceivableness; Deceive - de-sev'-a-b'-l-nes, de-sev' (nasha', "to lead astray"): "The pride of thy heart hath deceived thee" (Jeremiah 49:16), i.e. "Thy stern mountain fastnesses have persuaded thee that thou art impregnable." In Jeremiah 20:7, "O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived," pathah, signifies "to be enticed," "persuaded," as in the American Standard Revised Version and the Revised Version, margin.

In the Old Testament most often, and in the New Testament regularly, the various words rendered in the King James Version "deceive" denote some deliberate misleading in the moral or spiritual realm. False prophets (Jeremiah 29:8), false teachers (Ephesians 5:6) and Satan himself (Revelation 12:9) are deceivers in this sense. In the gospels, the King James Version "deceive" (planao, 9 times Matthew 24:4-5 parallel Mark 13:5-6 parallel Luke 21:8; Matthew 24:11, 24; John 7:12, 47) becomes in the Revised Version (British and American) "lead astray"; the same change is made in 1 John 2:26; 3:7; but elsewhere (13 t) both the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) render planao by "deceive."

"Deceivableness" (apate), only in 2 Thessalonians 2:10, signifies power to deceive, not liability to deception; the Revised Version (British and American) "deceit."

F. K. Farr

Decently

Decently - de'-sent-li (euschemonos): Only once is this word found in our English Bible (1 Corinthians 14:40). It is in the last verse of that remarkable chapter on the proper use of spiritual gifts in the church and the proper conduct of public worship. It does not refer here to absence of impurity or obscenity. It rather refers to good order in the conduct of public worship. All things that are done and said in public worship are to be in harmony with that becoming and reverent spirit and tone that befit the true worshippers of God.

Decision

Decision - de-sizh'-un: Has several different shades of meaning. It expresses the formation of a judgment on a matter under consideration. It expresses the quality of being firm or positive in one's actions. It expresses the termination of a contest or question in favor of one side or the other, as the decision of the battle, or the decision of the judge.

1. National Decisions: Until recent times the decision of disputed points between nations was determined by force of arms. Thus the questions of dispute were decided between Israel and the surrounding tribes, between Israel and Assyria, between Israel and Egypt, and later between Judea and Rome.

2. Judicial Decisions: In the earliest times the questions of dispute between individuals were decided by the patriarch who was the head of the family. When Israel became a nation men were appointed to decide the difficulties between the people. At first this was one of the most important duties of Moses, but when the task became too great he appointed judges to assist him (see Exodus 18:13-26). One important function of those who are called judges was to decide the difficulties between the people (see Judges 4:4-5). The kings also decided questions of dispute between individuals (see 2 Samuel 15:1-6; 1 Kings 3:16-28). As the people developed in their national ideals the decisions in judicial matters were rendered by councils appointed for that purpose.

3. Methods of Forming Decisions: Perplexing questions were many times decided by the casting of lots. The people believed that God would in this way direct them to the right decision (Proverbs 16:33; Joshua 7:10-21; 14:2; 1 Samuel 10:20 f). Casting lots must have been a common method of deciding perplexing questions (see 1 Samuel 14:41-42; Jonah 1:7). It was resorted to by the apostles to decide which of the two men they had selected should take the place of Judas (Acts 1:21-26). The custom gradually lost in favor, and decisions, even of perplexing questions, were formed by considering all the facts.

See AUGURY,IV , 3; LOTS.

A. W. Fortune

Decision, Valley of

Decision, Valley of - See JEHOSHAPHAT, VALLEY OF.

Declaration; Declare

Declaration; Declare - dek-la-ra'-shun, deklar': "Declare" is the translation of a variety of Hebrew and Greek words in the Old Testament and New Testament, appearing to bear uniformly the meaning "to make known," "set forth," rather than (the older meaning) "to explain" (Deuteronomy 1:5). Declaration (Esther 10:2 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "full account"; Job 13:17; Ecclesiasticus 43:6; Luke 11:1-54 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "narrative"; 2 Corinthians 8:19 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "to show") has the like meaning.

Decline

Decline - de-klin' [(@cur], or sur, naTah): In the King James Version this word occurs 9 times in its original sense (now obsolete) of "turn aside." the Revised Version (British and American) substitutes "turn aside" in Exodus 23:2; Deuteronomy 17:11; 2 Chronicles 34:2; Job 23:11. In Psalms 102:11; 109:23, the lengthening shadows of afternoon are said to "decline," and the Revised Version (British and American) introduces the word in the same general sense in Judges 19:8; 2 Kings 20:10; Jeremiah 6:4.

See AFTERNOON.

Dedan; Dedanites

Dedan; Dedanites - de'-dan, de'dan-its (the King James Version Dedanim, ded'-a-nim; dedhan, "low," dedhanim): An Arabian people named in Genesis 10:7 as descended from Cush; in Genesis 25:3 as descended from Keturah. Evidently, they were, like the related Sheba (Sabaeans), of mixed race (compare Genesis 10:7, 28). In Isaiah 21:13 allusion is made to the "caravans of Dedanites" in the wilds of Arabia, and Ezek mentions them as supplying Tyre with precious things (Ezekiel 27:20; in verse Ezekiel 15:1-8, "Dedan" should probably be read as in Septuagint, "Rodan," i.e. Rhodians). The name seems still to linger in the island of Dadan, on the border of the Persian Gulf. It is found also in Min. and Sab. inscriptions (Glazer, II, 392 ff).

James Orr

Dedicate; Dedication

Dedicate; Dedication - ded'-i-kat, ded-ika'-shun (chanukkah, "initiation," "consecration"; qadhesh, "to be clean," "sanctify"; cherem, "a thing devoted (to God)"): Often used in Hebrew of the consecration of persons, but usually in the English Versions of the Bible of the setting apart of things to a sacred use, as of the altar (Numbers 7:10 f,84,88; compare Daniel 3:2-3, "the dedication of the image"), of silver and gold (2 Samuel 8:11; 2 Kings 12:4), of the Temple (1 Kings 8:63; Ezra 6:16 f; compare Exodus 29:44), of the wall of Jerusalem (Nehemiah 12:27), of private dwellings (Deuteronomy 20:5). the Revised Version (British and American) substitutes "devoted" for "dedicated" in Ezekiel 44:29.

See CONSECRATION ; SANCTIFICATION.

Dedication, Feast of

Dedication, Feast of - ded-i-ka'-shun (ta egkainia, John 10:22): A feast held by the Jews throughout the country for eight days, commencing on the 25th Kiclev (December), in commemoration of the cleansing of the temple and dedication of the altar by Judas Maccabeus after their desecration by Antiochus Epiphanes (1 Maccabees 4:56, 59). The feast was to be kept "with mirth and gladness." 2 Maccabees 10:6, 7 says it was kept like the Feast of the Tabernacles, with the carrying of palm and other branches, and the singing of psalms. Josephus calls it "Lights," from the joy which accompanied it (Ant., XII, vii, 7). At this winter feast Jesus delivered in the temple the discourse recorded in John 10:24 ff, at Jerusalem.

James Orr

Deed

Deed - ded: Used in its ordinary modern sense in EV. In the Old Testament it is used to translates five Hebrew words: gemylah, literally, "recompense" (Isaiah 59:18); dabhar, literally, "word," "thing" (2 Chronicles 35:27 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "acts"; Esther 1:17-18; Jeremiah 5:28); ma`aseh (Genesis 20:9; 44:15; Ezra 9:13); `alilah (1 Chronicles 16:8 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "doings"; Psalms 105:1 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "doings"); po`al (Psalms 28:4 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "work"; Jeremiah 25:14). In the New Testament "deed" very frequently translates ergon (same root as English "work"; compare "energy"), which is still more frequently (espescially in the Revised Version (British and American)) rendered "work." In Luke 23:51; Acts 19:18; Romans 8:13; Colossians 3:9 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "doings," it stands for Greek praxis (literally, "a doing," "transaction"), each time in a bad sense, equivalent to wicked deed, crime, a meaning which is frequently associated with the plural of praxis (compare English "practices" in the sense of trickery; so often in Polybius; Deissmann maintains that praxis was a technical term in magic), although in Matthew 16:27 (the King James Version "works") and Romans 12:4 the same Greek word has a neutral meaning. In James 1:25 the King James Version "deed" is the translation of Greek poiesis, more correctly rendered "doing" in the Revised Version (British and American).

D. Miall Edwards

Deep

Deep - (tehom; abussos, Luke 8:31 the King James Version; Romans 10:7 the King James Version; bathos, Luke 5:4; buthos, 2 Corinthians 11:25): The Hebrew word ("water in commotion") is used (1) of the primeval watery waste (Genesis 1:2), where some suggest a connection with Babylonian Tiamat in the creation-epic; (2) of the sea (Isaiah 51:10 and commonly); (3) of the subterranean reservoir of water (Genesis 7:11; 8:2; 49:25; Deuteronomy 33:13; Ezekiel 31:4, etc.). In the Revised Version (British and American) the Greek word first noted is rendered, literally, "abyss."

See ABYSS; also ASTRONOMY, sec. III, 7.

Deep Sleep

Deep Sleep - See SLEEP, DEEP.

Deer

Deer - der ('ayyal, feminine 'ayyalah, and 'ayyeleth (compare Arabic, 'ayyal and 'iyal, "deer" and 'ayil, "ram," and Latin caper and capra, "goat," caprea, capreolus, "wild goat," "chamois," or "roe deer"); yachmur (compare Arabic, yachmur, "deer"); ya`alah, feminine of ya`el (compare Arabic, wa`l, "Pers wild goat"); tsebhi, and feminine tsebhiyah (compare Arabic, zabi and feminine zabiyah, "gazelle"]; `opher (compare Arabic, ghafr and ghufr, "young of the mountain goat")):

Of the words in the preceding list, the writer believes that only the first two, i.e. 'ayyal (with its feminine forms) and yachmur should be translated "deer," 'ayyal for the roe deer and yachmur for the fallow deer. Further, he believes that ya`el (including ya`alah) should be translated "ibex," and tsebhi, "gazelle." `Opher is the young of a roe deer or of a gazelle.

'Ayyal and its feminine forms are regularly in English Versions of the Bible rendered "hart" and "hind," terms which are more commonly applied to the male and female of the red deer, Cervus elaphus, which inhabits Great Britain, the continent of Europe, the Caucasus and Asia Minor, but which has never been reported as far south as Syria or Palestine. The roe deer, Capreolus caprea, however, which inhabits the British Isles, the greater part of Europe, the Caucasus and Persia, is certainly found in Palestine. The museum of the Syrian Protestant College at Beirut possesses the skeleton of a roe deer which was shot in the mountains near Tyre. As late as 1890 it was fairly common in southern Lebanon and Carmel, but has now (1912) become very scarce. The fallow deer, Cervus dama, is a native of Northern Africa and countries about the Mediterranean. It is found in central Europe and Great Britain, where it has been introduced from its more southern habitat. A variety of the fallow deer, sometimes counted as a separate species under the name of Cervus Mesopotamicus, inhabits northeastern Mesopotamia and Persia. It may in former times have been found in Palestine, and Tristram reports having seen the fallow deer in Galilee (Fauna and Flora of Pal), but while Tristram was a remarkably acute observer, he appears sometimes to have been too readily satisfied, and his observations, when unaccompanied, as in this case, by specimens, are to be accepted with caution. Now 'ayyal (and its feminine forms) occurs in the Bible 22 times, while yachmur occurs only twice, i.e. in the list of clean animals in Deuteronomy 14:5, and in 1 Kings 4:23, in the list of animals provided for Solomon's table. In both places the King James Version has "fallow deer" and the Revised Version (British and American) "roebuck." In view of the fact that the roe deer has within recent years been common in Palestine, while the occurrence of the fallow deer must be considered doubtful, it seems fair to render 'ayyal "roe deer" or "roebuck," leaving yachmur for fallow deer.

The Arabs call the roe deer both 'ayyal and wa`l. Wa`l is the proper name of the Persian wild goat, Capra aegagrus, and is also often used for the Arabic or Sinaitic ibex, Capra beden, though only by those who do not live within its range. Where the ibex is at home it is always called beden. This looseness of nomenclature must be taken into account, and we have no reason to suppose that the Hebrews were more exact than are the Arabs. There are many examples of this in English, e.g. panther, coney, rabbit (in America), locust, adder and many others.

Ya`el (including ya`alah) occurs 4 times. In Job 39:1; Psalms 104:18; 1 Samuel 24:2, English Versions of the Bible render ya`el by "wild goat." For ya`alah in Proverbs 5:19, the King James Version has "roe," while the Revised Version (British and American) has "doe," which is non-committal, since the name, "doe," may be applied to the female of a deer or of an ibex. Since the Arabic, wa`l, which is etymologically closely akin to ya`el, means the Persian wild goat, it might be supposed that that animal was meant, were it not that it inhabits the plains of the Syrian desert, and not the mountains of Southern Palestine, where the ibex lives. At least two of the passages clearly indicate the latter locality, i.e. Psalms 104:18: "The high mountains are for the wild goats," and 1 Samuel 24:2: "Saul .... went to seek David and his men upon the rocks of the wild goats." The conclusion then seems irresistible that ya`el, and consequently ya`alah, is the ibex.

Tsebhi (including tsebhiyah) is uniformly rendered "roe" or "roebuck" in the King James Version, while the Revised Version (British and American), either in the text or in the margin, has in most cases "gazelle." In two places "roe" is retained in the Revised Version (British and American) without comment, i.e. 2 Samuel 2:18: "Asahel was as light of foot as a wild roe," and 1 Chronicles 12:8: "were as swift as the roes upon the mountains." 'Ayyal and tsebhi occur together in Deuteronomy 12:15, 22; 14:5; 15:22; 1 Kings 4:23; Song of Solomon 2:9, 17, i.e. in 7 of the 16 passages in which we find tsebhi. If therefore it be accepted that 'ayyal is the roe deer, it follows that tsebhi must be something else. Now the gazelle is common in Palestine and satisfies perfectly every passage in which we find tsebhi. Further, one of the Arabic names of the gazelle is zabi, a word which is etymologically much nearer to tsebhi than appears in this transliteration.

'Opher is akin to `aphar, "dust," and has reference to the color of the young of the deer or gazelle, to both of which it is applied. In Song of Solomon 2:9, 17 and Song of Solomon 8:14, we have `opher ha-'ayyalim, English Versions of the Bible "young hart," literally, "fawn of the roe deer." In Song of Solomon 4:5 and Song of Solomon 7:3, we have `opharim te'ome tsebhiyah, the King James Version "young roes that are twins," the Revised Version (British and American) "fawns that are twins of a roe," the Revised Version, margin "gazelle" (for "roe"). For further reference to these questions, see ZOOLOGY.

With the exception of mere lists of animals, as in Deuteronomy 14:1-29 and 1 Kings 4:1-34, the treatment of these animals is highly poetical, and shows much appreciation of their grace and beauty.

Alfred Ely Day

Defame; Defaming

Defame; Defaming - de-fam', de-fam'-ing: These words occur but twice in the King James Version, and are translations of dibbah, "slander," from dabhath, "to slander," or spread an evil report, and blasphemeo, "to speak injuriously" of anyone (Jeremiah 20:10; 1 Corinthians 4:13). "To defame" differs from "to revile" in that the former refers to public slander, the latter to personal abuse.

Defect; Defective

Defect; Defective - de-fekt', de-fekt'-iv (hettema, "loss," "a defect"): Occurs in 1 Corinthians 6:7: "Nay, already it is altogether a defect in you (the King James Version "there is utterly a fault among you"), that ye have lawsuits one with another." "Defect" means "want or absence of something necessary for completeness" (the Revised Version, margin "a loss to you"). The meaning of the passage in the Revised Version (British and American) is that when Christians have lawsuits one with another it produces a lack of something which brings them short of completeness, they suffer a spiritual loss or defeat, and perhaps defect is not quite strong enough fully to express that idea.

Defective: Sirach 49:4 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "committed trespass."

A. W. Fortune

Defence

Defence - de-fens'.

See COURTS, JUDICIAL.

Defenced

Defenced - See FORTIFICATION.

Defer

Defer - de-fur' ('achar (in Hiphil), 'arakh (in Hiphil), mashakh (in Niphal), "to postpone," more or less definitely; "delay"): In Old Testament passages such as Isaiah 48:9; Ezekiel 12:25, 28; Daniel 9:19, the idea of indefinite postponement agrees with the Hebrew and with the context. In the only New Testament occurrence of the word anaballo, in the middle voice, Acts 24:22) a definite postponement is implied.

Defile; Defilement

Defile; Defilement - de-fil', de-fil'-ment (Anglo-Saxon, afylau, etc.; Middle English, defoulen, "make foul," "pollute," render (the King James Version) 9 Hebrew roots (the Revised Version (British and American) six): ga`al, "defile"; chalal, "defile" (from "untie, loosen, open," i.e. "make common," hence, "profane"); chaneph, "incline away" (from right or religion), hence, "profane," "defile" (Jeremiah 3:9, the American Standard Revised Version "pollute"); Tame', the principal root, over 250 times translated "defile" 74 times "to become, or render, unclean"; Tanaph, "to soil" (Song of Solomon 5:3); `alal, "deal severely, or decidedly, with," "roll" (Job 16:15, the King James Version, the American Revised Version, margin); `anah, "humble" (Genesis 34:2 the King James Version, the American Standard Revised Version "humble"); qadhash, "separate," "sanctify," "devote to religious use," hence, "forfeit" (Deuteronomy 22:9 the King James Version, the American Standard Revised Version "forfeit," margin "consecrated"). They also render 6 (the King James Version) Greek roots (American Revised Version, 4): koinos, etc., "common" or "unclean," because appertaining to the outside world and not to the people of God, opposite of katharos, "clean," used 13 times; miaino, miasma, miasmos, "stain," "tinge," "dye": "In their dreamings defile the flesh," Jude 1:8; moluno, "stain," "contaminate": "not defile their garments" (Revelation 3:4); spiloo, "spot," "stain": "defile the whole body" (James 3:6); phtheiro, "corrupt," "destroy": the temple of God (1 Corinthians 3:17 the King James Version, the American Standard Revised Version "destroyeth"); arsenokoites: "defile themselves with men" (1 Timothy 1:10 the King James Version, the American Standard Revised Version "abusers of")):

1. Defilement in the Old Testament: Defilement in the Old Testament was physical, sexual, ethical, ceremonial, religious, the last four, especially, overlapping. (1) Physical: "I have washed my feet; how shall I defile them?" (Song of Solomon 5:3). (2) Sexual: which might be ceremonial or moral; of individuals by illicit intercourse (Leviticus 18:20), or by intercourse at forbidden times (Leviticus 15:24; 1 Samuel 21:5); of the land by adultery: "Shall not that land be greatly defiled?" (Jeremiah 3:1 the American Standard Revised Version "polluted," usually substituted where the moral or religious predominates over the ceremonial). (3) Ethical: "Your hands are defiled with blood" (Isaiah 59:3); "Neither shall they defile themselves any more with .... any of their transgressions" (Ezekiel 37:23). (4) Ceremonial: to render ceremonially unclean, i.e. disqualified for religious service or worship, and capable of communicating the disqualification. (a) Persons were defiled by contact with carcasses of unclean animals (Leviticus 11:24); or with any carcass (Leviticus 17:15); by eating a carcass (Leviticus 22:8); by contact with issues from the body, one's own or another's, e.g. abnormal issues from the genitals, male or female (Leviticus 15:2, 25); menstruation (Leviticus 15:19); by contact with anyone thus unclean (Leviticus 15:24); copulation (Leviticus 15:16-18); uncleanness after childbirth (Leviticus 12:2-5); by contact with unclean persons (Leviticus 5:3), or unclean things (Leviticus 22:6), or with leprosy (especially defiling; Leviticus 13:14), or with the dead (Numbers 6:12), or with one unclean by such contact (Numbers 19:22), or by funeral rites (Leviticus 21:1); by contact with creeping things (Leviticus 22:5), or with unclean animals (Leviticus 11:26). (b) Holy objects were ceremonially defiled by the contact, entrance or approach of the defiled (Leviticus 15:31; Numbers 19:13); by the presence of dead bodies, or any remains of the dead (Ezekiel 9:7; 2 Kings 23:16: Josiah's defilement of heathen altars by the ashes of the priests); by the entrance of foreigners (Psalms 79:1; see Acts 21:28); by forbidden treatment, as the altar by being tooled (Exodus 20:25); objects in general by contact with the unclean. Ceremonial defilement, strictly considered, implied, not sin, but ritual unfitness. (5) Religious: not always easily distinguished or entirely distinguishable from the ceremonial, still less from the ethical, but in which the central attitude and relationship to Yahweh as covenant God and God of righteousness, was more fully in question. The land might be defiled by bloodshed (Numbers 35:33), especially of the just or innocent; by adultery (Jeremiah 3:1); by idolatry and idolatrous practices, like sacrificing children to idols, etc. (Leviticus 20:3; Psalms 106:39); the temple or altar by disrespect (Malachi 1:7, 12); by offering the unclean (Haggai 2:14); by any sort of unrighteousness (Ezekiel 36:17); by the presence of idols or idolatrous paraphernalia (Jeremiah 7:30).

2. Defilement in New Testament: The scope of defilement in its various degrees (direct, or primary, as from the person or thing defiled; indirect, or secondary, tertiary, or even further, by contact with the defiled) had been greatly widened by rabbinism into a complex and immensely burdensome system whose shadow falls over the whole New Testament life. Specific mentions are comparatively few. Physical defilement is not mentioned. Sexual defilement appears, in a figurative sense: "These are they that were not defiled with women" (Revelation 14:4). Ceremonial defilement is found in, but not approved by, the New Testament. Examples are: by eating with unwashed, "common," not ceremonially cleansed, hands (Mark 7:2); by eating unclean, "common," food (Acts 10:14; Peter's vision); by intimate association with Gentiles, such as eating with them (not expressly forbidden in Mosaic law; Acts 11:3), or entering into their houses (John 18:28; the Pharisees refusing to enter the Pretorium); by the presence of Gentiles in the Temple (Acts 21:28).

But with Christ's decisive and revolutionary dictum (Mark 7:19): "This he said, making all meats clean," etc., and with the command in Peter's vision: "What God hath cleansed, make not thou common" (Acts 10:15), and with Paul's bold and consistent teaching: "All things indeed are clean" (Romans 14:20, etc.), the idea of ceremonial or ritual defilement, having accomplished its educative purpose, passed. Defilement in the New Testament teaching, therefore, is uniformly ethical or spiritual, the two constantly merging. The ethical is found more predominantly in: "The things which proceed out of the mouth come forth out of the heart; and they defile the man" (Matthew 15:18); "that did not defile their garments" (Revelation 3:4); "defileth the whole body" (James 3:6). The spiritual seems to predominate in: "defiled and unbelieving" (Titus 1:15); "conscience being weak is defiled" (by concession to idolatry.) (1 Corinthians 8:7); "lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby the many be defiled" (Hebrews 12:15). For the supposed origins of the idea and details of defilement, as from hygienic or aesthetic causes, "natural aversions," "taboo," "totemism," associations with ideas of death, or evil life, religious symbolism, etc., see POLLUTION; PURIFICATION; UNCLEANNESS. Whatever use God may have made of ideas and feelings common among many nations in some form, the Divine purpose was clearly to impress deeply and indelibly on the Israelites the ideas of holiness and sacredness in general, and of Yahweh's holiness, and their own required holiness and separateness in particular, thus preparing for the deep New Testament teachings of sin, and of spiritual consecration and sanctification.

Philip Wendell Crannell

Defy

Defy - de-fi' (charaph, za`am): In 1 Samuel 17:10, 25, 26, 36, 45 (the story of David and Goliath) and kindred passages, this word is used in its most familiar sense--"to taunt," "challenge to combat" (Hebrew charaph). In Numbers 23:7-8 "denounce" would be a better translation than "defy" (Hebrew za`am).

Degenerate

Degenerate - de-jen'-er-at: Only in Jeremiah 2:21, where Judah is compared to a "noble vine" which it "turned into the degenerate branches of a foreign vine." It represents Hebrew curim = "stray" or "degenerate (shoots)," from cur = "to turn aside," especially to turn aside from the right path (Greek pikria, literally, "bitterness").

Degree

Degree - de-gre' (ma`alah, "a going up" or "ascent," hence, a staircase or flight of steps; "rank": tapeinos, "low"): By derivation it should mean "a step down" (Latin, de, down, gradus, step). It is used, however, of any step, up or down; then of grade or rank, whether high or low. (1) In its literal sense of step (as of a stair), it is used in the plural to translate Hebrew ma`aloth ("steps"), in the parallel passages 2 Kings 20:9-11 the King James Version (5 t); Isaiah 38:8 the King James Version (3 t), where we read of the "degrees" (the Revised Version (British and American) "steps") on the "dial of Ahaz" (Hebrew "steps of Ahaz"). See DIAL OF AHAZ. It seems to mean steps or progressive movements of the body toward a certain place in the phrase "A Song of Degrees" (the Revised Version (British and American) "Ascents"), which forms the title of each of the Psalms 120:1-7 through Psalms 134:1-3, probably because they were sung on the way up to the great feasts at Jerusalem. See PSALMS (2) The secondary (but now the more usual) sense of rank, order, grade is found in the following passages: (a) 1 Chronicles 15:18, "their brethren of the second (degree)," literally, "of the seconds" (Hebrew mishnim; compare 2 Chronicles 28:7, "Elkanah that was next to the king," Hebrew, "the king's second," i.e. in rank); (b) 1 Chronicles 17:17, "a man of high degree" (Hebrew ma`alah, "step"); (c) Psalms 62:9, "men of low degree .... men of high degree," a paraphrase of Hebrew "sons of man .... sons of man," the first "man" being Hebrew 'adham ("common humanity"; compare Greek anthropos, Latin homo, Welsh dyn), and the second Hebrew 'ish (man in a superior sense; compare Greek aner, Latin vir, Welsh gwr) ; (d) "of low degree" for Greek tapeinos in Sirach 11:1; Luke 1:52; James 1:9; (e) In 1 Timothy 3:13 the King James Version "a good degree" (Greek bathmos kalos, the Revised Version (British and American) "a good standing") is assured to those who have "served well as deacons." Some take this to mean promotion to a higher official position in the church; but it probably means simply a position of moral weight and influence in the church gained by faithfulness in service (so Hort).

D. Miall Edwards

Degrees, Songs of

Degrees, Songs of - (shir ha-ma`aloth; Septuagint ode ton anabathmon; Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) canticum graduum, the Revised Version (British and American) "a song of ascents"): The title prefixed to 15 psalms (Psalms 120:1-7 through 134) as to the significance of which there are four views: (1) The Jewish interpretation. According to the Mishna, Middoth 2 5, Cukkah 51b, there was in the temple a semi-circular flight of stairs with 15 steps which led from the court of the men of Israel down to the court of the women. Upon these stairs the Levites played on musical instruments on the evening of the first day of Tabernacles. Later Jewish writers say that the 15 psalms derived their title from the 15 steps. (2) Gesenius, Delitzsch and others affirm that these psalms derive their name from the step-like progressive rhythm of their thoughts. They are called Songs of Degrees because they move forward climactically by means of the resumption of the immediately preceding word. But this characteristic is not found in several of the group. (3) Theodoret and other Fathers explain these 15 hymns as traveling songs of the returning exiles. In Ezra 7:9 the return from exile is called "the going up (ha-ma`alah) from Babylon." Several of the group suit this situation quite well, but others presuppose the temple and its stated services. (4) The most probable view is that the hymns were sung by pilgrim bands on their way to the three great festivals of the Jewish year. The journey to Jerusalem was called a "going up," whether the worshipper came from north or south, east or west. All of the songs are suitable for use on such occasions. Hence, the title Pilgrim Psalms is preferred by many scholars.

See DIAL OF AHAZ.

John Richard Sampey

Dehaites

Dehaites - de-ha'-tez (dehawe'; the King James Version Dehavites): A people enumerated in Ezra 4:9 with Elamites, ere, as among those settled by the Assyrian king Osnappar (Assurbanipal) in Samaria. The identification is uncertain.

Dehort

Dehort - de-hort' (apostrepho; the Revised Version (British and American) DISSUADE): Not found in the English Bible; once only in Apocrypha (1 Maccabees 9:9). An obsolete English word; the opposite of "exhort." It means "to dissuade," "to forbid," "to restrain from."

Dekar

Dekar - de'-kar (deqer, "lancer"): Father of one of Solomon's commissaries (1 Kings 4:9 the King James Version).

See BEN-DEKER.

Delaiah

Delaiah - de-la'-ya (delayah, "God has raised"):

(1) A descendant of David (1 Chronicles 3:24; the King James Version "Dalaiah").

(2) One of David's priests and leader of the 23rd course (1 Chronicles 24:18).

(3) One of the princes who pleaded with Jehoiakim not to destroy the roll containing the prophecies of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 36:12, 25).

(4) The ancestor of a post-exilic family whose genealogy was lost (Ezra 2:60; Nehemiah 7:62; 1 Esdras 5:37 margin).

See DALAN.

(5) The father of timorous Shemaiah (Nehemiah 6:10).

Delay

Delay - de-la': The noun "delay" (Acts 25:17, "I made no delay"; the King James Version "without any delay") means "procrastination." The verb "to delay" (Exodus 22:29; 'achar) involves the idea "to stop for a time," the people being admonished not to discontinue a custom. The Pil. perfect of bush (Exodus 32:1), "Moses delayed to come," expresses not only the fact that he tarried, but also the disappointment on the part of the people, being under the impression that he possibly was put to shame and had failed in his mission, which also better explains the consequent action of the people. "To delay" (chronizo) is used transitively in Matthew 24:48 (the Revised Version (British and American) "My lord tarrieth") and in Luke 12:45. The meaning here is "to prolong," "to defer."

A. L. Breslich

Delectable

Delectable - de-lek'-ta-bl (chamadh, "to desire"): Found only in Isaiah 44:9, King James Version: "Their delectable things shall not profit," the King James Version margin"desirable." the American Standard Revised Version translates: "the things that they delight in." The reference is to idols or images. Delitzsch renders the phrase: "Their darlings are good for nothing." The word may be traced back to the Latin delectabilis, "pleasant," or "delightful."

Delicacy

Delicacy - del'-i-ka-si (to strenos): Found only in Revelation 18:3, King James Version: "The merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies." the Revised Version (British and American) has very properly changed delicacies to "wantonness," and "luxury" in the margin, which is much nearer to the original.

Delicate; Delicately

Delicate; Delicately - del'-i-kat, del'-i-kat-li (`edhen, `anogh; en truphe): "Delicate" usually an adjective, but once a substantive (Jeremiah 51:34 the King James Version). "He hath filled his belly (the Revised Version (British and American) "maw") with my delicates." the Revised Version (British and American) retains the word, but the American Standard Revised Version very properly has replaced it with "delicacies." In Sirach 30:18, the Revised Version (British and American) agatha, "good things." The adjective seems to have two meanings, though not easily distinguished: (1) tenderly reared, and (2) wanton or voluptuous. In Deuteronomy 28:54, 56; Isaiah 47:1; Jeremiah 6:2, "luxurious" or "daintily bred" would certainly be nearer the original than "delicate." "Delicate children" of Micah 1:16, the King James Version, is changed by the Revised Version (British and American) to "children of thy delight," i.e. beloved children, rather than children begotten in passion. The adverb "delicately" is employed in the same sense as the adjective (Lamentations 4:5; Luke 7:25). In the old English writers "delicate" is often used for voluptuous: "Dives for his delicate life to the devil went" (Piers Ploughman). The meaning of "delicately" (ma`adhan) in 1 Samuel 15:32 (the King James Version) is a real puzzle. The King James Version reads, "And Agag came unto him delicately," with a possible suggestion of weakness or fear. the American Standard Revised Version and the Revised Version, margin substitute "cheerfully." Others, by metathesis or change of consonants in the Hebrew word, translation "in bonds" or "fetters."

W. W. Davies

Deliciously

Deliciously - de-lish'-us-li (streniao "to live hard or wantonly"): "She (Babylon) .... lived deliciously" (Revelation 18:7, 9 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "wantonly," the Revised Version, margin "luxuriously").

Delight

Delight - de-lit' (verb, chaphets, ratsah, sha`a`; sunedomai): "To delight" is most frequently expressed by chaphets, which means originally "to bend" (compare Job 40:17, "He moveth his tail"), hence, "to incline to," "take pleasure in." It is used of God's pleasure in His people (Numbers 14:8; 2 Samuel 22:20; Psalms 18:19, etc.), and in righteousness, etc. (Isaiah 66:4; Jeremiah 9:24; Micah 7:18, etc.), also of man's delight in God and His will (Psalms 40:8; 73:25; the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American), "There is none upon earth that I desire besides thee"), and in other objects (Genesis 34:19; 1 Samuel 18:22; Esther 2:14; Isaiah 66:3); sha`a`, "to stroke," "caress," "be fond of," occurs in Psalms 94:19, "Thy comforts delight my soul"; Psalms 119:16, 47, 70, "I will delight myself in thy statutes." Similarly, Paul says (Romans 7:22), "I delight (sunedomai) in (margin, the Revised Version (British and American) "Greek with") the law of God after the inward man." This is the only occurrence of the word in the New Testament.

"To delight one's self" (in the Lord) is represented chiefly by `anagh (Job 22:26; 27:10; Psalms 37:4, 11; Isaiah 58:14).

Delight (noun), chiefly chephets (1 Samuel 15:22; Psalms 1:2; 16:3), ratson (Proverbs 11:1, 20; Proverbs 12:1-28, 22; 15:8), sha`ashu`im (Psalms 119:24, 77, 92, 143, 174; Proverbs 8:30-31). the Revised Version (British and American) has "delight" for "desire" (Nehemiah 1:11; Psalms 22:8; 51:16), for "observe," different reading (Proverbs 23:26), "no delight in" for "smell in" (Amos 5:21), "delightest in me" for "favorest me" (Psalms 41:11), "his delight shall be in" (m "Hebrew `scent' ") for "of quick understanding" (Isaiah 11:3).

The element of joy, of delight in God and His law and will, in the Hebrew religion is noteworthy as being something which we are apt to fall beneath even in the clearer light of Christianity.

W. L. Walker

Delightsome

Delightsome - de-lit'-sum: chephets, is rendered "delightsome": Malachi 3:12, "Ye shall be a delightsome land," literally, "a land of delight."

Delilah

Delilah - de-li'-la (delilah, "dainty one," perhaps; Septuagint Daleida, Dalida): The woman who betrayed Samson to the Philistines (Judges 16:1-31). She was presumably a Philistine, though that is not expressly stated. She is not spoken of as Samson's wife, though many have understood the account in that way. The Philistines paid her a tremendously high price for her services. The account indicates that for beauty, personal charm, mental ability, self-command, nerve, she was quite a wonderful woman, a woman to be admired for some qualities which she exhibits, even while she is to be utterly disapproved.

See SAMSON.

Willis J. Beecher

Deliver

Deliver - de-liv'-er (natsal, nathan; rhuomai, paradidomi): Occurs very frequently in the Old Testament and represents various Hebrew terms. The English word is used in two senses, (1) "to set free," etc., (2) "to give up or over."

(1) The word most often translated "deliver" in the first sense is natsal, meaning originally, perhaps, "to draw out." It is used of all kinds of deliverance (Genesis 32:11; Psalms 25:20; 143:9, etc.; Jeremiah 7:10; Ezekiel 3:19, etc.; Zephaniah 1:18, etc.). The Aramaic netsal occurs in Daniel 3:29; 6:14; 4, 7; yasha`, "to save," in Judges 3:9, 31 the King James Version, etc.; malaT, "to let or cause to escape," in Isaiah 46:2, "recover," etc. In the New Testament rhuomai, "to rescue," is most frequently translated "deliver" in this sense (Matthew 6:13 the King James Version, "Deliver us from evil"); katargeo, "to make useless" or "without effect" (Romans 7:6 the Revised Version (British and American), "discharged"). In the New Testament "save" takes largely the place of "deliver" in the Old Testament, and the idea is raised to the spiritual and eternal.

(2) For "deliver" in the sense of "give over, up," etc., the most frequent word is nathan, the common word for "to give" (Genesis 32:16; 40:13 the King James Version; Exodus 5:18). Other words are maghan (Hosea 11:8, the King James Version and the English Revised Version "How shall I deliver thee Israel?" i.e. "How shall I give thee up?" as in the first clause of the verse, with a different word (nathan), the American Standard Revised Version "How shall I cast thee off?"), yehabh, Aramaic (Ezra 5:14). In the New Testament paradidomi, "to give over to," is most frequent (Matthew 5:25; 11:27, "All things have been delivered (given or made over) unto me of my Father"; Mark 7:13; Luke 1:2; 1 Timothy 1:20, etc.); charizomai, "to grant as a favor" (Acts 25:11, 16 the King James Version).

(3) Yaladh, "to bring forth," is also rendered "deliver" in the sense of childbirth (Genesis 25:24; Exodus 1:19, etc.). In the New Testament this sense is borne by tikto (Luke 1:57; 2:6; Revelation 12:2, 4), and gennao (John 16:21).

In the Revised Version (British and American) there are many changes, such as, for "deliver," "restore" (Genesis 37:22; 40:13; Exodus 22:26; Deuteronomy 24:13); for "delivered," "defended" (1 Chronicles 11:14); for "cannot deliver thee," "neither .... turn thee aside" (Job 36:18); for "betray," "betrayed" we have "deliver," "delivered up," etc. (Matthew 10:4 margin; Mark 13:12; 14:10 f; Luke 21:16); for "delivered into chains," "committed to pits" (2 Peter 2:4, margin "some ancient authorities read chains"; compare Wisdom of Solomon 17:17); "Deliver us from evil," omitted in Luke 11:4, margin "Many ancient authorities add but deliver us from the evil one (or, from evil)."

W. L. Walker

Delos

Delos - de'-los (Delos): An island, now deserted, one of the Cyclades in the Aegean Sea, about 3 miles long and 1 mile broad, with a rocky mountain (Cynthus) several hundred feet high in the center. In antiquity Delos enjoyed great prosperity. According to Greek legend the island once floated on the surface of the water, until Poseidon fastened it on four diamond pillars for the wandering Leto, who, like Io, was pursued by the vengeful Hera. It was here that Apollo and Artemis were born; hence, the island was sacred, and became one of the chief seats of worship of the two deities. Numerous temples embellished Delos. The most magnificent was that of Apollo, which contained a colossal statue of the god, a dedicatory offering of the Naxians. This temple was a sanctuary visited by all the Greeks, who came from far and near to worship at the deity's shrine. There was a Dorian peripteral temple in Delos from the beginning of the 4th century BC. To the North was a remarkable altar composed entirely of ox-horns. The various Ionian cities sent sacred embassies (theoriai) with rich offerings. There was also a celebrated oracle in Delos which was accounted one of the most trustworthy in the world. Every five years the famous Delian festival was celebrated with prophecies, athletic contests and games of every kind. All the nations of Greece participated.

The earliest inhabitants of Delos were Carians; but about 1000 BC the island was occupied by Ionians. For a long time it enjoyed independence. In 478 Delos was chosen as the place for the convention of the representatives of the Greek states for deliberation about means for defense against Persia. The treasury of the Athenian Confederacy was kept here after 476. The island became independent of Athens in 454. During the 2nd and 1st centuries BC it became one of the chief ports of the Aegean. This was partly due to its location, and partly to the fact that the Romans, after 190 BC, favored the island as a rival to the sea-power of Rhodes. In 166 Delos was given to Athens; the inhabitants fled to Achea, and the island was colonized by Athenians, together with Romans.

The ruins of the city of Delos, which became a flourishing commercial port, are to the North of the temple. It became the center of trade between Alexandria and the Black Sea, and was for a long time one of the chief slave markets of the Greek world. But Delos received a severe blow, from which it never recovered, in the war between Rome and Mithridates. The latter's general landed in 88 BC and massacred many, and sold the remainder of the defenseless people, and sacked and destroyed the city together with the temple and its countless treasures. At the conclusion of peace (84) Delos came into the possession of the Romans, who later gave it back to Athens. Under the Empire the island lost its importance entirely.

Delos was one of the states to which Rome addressed letters in behalf of the Jews (138-137 BC; see 1 Maccabees 15:16-23). Among those who came to Delos from the East must have been many of this nation. Josephus cites in full a decree passed in Delos which confirmed the Jewish exemption from military service (Ant., XIV, x, 4).

The excavations of the French have laid bare 8 temples within the sacred enclosure (Apollo, Artemis, Dionysus). Numerous statues, dating from the earliest times of Greek art down to the latest, have been discovered; also 2,000 inscriptions, among which was an inventory of the temple treasure.

By the side of Delos, across a very narrow strait, lies Rheneia, another island which was the burying-ground of Delos; for on the sacred isle neither births, deaths nor burials were permitted. In 426 BC Delos was "purified" by the Athenians--by the removal of the bodies that had been interred there previously.

LITERATURE.

Lebegue, Recherches sur Delos (Paris, 1876); V. v. Schoffer, De Deli Insulae rebus, Berliner Studien fur klass. Phil. (Berlin, 1889); Homolle, S. Reinach and others, in the Bulletin de corresp. Hellen. (VI, 1-167; VII, 103-25, 329-73; VIII, 75-158; XIV, 389-511; XV, 113-68); Homolle, Archives de l'intendance sacree a Delos; Jebb, Journal of Hellenic Studies (1880), 7-62.

J. E. Harry

Deluge of Noah

Deluge of Noah - del'-uj

1. The Biblical Account

2. "Noah's Log Book"

3. The Egyptian Tradition

4. The Indian Tradition

5. The Chinese Tradition

6. The Greek Tradition

7. The British Tradition

8. The American Indian Traditions

9. The Babylonian Tradition

10. Cuneiform Tablets

11. Was the Flood Universal?

1. The Biblical Account: The means described in Genesis 6:1-22 through 8 by which the Lord destroyed, on account of their wickedness, all the members of the human race except Noah and his family. According to the account, Noah was warned of the event 120 years before (Genesis 6:3; 1 Peter 3:20; 2 Peter 2:5). During all this time he is said to have been a "preacher of righteousness" "while the ark was a preparing," when we may well suppose (according to theory to be presently propounded) the physical events leading up to the final catastrophe may have given point to his preaching. When the catastrophe came, the physical means employed were twofold, namely, the breaking up of the "fountains of the great deep" and the opening of "the windows of heaven" (Genesis 7:11). But the rain is spoken of as continuing as a main cause only 40 days, while the waters continued to prevail for 150 days (Genesis 7:24), when (Genesis 8:2-3) "the fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained; and the waters returned from off the earth continually," so that after 10 months the ark rested upon "the mountains of Ararat" (not the peak of Mount Ararat, but the highlands of Armenia in the upper part of the valley of the Euphrates and Tigris; see ARARAT). Here it rested 40 days before the water subsided sufficiently to suggest disembarking, when a raven (which could easily find its food on the carcasses of the animals which had been destroyed) was sent forth, and did not return (Genesis 8:7); but a dove sent out at the same time found no rest and returned empty to the ark (Genesis 8:9). After 7 days, however, it was sent out again and returned with a fresh olive leaf (Genesis 8:11). After 7 days more the dove was sent forth again and did not return. After 56 days more of waiting Noah and his family departed from the ark.

2. "Noah's Log Book": The following are the leading points in the story which has been appropriately styled by Sir William Dawson "Noah's log book" (see Southeast Bishop's article in Biblical Sac. (1906), 510-17, and Joseph B. Davidson in the author's Scientific Confirmations of Old Testament History, 180-184).

It will thus be seen that there is no need of supposing any duplication and overlapping of accounts in the Biblical story. There is continual progress in the account from beginning to end, with only such repetitions for literary effect as we are familiar with in oriental writings. In Genesis 6:5 through Genesis 7:13 the wickedness of the world is assigned as the reason which prevailed in the Divine counsels for bringing about the contemplated catastrophe. While emphasizing the righteousness of Noah which led to his preservation, Genesis 6:13-21 contains the direction for the making of the ark and of the preparations to bring into it a certain number of animals. This preparation having been made, the order was given (Genesis 7:1-4) for the embarkation which (Genesis 7:5) was duly accomplished. We are then told that Noah and his family, and beasts both clean and unclean, were shut up in the ark during the prevalence of the water and its final subsidence. Altogether the account is most graphic and impressive (see W. H. Green, Unity of the Book of Genesis, 83 ff).

Compared with other traditions of the Deluge, the Biblical account appears in a most favorable light, while the general prevalence of such traditions strongly confirms the reality of the Biblical story.

3. The Egyptian Tradition: An Egyptian legend of the Deluge is referred to in Plato's Timaeus, where the gods are said to have purified the earth by a great flood of water from which only a few shepherds escaped by climbing to the summit of a high mountain. In the Egyptian documents themselves, however, we find only that Ra' the creator, on account of the insolence of man, proceeded to exterminate him by a deluge of blood which flowed up to Heliopolis, the home of the gods; but the heinousness of the deed so affected him that he repented and swore never more to destroy mankind.

4. The Indian Tradition: In Indian mythology there is no reference to the Flood in the Rig Veda, but in the laws of Manu we are told that a fish said to Manu, "A deluge will sweep all creatures away ..... Build a vessel and worship me. When the waters rise enter the vessel and I will save thee ..... When the Deluge came, he had entered the vessel. .... Manu fastened the cable of the ship to the horn of the fish, by which means the latter made it pass over the mountains of the North. The fish said: `I have saved thee; fasten the vessel to a tree that the water may not sweep it away while thou art in the mountain; and in proportion as the waters decrease, thou shalt descend.' Manu descended with the waters, and this is what is called the Descent of Manu on the mountains of the North. The Deluge had carried away all creatures, and Manu remained alone" (translated by Max Muller).

5. The Chinese Tradition: The Chinese tradition is embodied in sublime language in their book of Li-Ki: "And now the pillars of heaven were broken, the earth shook to its very foundation; the sun and the stars changed their motions; the earth fell to pieces, and the waters enclosed within its bosom burst forth with violence, and overflowed. Man having rebelled against heaven, the system of the universe was totally disordered, and the grand harmony of nature destroyed. All these evils arose from man's despising the supreme power of the universe. He fixed his looks upon terrestrial objects and loved them to excess, until gradually he became transformed into the objects which he loved, and celestial reason entirely abandoned him."

6. The Greek Tradition: The Greeks, according to Plutarch, had five different traditions of the Deluge, that of Deucalion being the most important. According to this, Prometheus warned his son Deucalion of the flood which Zeus had resolved to bring upon the earth by reason of its wickedness. Accordingly, Deucalion constructed an ark and took refuge in it, but with his vessel was stranded on Mount Parnassus in Thessaly, whereupon they disembarked and repopulated the earth by the fantastic process revealed to them by the goddess Themis of throwing stones about them, those which Deucalion threw becoming men and those which Pyrrha threw becoming women. Lucian's form of the legend, however, is less fantastic and more nearly in line with Semitic tradition. In the Greek legend as in the Semitic, a dove is sent forth which returns both a first and a second time, its feet being tinged with mud the second time, intimating the abatement of the flood. But neither Homer nor Hesiod have this tradition. Probably it was borrowed from the Semites or the Hindus.

7. The British Tradition: In Britain there is a Druid legend that on account of the profligacy of mankind, the Supreme Being sent a flood upon the earth when "the waves of the sea lifted themselves on high round the border of Britain. The rain poured down from heaven and the waters covered the earth." But the patriarch, distinguished for his integrity, had been shut up with a select company in a strong ship which bore them safely upon the summit of the waters (Editor Davies in his Mythology and Rites of British Druids). From these the world was again repopulated. There are various forms of this legend but they all agree in substance.

8. The American Indian Traditions: Among the American Indians traditions of the Deluge were found by travelers to be widely disseminated. Mr. Catlin says, "Among the 120 different tribes which I visited in North, South, and Central America, not a tribe exists that has not related to me distinct or vague traditions of such a calamity, in which one, or three, or eight persons were saved above the waters upon the top of a high mountain" (quoted by Wm. Restelle in Biblical Sac. (January, 1907), 157). While many, perhaps most, of these traditions bear the stamp of Christian influence through the early missionaries, the Mexican legend bears evident marks of originality. According to it the 4th age was one of water, when all men were turned into fishes except Tezpi and his wife Hochiquetzal and their children, who with many animals took refuge in a ship which sailed safely over the tumultuous waters which overwhelmed the earth. When the flood subsided the ship stranded on Mount Cohuacan, whereupon he sent forth a vulture which did not return, and then a humming bird which returned with some leaves in its beak. The Peruvian story differs from this in many particulars. According to it a single man and woman took refuge in a box and floated hundreds of miles from Cuzco to an unknown land where they made clay images of all races, and animated them.

The Moravian missionary Cranz, in his History of Greenland, says that "the first missionaries among the Greenlanders found a tolerably distinct tradition of the Deluge" to the effect that "the earth was once tilted over and all men were drowned" except one "who smote afterward upon the ground with a stick and thence came out a woman with whom he peopled the earth again." Moreover, the Greenlanders point to the remains of fishes and bones of a whale on high mountains where men never could have dwelt, as proof that the earth was once flooded. Among the North American Indians generally legends of the Deluge are so embellished that they become extremely fantastic, but in many of them there are peculiarities which point unquestionably to a common origin of extreme antiquity.

The unprejudiced reader cannot rise from the study of the subject without agreeing in general with Francois Lenormant, who writes: "As the case now stands, we do not hesitate to declare that, far from being a myth, the Biblical Deluge is a real and historical fact, having, to say the least, left its impress on the ancestors of three races--Aryan, or Indo-European, Semitic, or Syrio-Arabian, Chamitic, or Kushite--that is to say on the three great civilized races of the ancient world, those which constitute the higher humanity--before the ancestors of these races had as yet separated, and in the part of Asia together inhabited" (Contemporary Review, November, 1879).

9. The Babylonian Tradition: The most instructive of these traditions are those which have come down to us from Babylonia, which until recently were known to us only through the Greek historian Berosus of the 4th century BC, who narrates that a great deluge happened at some indefinite time in the past during the reign of Xisuthrus, son of Ardates. Xisuthrus was warned beforehand by the deity Cronos, and told to build a ship and take with him his friends and relations and all the different animals with all necessary food and trust himself fearlessly to the deep, whereupon he built "a vessel 5 stadia (3,000 ft.) long and 2 stadia (1,200 ft.) broad." After the flood subsided Xisuthrus, like Noah, sent out birds which returned to him again. After waiting some days and sending them out a second time, they returned with their feet tinged with mud. Upon the third trial they returned no more, whereupon they disembarked and Xisuthrus with his wife, daughter and pilot offered sacrifice to the gods and were translated to live with the gods. It was found that the place where they were was "the land of Armenia," but they were told to return to Babylon. Berosus concluded his account by saying that "the vessel being thus stranded in Armenia, some part of it yet remains in the Corcyrean mountains."

10. Cuneiform Tablets: An earlier and far more important tradition was found inscribed on cuneiform tablets in Babylonia dating from 3000 BC. These were discovered by George Smith in 1870 and filled as many as 180 lines. The human hero of the account, corresponding to Noah of the Bible and Xisuthrus of Berosus, is Gilgamesh, who lived is Shurippak, a city full of violence, on the banks of the Euphrates. He was warned of an approaching flood and exhorted to pull down his house and build a ship and cause "seed of life of every sort to go up into it." The ship, he says, was to be "exact in its dimensions, equal in its breadth and its length. .... Its sides were 140 cubits high, the border of its top equaled 140 cubits. .... I constructed it in 6 stories, dividing it into 7 compartments. Its floors I divided into 9 chambers. .... I chose a mast (or rudder pole), and supplied what was necessary. Six sars of bitumen I poured over the outside; three sars of bitumen over the inside." After embarking, the storm broke with fearful violence and the steering of the ship was handed over to Bezur-Bel, the ship man. But amidst the roll of thunder and the march of mountain waves the helm was wrenched from the pilot's hands and the pouring rain and the lightning flashes dismayed all hearts. "Like a battle charge upon mankind" the water rushed so that the gods even were dismayed at the flood and cowered like dogs, taking refuge in the heaven of Anu while Ishtar screamed like a woman in travail, and repenting of her anger, resolved to save a few and "to give birth to my people" till like "the fry of fishes they fill the sea." The ship was therefore turned to the country of Nizir (Armenia).

It is worthy of notice that the cuneiform tablet exhibits as much variety of style as does the Biblical account. Plain narrative and rhetorical prose are intermingled in both accounts, a fact which effectually disposes of the critical theory which regards the Biblical account as a clumsy combination made in later times by piecing together two or more independent traditions. Evidently the piecing together, if there was any, had been accomplished early in Babylonian history.

See BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA.

On comparing the Biblical account with that of the cuneiform tablets, the following similarities and contrasts are brought to light:

(1) That the cuneiform inscription is from start to finish polytheistic (II. 3-17), whereas the narrative in Gen is monotheistic.

(2) The cuneiform agrees with the Biblical narrative in making the Deluge a Divine punishment for the wickedness of the world (II. 5, 6).

(3) The names differ to a degree that is irreconcilable with our present knowledge.

(4) The dimensions of the ark as given in Gen (6:15) are reasonable, while those of Berosus and the cuneiform tablets are unreasonable. According to Gen, the ark was 300 cubits (562 1/2 ft.) long, 50 cubits (93 2/3 ft.) wide, and 30 cubits (56 1/4 ft.) deep, which are the natural proportions for a ship of that size, being in fact very close to those of the great steamers which are now constructed to cross the Atlantic. The "Celtic" of the White Star line, built in 1901, is 700 ft. long, 75 ft. wide and 49 1/3 ft. deep. The dimensions of the "Great Eastern," built in 1858 (692 ft. long, 83 ft. broad, and 58 ft. deep), are still closer to those of the ark. The cuneiform tablets represent the length, width and depth each as 140 cubits (262 ft.) (II. 22, 23, 38-41), the dimensions of an entirely unseaworthy structure. According to Berosus, it was 5 stadia (3,000 ft.) and 2 stadia (1,200 ft.) broad; while Origen (Against Celsus, 4,41), represented it to be 135,000 ft. (25 miles) long, and 3,750 ft. (3/4 mile) wide.

(5) In the Biblical account, nothing is introduced conflicting with the sublime conception of holiness and the peculiar combination of justice and mercy ascribed to God throughout the Bible, and illustrated in the general scheme of providential government manifest in the order of Nature and in history; while, in the cuneiform tablets, the Deluge is occasioned by a quarrel among the gods, and the few survivors escape, not by reason of a merciful plan, but by a mistake which aroused the anger of Bel (II. 146-50).

(6) In all the accounts, the ark is represented as floating up stream. According to Gen, it was not, as is usually translated, on "Mount Ararat" (8:4), but in the "mountains of Ararat," designating an indefinite region in Armenia upon which the ark rested; according to the inscriptions, it was in Nizir (II. 115-20), a region which is watered by the Zab and the Tornadus; while, according to Berosus, it was on the Corcyrean Mountains, included in the same indefinite area. In all three cases, its resting-place is in the direction of the headwaters of the Euphrates valley, while the scene of the building is clearly laid in the lower part of the valley.

(7) Again, in the Biblical narrative, the spread of the water floating the ark is represented to have been occasioned, not so much by the rain which fell, as by the breaking-up of "all the fountains of the great deep" (Genesis 7:11), which very naturally describes phenomena connected with one of the extensive downward movements of the earth's crust with which geology has made us familiar. The sinking of the land below the level of the ocean is equivalent, in its effects, to the rising of the water above it, and is accurately expressed by the phrases used in the sacred narrative. This appears, not only in the language concerning the breaking-up of the great deep which describes the coming-on of the Flood, but also in the description of its termination, in which it is said, that the "fountains also of the deep .... were stopped, .... and the waters returned from off the earth continually" (Genesis 8:2-3). Nothing is said of this in the other accounts.

(8) The cuneiform tablets agree in general with the two other accounts respecting the collecting of the animals for preservation, but differ from Gen in not mentioning the sevens of clean animals and in including others beside the family of the builder (II. 66-69).

(9) The cuneiform inscription is peculiar in providing the structure with a mast, and putting it in charge of a pilot (II. 45, 70, 71).

(10) The accounts differ decidedly in the duration of the Flood. According to the ordinary interpretation of the Biblical account, the Deluge continued a year and 17 days; whereas, according to the cuneiform tablets, it lasted only 14 days (II. 103-7, 117-22).

(11) All accounts agree in sending out birds; but, according to Gen (8:8) a raven was first sent out, and then in succession two doves (8:8-12); while the cuneiform inscription mentions the dove and the raven in reverse order from Gen, and adds a swallow (II. 121-30).

(12) All accounts agree in the building of an altar and offering a sacrifice after leaving the ark. But the cuneiform inscription is overlaid with a polytheistic coloring: "The gods like flies swarmed about the sacrifices" (II. 132-43).

(13) According to the Biblical account, Noah survived the Flood for a long time; whereas Nuhnapishtim and his wife were at once deified and taken to heaven (II. 177-80).

(14) Both accounts agree in saying that the human race is not again to be destroyed by a flood (Genesis 9:11; II. 162-69).

Close inspection of these peculiarities makes it evident that the narrative in Genesis carries upon its face an appearance of reality not found in the other accounts. It is scarcely possible that the reasonable dimensions of the ark, its floating up stream, and the references to the breaking-up of the fountains of the great deep should have been hit upon by accident. It is in the highest degree improbable that correct statements of such unobvious facts should be due to the accident of legendary guesswork. At the same time, the duration of the Deluge, according to Genesis, affords opportunity for a gradual progress of events which best accords with scientific conceptions of geological movements. If, as the most probable interpretation would imply, the water began to recede after 150 days from the beginning of the Flood and fell 15 cubits in 74 days, that would only be 3 2/3 inches per day--a rate which would be imperceptible to an ordinary observer. Nor is it necessary to suppose that the entire flooded area was uncovered when Noah disembarked. The emergence of the land may have continued for an indefinite period, permitting the prevailing water to modify the climate of all western and central Asia for many centuries. Evidence that this was the case will be found in a later paragraph.

11. Was the Flood Universal?: In considering the credibility of the Biblical story we encounter at the outset the question whether the narrative compels us to believe the Flood to have been universal. In answer, it is sufficient to suggest that since the purpose of the judgment was the destruction of the human race, all the universality which it is necessary to infer from the language would be only such as was sufficient to accomplish that object. If man was at that time limited to the Euphrates valley, the submergence of that area would meet all the necessary conditions. Such a limitation is more easily accepted from the fact that general phrases like "Everybody knows," "The whole country was aroused," are never in literature literally interpreted. When it is said (Genesis 41:54-57) that the famine was "in all lands," and over "all the face of the earth," and that "all countries came into Egypt .... to buy grain," no one supposes that it is intended to imply that the irrigated plains of Babylonia, from which the patriarchs had emigrated, were suffering from drought like Palestine (For other examples of the familiar use of this hyperbole, see Deuteronomy 2:25; Job 37:3; Acts 2:25; Romans 1:8.)

As to the extent to which the human race was spread over the earth at the time of the Flood, two suppositions are possible. First, that of Hugh Miller (Testimony of the Rocks) that, owing to the shortness of the antediluvian chronology, and the violence and moral corruption of the people, population had not spread beyond the boundary of western Asia. An insuperable objection to this theory is that the later discoveries have brought to light remains of prehistoric man from all over the northern hemisphere, showing that long before the time of the Flood he had become widely scattered.

Another theory, supported by much evidence, is that, in connection with the enormous physical changes in the earth's surface during the closing scenes of the Glacial epoch, man had perished from off the face of the earth except in the valley of the Euphrates, and that the Noachian Deluge is the final catastrophe in that series of destructive events (see ANTEDILUVIANS). The facts concerning the Glacial epoch naturally lead up to this conclusion. For during the entire epoch, and especially at its close, the conditions affecting the level of the land surfaces of the northern hemisphere were extremely abnormal, and continued so until some time after man had appeared on the earth.

The Glacial epoch followed upon, and probably was a consequence of, an extensive elevation of all the land surfaces of the northern hemisphere at the close of the Tertiary period. This elevation was certainly as much as 2,000 ft. over the northern part of the United States, and over Canada and Northern Europe. Snow accumulated over this high land until the ice formed by it was certainly a mile thick, and some of the best authorities say 2, or even 3 miles. The surface over which this was spread amounted to 2,000,000 square miles in Europe and 4,000,000 in North America. The total amount of the accumulation would therefore be 6,000,000 cubic miles at the lowest calculation, or twice or three times that amount if the largest estimates are accepted. (For detailed evidence see Wright, Ice Age in North America, 5th edition) But in either case the transference of so much weight from the ocean beds to the land surfaces of the northern hemisphere brings into the problem a physical force sufficient to produce incalculable effects. The weight of 6,000,000 cubic miles of ice would be twenty-four thousand million million (24,000,000,000,000,000) tons, which is equal to that of the entire North American continent above sea level. Furthermore this weight was first removed from the ocean beds, thus disturbing still more the balance of forces which secure the stability of the land. The geological evidence is abundant that in connection with the overloading of the land surfaces in the Northern Hemisphere, and probably by reason of it, the glaciated area and a considerable margin outside of it sank down until it was depressed far below the present level. The post-Glacial depression in North America was certainly 600 ft. below sea level at Montreal, and several hundred feet lower further north. In Sweden the post-Glacial sea beaches show a depression of the land 1,000 ft. below the sea.

The evidences of a long-continued post-Glacial subsidence of the Aral-Caspian basin and much of the surrounding area is equally conclusive. At Trebizond, on the Black Sea, there is an extensive recent sea beach clinging to the precipitous volcanic mountain back of the city 750 ft. above the present water level. The gravel in this beach is so fresh as to compel a belief in its recent origin, while it certainly has been deposited by a body of water standing at that elevation after the rock erosion of the region had been almost entirely effected. The deposit is about 100 ft. thick, and extends along the precipitous face of the mountain for a half-mile or more. So extensive is it that it furnishes an attractive building place for a monastery. When the water was high enough to build up this shore line, it would cover all the plains of southern Russia, of Western Siberia and of the Aral-Caspian depression in Turkestan. Similar terraces of corresponding height are reported by competent authorities on the south shore of the Crimea and at Baku, on the Caspian Sea.

Further and most interesting evidence of this post-Glacial land depression is found in the existence of Arctic seal 2,000 miles from the Arctic Ocean in bodies of water as widely separated as the Caspian Sea, the Aral Sea and Lake Baikal. Lake Baikal is now 1,500 ft. above sea level. It is evident, therefore, that there must have been a recent depression of the whole area to admit the migration of this species to that distant locality. There are also clear indications of a smaller depression around the eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea, where there are abandoned sea beaches from 200 to 300 ft. above tide, which abound in species of shells identical with those now living nearby.

These are found in Egypt, in the valley of the Red Sea, and in the vicinity of Joppa and Beirut. During their formation Asia and Africa must have been separated by a wide stretch of water connecting the Mediterranean with the Red Sea. The effect of such lingering wide expanses of water upon the climate of Western Asia must have been profound, and would naturally provide those conditions which would favor the early development of the human race in Armenia (where even now at an elevation of 5,000 ft. the vine is indigenous), from which the second distribution of mankind is said to have taken place.

Furthermore there is indubitable evidence that the rainfall in central Asia was, at a comparatively recent time, immensely greater than it has been in the historic period, indicating that gradual passage from the conditions connected with the Deluge to those of the present time, at which we have hinted above. At the present time the evaporation over the Aral Sea is so great that two rivers (the ancient Oxus and the Jaxartes), coming down from the heights of central Asia, each with a volume as great as that of Niagara, do not suffice to cause an overflow into the Caspian Sea. But the existence of such an overflow during the prehistoric period is so plain that it has been proposed to utilize its channel (which is a mile wide and as distinctly marked as that of any living stream) for a canal.

Owing to the comparatively brief duration of the Noachian Deluge proper, we cannot expect to find many positive indications of its occurrence. Nevertheless, Professor Prestwich (than whom there has been no higher geological authority in England during the last century) adduces an array of facts relating to Western Europe and the Mediterranean basin which cannot be ignored (see Phil. Trans. of the Royal Soc. of London, CXXIV (1893), 903-84; Wright, Scientific Confirmation of the Old Testament History, 238-82). Among these evidences one of the most convincing is to be found in the cave of San Ciro at the base of the mountains surrounding the plain of Palermo in Sicily. In this cave there was found an immense mass of the bones of hippopotami of all ages down to the fetus, mingled with a few of the deer, ox and elephant. These were so fresh when discovered that they were cut into ornaments and polished and still retained a considerable amount of their nitrogenous matter. Twenty tons of these bones were shipped for commercial purposes in the first six months after their discovery. Evidently the animals furnishing these bones had taken refuge in this cave to escape the rising water which had driven them in from the surrounding plains and cooped them up in the amphitheater of mountains during a gradual depression of the land. Similar collections of bones are found in various ossiferous fissures, in England and Western Europe, notably in the Rock of Gibraltar and at Santenay, a few miles South of Chalons in central France, where there is an accumulation of bones in fissures 1,000 ft. above the sea, similar in many respects to that in the cave described at San Ciro, though the bones of hippopotami did not appear in these places; but the bones of wolves, bears, horses and oxen, none of which had been gnawed by carnivora, were indiscriminately commingled as though swept in by all-pervading currents of water. Still further evidence is adduced in the deposits connected with what is called the rubble drift on both sides of the English Channel and on the Jersey Islands. Here in various localities, notably at Brighton, England, and near Calais, France, elephant bones and human implements occur beneath deep deposits of unassorted drift, which is not glacial nor the product of limited and local streams of water, but can be accounted for only by general waves of translation produced when the land was being reelevated from beneath the water by a series of such sudden earthquake shocks as cause the tidal waves which are often so destructive.

Thus, while we cannot appeal to geology for direct proof of the Noachian Deluge, recent geological discoveries do show that such a catastrophe is perfectly credible from a scientific point of view; and the supposition that there was a universal destruction of the human race, in the northern hemisphere at least, in connection with the floods accompanying the melting off of the glacial ice is supported by a great amount of evidence. There was certainly an extensive destruction of animal species associated with man during that period. In Europe the great Irish elk, the machairodus, the cave lion, the rhinoceros, the hippopotamus and the elephant disappeared with prehistoric man, amid the floods at the close of the Glacial epoch. In North America equally large felines, together with horses, tapirs, llamas, great mastodons and elephants and the huge megalonyx went to destruction in connection with the same floods that destroyed so large a part of the human race during the dramatic closing scenes of the period. It is, therefore, by no means difficult for an all-round geologist to believe in a final catastrophe such as is described in Gen. If we disbelieve in the Biblical Deluge it is not because we know too much geology, but too little.

George Frederick Wright

Delusion

Delusion - de-lu'-zhun: (1) Isaiah 66:4, "I also will choose their delusions" (the Revised Version, margin "mockings"), Hebrew ta`alulim, which occurs only here and Isaiah 3:4 (where it is translated "babes," the Revised Version, margin "childishness"). Its meaning is somewhat ambiguous. The best translation seems to be "wantonness," "caprice." "Their wanton dealing, i.e. that inflicted on them" (BDB). Other translations suggested are "insults" (Skinner), "freaks of fortune" (Cheyne), "follies" (Whitehouse). Septuagint has empaigmata, "mockings," Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) illusiones. (2) 2 Thessalonians 2:11 the King James Version, "God shall send them strong delusion" (the Revised Version (British and American) "God sendeth them a working of error"), plane, "a wandering," "a roaming about," in the New Testament "error" either of opinion or of conduct.

D. Miall Edwards

Demand

Demand - de-mand': The peremptory, imperative sense is absent from this word in its occurrences in the King James Version, where it means no more than "ask," "inquire" (compare French, demander) one or the other of which the Revised Version (British and American) substitutes in 2 Samuel 11:7; Matthew 2:4; Luke 3:14; 17:20; Acts 21:33. the Revised Version (British and American) retains "demand" in Exodus 5:14; Job 38:3; 40:7; 42:4; Daniel 2:27; and inserts it (the King James Version "require") in Nehemiah 5:18.

Demas

Demas - de'-mas (Demas, "popular"): According to Colossians 4:14; 2 Timothy 4:10; Philemon 1:24, one who was for a time a "fellow-worker" with Paul at Rome (Col, Philem), but at last, "having loved this present world," forsook the apostle and betook himself to Thessalonica (2 Tim). No other particulars are given concerning him.

See APOSTASY; DEMETRIUS.

Demetrius (1)

Demetrius (1) - de-me'-tri-us (Demetrios, "of" or "belonging to Demeter," an ordinary name in Greece):

(1) Demetrius I, surnamed Soter ("saviour"), was the son of Seleucus IV (Philopator). He was sent as a boy to Rome, by his father, to serve as a hostage, and remained there quietly during his father's life. He was detained also during the reign of his uncle, ANTIOCHUS EPIPHANES (which see) from 175 to 164 BC; but when Antiochus died Demetrius, who was now a young man of 23 (Polyb. xxxi.12), chafed at a longer detention, particularly as his cousin, Antiochus Eupator, a boy of 9, succeeded to the kingdom with Lysias as his guardian. The Roman Senate, however, refused to listen to his plea for the restoration to Syria, because, as Polybius says, they felt surer of their power over Syria with a mere boy as king.

In the meantime, a quarrel had arisen between Ptolemy Philometor and Euergetes Physkon (Livy Epit. 46; Diod. Sic. fr xi), and Gnaeus Octavius, who had been sent to quell the disorder, was assassinated in Syria, while plundering the country. Demetrius, taking advantage of the troubled condition of affairs, consulted with his friend Polybius as to the advisability of attempting to seize the throne of Syria (op. cit. xxxi. 19). The historian advised him not to stumble twice on the same stone, but to venture something worthy of a king, so after a second unsuccessful appeal to the Senate, Demetrius escaped to Tripolis, and from there advanced to Antioch where he was proclaimed king (162 BC). His first act was to put to death young Antiochus, his cousin, and his minister Lysias (Appian, Syriac., c. 47; Ant, XII, x, 1; 1 Maccabees 7:1-4; 2 Maccabees 14:1, 2).

As soon as he was established in power, Demetrius made an attempt to placate the Romans by sending them valuable gifts as well as the assassin of Gn. Octavius (Polyb. xxi.23); and he then tried to secure the Hellenizing party by sending his friend BACCHIDES (which see) to make the wicked Alcimus high priest. After a violent struggle and much treachery on the part of Bacchides (Ant., XII, x, 2), the latter left the country, having charged all the people to obey Alcimus, who was protected by an army.

The Jews under Judas resented his presence, and Judas inflicted severe punishment on all who had gone over to Alcimus (1 Maccabees 7:24). Alcimus, in fear, sent a message for aid to Demetrius, who sent to his assistance Nicanor, the best disposed and most faithful of his friends, who had accompanied him in his flight from Rome (Ant., XII, x, 4). On his arrival in Judea, he attempted to win by guile, but Judas saw through his treachery, and Nicanor was forced to fight openly, suffering two signal defeats, the first at Capharsalama (1 Maccabees 7:31, 32), and the second (in which Nicanor himself was killed), at Adasa (1 Maccabees 7:39 ff; 2 Maccabees 15:26 ff).

In a short while, however, Demetrius, hearing of the death of Nicanor, sent Bacchides and Alcimus into Judea again (1 Maccabees 9:1). Judas arose against them with an army of 3,000 men, but when these saw that 20,000 opposed them, the greater part of them deserted, and Judas, with an army of 800, lost his life, like another Leonidas, on the field of battle (1 Maccabees 9:4, 6, 18). Then Bacchides took the wicked men and made them lords of the country (1 Maccabees 9:25); while Jonathan, who was appointed successor to Judas, fled with his friends (1 Maccabees 9:29 ff).

During the next seven years, Demetrius succeeded in alienating both the Romans (Polyb. xxxii.20) and his own people, and ALEXANDER BALAS (which see) was put forward as a claimant to the throne, his supporters maintaining that he was the son of Antiochus Epiphanes (1 Maccabees 10:1-21; Ant, XIII, ii, 1-3). Both Alexander and Demetrius made bids for the support of the Jews, the former offering the high-priesthood and the title of King's Friend (1 Maccabees 10:20), and the latter freedom from taxes, tributes and customs (1 Maccabees 10:28 ff). Alexander's bait proved more alluring, since the Jews "gave no credence" to the words of Demetrius, and with the aid of the Maccabees, he vied with Demetrius for the space of two years for the complete sovereignty of Syria. At the end of this time, a decisive battle took place, in which Demetrius was slain, and Alexander became king of Syria (150 BC) (1 Maccabees 10:48-50; Ant, XIII, ii, 4; Polyb. iii.5; see also MACCABEES).

(2) Demetrius II, surnamed Nikator ("conqueror"), was the son of Demetrius Soter. When Balas was warring with Demetrius I, he sent his son to a place of safety in Crete. Three years after his father's death (147 BC), the unpopularity of Alexander gave the young man an opportunity to return and seize the government. He landed in Cilicia with Cretan mercenaries and secured the support of all Syria with the exception of Judea (1 Maccabees 10:67 ff). Apollonius, his general, the governor of Coele-Syria, who essayed the conquest of the Jews, was defeated at Azotus with great loss.

Ptolemy Philometor, whose daughter was the wife of Alexander Balas, now entered into the struggle, and taking Cleopatra, his daughter, from Alexander, he gave her to Demetrius (1 Maccabees 11:12). He then joined Demetrius' army and the combined forces inflicted a defeat on Balas (145 BC), and from this Demetrius received his surname Nikator (Ant., XIII, iv, 8; 1 Maccabees 11:14 ff).

Jonathan now concluded a favorable treaty with Demetrius, whereby three Samaritan provinces were added to Judea and the whole country was made exempt from tax (1 Maccabees 11:20-37; Ant, XIII, iv, 9). Demetrius then dismissed his army except the foreigners, thinking himself safe with the loyalty of the Jews assured. In the meantime, Tryphon, one of Balas' generals, set up the son of Alexander, Antiochus, as a claimant to the throne, and secured the assistance of the discarded army of Demetrius. Jonathan's aid was sought and he quelled the rebellion, on condition that the Syrian garrison be removed from Jerusalem (1 Maccabees 11:41-52; Ant, XIII, v, 2-3).

The king, however, falsified all that he had said, and kept none of his promises, so the Jews, deserting him, took sides with Tryphon and supported the claims of the boy Antiochus (1 Maccabees 11:53-59; Ant, XIII, v, 5-11 ). Demetrius' generals then entered Syria but were defeated by Jonathan at Hazor (1 Maccabees 11:63-74), and by skillful generalship he made futile a second attempt at invasion (1 Maccabees 12:24 ff).

Tryphon, who was now master of Syria, broke faith with Jonathan (1 Maccabees 12:40) and essayed the conquest of Judea. Jonathan was killed by treachery, and Simon, his successor, made proposals of peace to Demetrius, who agreed to let bygones be bygones (1 Maccabees 13:36-40; Ant, XIII, vi, 7). Demetrius then left Simon to carry on the war, and set out to Parthia, ostensibly to secure the assistance of the king, Mithridates, against Tryphon (1 Maccabees 14:1). Here he was captured and imprisoned (14:3; Ant, XIII, v, 11; Josephus, however, puts this event in 140 rather than 138 BC).

After an imprisonment of ten years, he was released and resumed the sovereignty 128 BC, but becoming involved in a quarrel with Ptolemy Physkon, he was defeated in battle at Damascus. From this place, he fled to Tyre, where he was murdered in 125 BC, according to some, at the instigation of Cleopatra, his wife (Josephus, Ant, XIII, ix, 3).

(3) Demetrius III, Eukairos ("the fortunate"), was the son of Antiochus Grypus, and grandson of Demetrius Nikator. When his father died, civil war arose, in which his two elder brothers lost their lives, while Philip, the third brother, secured part of Syria as his domain. Demetrius then took up his abode in Coele-Syria with Damascus as his capital (Ant., XIII, xiii, 4; BJ, I, iv, 4).

War now broke out in Judea between Alexander Janneus and his Pharisee subjects, who invited Demetrius to aid them. Thinking this a good opportunity to extend his realm, he joined the insurgent Jews and together they defeated Janneus near Shechem (Ant., XIII, xiv, 1; BJ, 1, iv, 5).

The Jews then deserted Demetrius, and he withdrew to Berea, which was in the possession of his brother Philip. Demetrius besieged him, and Philip summoned the Parthians to his assistance. The tables were turned, and Demetrius, besieged in his camp and starved into submission, was taken prisoner and sent to Arsaces, who held him captive until his death (Ant., XIII, xiv, 3). The dates of his reign are not certain.

Arthur J. Kinsella

Demetrius (2)

Demetrius (2) - de-me'-tri-us (Demetrios, "belonging to Ceres"): The name of two persons:

(1) A Christian disciple praised by John (3 John 1:12).

(2) A silversmith of Ephesus who manufactured the little silver shrines of the goddess Diana to sell to the visiting pilgrims (Acts 19:23 ff). Because the teachings of Paul were injuring the trade of the silversmiths, there arose a riot of which Demetrius was the chief. Upon an inscription which Mr. Wood discovered among the ruins of the city, there appeared the name Demetrius, a warden of the Ephesian temple for the year 57 AD, and some authors believe the temple warden to be identical with the ringleader of the rebellion. The name, however, has been most common among the Greeks of every age. Because of its frequent use it cannot be supposed that Demetrius, the disciple of 3 John 1:12, was the silversmith of Ephesus, nor that Demas of 2 Timothy 4:10, who bore the name in a contracted form, may be identified with him.

E. J. Banks

Demon; Demoniac; Demonology

Demon; Demoniac; Demonology - dem'-mon, de-mo'-ni-ak, de-mon-ol'-o-ji (daimonion, earlier form daimon = pneuma akatharton, poneron, "demon," "unclean or evil spirit," incorrectly rendered "devil" in the King James Version):

I. Definition. The word daimon or daimonion seems originally to have had two closely related meanings; a deity, and a spirit, superhuman but not supernatural. In the former sense the term occurs in the Septuagint translation of Deuteronomy 32:17; Psalms 106:37; Acts 17:18. The second of these meanings, which involves a general reference to vaguely conceived personal beings akin to men and yet belonging to the unseen realm, leads to the application of the term to the peculiar and restricted class of beings designated "demons" in the New Testament.

II. The Origin of Biblical Demonology. An interesting scheme of development has been suggested (by Baudissin and others) in which Biblical demonism is brought through polytheism into connection with primitive animism.

1. The Evolutionary Theory: A simple criticism of this theory, which is now the ascendant, will serve fittingly to introduce what should be said specifically concerning Biblical demonology. (1) Animism, which is one branch of that general primitive view of things which is designated as spiritism, is theory that all Nature is alive (see Ladd, Phil. Rel., I, 89 f) and that all natural processes are due to the operation of living wills. (2) Polytheism is supposed to be the outcome of animism. The vaguely conceived spirits of the earlier conception are advanced to the position of deities with names, fixed characters and specific functions, organized into a pantheon. (3) Biblical demonology is supposed to be due to the solvent of monotheism upon contemporary polytheism. The Hebrews were brought into contact with surrounding nations, especially during the Persian, Babylonian and Greek periods, and monotheism made room for heathenism by reducing its deities to the dimension of demons. They are not denied all objective reality, but are denied the dignity and prerogatives of deity.

2. Objections to the Theory: The objections to this ingenious theory are too many and too serious to be overcome. (1) The genetic connection between animism and polytheism is not clear. In fact, the specific religious character of animism is altogether problematical. It belongs to the category of primitive philosophy rather than of religion. It is difficult to trace the process by which spirits unnamed and with characteristics of the vaguest become deities--especially is it difficult to understand how certain spirits only are advanced to the standing of deities. More serious still, polytheism and animism have coexisted without close combination or real assimilation (see Sayce, Babylonia and Assyria, 232; Rogers, Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, 75 f) for a long course of history. It looks as if animism and polytheism had a different raison d'etre, origin and development. It is, at least, unsafe to construct a theory on the basis of so insecure a connection. (2) The interpretation of heathen deities as demons by no means indicates that polytheism is the source of Biblical demonology. On general principles, it seems far more likely that the category of demons was already familiar, and that connection with polytheism brought about an extension of its application. A glance at the Old Testament will show how comparatively slight and unimportant has been the bearing of heathen polytheism upon Biblical thought. The demonology of the Old Testament is confined to the following passages: Leviticus 16:21-22; 17:7; Isaiah 13:21; 34:13; Deuteronomy 32:17; Psalms 106:37 (elsewhere commented upon; see COMMUNION WITH DEMONS). Gesenius well says of Leviticus 16:21 that it is "vexed with the numerous conjectures of interpreters." If the prevalent modern view is accepted we find in it an actual meeting-point of popular superstition and the religion of Yahweh (see AZAZEL). According to Driver (HDB, I, 207), this item in the Levitical ritual "was intended as a symbolical declaration that the land and the people are now purged from guilt, their sins being handed over to the evil spirit to whom they are held to belong, and whose home is in the desolate wilderness remote from human habitations (verse 22, into a land cut off)." A more striking instance could scarcely be sought of the way in which the religion of Yahweh kept the popular spiritism at a safe distance. Leviticus 17:7 (see COMMUNION WITH DEMONS) refers to participation in the rites of heathen worship. The two passages--Isaiah 13:20-21; Isaiah 34:13-14--are poetical and really imply nothing as to the writer's own belief. Creatures both seen and unseen supposed to inhabit places deserted of man are used, as any poet might use them, to furnish the details for a vivid word-picture of uninhabited solitude. There is no direct evidence that the narrative of the Fall (Genesis 3:1-19) has any connection with demonology (see HDB , I, 590 note), and the suggestion of Whitehouse that the mention of satyrs and night-monsters of current mythology with such creatures as jackals, etc., implies "that demons were held to reside more or less in all these animal denizens of the ruined solitude" is clearly fanciful. It is almost startling to find that all that can possibly be affirmed of demonology in the Old Testament is confined to a small group of passages which are either legal or poetical and which all furnish examples of the inhibiting power of high religious conceptions upon the minds of a naturally superstitious and imaginative people. Even if we add all the passages in which a real existence seems to be granted to heathen deities (e.g. Numbers 21:29; Isaiah 19:1, etc.) and interpret them in the extreme sense, we are still compelled to affirm that evidence is lacking to prove the influence of polytheism in the formation of the Biblical doctrine of demons. (3) This theory breaks down in another still more vital particular. The demonology of the Bible is not of kin either with primitive animism or popular Sere demonism. In what follows we shall address ourselves to New Testament demonology--that of the Old Testament being a negligible quantity.

III. New Testament Demonology. The most marked and significant fact of New Testament demonology is that it provides no materials for a discussion of the nature and characteristics of demons. Whitehouse says (HDB, I, 593) that New Testament demonology "is in all its broad characteristics the demonology of the contemporary Judaism stripped of its cruder and exaggerated features." How much short of the whole truth this statement comes will appear later, but as it stands it defines the specific direction of inquiry into the New Testament treatment of demons; namely, to explain its freedom from the crude and exaggerated features of popular demonism. The presence among New Testament writers of an influence curbing curiosity and restraining the imagination is of all things the most important for us to discover and emphasize. In four of its most vital features the New Testament attitude on this subject differs from all popular conceptions: (a) in the absence of all imaginative details concerning demons; (b) in the emphasis placed upon the moral character of demons and their connection with the ethical disorders of the human race; (c) in the absence of confidence in magical methods of any kind in dealing with demons; (d) in its intense restrictions of the sphere of demoniacal operations.

A brief treatment under each of these heads will serve to present an ordered statement of the most important facts.

(a) In the New Testament we are told practically nothing about the origin, nature, characteristics or habits of demons. In a highly figurative passage (Matthew 12:43) our Lord speaks of demons as passing through "waterless places," and in the story of the Gadarene demoniac (Luke 8:31) the "abyss" is mentioned as the place of their ultimate detention. The method of their control over human beings is represented in two contrasted ways (compare Mark 1:23 ff; Luke 4:33 ff), indicating that there was no fixed mode of regarding it. With these three scant items our direct information ceases. We are compelled to infer from the effects given in the limited number of specific instances narrated. And it is worthy of more than passing mention that no theoretical discussion of demons occurs. The center of interest in the Gospels is the person of Jesus, the sufferers and the cures. Interest in the demons as such is absent. Certain passages seem to indicate that the demons were able to speak (see Mark 1:24, 26, 34; Luke 4:41, etc.), but comparing these statements with others (compare Mark 1:23; Luke 8:28) it is seen that no distinction is drawn between the cries of the tormented in the paroxysms of their complaint and the cries attributed to the demons themselves. In other particulars the representation is consistent. The demons belong to the unseen world, they are incapable of manifestation except in in the disorders which they cause--there are no materializations, no grotesque narratives of appearances and disappearances, no morbid dealing with repulsive details, no license of speculation in the narratives. In contrast with this reticence is not merely the demonology of primitive people, but also that of the non-canonical Jewish books. In the Book of Enoch demons are said to be fallen angels, while Josephus holds that they are the spirits of the wicked dead. In the rabbinical writings speculation has run riot in discussing the origin, nature and habits of demons. They are represented as the offspring of Adam and Eve in conjunction with male and female spirits, as being themselves sexed and capable of reproduction as well as performing all other physical functions. Details are given of their numbers, haunts and habits, of times and places where they are especially dangerous, and of ways and methods of breaking their power (see EXORCISM). Full sweep is also given to the imagination in descriptive narratives, oftentimes of the most morbid and unwholesome character, of their doings among men. After reading some of these narratives one can agree with Edersheim when he says, "Greater contrast could scarcely be conceived than between what we read in the New Testament and the views and practices mentioned in Rabbinic writings" (LTJM, II, 776).

(b) It is also clearly to be noted that while in its original application the term daimonion is morally indifferent, in New Testament usage the demon is invariably an ethically evil being. This differentiates the New Testament treatment from extra-canonical Jewish writings. In the New Testament demons belong to the kingdom of Satan whose power it is the mission of Christ to destroy. It deepens and intensifies its representations of the earnestness of human life and its moral issues by extending the sphere of moral struggle to the invisible world. It clearly teaches that the power of Christ extends to the world of evil spirits and that faith in Him is adequate protection against any evils to which men may be exposed. (For significance of this point see Plummer, Luke (ICC ), 132-33.)

(c) The New Testament demonology differs from all others by its negation of the power of magic rites to deliver from the affliction. Magic which is clearly separable from religion at that specific point (see Gwatkin, Knowledge of God, I, 249) rests upon and is dependent upon spiritism. The ancient Babylonian incantation texts, forming a surprisingly large proportion of the extant documents, are addressed directly to the supposed activities and powers of demons. These beings, who are not trusted and prayed to in the sense in which deities are, command confidence and call forth prayer, are dealt with by magic rites and formulas (see Rogers, op. cit., 144). Even the Jewish non-canonical writings contain numerous forms of words and ceremonies for the expulsion of demons. In the New Testament there is no magic. The deliverance from a demon is a spiritual and ethical process (see EXORCISM).

(d) In the New Testament the range of activities attributed to demons is greatly restricted. According to Babylonian ideas: "These demons were everywhere; they lurked in every corner, watching for their prey. The city streets knew their malevolent presence, the rivers, the seas, the tops of mountains; they appeared sometimes as serpents gliding noiselessly upon their victims, as birds horrid of mien flying resistlessly to destroy or afflict, as beings in human forms, grotesque, malformed, awe-inspiring through their hideousness. To these demons all sorts of misfortune were ascribed--a toothache; a headache, a broken bone, a raging fever, an outburst of anger, of jealousy, of incomprehensible disease" (Rogers, op. cit., 145). In the extra-canonical Jewish sources the same exuberance of fancy appears in attributing all kinds of ills of mind and body to innumerable, swarming hosts of demons lying in wait for men and besieging them with attacks and ills of all descriptions. Of this affluence of morbid fancy there is no hint in the New Testament. A careful analysis of the instances will show the importance of this fact. There are, taking repetitions and all, about 80 references to demons in the New Testament. In 11 instances the distinction between demon-possession and diseases ordinarily caused is clearly made (Matthew 4:24; 8:16; 10:8; Mark 1:32, 34; 6:13; Mark 16:17-18; Luke 4:40-41; 9:1; 13:32; Acts 19:12). The results of demon-possession are not exclusively mental or nervous (Matthew 9:32-33; 12:22). They are distinctly and peculiarly mental in two instances only (Gadarene maniac, Matthew 8:28 and parallels, and Acts 19:13 f). Epilepsy is specified in one case only (Matthew 17:15). There is distinction made between demonized and epileptic, and demonized and lunatic (Matthew 4:24). There is distinction made between diseases caused by demons and the same disease not so caused (compare Matthew 12:22; 15:30). In most of the instances no specific symptoms are mentioned. In an equally large proportion, however, there are occasional fits of mental excitement often due to the presence and teaching of Christ.

Conclusions:

A summary of the entire material leads to the conclusion that, in the New Testament cases of demon-possession, we have a specific type of disturbance, physical or mental, distinguishable not so much by its symptoms which were often of the most general character, as by its accompaniments. The aura, so to say, which surrounded the patient, served to distinguish his symptoms and to point out the special cause to which his suffering was attributed. Another unique feature of New Testament demonology should be emphasized. While this group of disorders is attributed to demons, the victims are treated as sick folk and are healed. The whole atmosphere surrounding the narrative of these incidents is calm, lofty and pervaded with the spirit of Christ. When one remembers the manifold cruelties inspired by the unreasoning fear of demons, which make the annals of savage medicine a nightmare of unimaginable horrors, we cannot but feel the worldwide difference between the Biblical narratives and all others, both of ancient and modern times, with which we are acquainted. Every feature of the New Testament narratives points to the conclusion that in them we have trustworthy reports of actual cures. This is more important for New Testament faith than any other conclusion could possibly be.

It is also evident that Jesus treated these cases of invaded personality, of bondage of depression, of helpless fear, as due to a real superhuman cause, to meet and overcome which He addressed Himself. The most distinctive and important words we have upon this obscure and difficult subject, upon which we know far too little to speak with any assurance or authority, are these: "This kind can come out by nothing, save by prayer" (Mark 9:29).

LITERATURE.

(1) The most accessible statement of Baudissin's theory is in Whitehouse's article "Demons," etc., in Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (five volumes). (2) For extra-canonical Jewish ideas use Lange, Apocrypha, 118, 134; Edersheim, LTJM, Appendices XIII, XVI. (3) For spirit-lore in general see Ladd, Phil. Rel., index under the word, and standard books on Anthropology and Philosophy of Religion under Spiritism. (4) For Babylonian demonology see summary in Rogers, Religion of Babylonia and Assyria, 144 ff.

Louis Matthews Sweet

Demophon

Demophon - dem'-o-fon (Demophon): A Syrian general in Palestine under Antiochus V (Eupator) who continued to harass the Jews after covenants had been made between Lysias and Judas Maccabeus (2 Maccabees 12:2).

Den

Den - (ma`on, me`onah, "habitation"; me`arah, and spelaion, "cave"; me'urah (Isaiah 11:8), "a light-hole," from 'or, "light," perhaps for me`arah; cokh (Psalms 10:9 the King James Version), and cukkah (Job 38:40), "a covert," elsewhere "booth"; 'erebh (Job 37:8), "covert," as in the Revised Version (British and American); gobh; compare Arabic jubb, "pit" (Daniel 6:7); minharoth, "fissure" or "cleft" (Judges 6:2)): In the limestone mountains of Palestine caves, large and small, are abundant, the calcium carbonate, of which the rock is mainly composed, being dissolved by the water as it trickles over them or through their crevices. Even on the plains, by a similar process, pits or "lime sinks" are formed, which are sometimes used by the Arabs for storing straw or grain. Of this sort may have been the pit, bor, into which Joseph was cast by his brethren (Genesis 37:20). Caves and crevices and sometimes spaces among piled-up boulders at the foot of a cliff or in a stream bed are used as dens by jackals, wolves and other wild animals. Even the people, for longer or shorter periods, have lived as troglodytes. Compare Judges 6:2: "Because of Midian the children of Israel made them the dens (minharoth) which are in the mountains, and the caves (me`arah), and the strongholds (metsadh)." The precipitous sides of the valleys contain many caves converted by a little labor into human habitations. Notable instances are the valley of the Kidron near Mar-Saba, and Wadi-ul-Chamam near the Sea of Tiberias.

See CAVE.

Alfred Ely Day

Denarius

Denarius - de-na'-ri-us (denarion): A Roman silver coin, 25 of which went to the aureus, the standard gold coin of the empire in the time of Augustus, which was equal in value to about one guinea or $5,25; more exactly œ1.0,6 = $5.00, the œ = $4,866. Hence, the value of the denarius would be about 20 cents and this was the ordinary wage of a soldier and a day laborer. The word is uniformly rendered "penny" in the King James Version and "shilling" in the American Standard Revised Version, except in Matthew 22:19; Mark 12:15 and Luke 20:24, where the Latin word is used, since in these passsages it refers to the coin in which tribute was paid to the Roman government.

See MONEY.

H. Porter

Denounce

Denounce - de-nouns': Occurs in Deuteronomy 30:18: "I denounce unto you this day, that ye shall surely perish." It is used here in the obsolete sense of "to declare," to make known in a solemn manner. It is not found in the Bible with the regular meaning of "to censure," "arraign," etc.

Deny

Deny - de-ni': This word is characteristic of the New Testament rather than the Old Testament, although it translates three different Hebrew originals, namely, kachash, "to lie," "disown" (Genesis 18:15; Joshua 24:27; Job 8:18; 31:28; Proverbs 30:9); mana`, "to withhold," "keep back" (1 Kings 20:7; Proverbs 30:7); shubh, "to turn back," "say no" (1 Kings 2:16).

In the New Testament, antilego, is once translated "deny," in the case of the Sadducees who denied the resurrection (Luke 20:27 the King James Version), and where it carries the sense of speaking against the doctrine. But the word commonly is arneomai, with or without the prefix ap-. In the absence of the prefix the sense is "to disown," but when it is added it means "to disown totally" or to the fullest extent. In the milder sense it is found in Matthew 10:33; 70, 72; of Simon Peter, Mark 14:68, 70 (Acts 3:13-14; 2 Timothy 2:12-13; 2 Peter 2:1; 1 John 2:22-23; Jude 1:4; Revelation 2:13; 3:8). But it is significant that the sterner meaning is associated with Matthew 16:24 and its parallels, where Christ calls upon him who would be His disciple to deny himself and take up his cross and follow Him.

See also PETER, SIMON.

James M. Gray

Deposit

Deposit - de-poz'-it (paratheke, 1 Timothy 6:20; 2 Timothy 1:12, 14 the Revised Version, margin, paraphrased in both the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) into "that which is committed" (see COMMEND)): The noun was used in the classical Greek, just as its English equivalents, for "that which is placed with another for safe keeping," a charge committed to another's hands, consisting often of money or property; compare Exodus 22:7; Leviticus 6:2. This practice was common in days when there were no banks. (1) In 1 Timothy 6:20; also 2 Timothy 1:14, the reference is to a deposit which God makes with man, and for which man is to give a reckoning. The context shows that this deposit is the Christian faith, "the pattern of sound words" (2 Timothy 1:13), that which is contrasted with the "oppositions of the knowledge which is falsely so called" (1 Timothy 6:20). "Keep the talent of the Christian faith safe and undiminished" (Vincentius Lirenensis). (2) In 2 Timothy 1:12, the deposit is one which man makes with God. The key to the meaning of this expression is found probably in Psalms 31:5: "Into thy hand I commend my spirit: Thou hast redeemed me," i.e. "All that I am, with all my interests, have been entrusted to Thy safe keeping, and, therefore, I have no anxieties with respect to the future. The day of reckoning, `that day,' will show how faithful are the hands that hold this trust."

H. E. Jacobs

Depth

Depth - See ABYSS.

Deputy

Deputy - dep'-u-ti: This is the correct rendering of nitsabh (1 Kings 22:47). In Esther 8:9 and Esther 9:3 the term improperly represents caghan, in the King James Version, and is corrected to "governor" in the Revised Version (British and American). In the New Testament "deputy" represents anthupatos (Acts 13:7-8, 12; 18:12; 19:38), which the Revised Version (British and American) correctly renders "proconsul" (which see). The Roman proconsuls were officers invested with consular power over a district outside the city, usually for one year. Originally they were retiring consuls, but after Augustus the title was given to governors of senatorial provinces, whether they had held the office of consul or not. The proconsul exercised judicial as well as military power in his province, and his authority was absolute, except as he might be held accountable at the expiration of his office.

See GOVERNMENT.

William Arthur Heidel

Derbe

Derbe - dur'-be (Derbe, Acts 14:20-21; 16:1; Derbaios, Acts 20:4; Derbetes, Strabo, Cicero): A city in the extreme Southeast corner of the Lycaonian plain is mentioned twice as having been visited by Paul (on his first and second missionary journeys respectively), and it may now be regarded as highly probable that he passed through it on his third journey (to the churches of Galatia). The view that these churches were in South Galatia is now accepted by the majority of English and American scholars, and a traveler passing through the Cilician Gates to Southern Galatia must have traversed the territory of Derbe.

1. History: Derbe is first mentioned as the seat of Antipater, who entertained Cicero, the Roman orator and governor of Cilicia. When the kingdom of Amyntas passed, at his death in 25 BC, to the Romans, it was made into a province and called Galatia (see GALATIA). This province included Laranda as well as Derbe on the extreme. Southeast, and for a time Laranda was the frontier city looking toward Cappadocia and Cilicia and Syria via the Cilician Gates. But between 37 and 41 AD Laranda was transferred to the "protected" kingdom of Antiochus, and Derbe became the frontier city. It was the last city on distinctively Roman territory, on the road leading from Southern Galatia to the East; it was here that commerce entering the province had to pay the customs dues. Strabo records this fact when he calls Derbe a limen or "customs station." It owed its importance (and consequently its visit from Paul on his first journey) to this fact, and to its position on a great Roman road leading from Antioch, the capital of Southern Galatia, to Iconium, Laranda, Heracleia-Cybistra, and the Cilician Gates. Roman milestones have been found along the line of this road, one at a point 15 miles Northwest of Derbe. It was one of those Lycaonian cities honored with the title "Claudian" by the emperor Claudius; its coins bear the legend "Claudio-Derbe." This implied considerable importance and prosperity as well as strong pro-Roman feeling; yet we do not find Derbe standing aloof, like the Roman colonies Iconium and Lystra, from the Common Council of Lycaonian cities (Koinon Lykaonias).

Derbe remained in the province Galatia till about 135 AD, when it passed to the jurisdiction of the triple province Cilicia-Isauria-Lycaonia. It continued in this division till 295 AD, and was then included in the newly formed province Isauria. This arrangement lasted till about 372 AD, when Lycaonia, including Derbe, was formed into a separate province. The statement of Stephanus of Byzantium that Derbe was "a fortress of Isauria" originated in the arrangement which existed from 295 to 372 AD. Coins of the city represent Heracles, Fortuna and a winged Victory writing on a shield (after the pattern of the Venus of Melos, in the Louvre, Paris). Derbe is mentioned several times in the records of the church councils. A bishop, Daphnus of Derbe, was present at the Council of Constantinople in 381.

2. Situation: The site of Derbe was approximately fixed by the American explorer Sterrett, and more accurately by Sir W. M. Ramsay, who, after carefully examining all the ruins in the neighborhood, placed it at Gudelisin. Up to 1911, certain epigraphic evidence fixing the site had not been found, but Ramsay's identification meets all the conditions, and cannot be far wrong. On the East, Derbe was conterminous with Laranda, on the Northeast with Barata in the Kara Dagh. It bordered on the territory of Iconium on the Northwest, and on Isauria on the West. Its territory touched the foothills of Taurus on the South, and the site commands a fine view of the great mountain called Hadji Baba or the Pilgrim Father. The Greeks of the district say that the name is a reminiscence of Paul, "over whose travels" the mountain "stood as a silent witness."

The remains are mostly of the late Roman and Byzantine periods, but pottery of an earlier date has been found on the site. An inscription of a village on the territory of Derbe records the erection of a building by two architects from Lystra. A line of boundary stones, separating the territory of Derbe from that of Barata, is still standing. It probably belongs to an early delimitation of the territory of the frontier town of Galatia (Ramsay).

3. Paul at Derbe: In Acts 14:20-21, it is narrated that Paul and Barnabas, after being driven out of Lystra, departed to Derbe, where they "preached the gospel .... and made many disciples." But they did not further. Paul's mission included only the centers of Greco-Roman civilization; it was no part of his plan to pass over the frontier of the province into non-Roman territory. This aspect of his purpose is illustrated by the reference to Derbe on his second journey (Acts 16:1). Paul started from Antioch and "went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches" (Acts 15:41). "Then he came to Derbe and Lystra" (Acts 16:1 the King James Version). The unwarned reader might forget that in going from Cilicia to Derbe, Paul must have, passed through a considerable part of Antiochus' territory, and visited the important cities of Heracleia-Cybistra and Laranda. But his work ends with the Roman Cilicia and begins again with the Roman Galatia; to him, the intervening country is a blank. Concentration of effort, and utilization only of the most fully prepared material were the characteristics of Paul's missionary journeys in Asia Minor. That Paul was successful in Derbe may be gathered (as Ramsay points out) from the fact that he does not mention Derbe among the places where he had suffered persecution (2 Timothy 3:11). Gaius of Derbe (among others) accompanied Paul to Jerusalem, in charge of the donations of the churches to the poor in that city (Acts 20:4).

LITERATURE.

The only complete account of Derbe is that given in Sir W. M. Ramsay's Cities of Paul, 385-404. On Paul's mission there, see the same author's Paul the Traveler and Roman Citizen, 119, 178. Many inscriptions of the later Roman period are collected in Sterrett, Wolfe Expedition to Asia Minor, Numbers 18-52. The principal ancient authorities, besides Acts, are Cicero Ad Fam. xiii.73; Strabo xxx.569; Ptolemeus, v.6, 17; Steph. Byz., Hierocl., 675; Notit, Episcop., I, 404, and the Acta Conciliorum.

W. M. Calder

Derision

Derision - de-rizh'-un: Three verbs are so translated luts, "scorn" (Psalms 119:51); la`agh, "mock" (Psalms 2:4; 59:8; Ezekiel 23:32); and sachaq, "laugh at" (Job 30:1; Exodus 32:25 margin, "a whispering"; compare Wisdom of Solomon 5:3). This word is found almost exclusively in the Psalms and Prophets; Jeremiah is fond of it. It is used both as a substantive and a verb, the latter in the phrase "to have in derision:"

Descend; Descent

Descend; Descent - de-send', de-sent' (yaradh; katabaino, "go down"); (katabasis): Of Yahweh (Exodus 34:5); of the Spirit (Matthew 3:16); of angels (Genesis 28:12; Matthew 28:2; John 1:51); of Christ (1 Thessalonians 4:16; Ephesians 4:9). "He also descended into the lower parts of the earth" is variously interpreted, the two chief interpretations being the one of the incarnation, and the other of the "descent into hell" (1 Peter 3:19). The former regards the clause "of the earth," an appositive genitive, as when we speak of "the city of Rome," namely, "the lower parts, i.e. the earth." The other regards the genitive as possessive, or, with Meyer, as governed by the comparative, i.e. "parts lower than the earth." For the former view, see full discussion in Eadie; for the latter, Ellicott and especially Meyer, in commentaries on Eph.

H. E. Jacobs

Descent, of Jesus

Descent, of Jesus - de-sent'.

See APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS.

Describe

Describe - de-skrib': This verb, now obsolete, in the sense used in Joshua 18:4, 6, 8-9 and Judges 8:14, is a translation of kathabh, usually rendered "to write" or "inscribe." But in the above passages it has the Old English meaning of dividing into parts or into lots, as for example: "Walk through the land, and describe it according to their inheritance" (Joshua 18:4); that is, describe in writing the location and size of the several parcels of land thus portioned out. In Judges 8:14 "described" should be translated "wrote down a list of." "Describe" occurs twice in the King James Version of the New Testament (Romans 4:6 and Romans 10:5), where lego, and grapho, are both rendered "describeth." the Revised Version (British and American) corrects both, and substitutes "pronounceth" in the first and "writeth" in the second passage.

Description = "list" (1 Esdras 5:39).

W. W. Davies

Descry

Descry - de-skri': This word like "describe" came into the English through the French descrire (Latin, describere); it occurs only in the King James Version of Judges 1:23: "And the house of Joseph sent to Bethel." tur the verb thus translated, signifies "to explore" or "examine," and the Revised Version (British and American) correctly renders "sent to spy out."

Desert

Desert - dez'-ert midhbar, chorbah, yeshimon, `arabhah, tsiyah, tohu; eremos, eremia): Midhbar, the commonest word for "desert," more often rendered "wilderness," is perhaps from the root dabhar, in the sense of "to drive," i.e. a place for driving or pasturing flocks. Yeshimon is from yasham, "to be empty", chorbah (compare Arabic kharib, "to lie waste"; khirbah, "a ruin"; kharab, "devastation"), from charabh "to be dry"; compare also `arabh, "to be dry," and `arabhah, "a desert" or "the Arabah" (see CHAMPAIGN). For 'erets tsiyah (Psalms 63:1; Isaiah 41:18), "a dry land," compare tsiyim, "wild beasts of the desert" (Isaiah 13:21, etc.). Tohu, variously rendered "without form" (Genesis 1:2 the King James Version), "empty space," the King James Version "empty place" (Job 26:7), "waste," the King James Version "nothing" (Job 6:18), "confusion," the Revised Version, margin, "wasteness" (Isaiah 24:10 the English Revised Version), may be compared with Arabic tah, "to go astray" at-Tih, "the desert of the wandering." In the New Testament we find eremos and eremia: "The child (John) .... was in the deserts till the day of his showing unto Israel" (Luke 1:80); "Our fathers did eat manna in the desert" (John 6:31 the King James Version).

The desert as known to the Israelites was not a waste of sand, as those are apt to imagine who have in mind the pictures of the Sahara. Great expanses of sand, it is true, are found in Arabia, but the nearest one, an-Nufud, was several days' journey distant from the farthest southeast reached by the Israelites in their wanderings. Most of the desert of Sinai and of Palestine is land that needs only water to make it fruitful. East of the Jordan, the line between "the desert" and "the sown" lies about along the line of the Chijaz railway. To the West there is barely enough water to support the crops of wheat; to the East there is too little. Near the line of demarcation, the yield of wheat depends strictly upon the rainfall. A few inches more or less of rain in the year determines whether the grain can reach maturity or not. The latent fertility of the desert lands is demonstrated by the season of scant rains, when they become carpeted with herbage and flowers. It is marvelous, too, how the camels, sheep and goats, even in the dry season, will find something to crop where the traveler sees nothing but absolute barrenness. The long wandering of the Israelites in "the desert" was made possible by the existence of food for their flocks and herds. Compare Psalms 65:11-12:

"Thou crownest the year with thy goodness;

And thy paths drop fatness.

They drop upon the pastures of the Wilderness.

And the hills are girded with joy";

and also Joel 2:22: "The pastures of the wilderness do spring."

"The desert" or "the wilderness" (ha-midhbar) usually signifies the desert of the wandering, or the northern part of the Sinaitic Peninsula. Compare Exodus 3:1 King James Version: "MOSES .... led theflock (of Jethro) to the backside of the desert"; Exodus 5:3 King James Version: "Let us go .... three days' journey into the desert"; Exodus 19:2 King James Version: "They .... were come to the desert of Sinai"; Exodus 23:31 King James Version: "I will set thy bounds from the Red Sea even unto the sea of the Philistines, and from the desert unto the river" (Euphrates). Other uncultivated or pasture regions are known as Wilderness of Beersheba (Genesis 21:14), West of Judah (Judges 1:16), West of En-gedi (1 Samuel 24:1), West of Gibeon (2 Samuel 2:24), West of Maon (1 Samuel 23:24), West of Damascus; compare Arabic Badiyet-ush-Sham (1 Kings 19:15), etc. Midhbar yam, "the wilderness of the sea" (Isaiah 21:1), may perhaps be that part of Arabia bordering upon the Persian Gulf.

Aside from the towns and fields, practically all the land was midhbar or "desert," for this term included mountain, plain and valley. The terms, "desert of En-gedi," "desert of Maon," etc., do not indicate circumscribed areas, but are applied in a general way to the lands about these places. To obtain water, the shepherds with their flocks traverse long distances to the wells, springs or streams, usually arranging to reach the water about the middle of the day and rest about it for an hour or so, taking shelter from the sun in the shadows of the rocks, perhaps under some overhanging ledge.

Alfred Ely Day

Desire

Desire - de-zir': The verb "to desire" in the Scriptures usually means "to long for," "to ask for," "to demand," and may be used in a good or bad sense (compare Deuteronomy 7:25 the King James Version). the Revised Version (British and American) frequently renders the more literal meaning of the Hebrew. Compare Job 20:20, "delight"; Proverbs 21:20, "precious"; Psalms 40:6, "delight"; aiteo (except Colossians 1:9), and erotao (except Luke 7:36) are rendered "to ask" and zeteo, "to seek" (compare Luke 9:9 et. al.). The Hebrew kacaph, literally, "to lose in value," is translated (Zephaniah 2:1) by "hath no shame" (the Revised Version, margin "longing," the King James Version "not desired"). The literal translation "to lose in value," "to degenerate," would be more in harmony with the context than the translations offered. The Hebrew chemdah (2 Chronicles 21:20, "without being desired"), means according to the Arabic "to praise," "to give thanks." The context brings in contrast the burial of the king Jehoram with that of his fathers. In the latter case there was "burning," i.e. recognition and praise, but when Jehoram died, there was no chemdah, i.e. there was no praise for his services rendered to the kingdom. For "desire" in Ecclesiastes 12:5, see CAPERBERRY.

A. L. Breslich

Desire of All Nations

Desire of All Nations - This phrase occurs only in Haggai 2:7 (King James Version, the English Revised Version "desirable things," the American Revised Version, margin "things desired"), and is commonly applied to the Messiah.

At the erection of the temple in Ezra's time, the older men who had seen the more magnificent house of Solomon were disappointed and distressed at the comparison. The prophet, therefore, is directed to encourage them by the assurance that Yahweh is with them nevertheless, and in a little while will shake the heavens, the earth, the sea, the dry land and the nations, and "the desire of all nations" shall come, and the house shall be filled with glory, so that "the later glory of this house shall be greater than the former."

(1) Many expositors refer the prophecy to the first advent of Christ. The shaking of the heavens, the earth, the sea and the dry land is the figurative setting of the shaking of the nations, while this latter expression refers to those changes of earthly dominion coincident with the overthrow of the Persians by the Greeks, the Greeks by the Romans, and so on down to the beginning of our era. The house then in process of construction was filled with glory by the later presence of the Messiah, which glory was greater than the Shekinah of Solomon's time. Objections are presented to this view as follows: First, there is the element of time. Five centuries, more or less, elapsed between the building of Ezra's temple and the first advent of Christ, and the men of Ezra's time needed comfort for the present. Then there is the difficulty of associating the physical phenomena with any shaking of the nations occurring atthe first advent. Furthermore, in what sense, it is asked, could Christ, when He came, be said to be the desire of all nations? And finally, what comfort would a Jew find in this magnifying of the Gentiles?

(2) These difficulties, though not insuperable, lead others to apply the prophecy to the second advent of Christ. The Jews are to be restored to Jerusalem, and another temple is to be built (Ezekiel 40:1-49 through Ezekiel 48:1-35). The shaking of the nations and the physical phenomena find their fulfillment in the "Great Tribulation" so often spoken of in the Old Testament and Revelation, and which is followed by the coming of Christ in glory to set up His kingdom (Malachi 3:1; Matthew 24:29-30 and other places). Some of the difficulties spoken of in the first instance apply here also, but not all of them, while others are common to both interpretations. One such common difficulty is that Ezra's temple can hardly be identified with that of the time of Herod and Christ, and certainly not with that of Ezekiel; which is met, however, by saying that all the temples, including Solomon's, are treated as but one "house"--the house of the Lord, in the religious sense, at least, if not architecturally. Another such difficulty touches the question of time, which, whether it includes five centuries or twenty, is met by the principle that to the prophets, "ascending in heart to God and the eternity of God, all times and all things of this world are only a mere point." When the precise time of particular events is not revealed, they sometimes describe them as continuous, and sometimes blend two events together, having a near or partial, and also a remote or complete fulfillment. "They saw the future in space rather than in time, or the perspective rather than the actual distance." It is noted that the Lord Jesus so blends together the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, AD 70, and the days of the anti-Christ at the end of this age, that it is difficult to separate them, and to say which belongs exclusively to either (Matthew 24:1-51). That the words may have an ultimate fulfillment in the second advent of Christ receives strength from a comparison of Haggai 2:21-22 with Hebrews 12:26-27. The writer of that epistle condenses the two passages in Haggai 2:6-7 and Haggai 2:21-22, implying that it was one and the same shaking, of which the former verses denote the beginning, and the latter the end. The shaking, in other words, began introductory to the first advent and will be finished at the second. Concerning the former, compare Matthew 3:17; 27:51; 28:2; Acts 2:2; 4:31, and concerning the latter, Matthew 24:7; Revelation 16:20; 20:11 (Bengel, quoted by Canon Faussett).

(3) Other expositors seek to cut the Gordian knot by altogether denying the application to the Messiah, and translating "the desire of all nations" by "the beauty," or "the desirable things of all nations," i.e. their precious gifts (see Isaiah 60:5, 11; 61:6). This application is defended in the following way: (a) The Hebrew word means the quality and not the thing desired; (b) the Messiah was not desired by all the nations when He came; (c) the verb "shall come" is plural, which requires the noun to be understood in the plural, whereas if the Messiah be intended, the noun is singular; (d) "The silver is mine," etc. (Haggai 2:8) accords with the translation "the desirable things of all nations"; (e) the agreement of the Septuagint and Syriac versions with such rendering.

All these arguments, however, can be fairly met by counter-arguments, leaving the reader still in doubt. (a) An abstract noun is often put for the concrete; (b) the result shows that while the Jews rejected Christ, the Gentiles received and hence, desired Him; (c) where two nouns stand together after the manner of "the desire" and "nations," the verb agrees in number sometimes with the latter, even though the former be its nominative; (d) the 8th verse of the prophecy can be harmonized about as easily with one view as the other; (e) the King James Version is sustained by the Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) and early Jewish rabbis.

James M. Gray

Desolate

Desolate - des'-o-lat (very frequently in the Old Testament for shamem, and its derivatives; less frequently, charebh, and its derivatives, and other words. In the New Testament it stands for eremos (Matthew 23:38; Acts 1:20; Galatians 4:27) eremoo (Revelation 17:16), and monoo (1 Timothy 5:5)): From Latin de, intens., solus, alone. Several shades of meaning can be distinguished: (1) Its primary sense is "left lonely," "forlorn," e.g. Psalms 25:16, "Have mercy upon me; for I am desolate" (Hebrew yachidh, "alone"); 1 Timothy 5:5, "she that is a widow indeed, and desolate" (Greek memonomene, "left alone"). (2) In the sense of "laid waste," "destitute of inhabitants," e.g. Jeremiah 4:7, "to make thy land desolate, that thy cities be laid waste, without inhabitant." (3) With the meaning "comfortless," "afflicted," e.g. Psalms 143:4, "My heart within me is desolate." (4) In the sense of "barren," "childless," "unfruitful," e.g. Job 15:34; Isaiah 49:21 (Hebrew galmudh).

D. Miall Edwards

Desolation, Abomination of

Desolation, Abomination of - See ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION.

Despair

Despair - de-spar': The substantive only in 2 Corinthians 4:8, "perplexed, but not in (the Revised Version (British and American) "yet not unto") despair," literally, "being at a loss, but not utterly at a loss." "Unto despair" here conveys the force of the Greek prefix ex ("utterly," "out and out"). Desperate, in Job 6:26; Isaiah 17:11. In the latter instance, the Hebrew adjective is derived from a verb = "to be sick," and the literally, rendering would be "incurable" (compare Job 34:6, "my wound is incurable"). Desperately in Jeremiah 17:9 the King James Version, where the heart is said to be "desperately (i.e. incurably) wicked" or "sick."

Despite; Despiteful

Despite; Despiteful - de-spit', de-spit'-fool: "Despite" is from Latin despectus, "a looking down upon." As a noun (= "contempt") it is now generally used in its shortened form, "spite," while the longer form is used as a preposition (= "in spite of"). In English Versions of the Bible it is always a noun. In the Old Testament it translates Hebrew she'aT, in Ezekiel 25:6, and in the Revised Version (British and American) Ezekiel 25:15; 36:5 ("with despite of soul"). In Hebrews 10:29 ("hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace") it stands for Greek enubrizo, "to treat with contempt." The adjective "despiteful" occurs in the King James Version Ezekiel 25:15; 36:5; Sirach 31:31 ("despiteful words," the Revised Version (British and American) "a word of reproach"); Romans 1:30 (the Revised Version (British and American) "insolent" = Greek hubristes, from huper, "above"; compare English "uppish").

D. Miall Edwards

Dessau

Dessau - des'-o, des'-a-u (Dessaou (2 Maccabees 14:16)): the Revised Version (British and American) LESSAU (which see).

Destiny, (Meni)

Destiny, (Meni) - des'-ti-ni: A god of Good Luck, possibly the Pleiades.

See ASTROLOGY, 10; MENI.

Destroyer

Destroyer - de-stroi'-er: In several passages the word designates a supernatural agent of destruction, or destroying angel, executing Divine judgment. (1) In Exodus 12:23, of the "destroyer" who smote the first-born in Egypt, again referred to under the same title in Hebrews 11:28 the Revised Version (British and American) (the King James Version "he that destroyed"). (2) In Job 33:22, "the destroyers" (literally, "they that cause to die") = the angels of death that are ready to take away a man's life during severe illness. No exact parallel to this is found in the Old Testament. The nearest approach is "the angel that destroyed the people" by pestilence (2 Samuel 24:16-17 parallel 1 Chronicles 21:15-16); the angel that smote the Assyrians (2 Kings 19:35 = Isaiah 37:36 parallel 2 Chronicles 32:21); "angels of evil" (Psalms 78:49). (3) In the Apocrypha, "the destroyer" is once referred to as "the minister of punishment" (Revised Version; literally, "him who was punishing"), who brought death into the world (Wisdom of Solomon 18:22-25). (4) In 1 Corinthians 10:10, "the destroyer" is the angelic agent to whose instrumentality Paul attributes the plague of Numbers 16:46-49.

In later Jewish theology (the Targums and Midrash), the "destroyer" or "angel of death" appears under the name Sammael (i.e. the poison of God), who was once an arch-angel before the throne of God, and who caused the serpent to tempt Eve. According to Weber, he is not to be distinguished from Satan. The chief distinction between the "destroyer" of early thought and the Sammael of later Judaism is that the former was regarded as the emissary of Yahweh, and subservient to His will, and sometimes was not clearly distinguished from Yahweh Himself, whereas the latter was regarded as a perfectly distinct individuality, acting in independence or semi-independence, and from purely malicious and evil motives. The change was largely due to the influence of Persian dualism, which made good and evil to be independent powers.

D. Miall Edwards

Destruction

Destruction - de-struk'-shun: In the King James Version this word translates over 30 Hebrew words in the Old Testament, and 4 words in the New Testament. Of these the most interesting, as having a technical sense, is 'abhaddon (from verb 'abhadh, "to be lost," "to perish"). It is found 6 times in the Wisdom Literature, and nowhere else in the Old Testament; compare Revelation 9:11.

See ABADDON.

DESTRUCTION, CITY OF; HELIOPOLIS or CITY OF THE SUN

(Isaiah 19:18).

See ASTRONOMY, sec. I, 2; IR-HA-HERES; ON.

Determinate

Determinate - de-tur'-mi-nat (horismenos, "determined," "fixed"): Only in Acts 2:23, "by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of. God," Greek horismenos, from horizo, "to set boundaries," "determine," "settle" (compare English word "horizon"--literally, "that which bounds"). It is remarkable that Peter in one and the same sentence speaks of the death of Christ from two quite distinct points of view. (1) From the historical standpoint, it was a crime perpetrated by men who were morally responsible for their deed ("him .... ye by the hand of lawless men did crucify and slay"). (2) From the standpoint of Divine teleology, it was part of an eternal plan ("by the determinate," etc.). No effort is made to demonstrate the logical consistency of the two ideas. They represent two aspects of the one fact. The same Greek word is used in Luke 22:22, where Christ speaks of His betrayal as taking place "as it was (the Revised Version (British and American) "hath been") determined" (kata to horismenon). Compare Luke 24:26.

D. Miall Edwards

Determine

Determine - de-tur'-min:

(1) "To resolve," "decide." This is the primary meaning of the word and it is also the one that is the most common. In the New Testament the Greek word krino, is translated "determine," and it has the above meaning (Acts 20:16; 25:25; 1 Corinthians 2:2). The word occurs frequently in the Old Testament with this meaning (see Exodus 21:22; 1 Samuel 20:7, 9, 33).

(2) "To decree," "ordain," "mark out." The Greek word that is rendered "determine" with this meaning is horizo.

See DETERMINATE.

The Hebrew term charats is translated "determine" with the above meaning; as "his days are determined" (Job 14:5); "a destruction is determined" (Isaiah 10:22); "desolations are determined" (Daniel 9:26). The Hebrew term mishpaT, which means "judgment" or "sentence," is translated "determination" in Zephaniah 3:8.

A. W. Fortune.

Detestable, Things

Detestable, Things - de-tes'-ta-b'-l, (shiqquts; sheqets, synonymous with to`ebhah, "abomination," "abominable thing"): The translation of shiqqutsim in Jeremiah 16:18; Ezekiel 5:11; 7:20; 18, 21; 37:23; a term always applied to idol-worship or to objects connected with idolatry; often also translated "abomination," as in 1 Kings 11:5, 7 (bis); Jeremiah 4:1; Ezekiel 20:7-8, 30. Sheqets, translated "abomination," is applied in the Scriptures to that which is ceremonially unclean (Leviticus 7:21), creatures forbidden as food, as water animals without fins or scales in Leviticus 11:10-12, birds of prey and the like (verse 18), winged creeping things (verses 20,23), creeping vermin (verses 41 f). Compare also Isaiah 66:17. By partaking of the food of the animals in question one makes himself detestable (Leviticus 11:43; 20:25). Similarly the idolatrous appurtenances are to be held in detestation; nothing of the kind should be appropriated for private use (Deuteronomy 7:26).

See ABOMINATION.

Max L. Margolis

Deuel

Deuel - du'-el, de-u'-el de`u'el, "knowledge of God"): A Gadite, the father of Eliasaph, the representative of the tribe of Gad in the census-taking (Numbers 1:14), in making the offering of the tribe at the dedication of the altar (Numbers 7:42, 47), and as leader of the host of the tribe of the children of Gad in the wilderness (Numbers 10:20). Called Reuel in Numbers 2:14, daleth (d) being confused with resh (r).

Deutero-canonical, Books

Deutero-canonical, Books - du-ter-o-ka-non'-i-kal: A term sometimes used to designate certain books, which by the Council of Trent were included in the Old Testament, but which the Protestant churches designated as apocryphal (see APOCRYPHA), and also certain books of the New Testament which for a long time were not accepted by the whole church as Scripture. Webster says the term pertains to "a second Canon or ecclesiastical writing of inferior authority," and the history of these books shows that they were all at times regarded by a part of the church as being inferior to the others and some of them are so regarded today. This second Canon includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclusiasticus, 2 Esdras, 1 Maccabees and 2 Maccabees of the Old Testament, and Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, Jude, and Revelation of the New Testament.

1. The Old Testament Books: The Old Testament books under consideration were not in the Hebrew Canon and they were originally designated as apocryphal. The Septuagint contained many of the apocrphyal books, and among these were most of those which we have designated deutero-canonical. The Septuagint was perhaps the Greek Bible of New Testament times and it continued to be the Old Testament of the early church, and hence, these books were widely distributed. It seems, however, that they did not continue to hold their place along with the other books, for Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, in his Festal Epistle in 367 gave a list of the books of the Bible which were to be read, and at the close of this list he said: "There are also other books besides these, not canonized, yet set by the Fathers to be read to those who have just come up and who wish to be informed as to the word of godliness: Wisdom, Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobit, the so-called Teaching of the Apes, and the Shepherd of Hermas." Jerome also made a distinction between the apocryphal books and the others. In his Preface, after enumerating the books contained in the Hebrew Canon, he adds: "This prologue I write as a preface to the books to be translated by us from the Hebrew into Latin, that we may know that all the books which are not of this number are apocrphyal; therefore Wisdom, which is commonly ascribed to Solomon as its author, and the book of Jesus the son of Sirach, Judith, Tobit and the Shepher are not in the Canon." Rufinus made the same distinction as did Jerome. He declared that "these books are not canonical, but have been called by our forefathers ecclesiastical." Augustine included these books in his list which he published in 397. He begins the list thus: "The entire canon of Scripture is comprised in these books." Then follows a list of the books which includes Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 2 Esdras, Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, and it closes with these words: "In these 44 books is comprised all the authority of the Old Testament." Inasmuch as these books were regarded by the church at large as ecclesiastical and helpful, and Augustine had given them canonical sanction, they rapidly gained in favor and most of them are found in the great manuscripts.

See CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

2. The New Testament Books: It is not probable that there was any general council of the church in those early centuries that set apart the various books of the New Testament and canonized them as Scripture for the whole church. There was no single historical event which brought together the New Testament books which were everywhere to be regarded as Scripture. These books did not make the same progress in the various provinces and churches. A careful study of conditions reveals the fact that there was no uniform New Testament canon in the church during at least the first 3 centuries. The Ethiopic church, for example, had 35 books in its New Testament, while the Syrian church had only 22 books.

From an early date the churches were practically agreed on those books which are sometimes designated as the protocanonical, and which Eusebius designated as the homologoumena. They differed, however, in regard to the 7 disputed books which form a part of the so-called deutero-canon, and which Eusebius designated as the antilegomena. They also differed in regard to other ecclesiastical writings, for there was no fixed line between canonical and non-canonical books. While there was perhaps no council of the church that had passed on the books and declared them canonical, it is undoubtedly true that before the close of the 2nd century all the books that are in our New Testament, with the exception of those under consideration, had become recognized as Scripture in all orthodox churches.

The history of these seven books reveals the fact that although some of them were early used by the Fathers, they afterward fell into disfavor. That is especially true of Hebrews and Revelation. Generally speaking, it can be said that at the close of the 2nd century the 7 books under consideration had failed to receive any such general recognition as had the rest; however, all, with perhaps the exception of 2 Peter, had been used by some of the Fathers. He was freely attested by Clement of Rome and Justin Martyr; James by Hermas and probably by Clement of Rome; 2 John, 3 John and Jude by the Muratorian Fragment; Revelation by Hermas and Justin Martyr who names John as its author.

See CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Jerome, who prepared the Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) in the closing years of the 4th century, accepted all 7 of the doubtful books, yet he held that 2 John and 3 John were written by the Presbyter, and he intimated that 2 Peter and Jude were still rejected by some, and he said the Latins did not receive He among the canonical Scriptures, neither did the Greek churches receive Augustine, who was one of the great leaders during the last part of the 4th century and the first part of the 5th, accepted without question the 7 disputed books. These books had gradually gained in favor and the position of Jerome and Augustine practically settled their canonicity for the orthodox churches. The Council of Carthage, held in 397, adopted the catalogue of Augustine. This catalogue contained all the disputed books both of the New Testament and the Old Testament.

Since the Reformation.

The Canon of Augustine became the Canon of the majority of the churches and the Old Testament books which he accepted were added to the Vulgate, but there were some who still held to the Canon of Jerome. The awakening of the Reformation inevitably led to a reinvestigation of the Canon, since the Bible was made the source of authority, and some of the disputed books of the New Testament were again questioned by the Reformers. The position given the Bible by the Reformers led the Roman church to reaffirm its sanction and definitely to fix the books that should be accepted. Accordingly the Council of Trent, which convened in 1546, made the Canon of Augustine, which included the 7 apocphyal books of the Old Testament, and the 7 disputed books of the New Testament, the Canon of the church, and it pronounced a curse upon those who did not receive these books. The Protestants at first followed the example of Rome and adopted these books which had long had the sanction of usage as their Bible. Gradually, however, the questioned books of the Old Testament were separated from the others. That was true in Coverdale's translation, and in Matthew's Bible they were not only separated from the others but they were prefaced with the words, "the volume of the book called Hagiographa." In Cranmer's Bible, Hagiographa was changed into Apocrypha, and this passed through the succeeding edition into the King James Version.

A. W. Fortune

Deuteronomy

Deuteronomy - du-ter-on'-o-mi:

1. Name

2. What Deuteronomy Is

3. Analysis

4. Ruling Ideas

5. Unity

6. Authorship

7. Deuteronomy Spoken Twice

8. Deuteronomy's Influence in Israel's History

9. The Critical Theory

LITERATURE

1. Name: In Hebrew 'elleh ha-debharim, "these are the words"; in Greek, Deuteronomion, "second law"; whence the Latin deuteronomii, and the English Deuteronomy. The Greek title is due to a mistranslation by the Septuagint of the clause in Deuteronomy 17:18 rendered, "and he shall write for himself this repetition of the law." The Hebrew really means "and he shall write out for himself a copy of this law." However, the error on which the English title rests is not serious, as Deuteronomy is in a very true sense a repetition of the law.

2. What Deuteronomy Is: Deuteronomy is the last of the five books of the Pentateuch, or "five-fifths of the Law." It possesses an individuality and impressiveness of its own. In Exodus--Numbers Yahweh is represented as speaking unto Moses, whereas in Deuteronomy, Moses is represented as speaking at Yahweh's command to Israel (1:1-4; 5:1; 29:1). It is a hortatory recapitulation of various addresses delivered at various times and places in the desert wanderings--a sort of homily on the constitution, the essence or gist of Moses' instructions to Israel during the forty years of their desert experience. It is "a Book of Reviews"; a translation of Israel's redemptive history into living principles; not so much a history as a commentary. There is much of retrospect in it, but its main outlook is forward. The rabbins speak of it as "the Book of Reproofs." It is the text of all prophecy; a manual of evangelical oratory; possessing "all the warmth of a Bernard, the flaming zeal of a Savonarola, and the tender, gracious sympathy of a Francis of Assisi." The author's interest is entirely moral. His one supreme purpose is to arouse Israel's loyalty to Yahweh and to His revealed law. Taken as a whole the book is an exposition of the great commandment, "Thou shalt love Yahweh thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." It was from Deuteronomy that Jesus summarized the whole of the Old Covenant in a single sentence (Matthew 22:37; compare Deuteronomy 6:5), and from it He drew His weapons with which to vanquish the tempter (Matthew 4:4, 7, 10; compare Deuteronomy 8:3; 16, 13).

3. Analysis: Deuteronomy is composed of three discourses, followed by three short appendices: (1) 1:1 through 4:43, historical; a review of God's dealings with Israel, specifying in great detail where and when delivered (1:1-5), recounting in broad oratorical outlines the chief events in the nation's experience from Horeb to Moab (1:6 through 3:29), on which the author bases an earnest appeal to the people to be faithful and obedient, and in particular to keep clear of all possible idolatry (4:1-40). Appended to this first discourse is a brief note (4:41-43) concerning Moses' appointment of three cities of refuge on the East side of the Jordan. (2) 4:44 through 26:19, hortatory and legal; introduced by a superscription (4:44-49), and consisting of a resume of Israel's moral and civil statutes, testimonies and judgments. Analyzed in greater detail, this second discourse is composed of two main sections: (a) chapters 5 through 11, an extended exposition of the Ten Commandments on which theocracy was based; (b) chapters 12 through 26, a code of special statutes concerning worship, purity, tithes, the three annual feasts, the administration of justice, kings, priests, prophets, war, and the private and social life of the people. The spirit of this discourse is most ethical and religious. The tone is that of a father no less than that of a legislator. A spirit of humanity pervades the entire discourse. Holiness is its ideal. (3) 27:1 through 31:30, predictive and minatory; the subject of this third discourse being "the blessings of obedience and the curses of disobedience." This section begins with directions to inscribe these laws on plastered stones to be set up on Mt. Ebal (27:1-10), to be ratified by an antiphonal ritual of blessings and cursings from the two adjacent mountains, Gerizim and Ebal (27:11-26). These are followed by solemn warnings against disobedience (28:1 through 29:1), and fresh exhortations to accept the terms of the new covenant made in Moab, and to choose between life and death (29:2 through 30:20). Moses' farewell charge to Israel and his formal commission of Joshua close the discourse (Deuteronomy 31:1-30). The section is filled with predictions, which were woefully verified in Israel's later history. The three appendices, spoken of above, close the book: (a) Moses' Song (Deuteronomy 32:1-52), which the great Lawgiver taught the people (the Law was given to the priests, Deuteronomy 31:24-27); (b) Moses' Blessing (Deuteronomy 33:1-29), which forecast the future for the various tribes (Simeon only being omitted); (c) a brief account of Moses' death and burial (Deuteronomy 34:1-12) with a noble panegyric on him as the greatest prophet Israel ever had. Thus closes this majestic and marvelously interesting and practical book. Its keyword is "possess"; its central thought is "Yahweh has chosen Israel, let Israel choose Yahweh."

4. Ruling Ideas: The great central thought of Deuteronomy is the unique relation which Yahweh as a unique God sustains to Israel as a unique people. "Hear O Israel; Yahweh our God is one Yahweh." The monotheism of Deuteronomy is very explicit. Following from this, as a necessary corollary almost, is the other great teaching of the book, the unity of the sanctuary. The motto of the book might be said to be, "One God, one sanctuary."

(1) Yahweh, a Unique God. Yahweh is the only God, "There is none else besides him" Dt (4:35,39; 6:4; 32:39), "He is God of gods, and Lord of lords" (10:17), "the living God" (5:26), "the faithful God, who keepeth covenant and lovingkindness with them that love him and keep his commandments" (7:9), who abominates graven images and every species of idolatry (7:25,26; 12:31; 13:14; 18:12; 20:18; 27:15), to whom belong the heavens and the earth (10:14), who rules over all the nations (7:19), whose relation to Israel is near and personal (28:58), even that of a Father (32:6), whose being is spiritual (4:12,15), and whose name is "Rock" (32:4,15,18,30,31). Being such a God, He is jealous of all rivals (7:4; 29:24-26; 31:16,17), and hence, all temptations to idolatry must be utterly removed from the land, the Canaanites must be completely exterminated and all their altars, pillars, Asherim and images destroyed (7:1-5,16; 20:16-18; 12:2,3).

(2) Israel, a Unique People. The old Israel had become unique through the covenant which Yahweh made with them at Horeb, creating out of them "a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation" (Exodus 19:6). The new Israel who had been born in the desert were to inherit the blessings vouchsafed to their fathers, through the covenant just now being made in Moab (Deuteronomy 26:16-19; 27:9; 29:1; Deuteronomy 5:2-3). By means of it they became the heirs of all the promises given unto their fathers the patriarchs (Deuteronomy 4:31; 7:12; 8:18; 29:13); they too became holy and peculiar, and especially beloved of Yahweh (Deuteronomy 7:6; 2, 21; Deuteronomy 26:18-19; 28:9; 4:37), disciplined, indeed, but for their own good (Deuteronomy 8:2-3, 5, 16), to be established as a people, as Yahweh's peculiar lot and inheritance (Deuteronomy 32:6, 9; 4:7).

(3) The Relation between Yahweh and Israel a Unique Relation.

Other nations feared their deities; Israel was expected not only to fear Yahweh but to love Him and cleave to Him (Deuteronomy 4:10; 5:29; 6:5; 12, 20; 1, 13, 12; Deuteronomy 13:3-4; 17:19; 19:9; 28:58; 6, 16, 20; Deuteronomy 31:12-13). The highest privileges are theirs because they are partakers of the covenant blessings; all others are strangers and foreigners, except they be admitted into Israel by special permission (Deuteronomy 23:1-8).

5. Unity: The essential unity of the great kernel of Deuteronomy (Deuteronomy 5:1-33 through Deuteronomy 26:1-19) is recognized and freely allowed by nearly everyone (e.g. Kautzsch, Kuenen, Dillmann, Driver). Some would even defend the unity of the whole of Deuteronomy 1:1-46 through Deuteronomy 26:1-19 (Knobel, Graf, Kosters, Colenso, Kleinert). No other book of the Old Testament, unless it be the prophecies of Ezekiel, bears such unmistakable signs of unity in aim, language and thought. "The literary style of Deuteronomy," says Driver, "is very marked and individual; in his command of a chaste, yet warm and persuasive eloquence, the author of Deuteronomy stands unique among the writers of the OT" (Deuteronomy, lxxvii, lxxxviii). Many striking expressions characterize the style of this wonderful book of oratory: e.g. "cause to inherit"; "Hear O Israel"; the oft-repeated root, meaning in the Qal verb-species "learn," and in the Piel verb-species "teach"; "be willing"; "so shalt thou exterminate the evil from thy midst"; "as at this day"; "that it may be well with thee"; "the land whither thou goest in to possess it"; "with all thy heart and with all thy soul"; and many others, all of which occur frequently in Deuteronomy and rarely elsewhere in the Old Testament, thus binding, so far as style can, the different sections of the book into one solid unit. Barring various titles and editorial additions (Deuteronomy 1:1-5; Deuteronomy 4:44-49; 29:1; 1, 7, 9, 22; 34:1) and a few archaeological notes such as Deuteronomy 2:10-12, 20-23; 9, 11, 14; Deuteronomy 10:6-9, and of course the last chapter, which gives an account of Moses' death, there is every reason necessary for supposing that the book is a unit. Few writings in the entire field of literature have so clear a unity of purpose or so uniform a style of address.

6. Authorship: There is one passage bearing upon the authorship of Deuteronomy wherein it is stated most explicitly that Moses wrote "this law." It reads, "And Moses wrote this law, and delivered it unto the priests the sons of Levi. .... And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished (i.e. to the end), that Moses commanded the Levites, that bare the ark of the covenant of Yahweh, saying, Take this book of the law, and put it by the side of the ark of the covenant of Yahweh your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee" (Deuteronomy 31:9, 24-27). This passage is of more than traditional value, and should not be ignored as is so often done (e.g. by Ryle, article "Deuteronomy," HDB). It is not enough to say that Moses was the great fountain-head of Hebrew law, that he gave oral but not written statutes, or, that Moses was only the traditional source of these statutes. For it is distinctly and emphatically stated that "Moses wrote this law." And it is further declared (Deuteronomy 31:22) that "Moses wrote this song," contained in Deuteronomy 32:1-52. Now, these statements are either true, or they are false. There is no escape. The authorship of no other book in the Old Testament is so explicitly emphasized. The present writer believes that Moses actually wrote the great body of Deuteronomy, and for the following general reasons:

(1) Deuteronomy as a Whole Is Eminently Appropriate to What We Know of Moses' Times.

It closes most fittingly the formative period of Israel's history. The historical situation from first to last is that of Moses. The references to foreign neighbors--Egypt, Canaan, Amalek, Ammon, Moab, Edom--are in every case to those who flourished in Moses' own times. As a law book its teaching is based upon the Ten Commandments. If Moses gave the Ten Commandments, then surely he may have written the Book of Deuteronomy also. Besides, the Code of Hammurabi, which antedates Moses by at least 700 years, makes it possible certainly that Moses also left laws in codified or written form.

(2) Deuteronomy Is Represented as Emanating from Moses.

The language is language put into Moses' mouth. Nearly forty times his name occurs, and in the majority of instances as the authoritative author of the subject-matter. The first person is used predominatingly throughout: "I commanded Joshua at that time" Dt (3:21); and "I charged your judges at that time" (1:16); "And I commanded you at that time" (1:18); "I have led you forty years in the wilderness" (29:5). "The language surely purports to come from Moses; and if it was not actually used by him, it is a most remarkable case of impersonation, if not of literary forgery, for the writer represents himself as reproducing, not what Moses might have said, but the exact words of Moses" (Zerbe, The Antiquity of Hebrew Writing and Lit., 1911, 261).

(3) Deuteronomy Is a Military Law Book, a Code of Conquest, a Book of Exhortation.

It was intended primarily neither for Israel in the desert nor for Israel settled in Canaan, but for Israel on the borderland, eager for conquest. It is expressly stated that Moses taught Israel these statutes and judgments in order that they should obey them in the land which they were about to enter (4:5,14; 5:31). They must expel the aborigines (7:1; 9:1-3; 20:17; 31:3), but in their warfare they must observe certain laws in keeping with theocracy (20:1-20; 23:9-14; 21:10-14; 31:6,7), and, when they have finally dispossessed their enemies, they must settle down to agricultural life and live no longer as nomads but as citizens of a civilized land (19:14; 22:8-10; 24:19-21). All these laws are regulations which should become binding in the future only (compare Kittel, History Of the Hebrews, I, 32). Coupled with them are prophetic exhortations which seem to be genuine, and to have had their birth in Moses' soul. Indeed the great outstanding feature of Deuteronomy is its parenetic or hortatory character. Its exhortations have not only a military ring as though written on the eve of battle, but again and again warn Israel against allowing themselves to be conquered in religion through the seductions of idolatry. The book in short is the message of one who is interested in Israel's political and religious future. There is a paternal vein running throughout it which marks it with a genuine Mosaic, not a merely fictitious or artificial, stamp. It is these general features, so characteristic of the entire book, which compel one to believe in its Mosaic authorship.

7. Deuteronomy Spoken Twice: Certain literary features exist in Deuteronomy which lead the present writer to think that the bulk of the book was spoken twice; once, to the first generation between Horeb and Kadesh-barnea in the 2nd year of the Exodus wanderings, and a second time to the new generation, in the plains of Moab in the 40th year. Several considerations point in this direction:

(1) The Names of the Widely Separated Geographical Places Mentioned in the Title (Deuteronomy 1:1-2).

"These are the words which Moses spake unto all Israel beyond the Jordan in the wilderness, in the Arabah over against Suph, between Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Di-zahab"; to which is added, "It is eleven days' journey from Horeb by the way of Mount Seir unto Kadesh-barnea." If these statements have any relevancy whatever to the contents of the book which they introduce, they point to a wide area, from Horeb to Moab, as the historico-geographical background of the book. In other words, Deuteronomy, in part at least, seems to have been spoken first on the way between Horeb and Kadesh-barnea, and later again when Israel were encamped on the plains of Moab. And, indeed, what would be more natural than for Moses when marching northward from Horeb expecting to enter Canaan from the south, to exhort the Israel of that day in terms of Deuteronomy 5:1-33 through Deuteronomy 26:1-19? Being baffled, however, by the adverse report of the spies and the faithlessness of the people, and being forced to wait and wander for 38 years, what would be more natural than for Moses in Moab, when about to resign his position as leader, to repeat the exhortations of Deuteronomy 5:1-33 through Deuteronomy 26:1-19, adapting them to the needs of the new desert-trained generation and prefacing the whole by a historical introduction such as that found in Deuteronomy 1:1-46 through Deuteronomy 4:1-49?

(2) The Double Allusion to the Cities of Refuge (Deuteronomy 4:41-43; Deuteronomy 19:1-13).

On the supposition that Deuteronomy 5:1-33 through Deuteronomy 26:1-19 were spoken first between Horeb and Kadesh-barnea, in the Deuteronomy 2:11-37nd year of the Exodus, it could not be expected that in this section the names of the three cities chosen East of the Jordan should be given, and in fact they are not (Deuteronomy 19:1-13); the territory of Sihon and Og had not yet been conquered and the cities of refuge, accordingly, had not yet been designated (compare Numbers 35:2:Numbers 14:1-45). But in Deuteronomy 4:41-43, on the contrary, which forms a part of the historical introduction, which ex hypothesi was delivered just at the end of the 39 years' wanderings, after Sihon and Og had been subdued and their territory divided, the three cities of refuge East of the Jordan are actually named, just as might be expected.

(3) Section Deuteronomy 4:44-49. The section Deuteronomy 4:44-49, which, in its original form, very probably introduced chapters 5 through Deuteronomy 26:1-19 before these chapters were adapted to the new situation in Moab.

(4) The Phrase "Began Moses to Declare This Law" (1:5).

The phrase "began Moses to declare this law" (1:5), suggesting that the great lawgiver found it necessary to expound what he had delivered at some previous time. The Hebrew word translated "to declare" is found elsewhere in the Old Testament only in Deuteronomy 27:8 and in Habakkuk 2:2, and signifies "to make plain."

(5) The Author's Evident Attempt to Identify the New Generation in Moab with the Patriarchs.

"Yahweh made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day," i.e. with us who have survived the desert discipline (Deuteronomy 5:3). In view of these facts, we conclude that the book in its present form (barring the exceptions above mentioned) is the product of the whole 39 years of desert experience from Horeb on, adapted, however, to meet the exigencies of the Israelites as they stood between the victories already won on the East of the Jordan and those anticipated on the West. The impression given throughout is that the aged lawgiver's work is done, and that a new era in the people's history is about to begin.

8. Deuteronomy's Influence in Israel's History: The influence of Deuteronomy began to be felt from the very beginning of Israel's career in Canaan. Though the references to Deuteronomy in Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings are comparatively few, yet they are sufficient to show that not only the principles of Deuteronomy were known and observed but that they were known in written form as codified statutes. For example, when Jericho was taken, the city and its spoil were "devoted" (Joshua 6:17-18) in keeping with Deuteronomy 13:15 ff (compare Joshua 10:40; 12, 15 with Deuteronomy 7:2; Deuteronomy 20:16-17). Achan trespassed and he and his household were stoned, and afterward burned with fire (Joshua 7:25; compare Deuteronomy 13:10; 17:5). The fact that his sons and his daughters were put to death with him seems at first sight to contradict Deuteronomy 24:16, but there is no proof that they suffered for their father's sin (see ACHAN; ACHOR); besides the Hebrews recognized the unity of the household, even that of Rahab the harlot (Joshua 6:17). Again when Ai was taken, "only the cattle and the spoil" did Israel take for a prey unto themselves (Joshua 8:27), in keeping with Deuteronomy 20:14; also, the body of the king of Ai was taken down before nightfall from the tree on which he had been hanged (Joshua 8:29), which was in keeping with Deuteronomy 21:23 (compare Joshua 10:26-27). As in warfare, so in worship. For instance, Joshua built an altar on Mt. Ebal (Joshua 8:30-31), "as Moses the servant of Yahweh commanded" (Deuteronomy 27:4-6), and he wrote on them a copy of the law (Joshua 8:32), as Moses had also enjoined (Deuteronomy 27:3, 8). Moreover, the elders and officers and judges stood on either side of the ark of the covenant between Ebal and Gerizim (Joshua 8:33), as directed in Deuteronomy 11:29; Deuteronomy 27:12-13, and Joshua read to all the congregation of Israel all the words of the law, the blessings and the cursings (Joshua 8:34-35), in strict accord with Deuteronomy 31:11-12.

But the passage of paramount importance is the story of the two and a half tribes who, on their return to their home on the East side of the Jordan, erected a memorial at the Jordan, and, when accused by their fellow-tribesmen of plurality of sanctuary, emphatically disavowed it (Joshua 22:29; compare Deuteronomy 12:5). Obviously, therefore, Deuteronomy was known in the days of Joshua. A very few instances in the history of the Judges point in the same direction: e.g. the utter destruction of Zephath (Judges 1:17; compare Deuteronomy 7:2; 20:16 f); Gideon's elimination of the fearful and faint-hearted from his army (Judges 7:1-7; compare Deuteronomy 20:1-9); the author's studied concern to justify Gideon and Manoah for sacrificing at altars other than at Shiloh on the ground that they acted in obedience to Yahweh's direct commands (Judges 6:25-27; 13:16); especially the case of Micah, who congratulated himself that Yahweh would do him good seeing he had a Levite for a priest, is clear evidence that Deuteronomy was known in the days of the Judges (Judges 17:13; compare Deuteronomy 10:8; Deuteronomy 18:1-8; Deuteronomy 33:8-11). In 1 Samuel 1:1-9, 21, 24 the pious Elkanah is pictured as going yearly to worship Yahweh at Shiloh, the central sanctuary at that time. After the destruction of Shiloh, when the ark of the covenant had been captured by the Philistines, Samuel indeed sacrificed at Mizpah, Ramah and Bethlehem (1 Samuel 7:7-9, 17; 16:5), but in doing so he only took advantage of the elasticity of the Deuteronomic law: "When .... he giveth you rest from all your enemies round about, so that ye dwell in safety; then it shall come to pass that to the place which Yahweh your God shall choose, to cause his name to dwell there, thither shall ye bring all that I command you: your burnt-offerings, and your sacrifices" (Deuteronomy 12:10-11). It was not until Solomon's time that Israel's enemies were all subdued, and even then Solomon did not observe strictly the teachings of Deuteronomy; "His wives turned away his heart," so that he did not faithfully keep Yahweh's "covenant" and "statutes" (1 Kings 11:3, 11). Political disruption followed, and religion necessarily suffered. Yet Jehoiada the priest gave the youthful Joash "the crown" and "the testimony" (2 Kings 11:12; compare Deuteronomy 17:18). King Amaziah did not slay the children of the murderers who slew his father, in conscious obedience apparently to the law of Deuteronomy (2 Kings 14:6; compare Deuteronomy 24:16). Later on, Hezekiah, the cultured king of Judah, reformed the cult of his day by removing the high places, breaking down the pillars, cutting down the Asherahs, and even breaking in pieces the brazen serpent which Moses had made (2 Kings 18:4, 22). Hezekiah's reforms were unquestionably carried through under the influence of Deuteronomy.

It is equally certain that the prophets of the 8th century were not ignorant of this book. For example, Hosea complains of Israel's sacrificing upon the tops of the mountains and burning incense upon the hills, and warns Judah not to follow Israel's example in coming up to worship at Gilgal and Beth-aven (Hosea 4:13, 15). He also alludes to striving with priests (Hosea 4:4; compare Deuteronomy 17:12), removing landmarks (Hosea 5:10; compare Deuteronomy 19:14), returning to Egypt (Hosea 8:13; 9:3; compare Deuteronomy 28:68), and of Yahweh's tender dealing with Ephraim (Hosea 11:3; compare Deuteronomy 1:31; 32:10). The courage of Amos, the shepherd-prophet of Tekoa, can best be explained, also, on the basis of a written law such as that of Deuteronomy with which he and his hearers were already more or less familiar (Amos 3:2; compare Deuteronomy 7:6; Deuteronomy 4:7-8). He condemns Israel's inhumanity and adultery in the name of religion, and complains of their retaining overnight pledges wrested from the poor, which was distinctly forbidden in Deuteronomy (Amos 2:6-8; compare Deuteronomy 24:12-15; 23:17). Likewise, in the prophecies of Isaiah there are conscious reflections of Deuteronomy's thought and teaching. Zion is constantly pictured as the center of the nation's religion and as Yahweh's secure dwellingplace (Isaiah 2:2-4; 8:18; 28:16; Isaiah 29:1-2; compare Micah 4:1-4). In short, no one of the four great prophets of the 8th century BC--Isaiah, Micah, Amos, Hosea--ever recognized "high places" as legitimate centers of worship.

9. The Critical Theory: Over against the Biblical view, certain modern critics since De Wette (1805) advocate a late origin of Deuteronomy, claiming that it was first published in 621 BC, when Hilkiah found "the book of the law" in the temple in the 18th year of King Josiah (2 Kings 22:8 ff). The kernel of Deuteronomy and "the book of the law" discovered by Hilkiah are said to be identical. Thus, Dr. G. A. Smith claims that "a code like the Book of Deuteronomy was not brought forth at a stroke, but was the expression of the gradual results of the age-long working of the Spirit of the Living God in the hearts of His people" (Jerusalem, II, 115). According to Dr. Driver, "Deuteronomy may be described as the prophetic reformulation and adaptation to new needs, of an older legislation. It is probable that there was a tradition, if not a written record, of a final legislative address delivered by Moses in the steppes of Moab: the plan followed by the author would rest upon a more obvious motive, if he thus worked upon a traditional basis. But be that as it may, the bulk of the laws contained in Deuteronomy is undoubtedly far more ancient than the author himself. .... What is essentially new in Deuteronomy is not the matter, but the form. .... The new element in Deuteronomy is thus not the laws, but their parenetic setting" (Deuteronomy, lxi, lvi). This refined presentation of the matter would not be so very objectionable, were Drs. Smith and Driver's theory not linked up with certain other claims and allegations to the effect that Moses in the 15th century BC could not possibly have promulgated such a lofty monotheism, that in theological teaching "the author of Deuteronomy is the spiritual heir of Hosea," that there are discrepancies between it and other parts of the Pentateuch, that in the early history of Israel down to the 8th century plurality of sanctuaries was legally permissible, that there are no traces of the influence of the principal teachings of a written Deuteronomy discoverable in Hebrew literature until the time of Jeremiah, and that the book as we possess it was originally composed as a program of reform, not by Moses but in the name of Moses as a forgery or pseudepigraph. For example, F. H. Woods says, "Although not a necessary result of accepting the later date, the majority of critics believe this book of the law to have been the result of a pious fraud promulgated by Hilkiah and Shaphan with the retention of deceiving Josiah into the belief that the reforms which they desired were the express command of God revealed to Moses" (HDB, II, 368). Some are unwilling to go so far. But in any case, it is claimed that the law book discovered and published by Hilkiah, which brought about the reformation by Josiah in 621 BC, was no other than some portion of the Book of Deuteronomy, and of Deuteronomy alone. But there are several considerations which are opposed to this theory: (1) Deuteronomy emphasizes centralization of worship at one sanctuary (12:5); Josiah's reformation was directed rather against idolatry in general (2 Kings 23:4 ff). (2) In Deuteronomy 18:6-8, a Levite coming from the country to Jerusalem was allowed to minister and share in the priestly perquisites; but in 2 Kings 23:9, "the priests of the high places came not up to the altar of Yahweh in Jerusalem, but they did eat unleavened bread among their brethren." And according to the critical theory, "Levites" and "priests" are interchangeable terms. (3) The following passages in Exodus might almost equally with Deuteronomy account for Josiah's reformation: Exodus 20:3; 18, 20; Exodus 23:13-14, 32-33; Exodus 34:13, 14-17. (4) The law book discovered by Hilkiah was recognized at once as an ancient code which the fathers had disobeyed (2 Kings 22:13). Were they all deceived? Even Jeremiah (compare Jeremiah 11:3-4)? "There were many persons in Judah who had powerful motives for exposing this forgery if it was one" (Raven, Old Testament Introduction, 112). (5) One wonders why so many archaic and, in Josiah's time, apparently obsolete laws should have been incorporated in a code whose express motive was to reform an otherwise hopeless age: e.g. the command to exterminate the Canaanites, who had long since ceased to exist (Deuteronomy 7:18, 22), and to blot out Amalek (Deuteronomy 25:17-19), the last remnants of whom were completely destroyed in Hezekiah's time (1 Chronicles 4:41-43). Especially is this true of the score and more of laws peculiar to Deuteronomy, concerning building battlements on the roofs of houses (Deuteronomy 22:8), robbing birds' nests (Deuteronomy 22:6-7), the sexes exchanging garments (Deuteronomy 22:5), going out to war (Deuteronomy 20:1 ff), etc. (6) Especially remarkable is it that if Deuteronomy were written, as alleged, shortly before the reign of Josiah, there should be no anachronisms in it betraying a post-Mosaic origin. There are no allusions to the schism between Judah and Israel, no hint of Assyrian oppression through the exaction of tribute, nor any threats of Israel's exile either to Assyria or Babylonia, but rather to Egypt (Deuteronomy 28:68). "Jerusalem" is never mentioned. From a literary point of view, it is psychologically and historically well-nigh impossible for a writer to conceal all traces of his age and circumstances. On the other hand, no Egyptologist has ever discovered any anachronisms in Deuteronomy touching Egyptian matters. From first to last the author depicts the actual situation of the times of Moses. It is consequently hard to believe, as is alleged, that a later writer is studying to give "an imaginative revivification of the past."

(7) The chief argument in favor of Deuteronomy's late origin is its alleged teaching concerning the unity of the sanctuary. Wellhausen lays special emphasis upon this point. Prior to Josiah's reformation, it is claimed, plurality of sanctuaries was allowed. But in opposition to this, it is possible to point victoriously to Hezekiah's reformation (2 Kings 18:4, 22), as a movement in the direction of unity; and especially to Exodus 20:24, which is so frequently misinterpreted as allowing a multiplicity of sanctuaries. This classical passage when correctly interpreted allows only that altars shall be erected in every place where Yahweh records His name, "which presumably during the wanderings and the time of the judges would mean wherever the Tabernacle was" (Mackay, Introduction to Old Testament, 110). This interpretation of this passage is confirmed and made practically certain, indeed, by the command in Exodus 23:14-19 that Israel shall repair three times each year to the house of Yahweh and there present their offering. On the other hand, Deuteronomy's emphasis upon unity of sanctuary is often exaggerated. The Book of Deuteronomy requires unity only after Israel's enemies are all overcome (Deuteronomy 12:10-11). "When" Yahweh giveth them rest, "then" they shall repair for worship to the place which "God shall choose." As Davidson remarks: "It is not a law that is to come into effect on their entry into Canaan; it is to be observed from the time that Yahweh shall have given them rest from all their enemies round about; that is, from the times of David, or more particularly, Solomon; for only when the temple was built did that place become known which Yahweh had chosen to place His name there" (Old Testament Theology, 361). Besides, it should not be forgotten that in Deuteronomy itself the command is given to build an altar in Mt. Ebal (27:5-7). As a matter of fact, the unity of sanctuary follows as a necessary consequence of monotheism; and if Moses taught monotheism, he probably also enjoined unity of worship. If, on the other hand, monotheism was first evolved by the prophets of the 8th century, then, of course, unity of sanctuary was of 8th-century origin also.

(8) Another argument advanced in favor of the later origin of Deuteronomy is the contradiction between the laws of Deuteronomy and those of Lev-Nu concerning the priests and Levites. In Numbers 16:10, 35, 40, a sharp distinction is drawn, it is alleged, between the priests and common Levites, whereas in Deuteronomy 18:1-8, all priests are Levites and all Levites are priests. But as a matter of fact, the passage in Deuteronomy does not invest a Levite with priestly but with Levitical functions (compare Deuteronomy 18:7). "The point insisted upon is that all Levites shall receive full recognition at the sanctuary and be accorded their prerogatives. It goes without saying that if the Levite be a priest he shall serve and fare like his brethren the priests; if he be not a priest, he shall enjoy the privileges that belong to his brethren who are Levites, but not priests" (J. D. Davis, article "Deuteronomy," in Smith, Dictionary of the Bible, 117). The Book of Deuteronomy teaches not that all the tribe, but only the tribe of Levi may exercise priestly functions, thus restricting the exercise of priestly prerogatives to one and only one tribe. This was in perfect harmony with Lev-Nu and also in keeping with the style of popular discourse.

(9) Recently Professor Ed. Naville, the Egyptologist, has propounded a theory of the origin of "the Book of the Law" discovered by Hilkiah, which is not without some value. On the analogy of the Egyptian custom of burying texts of portions of "the Book of the Dead" at the foot of statues of gods and within foundations of temple walls, as at Hermopolis, he concludes that Solomon, when he constructed the Temple, probably deposited this "Book of the Law" in the foundations, and that when Josiah's workmen were about their tasks of repairing the edifice, the long-forgotten document came to light and was given to Hilkiah the priest. Hilkiah, however, upon examination of the document found it difficult to read, and so, calling for Shaphan the scribe, who was more expert in deciphering antique letters than himself, he gave the sacred roll to him, and he in turn read it to both Hilkiah and the king. The manuscript may indeed have been written in cuneiform. Thus, according to Naville, "the Book of the Law," which he identifies with Deuteronomy, must be pushed back as far as the age of Solomon at the very latest. Geden shares a similar view as to its date: "some time during the prosperous period of David and the United Monarchy" (Intro to the Hebrew Bible, 1909, 330).

But why not ascribe the book to the traditional author? Surely there can be no philosophical objection to doing so, in view of the now-known Code of Hammurabi, which antedates Moses by so many hundreds of years! No other age accounts so well for its origin as that of the great lawgiver who claims to have written the bulk of it. And the history of the disintegration of the book only shows to what extremes a false method may lead; for example, Steuernagel separates the "Thou" and "Ye" sections from each other and assigns them to different authors of late date: Kennett, on the other hand, assigns the earliest strata to the period of the Exile (Jour. of Theol. Studies, 1904), On the whole, no theory is so satisfactory as that which, in keeping with Deuteronomy 31:22, 24, ascribes to Moses the great bulk of the book.

See also CRITICISM; PENTATEUCH.

LITERATURE.

On the conservative side: James Orr, The Problem of the Old Testament, The Bross Prize, 1906; article "Deuteronomy," Illustrated Bible Dict., 1908; James Robertson, The Early Religion of Israel, 1892; article "Deuteronomy," The Temple Bible Dict., 1910; John D. Davis, article "Deuteronomy," Davis' Dict. of the Bible, 1911; John H. Raven, Old Testament Intro, 1906; A. S. Geden, Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, 1909; W. Moller, Are the Critics Right? 1903; R. B. Girdlestone, The Student's Deuteronomy, 1899; Hugh Pope, The Date of the Composition of Deuteronomy, 1911; A. S. Zerbe, The Antiquity of Hebrew Writing and Lit., 1911; Ed. Naville, The Discovery of the Book of the Law under King Josiah, 1911; E. C. Bissell, The Pentateuch: Its Origin and Structure, 1885; G. L. Robinson, The Expositor, "The Genesis of Deuteronomy," October and November, 1898, February, March, May, 1899; W. H. Green, Moses and the Prophets, 1891; The Higher Criticism of the Pentateuch, 1895; A. M. Mackay, The Churchman's Introduction to the Old Testament, 1901; J. W. Beardslee, Outlines of an Introduction to the Old Testament, 1903; G. Vos, The Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuchal Codes, 1886.

On the other side: S. R. Driver, A Crit. and Exeg. Commentary on Deuteronomy, 1895; The Hexateuch, by J. Estlin Carpenter and G. Harford-Battersby, I, II, 1900; G. A. Smith, Jerusalem, II, 1908; W. Robertson Smith, The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, 1895; A. Kuenen, The Hexateuch, 1886; H. E. Ryle, article "Deuteronomy," HDB, 1898; G. F. Moore, article "Deuteronomy," Encyclopedia Bibl., 1899; J. A. Paterson, article "Deuteronomy," Encyclopedia Brit, VIII, 1910.

In German: De Wette, Dissert. crit-exeget., 1805; Kleinert, Das Dt u. d. Deuteronomiker, 1872; Wellhausen, Die Comp. des Hexateuch. u. d. hist. Bucher des Altes Testament, 1889; Gesch. Israels, 1895; Steuernagel, Der Rahmen des Deuteronomy, 1894; Entsteh. des dt. Gesetzes, 1896.

George L. Robinson

Device

Device - de-vis': "A scheme," "invention," "plot." In the Old Testament it stands for six Hebrew words, of which the most common is machashebheth (from chashabh, "to think," "contrive"). In the New Testament it occurs only twice, once for Greek enthumesis (Acts 17:29), and once for noema (2 Corinthians 2:11). Sometimes the word means simply that which is planned or invented, without any evil implication, as in 2 Chronicles 2:14; Acts 17:29 (of artistic work or invention), and Ecclesiastes 9:10 (in the general sense of reasoning or contriving). But more frequently it is used in an evil sense, of a wicked purpose or plot, "Let us devise devices against Jeremiah" (Jeremiah 18:18); "For we are not ignorant of his (i.e. Satan's) devices" (2 Corinthians 2:11), etc.

D. Miall Edwards

Devil

Devil - dev'-'-l.

See DEMON; SATAN.

Devoted, Things

Devoted, Things - de-vot'-ed, (cherem).

See CURSE; DEDICATE.

Devotion; Devotions

Devotion; Devotions - de-vo'-shun, sebasmata): For the King James Version "your devotions" (Acts 17:23), the Revised Version (British and American) has "the objects of your worship," which is probably the intended meaning of the King James Version. the Revised Version (British and American) reads "devotion" for the King James Version "prayer" in Job 15:4 (the Revised Version, margin "meditation," Hebrew siach).

Devout

Devout - de-vout' (eulabes, eusebes, sebomai, "pious," "dutiful," "reverential"): The word is peculiar to Luke. Applied to Simeon (Luke 2:25), Cornelius (Acts 10:2, 7), Ananias (Acts 22:12). "Devout proselytes" (Acts 13:43, the King James Version "religious proselytes"), with possible reference to the proselytes of righteousness as distinguished from the proselytes of the gate (see PROSELYTE). "Devout women of honorable estate" (Acts 13:50), proselytes to Judaism and wives of the men in high position among the heathen (see Josephus,BJ ,II , xx, 2). "Devout Greeks" (Acts 17:4), probably, though not necessarily, proselytes of the gate, heathen by birth, who attended the synagogue services and worshipped God. "Devout persons" (Acts 17:17), proselytes of the gate.

M. O. Evans

Dew

Dew - du (Tal; drosos).

1. Formation of Dew: Two things are necessary for the formation of dew, moisture and cold. In moist countries there is less dew because the change in temperature between day and night is too small. In the deserts where the change in temperature between day and night is sometimes as much as 40 degrees F., there is seldom dew because of lack of moisture in the atmosphere. Palestine is fortunate in being near the sea, so that there is always a large percentage of water vapor in the air. The skies are clear, and hence, there is rapid radiation beginning immediately after sunset, which cools the land and the air until the moisture is condensed and settles on cool objects. Air at a low temperature is not capable of holding as much water vapor in suspension as warm air. The ice pitcher furnishes an example of the formation of dew. Just as the drops of water form on the cool pitcher, so dew forms on rocks, grass and trees.

2. Value of Dew in Palestine: In Palestine it does not rain from April to October, and were it not for the dew in summer all vegetation would perish. Dew and rain are equally important. If there is no rain the winter grass and harvests fail; if no dew, the late crops dry up and there is no fruit. Failure of either of these gifts of Nature would cause great want and hardship, but the failure of both would cause famine and death. Even on the edge of the great Syrian desert in Anti-Lebanon, beyond Jordan and in Sinai, a considerable vegetation of a certain kind flourishes in the summer, although there is not a drop of rain for six months. The dews are so heavy that the plants and trees are literally soaked with water at night, and they absorb sufficient moisture to more than supply the loss due to evaporation in the day. It is more surprising to one who has not seen it before to find a flourishing vineyard practically in the desert itself. Some of the small animals of the desert, such as the jerboa, seem to have no water supply except the dew. The dew forms most heavily on good conductors of heat, such as metals and stones, because they radiate their heat faster and cool the air around them. The wetting of Gideon's fleece (Judges 6:38) is an indication of the amount of dew formed, and the same phenomenon might be observed any clear night in summer in Palestine

3. Importance to Israel: Dew was a present necessity to the people of Israel as it is today to the people of the same lands, so Yahweh says, "I will be as the dew unto Israel" (Hosea 14:5). Dew and rain are of equal importance and are spoken of together in 1 Kings 17:1. It was especially valued by the children of Israel in the desert, for it supplied the manna for their sustenance (Exodus 16:13; Numbers 11:9).

4. Symbol of Blessing: Isaac in blessing Jacob asked that the "dew of heaven" (Genesis 27:28) may be granted to him; that these things which make for fertility and prosperity may be his portion. "The remnant of Jacob shall be in the midst of many peoples as dew from Yahweh" (Micah 5:7), as a means of blessing to the nations. "Blessed of Yahweh for .... dew" (Deuteronomy 33:13).

5. Symbol of Refreshment: Dew is the means of refreshing and reinvigorating all vegetation. Many Scripture references carry out this idea. The song of Moses says, "My speech shall distill as the dew" (Deuteronomy 32:2). "A cloud of dew" (Isaiah 18:4) refreshes the harvesters. "My head is filled with dew" (Song of Solomon 5:2). "Like the dew of Hermon" (Psalms 133:3). "Thou hast the dew of thy youth" (Psalms 110:3). "Thy dew is as the dew of herbs" (Isaiah 26:19). Job said of the time of his prosperity, "The dew lieth all night upon my branch" (Job 29:19).

Other figures use dew as the symbol of stealth, of that which comes up unawares (2 Samuel 17:12), and of inconstancy (Hosea 6:4; 13:3). God's knowledge covers the whole realm of the phenomena of Nature which are mysteries to man (Job 38:28; Proverbs 3:20).

Alfred H. Joy

Diadem

Diadem - 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"); Isaiah 62:3: "a royal diadem in the hand of thy God."

(2) tsephirah, means "a crown," "diadem," i.e. something round about the head; Isaiah 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." Ezekiel 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 Revelation 12:3: "a great red dragon .... and upon his heads seven diadems" (the King James Version "crowns"); Revelation 13:1: "a beast .... and on his horns ten diadems"; Revelation 19:11-12: "a white horse .... and upon his head are many diadems."

See CROWN.

William Edward Raffety

Dial of Ahaz

Dial of Ahaz - 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 Kings 20:5-11). And in Isaiah 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."

2. The Sign a Real Miracle: 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 Chronicles 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.

3. The "Dial" a Staircase: 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 Kings 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 Chronicles 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 Chronicles 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.

6. Meaning of the Sign: 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 John 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" (Psalms 120:1-7 through Psalms 134:1-3). 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

Diamond

Diamond - di'-a-mund.

See STONES, PRECIOUS.

Diana; Artemis

Diana; Artemis - 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

Diaspora

Diaspora - di-as'-po-ra.

See DISPERSION.

Diblah

Diblah - dib'-la (dibhlah, "circle"; Deblatha): The name occurs only in Ezekiel 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.

Diblaim

Diblaim - dib'-la-im, dib-la'-im (dibhlayim, "two cakes"): A native of Northern Israel and father of Gomer, the wife of Hosea (Hosea 1:3).

Diblath

Diblath - dib'-lath.

See DIBLAH.

Diblathaim

Diblathaim - dib-la-tha'-im.

See ALMON-DIBLATHAIM.

Dibon; Dibon-gad

Dibon; Dibon-gad - di'-bon (dibhon, "washing"; Daibon):

(1) A city of Moab captured by the Amorites (Numbers 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 (Numbers 32:34; 33:45). In Joshua 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 Jeremiah 48:18, 22 it is named among the cities of Moab. The form of the name, Dimon, in Isaiah 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 (Nehemiah 11:25). It may be the same as Dimonah (Joshua 15:22); unidentified.

W. Ewing

Dibri

Dibri - dib'-ri (dibhri, "eloquent" (?)): A Danite, whose daughter Shelomith married an Egyptian. Their son was "cut off" (stoned) for blasphemy (Leviticus 24:11).

Dice-playing

Dice-playing - See GAMES.

Dictionaries

Dictionaries - 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 Psalms 119:1-176, 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.

1. Bible Dictionaries: 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.

2. Bibliography: 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.

6. Universal Encyclopedias: 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.

12. Dictionaries of Language: 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