International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
Skirt — Sparrow
Skirt
Skirt - skurt: (1) kanaph, "wing" "extremity" (Ruth 3:9, etc.), is the usual word. But in 1 Samuel 24:4 ff perhaps "corner" is the best translation. (2) shul, "loose hanging" (Exodus 28:33, etc.; in the King James Version often rendered "hem"). (3) peh, "mouth," "opening" (Psalms 133:2, "the precious oil .... that came down upon the skirt"). But the "opening" is that for is that for the head, so that the Revised Version margin "collar" is the correct translation. "Skirt" is frequently used in a euphemistic sense, for which the commentaries must be consulted.
Skull
Skull - skul (gulgoleth; kranion): The Hebrew word, which is well known to Bible readers in its Aramaic-Greek form "Golgotha," expresses the more or less globular shape of the human skull, being derived from a root meaning "to roll." It is often translated in English Versions of the Bible by "head," "poll," etc. In the meaning "skull" it is found twice (Judges 9:53; 2 Kings 9:35). In the New Testament the word is found only in connection with GOLGOTHA (which see), "the place of a skull" (Matthew 27:33; Mark 15:22; John 19:17), or "the skull" (Luke 23:33).
Sky
Sky - ski (shachaq, "fine dust" or "cloud," apparently from [?] shachaq, "to rub," "to pulverize"; Samaritan: shechaqayyah instead of Hebrew shamayim; sachq = "cloud," "small dust"):
1. In the Old Testament: The Revised Version (British and American) has "skies" for the King James Version "clouds" in Job 35:5; 36:28; 37:21; Psalms 36:5; 57:10; 68:34; 78:23; 108:4; Proverbs 3:20; 8:28, in which passages BDB supports the rendering of King James Version. In Psalms 89:6, 37 Revised Version (British and American) has "sky" for King James Version "heaven." English Versions has "sky" in Deuteronomy 33:26; 2 Samuel 22:12; Job 37:18; Psalms 18:11; 77:1; Isaiah 45:8; Jeremiah 51:9. The word occurs mainly in poetical passages.
2. In the New Ttestament: In the New Testament ouranos, is translated "heaven" (the King James Version "sky") in connection with the weather in Matthew 16:2-3; Luke 12:56. In Hebrews 11:12 we find "the stars of heaven" ("the sky") as a figure of multitude. The conception, however, that the visible "sky" is but the dome-like floor of a higher world often makes it hard to tell whether "heaven" in certain passages may or may not be identified with the sky.
Alfred Ely Day
Slander
Slander - slan'-der (substantive, dibbah, "slander"; diabolos, "slanderer"; verb raghal, "to slink about" as a talebearer, lashan, "to use the tongue," "to slander"; diaballo, "to calumniate," "to slander"; and other words): Slander (etymologically a doublet of "scandal," from OFr. esclandre, Latin scandalum, "stumblingblock") is an accusation maliciously uttered, with the purpose or effect of damaging the reputation of another. As a rule it is a false charge (compare Matthew 5:11); but it may be a truth circulated insidiously and with a hostile purpose (e.g. Daniel 3:8, "brought accusation against," where Septuagint has diaballo, "slander"; Luke 16:1, the same Greek word). Warnings, condemnations and complaints in reference to this sin are very frequent, both in the Old Testament and New Testament. Mischievous "tale-bearing" or "whispering" is condemned (Leviticus 19:16; Ezekiel 22:9). There are repeated warnings against evil-speaking (as in Psalms 34:13; Proverbs 15:28; Ephesians 4:31; Colossians 3:8; James 4:11; 1 Peter 3:10), which is the cause of so much strife between man and man (Proverbs 16:27-30), and which recoils on the speaker himself to his destruction (Psalms 101:5; 140:11). Especially is false witness, which is "slander carried into a court of justice," to be condemned and punished (Exodus 20:16; Deuteronomy 19:16-21; compare Proverbs 12:17; 5, 25; 19:5; 21:28; 24:28). Special cases of slander more than usually mean are when a wife's chastity is falsely impeached by her husband (Deuteronomy 22:13-19), and when one slanders a servant to his master (Proverbs 30:10). Even a land may be slandered as well as persons (Numbers 14:36). Slanderers and backbiters are mentioned in some of Paul's darkest catalogues of evildoers (Romans 1:29-30; 2 Corinthians 12:20; 2 Timothy 3:3). To refrain from slander is an important qualification for citizenship in theocracy (Psalms 15:1, 3; Psalms 24:3-4) and for a place in the Christian church (1 Timothy 3:11; Titus 2:3). Jesus Himself was the victim of slanders (Matthew 11:19) and of false testimony (Matthew 27:63). The apostles, too, came in for a full share of it (e.g. Acts 24:5 f; Acts 28:22; 2 Corinthians 6:8). In the case of Paul, even his central doctrine of justification was "slanderously reported" as if it encouraged immorality (Romans 3:8). The devil (= "the calumniator") is represented as the great accuser of God's people (Revelation 12:10), the slanderer paragraph excellence (compare Job 1:9-11; Zechariah 3:1).
See also CRIMES ; PUNISHMENTS.
D. Miall Edwards
Slaughter, of the Innocents
Slaughter, of the Innocents - slo'-ter.
See INNOCENTS, MASSACRE OF THE.
Slaughter, Valley of
Slaughter, Valley of - In Jeremiah 7:32; 19:6, a name given to the valley of Hinnom.
See HINNOM, VALLEY OF; JERUSALEM,III , 2.
Slave; Slavery
Slave; Slavery - slav, slav'-er-i:
1. Acquiring of Slaves
2. Hebrews as War Captives
3. Freedom of Slaves
4. Rights of Slaves
5. Rights of Slave Masters
6. The New Testament Conception
LITERATURE
The origin of the term "slave" is traced to the German sklave, meaning a captive of the Slavonic race who had been forced into servitude (compare Slav); French esclave, Dutch slaaf, Swedish slaf, Spanish esclavo. The word "slave" occurs only in Jeremiah 2:14 and in Revelation 18:13, where it is suggested by the context and not expressed in the original languages (Hebrew yelidh bayith, "one born in the house"; Greek soma, "body"). However, the Hebrew word `ebhedh, in the Old Testament and the Greek word doulos, in the New Testament more properly might have been translated "slave" instead of "servant" or "bondservant," understanding though that the slavery of Judaism was not the cruel system of Greece, Rome, and later nations. The prime thought is service; the servant may render free service, the slave, obligatory, restricted service.
Scripture statement rather than philological study must form the basis of this article. We shall notice how slaves could be secured, sold and redeemed; also their rights and their masters' rights, confining the study to Old Testament Scripture, noting in conclusion the New Testament conception. The word "slave" in this article refers to the Hebrew slave unless otherwise designated.
1. Acquiring of Slaves: Slaves might be acquired in the following ways, namely:
(1) Bought. There are many instances of buying slaves (Leviticus 25:39 ff). Hebrew slavery broke into the ranks of every human relationship: a father could sell his daughter (Exodus 21:7; Nehemiah 5:5); a widow's children might be sold to pay their father's debt (2 Kings 4:1); a man could sell himself (Leviticus 25:39, 47); a woman could sell herself (Deuteronomy 15:12-13, 17), etc. Prices paid were somewhat indefinite. According to Exodus 21:32 thirty shekels was a standard price, but Leviticus 27:3-7 gives a scale of from 3 to 50 shekels according to age and sex, with a provision for an appeal to the priest in case of uncertainty (Leviticus 27:8). Twenty shekels is the price set for a young man (Leviticus 27:5), and this corresponds with the sum paid for Joseph (Genesis 37:28).
But in 2 Maccabees 8:11 the price on the average is 90 for a talent, i.e. 40 shekels each. The ransom of an entire talent for a single man (1 Kings 20:39) means that unusual value (far more than that of a slave) was set on this particular captive.
There were certain limitations on the right of sale (Exodus 21:7 ff).
(2) Exchange. Slaves, i.e. non-Hebrew slaves, might be traded for other slaves, cattle, or provisions.
(3) Satisfaction of Debt. It is probable that a debtor, reduced to extremity, could offer himself in payment of his debt (Leviticus 25:39), though this was forbidden in the Torath Kohanim; compare 'Otsar Yisra'el, vii.292b. That a creditor could sell into slavery a debtor or any of his family, or make them his own slaves, has some foundation in the statement of the poor widow whose pathetic cry reached the ears of the prophet Elisha: "Thy servant my husband is dead; .... and the creditor is come to take unto him my two children to be bondsmen" (2 Kings 4:1).
(4) Gift. The non-Hebrew slave, and possibly the Hebrew slave, could be acquired as a gift (Genesis 29:24).
(5) Inheritance. Children could inherit non-Hebrew slaves as their own possessions (Leviticus 25:46).
(6) Voluntary Surrender. In the case of a slave's release in the seventh year there was allowed a willing choice of indefinite slavery. The ceremony at such a time is interesting: "Then his master shall bring him unto the judges (margin), and shall bring him to the door, or unto the door-post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever" (Exodus 21:6). A pierced ear probably meant obedience to the master's voice. History, however, does not record a single instance in which such a case occurred.
(7) Arrest. "If the thief be found breaking in, .... he shall make restitution: if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft" (Exodus 22:2-3).
(8) Birth. The children of slaves, born within the master's house of a wife given to the slave there, became slaves, and could be held, even if the father went free (Exodus 21:4; compare Leviticus 25:54).
(9) Capture in War. Thousands of men, women and children were taken in war as captives and reduced, sometimes, to most menial slavery. Such slavery, however, was more humane than wholesale butchery according to the customs of earlier times (Numbers 31:7-35). Males were usually slain and females kept for slavery and concubinage (Deuteronomy 21:10-11, 14). Captive slaves and bought slaves, "from nations round about," forced moral ruin into Israel's early civilization.
See SIEGE, 3.
The two principal sources of slave supply were poverty in peace and plunder in war.
2. Hebrews as War Captives: The Hebrews themselves were held as captive slaves at various times by (1) Phoenicians (the greatest slave traders of ancient times), (2) Philistines, (3) Syrians (2 Kings 5:2 ff), (4) Egyptians, and (5) Romans. There must have been thousands subjected to severest slavery.
See also EGYPT; ISRAEL; PHARAOH; SERVANT, etc.
3. Freedom of Slaves: The freedom of slaves was possible in the following ways:
(1) By Redemption. Manumission by redemption was common among the Hebrews. The slave's freedom might be bought, the price depending on (a) the nearness to the seventh year or the Jubilee year, (b) the first purchase price, and (c) personal considerations as to age and ability of the one in bondage. A slave could be redeemed as follows: (a) by himself, (b) by his uncle, (c) by his nephew or cousin, (d) or by any near relative (Leviticus 25:48-55). The price depended on certain conditions as indicated above.
(2) By the Lapse of Time. The seventh year of service brought release from bondage. "If thou buy a Hebrew servant (margin "bondman"), six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing" (Exodus 21:2-4).
(3) By the Law of the Jubilee Year. The year of Jubilee was the great year when slaves were no longer slaves but free. "He shall serve with thee unto the year of jubilee: then shall he go out from thee, he and his children .... return unto his own family, and unto the possession of his fathers" (Leviticus 25:40 f).
(4) By Injury. A servant whose master maimed him (or her), in particular by causing the loss of an eye or even a tooth, was thereby freed (Exodus 21:26 f).
(5) By Escape. (Deuteronomy 23:15 f; 1 Kings 2:39). See "Code of Hammurabi" inHDB (extra vol, p. 600) and compare Philemon 1:12 ff.
(6) By Indifference. In case of a certain kind of female slave, the neglect or displeasure of her master in itself gave her the right to freedom (Exodus 21:7-11; Deuteronomy 21:14).
(7) By Restitution. A caught thief, having become a bondsman, after making full restitution by his service as a slave, was set at liberty (Exodus 22:1-4).
(8) By the Master's Death. "And Abram said, .... I go childless, and he that shall be possessor of my house is Eliezer of Damascus .... and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir" (Genesis 15:2 f). This passage has been mistakenly supposed to indicate that a master without children might give freedom to a slave by constituting the slave an heir to his possessions. But on the contrary, Abram seems to contemplate with horror the possibility that Eliezer will take possession of his goods in the absence of an heir. In view of the fact that adoption, the adrogatio of the Roman law, was unknown both to Biblical and Talmudic law (see Jewish Encyclopedia, under the word), the statement in Genesis 15:2 does not seem to indicate any such custom as the adoption of slaves. If any method of emancipation is here suggested, it is by the death of the master without heir, a method thoroughly discussed in the Talmud (mithath ha-'adhon).
(9) By Direct Command of Yahweh. "The word that came unto Jeremiah from Yahweh, .... that every man should let his man-servant, and .... his maid-servant, that is a Hebrew or a Hebrewess, go free; that none should make bondsmen of them .... they obeyed, and let them go" (Jeremiah 34:8-10).
The nine methods here enumerated may be classified thus:
A. By operation of law:
1. By lapse of time. (a) After serving six years or other contractual period. See (2) above.
(b) Upon the approach of the Jubilee year. See (3) above.
2. By death of the master without heirs. See (8) above.
B. By act of the parties:
1. By an act of the master. (a) Voluntary manumission, including (9) above. (b) Indifference in certain cases. See (6) above. (c) Maiming servant. See (4) above. 2. By act of the servant. (a) Redemption. See (1) above. (b) Restitution. See (7) above. (c) Escape. See (5) above. 3. By act of a third party. Redemption--(1) above.
4. Rights of Slaves: As noted in the beginning of this article, the Hebrew slaves fared far better than the Grecian, Roman and other slaves of later years. In general, the treatment they received and the rights they could claim made their lot reasonably good. Of course a slave was a slave, and there were masters who disobeyed God and even abused their "brothers in bonds." As usual the unfortunate female slave got the full measure of inhuman cruelty. Certain rights were discretionary, it is true, but many Hebrew slaves enjoyed valuable individual and social privileges. As far as Scripture statements throw light on this subject, the slaves of Old Testament times might claim the following rights, namely:
(1) Freedom. Freedom might be gained in any one of the above-mentioned ways or at the master's will. The non-Hebrew could be held as a slave in perpetuity (Leviticus 25:44-46).
(2) Good Treatment. "Thou shalt not rule over him (Hebrew slave) with rigor, but shalt fear thy God. .... Ye shall not rule, one over another, with rigor" (Leviticus 25:43, 46). The non-Hebrew seemed to be left unprotected.
(3) Justice. An ancient writer raises the query of fairness to slaves. "If I have despised the cause of my man-servant or of my maid-servant, when they contended with me; what then shall I do when God riseth up?" (Job 31:13 f). No doubt the true Hebrew master was considerate of the rights of his slaves. The very fact, however, that the Hebrew master could punish a Hebrew slave, "to within an inch of his life," gave ready opportunity for sham justice. "And if a man smite his servant, or his maid ("bondman or bondwoman"), with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall surely be punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished; for he is his money" (Exodus 21:20 f).
(4) Family. The slave before his release might have his wife and children (Exodus 21:5).
(5) Voluntary Slavery. Even when the seventh year came, the slave had a right to pledge himself, with awl-pierced ear, to perpetual service for his master (Exodus 21:5 f; Deuteronomy 15:16). The traditional interpretation of "forever" in these passages is "until the next Jubilee year" (compare Kiddushin 21).
(6) Money or Property. Some cases at least indicate that slaves could have money of their own. Thus, if a poor slave "waxed rich" he could redeem himself (Leviticus 25:49). Compare 1 Samuel 9:5-10, where, however, the Hebrew throughout calls the "servant" na`ar, "a youth," never `ebhedh.
(7) Children. If married when free, the slave could take wife and children with him when freedom came, but if he was married after becoming a slave, his wife and children must remain in possession of his master. This law led him often into perpetual slavery (Exodus 21:3 f).
(8) Elevation. A chance to rise was allowable in some instances, e.g. Eliezer, a foreign slave in a Hebrew household, and Joseph, a Hebrew slave in a foreign household. Each rose to a place of honor and usefulness (Genesis 15:2; 39:4).
(9) Religious Worship. After being circumcised, slaves were allowed to participate in the paschal sacrifice (Exodus 12:44) and other religious occasions (Deuteronomy 12:12).
(10) Gifts. Upon obtaining freedom, slaves, at the discretion of masters, were given supplies of cattle, grain and wine (Deuteronomy 15:13 f).
5. Rights of Slave Masters: The rights of a slave master may briefly be stated as follows: (1) to hold as chattel possession his non-Hebrew slaves (Leviticus 25:45); (2) to leave such slaves as an inheritance for his children (Leviticus 25:46); (3) to hold as his own property the wife and children of all slaves who were unmarried at the time they became slaves (Exodus 21:4); (4) to pursue and recover runaway slaves (1 Kings 2:39-41); (5) to grant freedom at any time to any slave. This is implied rather than stated. Emancipation other than at the Sabbatical and Jubilee years was evidently the right of masters; (6) to circumcise slaves, both Jew and Gentile, within his own household (Genesis 17:13, 23, 27); (7) to sell, give away, or trade slaves (Genesis 29:24. According to Torath Kohanim a Hebrew servant could be sold only under certain restrictions. See 1, (1)); (8) to chastise male and female slaves, though not unto death (Exodus 21:20); (9) to marry a slave himself, or give his female slaves in marriage to others (1 Chronicles 2:35); (10) to marry a daughter to a slave (1 Chronicles 2:34 f); (11) to purchase slaves in foreign markets (Leviticus 25:44); (12) to keep, though not as a slave, the runaway slave from a foreign master (Deuteronomy 23:15-16. See 3, (5)); (13) to enslave or sell a caught thief (Genesis 44:8-33; Exodus 22:3); (14) to hold, in perpetuity, non-Hebrew slaves (Leviticus 25:46); (15) to seek advice of slaves (1 Samuel 25:14 ff; but the reference here is open to doubt. See 4, (6)); (16) to demand service (Genesis 14:14; Genesis 24:1-67).
Throughout Old Testament times the rights of both slaves and masters varied, but in general the above may be called the accepted code. In later times Zedekiah covenanted with the Hebrews never again to enslave their own brothers, but they broke the covenant (Jeremiah 34:8).
6. The New Testament Conception: There were slaves during New Testament times. The church issued no edict sweeping away this custom of the old Judaism, but the gospel of Christ with its warm, penetrating love-message mitigated the harshness of ancient times and melted cruelty into kindness. The equality, justice and love of Christ's teachings changed the whole attitude of man to man and master to servant. This spirit of brotherhood quickened the conscience of the age, leaped the walls of Judaism, and penetrated the remotest regions. The great apostle proclaimed this truth: "There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor free, .... ye all are one man in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:28). The Christian slaves and masters are both exhorted in Paul's letters to live godly lives and make Christ-like their relations one to the other--obedience to masters and forbearance with slaves. "Bondservants (m), be obedient unto .... your masters, .... as bondservants (m) of Christ .... And, ye masters .... forbear threatening: .... their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no respect of persons with him" (Ephesians 6:5-9).
Christ was a reformer, but not an anarchist. His gospel was dynamic but not dynamitic. It was leaven, electric with power, but permeated with love. Christ's life and teaching were against Judaistic slavery, Roman slavery and any form of human slavery. The love of His gospel and the light of His life were destined, in time, to make human emancipation earth-wide and human brotherhood as universal as His own benign presence.
LITERATURE.
Nowack, Hebrew Arch.; Ewald, Alterthumer, III, 280-88; Grunfeld, Die Stellung des Sklaven bei den Juden, nach bibl. und talmud. Quellen, 1886; Mielziner, Die Verhaltnisse der Sklaven bei den alter Hebrdern, 1859; Mandl, Das Sklavenrecht des Altes Testament, 1886; Kahn, L'esclavagedans la Bible et le Talmud, 1867; Sayce, Social Life among the Assyrians and Babylonians; Lane, Manners and Customs of Modern Egyptians, 205; Arabian Nights, I, 64 ff; Thomson, LB; McCurdy, HPM, 1894; Trumbull, Studies in Oriental Social Life, 1894. There is a wealth of material in the Talmudic tractate Kiddushin (pp. 17-22).
William Edward Raffety
Slaying
Slaying - sla'-ing (by spear, dart, or sword).
See PUNISHMENTS.
Sleep
Sleep - slep: Represents many words in Hebrew and Greek. For the noun the most common are shenah, and hupnos; for the verb, yashen, shakhabh, and katheudo. The figurative uses for death (Deuteronomy 31:16, etc.) and sluggishness (Ephesians 5:14, etc.) are very obvious.
See DREAM.
Sleep, Deep
Sleep, Deep - (tardemah, verb radham, from a root meaning "to be deaf"): The verb radham has no further meaning than "to be fast asleep" (Judges 4:21; Jonah 1:5), but the King James Version used "deep sleep" as a translation only in Daniel 8:18; 10:9, where a sleep supernaturally caused (a "trance") is meant compare "dead sleep" in Psalms 76:6). The Revised Version's insertion of deep sleep in place of The King James Version's "fast asleep" in Judges 4:21 is consequently unfortunate. The noun tardemah has the same meaning of "trance" in Genesis 2:21; 15:12; 1 Samuel 26:12; Job 4:13; 33:15, but in Proverbs 19:15; Isaiah 29:10, it is used figuratively of torpor. In Acts 20:9 (huipnos bathtus), heavy natural sleep is meant.
Burton Scott Easton
Sleeves
Sleeves - slevz (Genesis 37:3 margin).
See DRESS;
Sleight
Sleight - slit: No connection with "slight," but from the same root as "sly" and so = "cunning." So in Ephesians 4:14, "sleight of men," for kubeia, "dice-plalying" (compare "cube") "gamblers' tricks" "trickery."
Slime; Slime Pits
Slime; Slime Pits - slim, slim'-pits (chemar; Septuagint asphaltos; Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) bitumen; the Revised Version margin "bitumen"; compare Arabic chummar, "bitumen"; and compare chomer, "clay," "mortar"): In the account of the ark in Genesis 6:14, kopher Septuagint asphaltos; Vulgate: bitumen; compare Arabic kufr, "pitch") does not necessarily denote vegetable pitch, but may well mean bitumen. The same may be said of zepheth, "pitch" (compare Arabic zift, "pitch"), in Exodus 2:3 and Isaiah 34:9. The word "slime" occurs in the following passages: "And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for mortar" (Genesis 11:3); "Now the vale of Siddim was full of slime pits" (Genesis 14:10, margin "bitumen pits"); "She took for him an ark of bulrushes, and daubed it with slime and with pitch" (Exodus 2:3).
Bitumen is a hydrocarbon allied to petroleum and natural gas. It is a lustrous black solid, breaking with a conchoidal fracture, burning with a yellow flame, and melting when ignited. It is probably derived from natural gas and petroleum by a process of oxidation and evaporation, and its occurrence may be taken as a sign that other hydrocarbons are or have been present in the strata. It is found in small lumps and larger masses in the cretaceous limestone on the west side of the Dead Sea, and there is reason to believe that considerable quantities of it rise to the surface of the Dead Sea during earthquakes. In ancient times it was exported to Egypt to be used in embalming mummies. Important mines of it exist at Chasbeiya near Mt. Hermon and in North Syria. Springs of liquid bituminous matter exist in Mesopotamia, where according to Herodotus and other classical writers it was used as mortar with sun-dried bricks. Various conjectures have been made as to the part played by bitumen in the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Diodorus Siculus calls the Dead Sea limne asphalstitis, "lake of asphalt."
See SIDDIM; CITIES OF THE PLAIN.
Alfred Ely Day
Sling
Sling - See ARMOR,III , 2.
Slip
Slip - As meaning "a cutting from a plant," it is still good English. In this sense in Isaiah 17:10 for zemorah, "branch," "twig." For the phrase "slip of the tongue" compare Sirach 14:1; 19:16; 20:18; 21:7; 25:8.
Slopes
Slopes - slops.
See ASHDOTH PISGAH.
Slow
Slow - slo: Chiefly for 'erekh, literally, "long," in the phrase "slow to anger" (Nehemiah 9:17, etc.). In Exodus 4:10; Luke 24:25; James 1:19, for kabhedh; bradus, both meaning "heavy," "sluggish," while Sirach 7:35 uses "be slow" for okneo, "hesitate." In addition, the King James Version uses. "slow" for argos, "inactive," in Wisdom of Solomon 15:15, "slow to go" (the Revised Version (British and American) "helpless for walking"), and in Titus 1:12, "slow bellies" (the Revised Version (British and American) "idle gluttons"). In Sirach 51:24, the King James Version has "be slow" for hustereo, "be lacking" (so the Revised Version (British and American)).
Sluggard
Sluggard - slug'-ard: Found only in the Old Testament, and there only in Proverbs. It is the rendering given the word 'atsel everywhere in the Revised Version (British and American), but in the King James Version only in Proverbs 6:6, 9; 10:26; 13:4; 20:4; 26:16 (elsewhere the King James Version translates by "slothful"). The root meaning of ['atsel] is "to be sluggish," "stupid." The English word "slug" is said to be "allied to slack" (Webster).
Sluice
Sluice - sloos (sekher, literally, "hire"): In Isaiah 19:10, the King James Version reads, "all that make sluices and ponds for fish." the Revised Version (British and American) entirely alters the translation of the whole verse. It reads, "And the pillars of Egypt shall be broken in pieces; all they that work for hire (margin "that make dams") shall be grieved in soul."
Smell
Smell - smel (Hebrew and Aramaic reach, as noun, "savor," "scent"; ruach, as verb, literally, "to breathe," "to inhale," thence "to smell"; osme, the "smell," "savor," euodia, "sweet smell" "fragrance" osphresis "the sense of smell"; verb osphrainomai): And he came near, and kissed him: and he smelled (way-yarach) the smell (reach) of his raiment, and blessed him, and said, See, the smell (reach) of my son is as the smell (reach) of a field which Yahweh hath blessed" (Genesis 27:27). Idols are described as "gods, the work of men's hands, wood and stone, which neither see, nor hear, nor eat, nor smell" (Deuteronomy 4:28). Acceptable sacrifices and pious conduct are called a "sweet smell" or "savor" (Exodus 29:18; Ephesians 5:2; Philippians 4:18) well-pleasing to God. The godless life, which dishonors God, is hateful to Him: "I will not smell the savor of your sweet odors" (Leviticus 26:31). The phrase, "being in bad odor with a person," can be traced to Biblical language: "Ye have made our savor to be abhorred in the eyes of Pharaoh, and in the eyes of his servants" (Exodus 5:21). Thus "smell" is occasionally equivalent with "quality," "character": "His (Moab's) taste remaineth in him, and his scent is not changed" (Jeremiah 48:11). Character or quality is the most infallible test, the most manifest advertisement of a thing or a person; thus we find the following very instructive passage: "(God) maketh manifest through us the savor (osme) of his knowledge in every place. For we are a sweet savor (euodia) of Christ unto God, in (better: "among") them that are saved, and in (better: "among") them that perish; to the one a savor (osme) from death unto death; to the other a savor (osme) from life unto life" (2 Corinthians 2:14-16). See TRIUMPH. In the passage Isaiah 3:24, the King James Version "sweet smell" (besem, "balsam plant") has been changed to "sweet spices" in the Revised Version (British and American).
H. L. E. Luering
Smith
Smith - smith.
See CRAFTS, 10; TUBAL-CAIN.
Smiting By the Sun
Smiting By the Sun - See SUN, SMITING BY.
Smoke
Smoke - smok: Used figuratively of the divine jealousy (Deuteronomy 29:20) and anger (Psalms 74:1); symbolic of the glory of the divine holiness (Isaiah 4:5; 6:4; Revelation 15:8).
Smyrna
Smyrna - smur'-na (Smurna):
1. Ancient: Smyrna, a large ancient city on the western coast of Asia Minor, at the head of a gulf which reaches 30 miles inland, was originally peopled by the Asiatics known as the Lelages. The city seems to have been taken from the Lelages by the Aeolian Greeks about 1100 BC; there still remain traces of the cyclopean masonry of that early time. In 688 BC it passed into the possession of the Ionian Greeks and was made one of the cities of the Ionian confederacy, but in 627 BC it was taken by the Lydians. During the years 301 to 281 BC, Lysimachus entirely rebuilt it on a new site to the Southwest of the earlier cities, and surrounded it by a wall. Standing, as it did, upon a good harbor, at the head of one of the chief highways to the interior, it early became a great trading-center and the chief port for the export trade. In Roman times, Smyrna was considered the most brilliant city of Asia Minor, successfully rivaling Pergamos and Ephesus. Its streets were wide and paved. Its system of coinage was old, and now about the city coins of every period are found. It was celebrated for its schools of science and medicine, and for its handsome buildings. Among them was the Homerium, for Smyrna was one of several places which claimed to be the birthplace of the poet. On the slope of Mt. Pagus was a theater which seated 20,000 spectators. In the 23 AD year a temple was built in honor of Tiberius and his mother Julia, and the Golden Street, connecting the temples of Zeus and Cybele, is said to have been the best in any ancient city. Smyrna early became a Christian city, for there was one of the Seven Churches of the Book of Revelation (2:8-11). There Polycarp, the bishop of Smyrna, was martyred, though without the sanction of the Roman government. It seems that the Jews of Smyrna were more antagonistic than were the Romans to the spread of Christianity, for it is said that even on Saturday, their sacred day, they brought wood for the fire in which Polycarp was burned. His grave is still shown in a cemetery there. Like many other cities of Asia Minor, Smyrna suffered frequently, especially during the years 178-80 AD, from earthquakes, but it always escaped entire destruction. During the Middle Ages the city was the scene of many struggles, the most fierce of which was directed by Timur against the Christians. Tradition relates that there he built a tower, using as stones the heads of a thousand captives which he put to death, yet Smyrna was the last of the Christian cities to hold out against the Mohammedans; in 1424 it fell into the hands of the Turks. It was the discovery of America and the resulting discovery of a sea route to India which ruined the Smyrna trade.
2. Modern: Modern Smyrna is still the largest city in Asia Minor, with a population of about 250,000, of whom half are Greek and less than one-fourth are Mohammedans. Its modern name, Ismir, is but a Turkish corruption of the ancient name. Even under the Turkish government the city is progressive, and is the capital of the Aidin vilayet, and therefore the home of a governor. Several railroads follow the courses of the ancient routes into the distant interior. In its harbor ships from all parts of the world may be seen. The ancient harbor of Paul's time has been filled in, and there the modern bazaars stand. The old stadium has been destroyed to make room for modern buildings, and a large part of the ancient city lies buried beneath the modern houses and the 40 mosques of which the city boasts. The better of the modern buildings, belonging to the government and occupied by the foreign consuls, stand along the modern quay. Traces of the ancient walls are still to be found. West of Mt. Pagus is the Ephesian gate, and the Black-gate, as the Turks call it, is near the railroad station. The castle upon Mt. Pagus, 460 ft. above the sea, dates from Byzantine times. The prosperity of Smyrna is due, not only to the harbor and the port of entry to the interior, but partly to the perfect climate of spring and autumn--the winters are cold and the summers are hot; and also to the fertility of the surrounding country. Figs, grapes, valonia, opium, sponges, cotton and liquorice root are among the chief articles of trade.
E. J. Banks
Snail
Snail - snal ((1) chomeT, the Revised Version (British and American) "sand-lizard," Septuagint saura, "lizard" (Leviticus 11:30); (2) shabbelul, Septuagint keros, "wax" (Psalms 58:8)): (1) ChomeT is 7th in the list of unclean "creeping things" in Leviticus 11:30, and occurs nowhere else. "Snail" is not warranted by Septuagint or Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) the Revised Version (British and American) has "sand-lizard." It may be the skink or a species of Lacerta. See LIZARD. (2) Shabbelul is translated "snail" in Psalms 58:8: "Let them be as a snail which melteth and passeth away." Mandelkern gives limax, "slug." Gesenius derives shabbelul from balal, "to pour"; compare Arabic balla, "to wet," instancing leimax, "snail," or "slug," from leibo, "to pour." While Septuagint has keros, "wax," Talmud (Mo`edh QaTan 6b) supports "snail." The ordinary explanation of the passage, which is not very satisfying, is that the snail leaves a trail of mucus (i.e. it melts) as it moves along. This does not in any way cause the snail to waste away, because its glands are continually manufacturing fresh mucous. Two large species of snail, Helix aspersa and Helix pomatia, are collected and eaten, boiled, by the Christians of Syria and Palestine, especially in Lent. The Jews and Moslems declare them to be unclean and do not eat them.
Alfred Ely Day
Snare
Snare - snar (pach; pagis, but brochos, in 1 Corinthians 7:35): Over half a dozen Hebrew words are used to indicate different methods of taking birds and animals, of which the snare (pach) is mentioned oftener than any other. It was a noose of hair for small birds, of wire for larger birds or smaller animals. The snares were set in a favorable location and grain scattered to attract the attention of feathered creatures. They accepted the bribe of good feeding and walked into the snare, not suspecting danger. For this reason the snare became particularly applicable in describing a tempting bribe offered by men to lead their fellows into trouble, and the list of references is a long one, all of the same nature. See Exodus 10:7; 1 Samuel 18:21; 28:9; Psalms 11:6; 18:5, "snares of death"; used symbolically of anything that may kill: Psalms 91:3; 124:7; 140:5; 141:9; Proverbs 7:23; 13:14; 18:7; 20:25; 22:25; 29:25; Ecclesiastes 9:12. But this is a people robbed and plundered; they are all of them snared in holes, and they are hid in prison-houses: they are for a prey, and none delivereth; for a spoil, and none saith, Restore" (Isaiah 41:22). Here it is specified that the snare was in a hole so covered as to conceal it. Jeremiah 18:22 clearly indicates that the digging of a pit to take prey was customary, and also the hiding of the snare for the feet. North American Indians in setting a snare usually figure on catching the bird around the neck. Jeremiah 50:24, "I have laid a snare for thee"; Hosea 9:8, "A fowler's snare is in all his ways"; Amos 3:5 seems to indicate that the snare was set for the feet; Luke 21:34, "But take heed to yourselves, lest haply .... that day come on you suddenly as a snare"; Romans 11:9, "Let their table be made a snare, and a trap"; 1 Corinthians 7:35, "not that I may cast a snare upon you"; 1 Timothy 3:7, "the snare of the devil"; also 1 Timothy 6:9 "But they that are minded to be rich fall into a temptation and a snare and many foolish and hurtful lusts, such as drown men in destruction and perdition."
Gene Stratton-Porter
Sneeze
Sneeze - snez (zorer, Pho`el-form zarar): "The child sneezed seven times, and the child opened his eyes" (2 Kings 4:35). "Sneezing," better "snorting," is found in the description of Leviathan (the crocodile): "His sneezings (`atsishah) flash forth light, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning" (Job 41:18 (Hebrews 10:1-39)).
See NEESING.
Snow
Snow - sno (shelegh, telagh (Daniel 7:9); chion): (1) Snow is not uncommon in the winter in Jerusalem, but it never reaches any depth and in many winters it is not seen at all. It usually disappears, for the most part, as soon as the sun appears, though it may "hide itself" for a time in the gorge cut by a stream (Job 6:16). On lower levels than Jerusalem there is never sufficient to cover the ground, though often there are some flakes seen in the air. Even at sea-level there is occasionally a sufficient fall of hail to cover the ground. A very exceptional snowfall is related in 1 Maccabees 13:22 at Adora (near Hebron). It was heavy enough to prevent the movement of troops. (2) The tops of the mountains of Lebanon are white with snow for most of the year, and snow may be found in large banks in the valleys and the northern slopes at any time in the summer. Mt. Hermon, 9,200 ft. high, has long streaks of snow in the valleys all the summer. (3) The snow of the mountains is the source of the water of the springs which last throughout the drought of summer. In case the snow fails there is sure to be a lack of water in the fountains: "Shall the snow of Lebanon fail .... or shall the cold waters that flow down from afar be dried up?" (Jeremiah 18:14). (4) Large quantities of snow are stored in caves in the mountains in winter and are brought down to the cities in summer to be used in place of ice for cooling drinks and refrigerating purposes.
(5) God's power over the elements of Nature is often brought out in the Old Testament: "For he saith to the snow, Fall thou on the earth" (Job 37:6); but man cannot fathom the works of God: "Hast thou entered the treasuries of the snow?" (Job 38:22). "The snowy day" (1 Chronicles 11:22; 2 Samuel 23:20) and the "fear of snow" (Proverbs 31:21) are figurative uses describing winter and cold. "Snow in summer" (Proverbs 26:1) would be most out of place, yet it might be most refreshing to the tired workmen in the time of harvest.
(6) Snow is the symbol of purity and cleanness, giving us some of our most beautiful passages of Scripture: "Wash me and I shall be whiter than snow" (Psalms 51:7); "Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow" (Isaiah 1:18). Carrying the figure farther, snow-water might be expected to have a special value for cleansing: "If I wash myself with snow-water" (Job 9:30). The most common use in Scripture is to denote whiteness in color and implying purity as well: "His raiment was white as snow" (Daniel 7:9; Matthew 28:3; Mark 9:3; Revelation 1:14).
(7) The whiteness of leprosy is compared to snow (Exodus 4:6; Numbers 12:10; 2 Kings 5:27).
Alfred H. Joy
Snuffers; Snuffdishes
Snuffers; Snuffdishes - snuf'-erz, snuf'-dish-ez (melqachayim, machtoth): These two utensils are thrice mentioned in connection with the wilderness tabernacle (Exodus 25:38; 37:23; Numbers 4:9). the American Standard Revised Version prefers to read "snuffers and snuffdishes" in place of "tongs and snuffdishes" (compare 2 Chronicles 4:22), the connection between the two utensils being indicated by the fact that both are said to belong to the seven lamps, and were to be made out of the talent of gold which was specified as the weight of the whole (Exodus 25:37-39).
The seven-branched candlestick which stood in the holy place of both tabernacle and temple was surmounted, in each of its arms, by a removable lamp in which olive oil was burnt. From the requirement of keeping these lights brilliantly burning throughout each night of the year, arose the need for snuffers and snuffdishes. By the former, the burnt portions of the wick were removed; in the latter they were deposited previous to removal. The lamps may have required to be trimmed as often as every half-hour. For this purpose a priest would enter the outer chamber "accomplishing the services" (Hebrews 9:6).
In the time of Solomon's Temple another word than melqachayim was used to describe this utensil. It is mezammeroth, from a verb meaning "to prune" or "trim," and is found in 1 Kings 7:50; 2 Kings 12:13; 25:14; 2 Chronicles 4:22; Jeremiah 52:18. In 4 of these passages, the English text reads, "the snuffers and the basins"; the 5th is merely a summary of things taken to Babylon (2 Kings 25:14). In this constant later association of "basins" and "snuffers" it is seen that the basins referred to were used for the reception of the cast-off portions of the wicks of the seven lamps, and took the place of the snuffdishes of an earlier age.
See TONGS.
W. Shaw Caldecott
So
So - so (co', although the Hebrew might be pointed cewe'; Assyrian Sib'u; Septuagint Segor, Soa; Manetho, Seuechos; Latin Sevechus; Herodotus (ii. 137 ff), Sabakon): In all probability the "Sabaeo" of Herodotus, the Shabaka, who founded the Ethiopian dynasty, the XXVth of Egyptian kings. His date is given as 715-707 BC (Flinders Petrie, History of Egypt, III, 281 ff), but we may suppose that before his accession to the throne he was entitled to be designated king, as being actually regent. To this So, Hoshea, king of Israel, made an appeal for assistance to enable him to throw off the yoke of the Assyrian Shalmaneser IV (2 Kings 17:3 ff). But Hoshea's submission to So brought him no advantage, for Shalmaneser came up throughout all the land and laid siege to Samaria. Not long after the fall of Samaria, So ventured upon an eastern campaign, and was defeated by Sargon, the successor of Shalmaneser, in the battle of Raphia in 720 BC.
LITERATURE.
Flinders Petrie, History of Egypt, III, 281 ff; McCurdy, HPM, I, 422; Schrader, COT, I, 261.
T. Nicol.
Soap
Soap - sop (borith; the King James Version sope): Borith is a derivative of bor, "purity," hence, something which cleanses or makes pure. Soap in the modern sense, as referring to a salt of a fatty acid, for example, that produced by treating olive oil with caustic soda, was probably unknown in Old Testament times. Even today there are districts in the interior of Syria where soap is never used. Cooking utensils, clothes, even the body are cleansed with ashes. The ashes of the household fires are carefully saved for this purpose. The cleansing material referred to in Jeremiah 2:22 (compare Septuagint at the place, where borith is rendered by poia = "grass") and Malachi 3:2 was probably the vegetable lye called in Arabic el qali (the origin of English alkali). This material, which is a mixture of crude sodium and potassium carbonates, is sold in the market in the form of grayish lumps. It is produced by burning the desert plants and adding enough water to the ashes to agglomerate them. Before the discovery of Leblanc's process large quantities of qali were exported from Syria to Europe.
For washing clothes the women sprinkle the powdered qali over the wet garments and then place them on a flat stone and pound them with a wooden paddle. For washing the body, oil is first smeared over the skin and then qali rubbed on and the whole slimy mixture rinsed off with water. Qali was also used in ancient times as a flux in refining precious metals (compare Malachi 3:2). At the present time many Syrian soap-makers prefer the qali to the imported caustic soda for soap-making.
In Susanna (verse 17) is a curious reference to "washing balls" (smegmata).
James A. Patch
Sober; Sobriety; Soberness
Sober; Sobriety; Soberness - so'-ber, sa-bri'-e-ti, so'-ber-nes (Greek adjective sophron, and its related nouns, sophrosune, sophronismos; verbs sophroneo and sophronizo; adverb sophronos, "of sound mind," and sophronizo; "self-possessed," "without excesses of any kind," "moderate and discreet"): In Mark 5:15; Luke 8:35, "sane," said of one out of whom demons had just been cast. In the Pastoral Epistles, this virtue is especially commended to certain classes, because of extravagances characterizing particular periods of life, that had to be guarded against, namely, to aged men, with reference to the querulousness of old age (Titus 2:2); to young men, with reference to their sanguine views of life, and their tendency to disregard consequences (Titus 2:6); enjoined upon young women, with reference to extravagance in dress and speech (Titus 2:5; 1 Timothy 2:9); and, in a similar manner, commended to ministers, because of the importance of their judgment and conduct, as teachers and exemplars (1 Timothy 3:2). "Words of soberness" (Acts 26:25) are contrasted with the "mania," "madness," that Festus had just declared to be the explanation of Paul's eloquence (Acts 26:24).
In a few passages, the Greek verb nepho and its derivative adjective nephalios are used in the same sense. The word originally had a physical meaning, as opposed to drunkenness, and is thus used in 1 Thessalonians 5:6, 8, as the foundation of the deeper meaning. Used metaphorically also in the Pastoral Epistles and 1 Peter, as sometimes in the classics, for "cool," "unimpassioned." Ellicott, on 1 Timothy 3:2, 11, distinguishes between the two words by regarding sophron "as pointing to the outward exhibition of the inward virtue" implied in nephalios.
H. E. Jacobs
Socho
Socho - so'-ko: Occurs in 1 Chronicles 4:18, the Revised Version (British and American) "Soco."
See SOCOH.
Socket
Socket - sok'-et ('edhen): The tabernacle in the wilderness being constructed as a portable building without permanent foundation, its stability was attained by the use of "sockets" into which the pillars and boards forming its walls were sunk. The word therefore is used solely in relation to the tabernacle, except in one poetic passage (Song of Solomon 5:15), where the legs of the beloved are compared to "pillars of marble set upon sockets of fine gold." In all, the tabernacle with its court rested upon 165 bases or sockets, apportioned thus: (1) silver sockets, each a talent (circa 95 lbs.) in weight (Exodus 38:27), namely, 96 to support the 48 boards of the tabernacle (Exodus 26:19 ff); 4 for the pillars supporting the veil (Exodus 26:32) = 100; (2) bronze sockets, weight not given, namely, 50 to support the 50 standards on which were hung the curtains of the tabernacle on North, South and West (Exodus 27:10 ff), 10 to support 10 pillars on the E. (Exodus 27:13 ff), and 5 to support the 5 pillars upholding the screen at the tabernacle entrance (Exodus 26:27) = 65. The site for the tabernacle being chosen and leveled, these sockets would be "laid" upon it (Exodus 40:18), and the tenons of the boards, or projecting base of the pillar, inserted into holes made for the purpose.
W. Shaw Caldecott
Socoh; Soco
Socoh; Soco - so'-ko (sokkhoh, "branches"), (sokho (in Chronicles only); Socho, most usual, but many forms in Septuagint and in the King James Version: Socoh, Shochoh, Shoco, Shocho):
(1) A city in the Shephelah of Judah mentioned along with Jarmuth, Adullam, Azekah, etc. (Joshua 15:35); the Philistines "gathered together at Socoh, which belongeth to Judah, and encamped between Socoh and Azekah" (1 Samuel 17:1); it is mentioned as one of the districts from which Solomon drew his supplies (1 Kings 4:10, the King James Version "Sochoh"); the association of Socoh in this verse with Hepher is worth noticing in connection with 1 Chronicles 4:18 ("Heber"). Soco (the King James Version "Shoco") was one of the cities fortified by Rehoboam for the defense of Judah (2 Chronicles 11:7); it was captured by the Philistines in the time of Ahaz (2 Chronicles 28:18). The site is, without doubt, Khirbet esh Shuweikeh (Shuweikeh is a diminutive of Shaukeh, "a thorn"), a rounded, elongated hilltop, showing clear traces of ancient city walls. The situation is one of considerable natural strength on the south side of the Vale of Elah just where the Wady ec Cur makes a sweep to the West and becomes the Wady es Sunt. Like so many such ancient sites, the hill has very steep slopes on 3 sides (South, West, and North), and is isolated from the ridge of higher ground to the East by a narrow neck of lower ground. In the valley to the Southwest is a plentiful spring. The site was known to Jerome in the 4th century. He described it as 8 or 9 Roman miles from Eleutheropolis (Beit Jibrin) (PEF, III, 53, 125, Sh XVII, BR, II, 21). The Sucathites (1 Chronicles 2:55) were probably inhabitants of Soco.
(2) A city of Judah in the South, associated (Joshua 15:48) with Shamir and Jattir. This is doubtless Khirbet Shuweikeh, a large ruin occupying a low hill, 10 miles Southwest of Hebron; there are many caves and rock-cut cisterns as well as drafted stones. Cheyne doubtfully locates the Socoh of 1 Kings 4:10 here. See PEF , 404, 410, ShXXV ;B R , I, 494.
E. W. G. Masterman
Sod, Sodden
Sod, Sodden - sod'-'-n.
See SEETHE.
Soda
Soda - so'-da.
See NITRE.
Sodering
Sodering - sod'-er-ing (debheq): the King James Version in Isaiah 41:7, the Revised Version (British and American) "soldering," of smith work.
Sodi
Sodi - so'-di (codhi): One of the spies, representing the tribe of Zebulun (Numbers 13:10).
Sodom
Sodom - sod'-um (cedhom; Sodoma) One of the 5 CITIES OF THE PLAIN (which see), destroyed by fire from heaven in the time of Abraham and Lot (Genesis 19:24). The wickedness of the city became proverbial. The sin of sodomy was an offense against nature frequently connected with idolatrous practices (see Rawlinson, History of Phoenicia). See SODOMITE. The fate of Sodom and Gomorrah is used as a warning to those who reject the gospel (Matthew 10:15; 11:24; 2 Peter 2:6; Jude 1:7). The word is used in a typical sense in Revelation 11:8. Sodom was probably located in plain South of the Dead Sea, now covered with water. The name is still preserved in Jebel Usdum (Mt. Sodom).
See ARABAH; CITIES OF THE PLAIN; DEAD SEA.
LITERATURE.
Dillmann. Genesis, 111 f; Robinson, BR, II, 187 ff; G. A. Smith, HGHL, 505 ff; Blanckenhorn, ZDPV, XIX, 1896, 53 ff; Baedeker-Socin, Palestine, 143; Buhl, GAP, 117, 271, 274.
George Frederick Wright
Sodom, Vine of
Sodom, Vine of - (gephen cedhom):
"For their vine is of the vine of Sodom,
And of the fields of Gomorrah:
Their grapes are grapes of gall,
Their clusters are bitter" (Deuteronomy 32:32).
This must be distinguished from the "Apples of Sodom" (which see), described by Josephus (BJ, IV, viii, 4), which appear to have been an actual species of fruit, probably either the colocynth or the fruit of the Usher tree, Calotropis procera. It would appear, however, from the above, the only passage referring to the Vine of Sodom, that this expression is metaphorical and does not refer to any particular plant.
E. W. G. Masterman
Sodomite
Sodomite - sod'-om-it (qadhesh, feminine qedheshah): Qadhesh denotes properly a male temple prostitute, one of the class attached to certain sanctuaries of heathen deities, and "consecrated" to the impure rites of their worship. Such gross and degrading practices in Yahweh's land could only be construed as a flagrant outrage; and any association of these with His pure worship was abhorrent (Deuteronomy 23:17 f): The presence of Sodomites is noted as a mark of degeneracy in Rehoboam's time (1 Kings 14:24). Asa endeavored to get rid of them (1 Kings 15:12), and Jehoshaphat routed them out (1 Kings 22:46). Subsequent corruptions opened the way for their return, and Josiah had to break down their houses which were actually "in the house of the Lord" (2 Kings 23:7). The feminine qedheshah is translated "prostitute" in Genesis 38:21-22; Hosea 4:14; in Deuteronomy 23:17 "prostitute" (the King James Version margin "sodomitess," the Revised Version margin transliterates). The English word is, of course, derived from Sodom, the inhabitants of which were in evil repute for unnatural vice.
W. Ewing
Sodomitish; Sea
Sodomitish; Sea - sod'-om-it-ish.
See DEAD SEA.
Sodomy
Sodomy - sod'-o-mi.
See SODOM; SODOMITE;CRIMES ; PUNISHMENTS.
Sojourner
Sojourner - soj'-er-ner, so'-jur-ner, suj'-er-ner.
See STRANGER AND SOJOURNER.
Soldering
Soldering - sod'-er-ing.
See SODERING.
Soldier
Soldier - sol'-jer.
See ARMY.
Solemn Assembly (Meeting)
Solemn Assembly (Meeting) - See CONGREGATION; FASTS AND FEASTS; SOLEMN,SOLEMNITY .
Solemn, Solemnity
Solemn, Solemnity - sol'-em, so-lem'-ni-ti: The word "solemn" had (1) at first the meaning "once in the year," through its derivation from Latin sollus, "whole," annus, "year." As, however, a regular annual occurrence is usually one of particular importance, the word took on (2) the meaning "ceremonious." From this is derived (3) the usual modern force of "grave" in opposition to "joyous." This last meaning is not in Biblical English, and the meanings of "solemn" in English Versions of the Bible are either (1) or (2). Nor is there any certain case of (1), for the word is always a gloss in English Versions of the Bible and, although frequently introduced in references to annual events (Leviticus 23:36, etc.), it is even more often used where "annual" is foreign to the passage (2 Kings 10:20; Psalms 92:3, etc.). The use of the word in the King James Version is unsystematic. It is always (except in Jeremiah 9:2) found in conjunction with "assembly" when (10 times) the latter word represents atsarah ('atsereth) (Leviticus 23:36, etc.) (retained by the Revised Version (British and American) with margin "closing festival," Leviticus 23:36; 2 Chronicles 7:9; Nehemiah 8:18). the King James Version uses "solemnity" or "solemn day," "feast," etc., 17 times for the very common word mo`edh ("appointed" time, etc.).
See FEASTS.
RV's treatment of these passages defies analysis. "Solemnity" is kept in Isaiah 33:20; Ezekiel 46:11, and "solemn" in Lamentations (4 times); Hosea (3 times); Zephaniah 3:18. In Ezekiel 36:38; 45:17; 46:9 it is replaced by "appointed," elsewhere (and for mo'adhoth, 2 Chronicles 8:13) by "set." The margins further complicate the renderings. the King James Version also uses "solemn" with chagh, "feast," 4 times, and with chaghagh, "keep a feast," in Deuteronomy 16:15. The word is dropped by the Revised Version (British and American), except the English Revised Version in Psalms 81:3. Finally, the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) have "solemn sound" for higgayon, in Psalms 92:3. The context, however, demands "resounding melody." And 11 times the Revised Version (British and American) has introduced "solemn" to represent the intensive in the form shabbath shabbathon (Exodus 16:23, etc.), where the King James Version has simply "sabbath" or "sabbath of rest." the Revised Version (British and American) here has imitated the adverbial "solemnly" in the similar intensified expressions in Genesis 43:3; 1 Samuel 8:9.
The Revised Version (British and American) Apocrypha translates en hemerais kairou, "in the days of the season" (Baruch 1:14), by "on the days of the solemn assembly" (the King James Version "solemn days"), and both the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) have "solemn feast days" for dies festos (2 Esdras 1:31). Otherwise the King James Version's use of "solemn" is dropped by the Revised Version (British and American).
Burton Scott Easton
Solomon
Solomon - sol'-o-mun (shelomoh; New Testament Solomon):
I. EARLY LIFE
1. Name and Meaning
2. Sources
3. Birth and Upbringing
4. His Accession
5. Closing Days of David
II. REIGN OF SOLOMON
1. His Vision
2. His Policy
3. Its Results
4. Alliance with Tyre
5. Alliance with Egypt
6. Domestic Troubles
III. HIS BUILDINGS
1. The Temple
2. The Palace
3. Other Buildings
4. The Corvee
IV. HIS CHARACTER
1. Personal Qualities
2. His Wisdom
3. His Learning
4. Trade and Commerce
5. Officers of State
6. Wives
7. Revenues
8. Literary Works
LITERATURE
I. Early Life. Solomon was the son of David and Bath-sheba, and became the 3rd king of Israel.
1. Name and Meaning: He was so named by his mother (2 Samuel 12:24, Qere; see TEXT AND MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT; TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT), but by the prophet Nathan, or by his father (Vulgate), he was called Jedidiah--"loved of Yahweh." The name "Solomon" is derived from the root meaning "to be quiet" or "peaceful," and Solomon was certainly the least warlike of all the kings of Israel or Judah, and in that respect a remarkable contrast to his father (so 1 Chronicles 22:9). His name in Hebrew compares with Irenaeus in Greek, Friedrich in German, and Selim in Arabic; but it has been suggested that the name should be pronounced shillumah, from the word denoting "compensation," Bath-sheba's second son being given in compensation for the loss of the first (but see 3, below).
2. Sources: The oldest sources for the biography of Solomon are doubtless the "Annals of Solomon" referred to in 1 Kings 11:41, the "history of Nathan the prophet," the "prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite" and the "visions of Iddo the seer," mentioned in 2 Chronicles 9:29, all which may be merely the relative sections of the great book of the "Annals of the Kings" from which our Books of Kings and Chronicles are both derived. These ancient works are, of course, lost to us save in so far as they have been embodied in the Old Testament narrative. There the life of South is contained in 2 Samuel 12:24 f; 1 Kings 1:1-53 through 1 Kings 11:1-43; 1 Chronicles 22:1-19 through 2 Chronicles 9:1-31. Of these sources 2 Samuel 12:24 f and 1 Kings 1:1-53; 2:1; are much the oldest and in fact form part of one document, 2 Samuel 9:1-13 through 2 Samuel 20:1-26; 1 Kings 1:1-53; 2:1 dealing with the domestic affairs of David, which may well be contemporary with the events it describes. The date of the composition of the Books of Chronicles is about 300 BC--700 years after the time of Solomon--and the date of the Books of Kings, as a completed work, must, of course, be later than the exile. Nothing of importance is gained from citations from early historians in Josephus and later writers. Far and away the best source for, at least, the inner life of Solomon would be the writings ascribed to him in the Old Testament, could we be sure that these were genuine (see below).
3. Birth and Upbringing: The children of David by Bath-sheba are given in 1 Chronicles 3:5 as Shimea, Shobab, Nathan and Solomon. Compare also 2 Samuel 5:14; 1 Chronicles 14:4, where the same persons evidently are named. It would thus appear that Solomon was the 4th son of Bath-sheba, supposing Shimea to be the child that died. Otherwise Solomon would be the 5th son. There are therefore some events omitted in 2 Samuel 12:24 f, or else the names Shobab and Nathan are remains of some clause which has been lost, and not proper names. Like the heir apparent of a Turkish sultan, Solomon seems to have spent his best years in the seclusion of the harem. There he was doubtless more influenced by his mother than by his father, and in close intimacy with his mother was the prophet Nathan, who had given him his by-name of fortunate import (2 Samuel 12:25).
4. His Accession: It was not until David lay on his deathbed that Solomon left the women's quarters and made his appearance in public. That he had been selected by David, as the son of the favorite wife, to succeed him, is pre-supposed in the instructions which he received from his father regarding the building of the Temple. But as soon as it appeared that the life of David was nearing its end, it became evident that Solomon was not to have a "walk over." He found a rival in Adonijah the son of Haggith, who was apparently the eldest surviving son of his father, and who had the support of Joab, by far the strongest man of all, of Abiathar, the leading, if not the favorite, priest (compare 2 Samuel 15:24 ff), and of the princes of the royal house. Solomon, on the other hand, had the support of his mother Bath-sheba, David s favorite wife, of Nathan the court prophet, of Zadok who had eclipsed Abiathar, of Benaiah, the son of a priest, but one of the three bravest of David's soldiers, and captain of the bodyguard of Cherethites and Pelethites, and of the principal soldiers. It is especially noted that Shimei and Hushai (so Josephus) took no active part at any rate with Adonijah (1 Kings 1:8). The conspiracy came to nothing, for, before it developed, Solomon was anointed at Gibeon (not Gihon, 1 Kings 1:33, 38, 45), and entered Jerusalem as king.
5. Closing Days of David: The age of Solomon at his accession is unknown. The expression in 1 Kings 3:7 is not, of course, to be taken literally (otherwise Ant, VIII, vii, 8). His reign opened, like that of many an oriental monarch, with a settlement in blood of the accounts of the previous reign. Joab, David's nephew, who had brought the house within the bounds of blood revenge, was executed. Adonijah, as soon as his father had breathed his last, was on a nominal charge put to death. Abiathar was relegated to his home at Anathoth (1 Kings 2:26). Conditions were imposed on Shimei which he failed to keep and so forfeited his life (1 Kings 2:36 ff). These steps having been taken, Solomon began his reign, as it were, with a clean slate.
II. Reign of Solomon. 1. His Vision: It was apparently at the very beginning of his reign that Solomon made his famous choice of a "hearing heart," i.e. an obedient heart, in preference to riches or long life. The vision took place at Gibeon (2 Chronicles 1:7, but in 1 Kings 3:4 f the ancient versions read "upon the altar that was in Gibeon. And the Lord appeared," etc.). The life of Solomon was a curious commentary on his early resolution. One of the first acts of his reign was apparently, in the style of the true oriental monarch, to build himself a new palace, that of his father being inadequate for his requirements. In regard to politics, however, the events of Solomon's reign may be regarded as an endorsement of his choice. Under him alone was the kingdom of Israel a great world-power, fit almost to rank beside Assyria and Egypt. Never again were the bounds of Israel so wide; never again were north and south united in one great nation. There is no doubt that the credit of this result is due to the wisdom of Solomon.
2. His Policy: Solomon was by nature an unwarlike person, and his whole policy was in the direction of peace. He disbanded the above-mentioned foreign legion, the Cherethites and Pelethites, who had done such good service as bodyguard to his father. All his officers seem to have been mediocre persons who would not be likely to force his hand, as Joab had done that of David (2 Samuel 3:39). Even the fortification of Jerusalem and of the frontier towns was undertaken with a view to repel attack, not for the purposes of offense. Solomon did, no doubt, strengthen the army, especially the cavalry arm (1 Kings 4:26; 10:26), but he never made any use of this, and perhaps it existed largely on paper. At any rate Solomon seems to have been rather a breeder of and dealer in horse-flesh than a soldier. He appears also to have had a fine collection of armor (1 Kings 10:25), but much of it was made of gold (1 Kings 10:16 f) and was intended for show, not for use. Both in his reputation for wisdom and in his aversion to war Solomon bears a striking resemblance to King James VI of Scotland and I of England, as depicted by the hand of Sir Walter Scott. It was fortunate for him that both the neighboring great powers were for the time in a decadent state, otherwise the history of the kingdom of Israel would have ended almost before it had begun. On the other hand, it has been remarked that if Solomon had had anything like the military genius of David and his enthusiasm for the religion of Yahweh, he might have extended the arms of Israel from the Nile to the Tigris and anticipated the advent of Islam. But his whole idea was to secure himself in peace, to amass wealth and indulge his love of grandeur with more than oriental splendor.
3. Its Results: Solomon, in fact, was living on the achievements and reputation of his father, who laid the basis of security and peace on which the commercial genius of Solomon could raise the magnificent structure which he did. But he took the clay from the foundations in order to build the walls. The Hebrews were a military people and in that consisted their life. Solomon withdrew their energies from their natural bent and turned them to cornmerce, for which they were not yet ripe. Their soul rebelled under the irksome drudgery of an industry of which they did not reap the fruits. Solomon had in fact reduced a free people to slavery, and concentrated the wealth of the whole country in the capital. As soon as he was out of the way, his country subjects threw off the yoke and laid claim to their ancient freedom. His son found himself left with the city and a territory as small as an English county.
4. Alliance with Tyre: Solomon's chief ally was Hiram, the king of Tyre, probably the friend and ally of David, who is to be distinguished from Hiram the artificer of 1 Kings 7:13 ff. Hiram the king entered into a treaty with Solomon which was to the advantage of both parties. Hiram supplied Solomon with cedar and pine wood from Lebanon, as well as with skilled artisans for his building. Tyrian sailors were also drafted into the ships of Solomon, the Hebrews not being used to the sea (1 Kings 9:26 f), besides which Phoenician ships sailed along with those of Solomon. The advantages which Hiram received in return were that the Red Sea was open to his merchantmen, and he also received large supplies of corn and oil from the land of Israel (1 Kings 5:11 corrected by Septuagint and 2 Chronicles 2:10). At the conclusion of the building of the palace and Temple, which occupied 20 years, Solomon presented Hiram with 20 villages (1 Kings 9:11; the converse, 2 Chronicles 8:2), and Hiram made Solomon a return present of gold (1 Kings 9:14; omitted in 2 Chronicles).
5. Alliance with Egypt: Second to Hiram was the Pharaoh of Egypt, whose daughter Solomon married, receiving as her dower the town of Gezer (1 Kings 9:16). This Pharaoh is not named in the Old Testament. This alliance with Egypt led to the introduction of horses into Israel (1 Kings 10:28 f), though David had already made a beginning on a small scale (2 Samuel 8:4). Both these alliances lasted throughout the reign. There is no mention of an alliance with the eastern power, which was then in a decadent state.
6. Domestic Troubles: It was probably nearer the beginning than the end of Solomon's reign that political trouble broke out within the realm. When David had annexed the territory of the Edomites at the cost of the butchery of the male population (compare 2 Samuel 8:14; Psalms 60:1-12, title) one of the young princes of the reigning house effected his escape, and sought and found an asylum in Egypt, where he rose to occupy a high station. No sooner had he heard of the death of David and Joab than he returned to his native country and there stirred up disaffections against Solomon (1 Kings 11:14 ff; see HADAD), without, however, restoring independence to Edom (1 Kings 9:26). A second occasion of disaffection arose through a prophet having foretold that the successor of Solomon would have one of the Israelite tribes only and that the other ten clans would be under Solomon's master of works whom he had set over them. This officer also took refuge in Egypt and was protected by Shishak. He remained there until the death of Solomon (1 Kings 11:26 ff). A third adversary was Rezon who had fled from his master the king of Zobah (1 Kings 11:23), and who established himself at Damascus and rounded a dynasty which was long a thorn in the side of Israel. These domestic troubles are regarded as a consequence of the falling away of Solomon from the path of rectitude, but this seems to be but a kind of anticipative consequence, that is, if it was not till the end of his reign that Solomon fell into idolatry and polytheism (1 Kings 11:4).
III. His Buildings. 1. The Temple: The great undertaking of the reign of Solomon was, of course, The TEMPLE (which see), which was at first probably considered as the Chapel Royal and an adjunct of the palace. The Temple was begun in the 4th year of the reign and finished in the 11th, the work of the building occupying 7« years (1 Kings 6:1-38; 7:13 ff). The delay in beginning is remarkable, if the material were all ready to hand (1 Chronicles 22:1-19). Worship there was inaugurated with fitting ceremony and prayers (1 Kings 8:1-66).
2. The Palace: To Solomon, however, his own palace was perhaps a more interesting undertaking. It at any rate occupied more time, in fact 13 years (1 Kings 7:1-12; 9:10; 2 Chronicles 8:1), the time of building both palace and Temple being 20 years. Possibly the building of the palace occupied the first four years of the reign and was then intermitted and resumed after the completion of the Temple; but of this there is no indication in the text. It was called the House of the Forest of Lebanon from the fact that it was lined with cedar wood (1 Kings 7:2). A description of it is given in 1 Kings 7:1-12.
3. Other Buildings: Solomon also rebuilt the wall of the city and the citadel (see JERUSALEM; MILLO). He likewise erected castles at the vulnerable points of the frontiers--Hazor, Megiddo and Gezer (1 Kings 9:15), lower Beth-horon and BAALATH (which see). According to the Qere of 1 Kings 9:18 and the ancient versions as well as 2 Chronicles 8:4, he was the founder of Tadmor (Palmyra); but the Kethibh of 1 Kings 9:18 reads Tamar (compare Ezekiel 47:19). Some of the remains of buildings recently discovered at Megiddo and Gezer may go back to the time of Solomon.
4. The Corvee: Solomon could not have built on the scale he did with the resources ordinarily at the command of a free ruler. Accordingly we find that one of the institutions fostered by him was the corvee, or forced labor. No doubt something of the kind always had existed (Joshua 9:21) and still exists in all despotic governments. Thus the people of a village will be called on to repair the neighboring roads, especially when the Pasha is making a progress in the neighborhood. But Solomon made the thing permanent and national (1 Kings 5:13-15; 9:15). The immediate purpose of the levy was to supply laborers for work in the Lebanon in connection with his building operations. Thus 30,000 men were raised and drafted, 10,000 at a time, to the Lebanon, where they remained for a month, thus having two months out of every three at home. But even when the immediate cause had ceased, the practice once introduced was kept up and it became one of the chief grievances which levi to the dismemberment of the kingdom (1 Kings 12:18, Adoram = Adoniram; compare 2 Samuel 20:24), for hitherto the corvee had been confined to foreign slaves taken in war (1 Kings 9:21). It is said the higher posts were reserved for Israelites, the laborers being foreigners (1 Kings 9:22), that is, the Israelites acted as foremen. Some of the foreign slaves seem to have formed a guild in connection with the Temple which lasted down to the time of the exile (Ezra 2:55-57; Nehemiah 7:57-59).
See NETHINIM.
IV. His Character. 1. Personal Qualities: In Solomon we have the type of a Turkish sultan, rather than a king of Israel. The Hebrew kings, whether of Israel or Judah, were, in theory at least, elective monarchs like the kings of Poland. If one happened to be a strong ruler, he managed to establish his family it might be, for three or even four generations. In the case of the Judean dynasty the personality of the first king made such a deep impression upon the heart of the people that the question of a change of dynasty there never became pressing. But Solomon would probably have usurped the crown if he had not inherited it, and once on the throne he became a thoroughgoing despot. All political power was taken out of the hands of the sheiks, although outward respect was still paid to them (1 Kings 8:1), and placed in the hands of officers who were simply creatures of Solomon. The resources of the nation were expended, not on works of public utility, but on the personal aggrandizement of the monarch (1 Kings 10:18 ff). In the means he took to gratify his passions he showed himself to be little better than a savage and if he did not commit such great crimes as David, it was perhaps because he had no occasion, or because he employed greater cunning in working out his ends.
2. His Wisdom: The wisdom for which Solomon is so celebrated was not of a very high order; it was nothing more than practical shrewdness, or knowledge of the world and of human nature. The common example of it is that given in 1 Kings 3:16 ff, to which there are innumerable parallels in Indian, Greek and other literatures. The same worldly wisdom lies at the back of the Book of Proverbs, and there is no reason why a collection of these should not have been made by Solomon just as it is more likely that he was a composer of verses than that he was not (1 Kings 4:32). The statement that he had breadth of heart (1 Kings 4:29) indicates that there was nothing known which did not come within his ken.
3. His Learning: The word "wisdom," however, is used also in another connection, namely, in the sense of theoretical knowledge or book leaning, especially in the department of natural history. It is not to be supposed that Solomon had any scientific knowledge of botany or zoology, but he may have collected the facts of observation, a task in which the Oriental, who cannot generalize, excels. The wisdom and understanding (1 Kings 4:29) for which Solomon was famous would consist largely in stories about beasts and trees like the well-known Fables of Pilpai. They included also the "wisdom" for which Egypt was famous (1 Kings 4:30), that is, occult science. It results from this last statement that Solomon appears in post-Biblical and Arabian literature as a magician.
4. Trade and Commerce: Solomon was very literally a merchant prince. He not only encouraged and protected commerce, but engaged in it himself. He was in fact the predominant, if not sole, partner in a great trading concern, which was nothing less than the Israelite nation. One of his enterprises was the horse trade with Egypt. His agents bought up horses which were again sold to the kings of the Hittites and the Arameans. The prices paid are mentioned (1 Kings 10:29). The best of these Solomon no doubt retained for his own cavalry (1 Kings 10:26). Another commodity imported from that country was linen yarn (1 Kings 10:28 the King James Version). The navy which Solomon built at the head of the Gulf of Akaba was not at all for military, but purely commercial ends. They were ships of Tarshish, that is, merchant ships, not ships to Tarshish, as 2 Chronicles 9:21. They traded to OPHIR (which see), from which they brought gold; silver, ivory, apes and peacocks, the round voyage lasting 3 years (1 Kings 9:26 ff; 1 Kings 10:22). Special mention is made of "almug" (1 Kings 10:11) or "algum" (2 Chronicles 9:10 f) trees (which see). The visit of the Queen of Sheba would point to the overland caravan routes from the Yemen being then open (1 Kings 10:15). What with direct imports and the result of sales, silver and cedar wood became very plentiful in the capital (1 Kings 10:27).
5. Officers of State: The list of Solomon's officers of state is given in 1 Kings 4:2 ff. These included a priest, two secretaries, a recorder, a commander-in-chief, a chief commissariat officer, a chief shepherd (if we may read ro`eh for re'eh), a master of the household, and the head of the corvee. The list should be compared with those of David's officers (2 Samuel 8:16 ff; 2 Samuel 20:23 ff). There is much resemblance, but we can see that the machine of state was becoming more complicated. The bodyguard of foreign mercenaries was abolished and the captain Benaiah promoted to be commander-in-chief. Two scribes were required instead of one. Twelve commissariat officers were appointed whose duty it was to forward from their districts the supplies for the royal household and stables. The list of these officials, a very curious one, is given in 1 Kings 4:7 ff. It is to be noted that the 12 districts into which the country was divided did not coincide with the territories of the 12 tribes. It may be remarked that Solomon seems as far as possible to have retained the old servants of his father. It will be noticed also that in all the lists there is mention of more than one priest. These "priests" retained some of their original functions, since they acted as prognosticators and diviners.
6. Wives: Solomon's principal wife was naturally the daughter of Pharaoh; it was for her that his palace was built (1 Kings 3:1; 7:8; 16, 24). But in addition to her he established marriage relations with the neighboring peoples. In some cases the object was no doubt to cement an alliance, as with the Zidonians and Hittites and the other nationalities (1 Kings 11:1), some of which were forbidden to Israelites (Deuteronomy 7:3). It may be that the daughter of Pharaoh was childless or died a considerable time before Solomon, but his favorite wife was latterly a grand-daughter of Nahash, the Ammonite king (1 Kings 14:21 Septuagint), and it was her son who succeeded to the throne. Many of Solomon's wives were no doubt daughters of wealthy or powerful citizens who wished by an alliance with the king to strengthen their own positions. Yet we do not read of his marrying an Israelite wife. According to the Arabian story Bilqis, the Queen of Sheba who visited Solomon (1 Kings 10:1 ff),. was also married to him. He appears to have had only one son; we are not told of any other than Rehoboam. His daughters were married to his own officers (1 Kings 4:11, 15).
7. Revenues: Solomon is said to have started his reign with a capital sum of 100,000 talents of gold and a million talents of silver, a sum greater than the national debt of Great Britain. Even so, this huge sum was ear-marked for the building of the Temple (1 Chronicles 22:14). His income was, for one year, at any rate, 666 talents of gold (1 Kings 10:14), or about twenty million dollars. This seems an immense sum, but it probably was not so much as it looks. The great mass of the people were too poor to have any commodities which they could exchange for gold. Its principal use was for the decoration of buildings. Its purchasing power was probably small, because so few could afford to buy it. It was in the same category as the precious stones which are of great rarity, but which are of no value unless there is a demand for them. In the time of Solomon there was no useful purpose to which gold could be put in preference to any other metal.
8. Literary Works: It is not easy to believe that the age of Solomon, so glorious in other respects, had not a literature to correspond. Yet the reign of the sultan Ismail in Morocco, whom Solomon much resembles, might be cited in favor of such a supposition. Solomon himself is stated to have composed 3,000 animal stories and 1,005 songs (1 Kings 4:32). In the Old Testament the following are ascribed to him: three collections of Proverbs, 1 Kings 1:1 ff; 1 Kings 10:1 ff; 25:1 ff; The Song of Songs; Psalms 72:1-20 and Psalms 127:1-5; Ecclesiastes (although Solomon is not named). In Proverbs 25:1 the men of Hezekiah are said to have copied out the following proverbs.
LITERATURE.
The relative portions of the histories by Ewald, Stanley (who follows Ewald), Renan, Wellhausen and Kittel; also H. Winckler, Alttestamentliche Untersuchungen; and the commentaries on the Books of Kings and Chronicles.
Thomas Hunter Weir
Solomon, Odes of
Solomon, Odes of - See APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE, sec. B, III, 2.
Solomon, Pools of
Solomon, Pools of - See POOLS OF SOLOMON.
Solomon, Psalms (Psalter) of
Solomon, Psalms (Psalter) of - See APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE, sec. B, III, 1.
Solomon, Song of
Solomon, Song of - See SONG OF SONGS.
Solomon, Wisdom of
Solomon, Wisdom of - See WISDOM OF SOLOMON.
Solomon's Porch
Solomon's Porch - See PORCH,PORTICO , SOLOMON'S.
Solomon's Servants
Solomon's Servants - ('adbhedhe shelomoh; douloi Salomon): "The children of Solomon's servants" constituted a company or guild of the Jewish exiles who returned with Zerubbabel from Babylonia to Jerusalem in 537 BC, pursuant to the decree of Cyrus; they are mentioned 5 times (Ezra 2:55, 58 parallel Nehemiah 7:57, 60; 11:3). As the prime purpose of the returning exiles was the rebuilding of the Temple and the restoration of Yahweh's worship (Ezra 1:2-3), it was important that those who held the privileges of sanctuary service as a family heritage should go back to their duties. This included, besides priests and Levites, the NETHINIM (which see) and Solomon's Servants. In every reference to them, Solomon's Servants are connected with the Nethinim, who had been "given" or dedicated (nethinim or nethunim is pass. participle of nathan, "to give," "to appoint") by David "for the service of the Levites (Ezra 8:20); so Solomon's Servants traced their official beginning back to Solomon's appointment, as their name indicates. In the joint references they always fall into the natural chronological order, i.e. following the Nethinim. It is possible, therefore, that they are referred to in Ezra 7:24 also, under the title "servants of this house of God," which immediately follows "Nethinim" in the list of those exempt from taxation and tolls.
What their duties in the house of God may have been is not stated in the records. These must have been more or less menial, the more formal and honorable duties being reserved for "the priests and Levites, the singers, (and) porters" (Ezra 7:24). When the ark was brought to Jerusalem by David and the ceremonial of the sacrificial system was more strictly observed, the services of priests and Levites were greatly increased, and to meet the needs of the new order David appointed the Nethinim (Ezra 8:20; compare 1 Chronicles 9:2). Likewise the much greater increase in such duties on the completion of Solomon's Temple was the occasion for the dedication of an additional number of these assistants to the Levites.
The number of those who returned with Zerubbabel was not great, together with the Nethinim being only 392. This does not appear to have been sufficient for the needs of the sanctuary, since Ezra, in preparation for his expedition in 458 BC, made special appeal for Nethinim to go with him, of whom 220 responded (Ezra 8:15-20). No doubt at the first their service was considered to be lowly; but by the time of the exile, certainly after it, their position had developed into one of considerable honor and constituted them a privileged class in the nation. While many of the people were required by Nehemiah to live in Jerusalem, they were allowed to dwell in their possessions "in the cities of Judah" (Nehemiah 11:3).
A question of some interest and of difference of opinion is whether Solomon's Servants were Levites or non-Israelites. The latter view is the more generally held, for the following reasons; (1) After the completion of the Temple and his other great buildings a large body of workmen, whom Solomon had drafted from the non-Israelite population, were without occupation, and might well have been assigned to the menial duties of the Temple (1 Kings 9:1-28), their name in Septuagint (douloi) properly indicating such a class; (2) Ezekiel excludes non-Israelites from the service of his ideal temple, as though they had been allowed in the preexilic Temple (44:9); (3) they are always clearly distinguished from the Levites in the lists of religious bodies.
But, on the other hand, equally strong arguments favor their Levitical descent: (1) Levites also are called douloi in 1 Esdras; (2) it is more probable that Ezekiel refers to the abuses of Athaliah, Ahaz and Manasseh than to the institutions of David and Solomon; (3) Ezra specifically classifies the Nethinim as Levites (8:15-20); (4) there is not the slightest intimation in the text of 1 Kings 9:15-22 that the Gentilebondservants were assigned to temple-service after completion of the great building operations; such an interpretation is wholly inferential, while, on the contrary, it is more probable that such an innovation would have been mentioned in the narrative; and (5) it is not probable that Ezra and Nehemiah, or Zerubbabel, with their strict views of Israelite privilege (compare Ezra 2:62), would have admitted non-Israelites to sacred functions, the less so in view of Ezekiel's prohibition. There is more ground, then, for holding that Solomon's Servants, like the porters and singers, were an order of Levites.
Edward Mack
Someis
Someis - so'-me-is (Someeis; the King James Version Samis): One of the Israelites, who put away their foreign wives (1 Esdras 9:34) = "Shimei" in Ezra 10:38.
Sometime
Sometime - sum'-tim: In modern English means "occasionally," and is so used in Sirach 37:14 for eniote. Otherwise the word means "at some past time," and is the translation of pote. the Revised Version (British and American) changes to "aforetime" in Wisdom of Solomon 5:3; 1 Peter 3:20; to "once" in Ephesians 2:13; 5:8; to "in time past" in Colossians 1:21; while in Colossians 3:7 the English Revised Version has "aforetime," the American Standard Revised Version "once." the King James Version does not distinguish between "sometime" and "sometimes."
Son of God, The
Son of God, The - (ho huios theou):
1. Use of Title in the Synoptists
2. Meanings in the Old Testament
3. Sense as Applied to Jesus
4. Physical Reason
5. Alleged Equivalence to "Messiah"--Personal Sense Implied
6. Higher Use by Jesus Himself
7. The "Son" in Matthew 11:27
8. The "Son" in Mark 13:32
9. The "Son" in Matthew 28:18-20
10. Apostolic Doctrine: Deity Affirmed
11. The Fourth Gospel: Deity, Preexistence, etc.
LITERATURE
1. Use of Title in the Synoptists: While the title "the Son of man" is always, except once, applied by Jesus to Himself, "the Son of God" is never applied by Jesus to Himself in the Synoptists. When, however, it is applied to Him by others, He accepts it in such a way as to assert His claim to it. Now and then He Himself employs the abbreviated form, "the Son," with the same intention; and He often speaks of God as "the Father" or "my Father" or "my Father who is in heaven" in such a manner as to betray the consciousness that He is the Son of God.
2. Meanings in the Old Testament: While to the common mind "the Son of man" is a title designating the human side of our Lord's person, "the Son of God" seems as obviously to indicate the divine side. But scholarship cannot take this for granted; and, indeed, it requires only a hasty glance at the facts to bring this home even to the general reader, because in Scripture the title is bestowed on a variety of persons for a variety of reasons. First, it is applied to angels, as when in Job 2:1 it is said that "the sons of God came to present themselves before Yahweh"; they may be so called because they are the creatures of God's hands or because, as spiritual beings, they resemble God, who is a spirit. Secondly, in Luke 3:38 it is applied to the first man; and from the parable of the Prodigal Son it may be argued that it is applicable to all men. Thirdly, it is applied to the Hebrew nation, as when, in Exodus 4:22, Yahweh says to Pharaoh, "Israel is my son, my first-born," the reason being that Israel was the object of Yahweh's special love and gracious choice. Fourthly, it is applied to the kings of Israel, as representatives of the chosen nation. Thus, in 2 Samuel 7:14, Yahweh says of Solomon, "I will be his father, and he shall be my son"; and, in Psalms 2:7, the coronation of a king is announced in an oracle from heaven, which says, "Thou art my son; this day have I begotten thee." Finally, in the New Testament, the title is applied to all saints, as in John 1:12, "But as many as received him, to them gave he the right to become children of God, even to them that believe on his name." When the title has such a range of application, it is obvious that the Divinity of Christ cannot be inferred from the mere fact that it is applied to Him.
3. Sense as Applied to Jesus: It is natural to assume that its use in application to Jesus is derived from one or other of its Old Testament uses; and the one almost universally fixed upon by modern scholarship as that from which it was derived is the fourth mentioned above--that to the Jewish kings. Indeed, it is frequently asserted that in the Jewish literature between the Old Testament and the New Testament, it is found already coined as a title for the Messianic king; but the instances quoted by Dalman and others in proof of this are far from satisfactory.
4. Physical Reason: When we come to examine its use in the New Testament as applied by others to Jesus, the facts are far from simple, and it is not applied in a uniform sense. In Luke 1:35, the following reason for its use is given, "The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee: wherefore also the holy thing which is begotten shall be called the Son of God." This is a physical reason, akin to that on account of which the angels or the first man received the title; but it is rather curious that this point of view does not seem to be adopted elsewhere, unless it be in the exclamation of the centurion at the foot of the cross, "Truly this was the Son of God" (Matthew 27:54). As a pagan this soldier might be thinking of Jesus as one of those heroes, born of human mothers but divine fathers, of whom the mythology of his country had so much to tell (compare the margin).
5. Alleged Equivalence to Messiah--Personal Sense Implied:
(1) Baptism, Temptation. It has been contended, not without plausibility, that for Jesus Himself the source of the title may have been the employment of it in the voice from heaven at His Baptism, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased" (Matthew 3:17). By these words, it is usually assumed, He was designated as the Messiah; but in the adjective "beloved," and the words "in whom I am well pleased," there is something personal, beyond the merely official recognition. The same may be said of the voice from heaven in the scene of the Transfiguration. Milton, in Paradise Regained, makes Satan become aware of the voice from heaven at the Baptism; but this is also implied in the terms with which he approached Him in the Temptation in the wilderness, "If thou art the Son of God" (Matthew 4:3, etc.); and, if this was the sense in which the prince of devils made use of the phrase, we may conclude that in the mouths of the demoniacs who hailed Jesus by the same title it must have had the same meaning.
(2) At Caesarea Philippi. When, at Caesarea Philippi, Jesus evoked from the Twelve their great confession, this is given by two of the synoptists in the simple form, "Thou art the Christ" (Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20); but Mt adds, "the Son of the living God" (Matthew 16:16). It is frequently said that Hebrew parallelism compels us to regard these words as a mere equivalent for "Messiah." But this is not the nature of parallelism, which generally includes in the second of the parallel terms something in excess of what is expressed in the first; it would be quite in accordance with the nature of parallelism if the second term supplied the reason for the first. That is to say, Jesus was the Messiah because He was the Son of God.
(3) Trial before Sanhedrin. There is another passage where it is frequently contended that "the Christ" and "the Son of God" must be exactly parallel, but a close examination suggests the reverse. In the account of the ecclesiastical trial in the Gospel of Lk, He is charged, "If thou art the Christ, tell us"; and, when He replies, "If I tell you, ye will not believe: and if I ask you, ye will not answer. But from henceforth shall the Son of man be seated at the right hand of the power of God," they all say, "Art thou then the Son of God?" and, when He replies in the affirmative, they require no further witness (Luke 22:67-71), Matthew informing us that the high priest hereupon rent his garments, and they all agreed that He had spoken blasphemy and was worthy of death (Matthew 26:65 f). The usual assumption is that the second question, "Art thou .... the Son of God?" implies no more than the first, `Art thou the Christ?'; but is not the scene much more intelligible if the boldness of His answer to the first question suggested that He was making a still higher claim than to be the Christ, and that their second question applied to this? It was when Jesus affirmed this also that their angry astonishment knew no bounds, and their sentence was immediate and capital. It may be questioned whether it was blasphemy merely to claim to be the Messiah; but it was rank and undeniable blasphemy to claim to be the Son of God. This recalls the statement in John 5:18, "The Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only brake the sabbath, but also called God his own Father, making himself equal with God"; to which may be added (John 10:33), "The Jews answered him, For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God."
6. Higher Use by Jesus Himself: Naturally it is with the words of Jesus Himself on this subject that we are most concerned. He speaks of God as His Father, and to the disciples He speaks of God as their Father; but He never speaks to them of God as their common Father: what He says is, "My Father and your Father" (John 20:17). H. J. Holtzmann and others have attempted to make light of this, and even to speak of the opening words of the Lord's Prayer, "Our Father who art in heaven," as if Jesus might have uttered them in company with the disciples; but the distinction is a vital one, and we do not agree with those who can believe that Jesus could have uttered, for Himself along with others, the whole of the Lord's Prayer, including the petition, "Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors."
7. The "Son" in Matthew 11:27: Of the passages in the Synoptists where Jesus speaks about God as "the Father" and Himself as "the Son," a peculiar solemnity attaches to Matthew 11:27 parallel Luke 10:22, "All things have been delivered unto me of my Father: and no one knoweth the Son, save the Father; neither doth any know the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son willeth to reveal him." There is a Johannine flavor in these words, and they reveal an intimacy of the Son with the Father, as well as a power over all things, which could not have been conferred by mere official appointment, unless there had been in the background a natural position warranting the official standing. Not infrequently has the word "Messianic" been allowed by scholars to blind them to the most obvious facts. The conferring of an office on a mere man could not enable him to do things beyond the reach of human powers; yet it is frequently assumed that, if only Jesus was Messiah, He was able for anything, even when the thing in question is something for which a mere man is wholly incompetent.
8. The "Son" in Mark 13:32: There is a saying of Jesus (Mark 13:32) about His own Sonship which may seem to refute the church doctrine on the subject, as in it He confesses ignorance of the date of His Second Coming: "Of that day or that hour knoweth no one, not even the angels in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father." Yet, while there is much in this passage fitted to produce sane and sober views as to the real manhood of Jesus, there are few sayings of His that betray a stronger consciousness of His being more than man. Four planes of being and of knowledge are specified--that of men, that of angels, that of Himself, and that of God. Evidently the Son is above not only men but angels, and, if it is confessed that He is ignorant of anything, this is mentioned as a matter of surprise.
9. The "Son" in Matthew 28:18-20: The conclusion would seem to be that He is a being intermediate between the angels and God; but this impression is corrected by the greatest of all the sayings in which He calls Himself the Son (Matthew 28:18-20), "All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth. Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." Here the Son is named along with the Father and the Holy Spirit in a way suggesting the equality of all three, an act of worship being directed to them jointly. By those who disbelieve in the Deity of Christ, the most strenuous attempts have been made to get rid of this passage, and in certain quarters it is taken for granted that it must have been an addition to the text of this Gospel. But for this there is no ground whatever; the passage is the climax of the Gospel in which it occurs, in the same way as the confession of Thomas is the climax of the Gospel of Jn; and to remove it would be an intolerable mutilation. Of course to those who disbelieve in the bodily resurrection of our Lord, this has no more substance than the other details of the Forty Days; but to those who believe in His risen glory the words appear to suit the circumstances, their greatness being congruous with the entire representation of the New Testament.
10. Apostolic Doctrine: Deity Affirmed: Indeed, it is the Son of God, as He appears in this final scene in the First Gospel, who dominates the rest of the New Testament. Thus, in Acts 9:20, the beginning of Paul's testimony as a Christian is given in these words, "And straightway in the synagogues he proclaimed Jesus, that he is the Son of God"; and what this meant to Paul may be gathered from his own statement in the opening of Romans, "Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, which he promised afore through his prophets in the holy scriptures, concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, who was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness by the resurrection from the dead; even Jesus Christ our Lord" (Romans 1:1-4). In He the equality of the Son with the Father is theme throughout the entire book; and in Revelation 2:18, "the Son of God, who hath his eyes like a flame of fire," speaks from the right hand of power to the church.
On this subject there was no division of opinion in the apostolic church. On many other questions the followers of Jesus were divided; but on this one they were unanimous. For this the authority of Paul is often assumed to be responsible; but there was a prior and higher authority. This was the self-testimony of Jesus in the Gospel of John. Though this may not have been put in literary form till all the other books of the New Testament had been completed, it was active and influential in the church all the time, affecting Paul and the other New Testament writers.
11. The Fourth Gospel: Deity, Preexistence, etc.: There is no real disharmony between the expression of our Lord's self-consciousness in the Synoptists and that in John; only in the latter it is far ampler and more distinct. Here Jesus is not only called "the Son of God" by others, but applies the title to Himself in its full shape, as well as in the abbreviated form of "the Son." He further calls Himself the "only begotten Son of God" (3:16,18), that is to say, He is Son in a sense in which no others can claim the title. This seems expressly to contradict the statement, so often made, that He makes others sons of God in the same sense as Himself, or that His Sonship is ethical, not metaphysical. No doubt it is ethical--that is to say, He is like the Father in feeling, mind and will--but it does not follow that it is not at the same time metaphysical. In fact, the perfection of ethical unity depends upon that which is metaphysical. Between a dog and a man there may be deep sympathy, yet it is limited by the difference of their natures; whereas between a woman and a man there is perfect sympathy, because they are identical in nature.
Another feature of Sonship in the Fourth Gospel is preexistence, though, strange to say, this is more than once connected with the title "Son of man." But the strongest and most frequent suggestions as to what is implied in Sonship are to be found in the deeds attributed to the Son; for these are far beyond the competence of any mere man. Thus, He executes judgment (John 5:22); He has life in Himself and quickeneth whom He will (John 5:26, 21); He gives eternal life (John 10:10), and it is the will of the Father that all men should honor the Son, even as they do the Father (John 5:23). Nevertheless, the Son does nothing of Himself, but only what He hath seen the Father do (John 5:19); and only that which He hath heard of the Father does He speak (John 14:10). In short, God is not only His Father, but His God (John 20:17). To statements such as these a merely official Sonship is not adequate; the relation must be ethical and metaphysical as well; and to a perfect Sonship all three elements are essential.
LITERATURE.
See the books on the Theology of the New Testament by Weiss, Beyschlag, Holtzmann, Feine, Schlatter, Weinel, Bovon, Stevens, Sheldon; and on the Teaching of Jesus by Bruce, Wendt, Dalman; Gore, The Incarnation of the Son of God, Bampton Lectures, 1891, and Dissertations on Subjects Connected with the Incarnation; Robertson, Teaching of Jesus concerning God the Father; full bibliography in Stalker, Christ's Teaching concerning Himself.
James Stalker
Son of Man, The
Son of Man, The - (ho huios tou anthropou) :
1. Use in the New Testament: Self-Designation of Jesus
2. Questions as to Meaning
I. SOURCE OF THE TITLE
1. The Phrase in the Old Testament--Psalms, Ezekiel, Daniel
2. "Son of Man" in Daniel 7--New Testament Allusions
3. Expressive of Messianic Idea
4. Post-canonical Literature: Book of Enoch
II. WHY JESUS MADE USE OF THE TITLE
1. Consciousness of Being the Messiah
2. Half Concealed, Yet Half Revealed His Secret
3. Expressive of Identification with Men in Sympathy, Fortunes and Destiny
4. Speculations (Lietzmann, Wellhausen, etc.) on Aramaic Meaning: These Rejected (Dalman, etc.)
LITERATURE
1. Use in New Testament: Self-Designation of Jesus:
This is the favorite self-designation of Jesus in the Gospels. In Matthew it occurs over 30 times, in Mark 15:1-47 times, in Luke - 25 times, and in John a dozen times. It is always in the mouth of Jesus Himself that it occurs, except once, when the bystanders ask what He means by the title (John 12:34). Outside the Gospels, it occurs only once in Acts, in Stephen's speech (Acts 7:56), and twice in the Book of Revelation (Acts 1:13; 14:14).
2. Questions as to Meaning: At first sight it appears so apt a term for the human element in our Lord's person, the divine element being similarly denoted by "the Son of God," that this was supposed to be its meaning, as it still is by the common man at the present day. As long as it was assumed that the meaning could be elicited by merely looking at the words as they stand and guessing what they must signify, this was substantially the view of all, although this common conception went in two directions--some noting especially the loftier and more ideal elements in the conception, while others emphasized what was lowly and painful in the human lot; and both could appeal to texts in support of their view. Thus, the view "that Christ by this phrase represented Himself as the head, the type, the ideal of the race" (Stanton, The Jewish and the Christian Messiah), could appeal to such a saying as, "The Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath" (Mark 2:28); while the humbler view could quote such a saying as, "The foxes have holes, and the birds of the heaven have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head" (Matthew 8:20).
The more scientific investigation of the phrase began, however, when it was inquired, first, what the source was from which Jesus derived this title, and, secondly, why He made use of it.
I. Source of the Title. 1. The Phrase in the Old Testament--Psalms, Ezekiel, Daniel:
That the phrase was not one of Jesus' own invention is manifest, because it occurs often in the Old Testament.
Thus, in Psalms 8:4 it is used as an equivalent for "man" in the parallel lines,
"What is man, that thou art mindful of him?
And the son of man, that thou visitest him ?"
This passage has sometimes been regarded as the source whence Jesus borrowed the title; and for this a good deal might be said, the psalm being an incomparable exposition both of the lowliness and the loftiness of human nature. But there is another passage in the Psalms from which it is far from incredible that it may have been derived: in Psalms 80:17 occur the words,
"Let thy hand be upon the man of thy right hand,
Upon the son of man whom thou maddest strong for thyself."
This is an appeal, in an age of national decline, for the raising up of a hero to redeem Israel; and it might well have kindled the spark of Messianic consciousness in the heart of the youthful Jesus.
There is a book of the Old Testament in which the phrase "the son of man" occurs no fewer than 90 times. This is the Book of Ezekiel, where it is always applied to the prophet himself and designates his prophetic mission. In the words of Nosgen (Christus der Menschenund Gotlessohn): "It expresses the contrast between what Ezekiel is in himself and what God will make out of him, and to make his mission appear to him not as his own, but as the work of God, and thus to lift him up, whenever the flesh threatens to faint and fail." Thus there was one before Jesus of Nazareth who bore the title, at least in certain moments of his life; and, after Ezekiel, there arose another Hebrew prophet who has put on record that he was addressed from the same high quarter in the same terms; for, in Daniel 8:17, it is written, "So he came near where I stood; and when he came, I was affrighted, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man"--words then following intended to raise the spirit of the trembling servant of God. By Weizsacker and others the suggestion has been made that Jesus may have borrowed the term from Ezekiel and Daniel to express His consciousness of belonging to the same prophetic line.
2. "Son of Man" in Daniel 7:1-28--New Testament Allusions:
There is, however, in the same Book of Daniel another occurrence of the phrase, in a totally different sense, to which the attention of science is more and more being drawn. In 7:3 ff, in one of the apocalyptic visions common to this prophet, four beasts are seen coming out of the sea--the first a lion with eagle's wings, the second a bear, the third a fourheaded leopard, and the fourth a terrible monster with ten heads. These beasts bear rule over the earth; but at last the kingdom is taken away from them and given to a fifth ruler, who is thus described, "I saw in the night-visions, and, behold, there came with the clouds of heaven one like unto a son of man, and he came even to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations, and languages should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed" (Daniel 7:13-14). Compare with these words from Dan the words of Jesus to the high priest during His trial, "Henceforth ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven" (Matthew 26:64), and the echo of the Old Testament words cannot be mistaken. Equally distinct is it in the great discourse in Matthew 24:30, "Then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory."
3. Expressive of Messianic Idea: The use of this self-designation by Jesus is especially frequent and striking in passages referring to His future coming to judgment, in which there is necessarily a certain resemblance to the apocalyptic scene in Daniel. In such utterances the Messianic consciousness of Jesus is most emphatically expressed; and the passage in Daniel is also obviously Messianic. In another considerable series of passages in which this phrase is used by Jesus, the references are to His sufferings and death; but the assumption which explains these also most easily is that they are Messianic too; Jesus is speaking of the fortunes to which He must submit on account of His vocation. Even the more dignified passages, expressive of ideality, are best explained in the same way. In short, every passage where the phrase occurs is best understood from this point of view, whereas, from any other point of view, not a few appear awkward and out of place. How little, for example, does the idea that the phrase is expressive of lowliness or of brotherhood with suffering humanity accord with the opening of the judgment-scene in Matthew 25:31, "But when the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the angels with him, then shall he sit on the throne of his glory"!
4. Post-canonical Literature: Book of Enoch: The son of man, or rather "one like unto a son of man" mentioned in Daniel, is primarily the Hebrew people, as is expressly noted in the prophecy itself; but Jesus must have looked upon Himself as the representative of the people of God, in the same way as, in the Old Testament generally, the reigning sovereign was regarded as the representative of the nation. But the question has been raised whether this transference of the title from a collective body to an individual may have been mediated for Him through postcanonical religious literature or the prevalence among the people of ideas generated through this literature. In the Book of Enoch there occur numerous references to the son of man, which bear a remarkable resemblance to some of the sayings of Jesus. The date usually assigned to this production is some 200 years BC; and, if these passages in it actually existed as early as this, the book would almost require to be included in the canonical Scriptures, though for other reasons it is far from worthy of any such honor. The whole structure of the Book of Enoch is so loose and confused that it must always have invited interpolation; and interpolations in it are recognized as numerous. The probability, therefore, is that the passages referring to the son of man are of later date and of Christian origin.
II. Why Jesus Made Use of the Title. The conclusion that this title expresses, not the personal qualities of Jesus as a man, but His functions as Messiah, may be disappointing; but there is a way of recovering what seems to have been lost; because we must now inquire for what reasons He made use of this term.
1. Consciousness of Being the Messiah: The first reason, of course, is, that in Daniel it expressed Messiahship, and that Jesus was conscions of being the Messiah. In the Old Testament He was wont all His days to read His own history. He ranged over all the sacred books and found in them references to His own person and work. With divinatory glance He pierced into the secrets of Scripture and brought forth from the least as well as the best-known portions of the ancient oracles meanings which are now palpable to all readers of the Bible, but which He was the first to discover. From the passage in Daniel, or from some other passage of the Old Testament in which the phrase "the son of man" occurs, a hint flashed out upon Him, as He read or heard; and the suggestion grew in His brooding mind, until it rounded itself into the fit and satisfying expression for one side of His self-consciousness.
2. Half Concealed, Yet Half Revealed His Secret: Another reason why He fixed upon this as His favorite self-designation may have been that it half concealed as well as half revealed His secret. Of the direct names for the Messiah He was usually shy, no doubt chiefly because His contemporaries were not prepared for an open declaration of Himself in this character; but at all stages of His ministry He called Himself the Son of man without hesitation. The inference seems to be, that, while the phrase expressed much to Himself, and must have meant more and more for those immediately associated with Him, it did not convey a Messianic claim to the public ear. With this accords well the perplexity once manifested by those listening to Him, when they asked, "Who is this Son of man?" (John 12:34); as it also explains the question of Jesus to the Twelve at Caesarea Philippi, "Who do men say that the Son of man is?" or, as it is in the margin, "that I the Son of man am?" (Matthew 16:13). That He was the Son of man did not evidently mean for all that He claimed to be the Messiah.
3. Expressive of Identification with Men in Sympathy, Fortunes and Destiny:
But when we try to realize for what reasons Jesus may have picked this name out from all which presented themselves to Him in His intimate and loving survey of the Old Testament, it is difficult to resist the belief that a third and the principal reason was because it gave expression to His sense of connection with all men in sympathy, fortunes and destiny. He felt Himself to be identified with all as their brother, their fellow-sufferer, their representative and champion; and, in some respects, the deepest word He ever spake was, "For the Son of man also came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many" (Mark 10:45 parallel).
4. Speculations (Lietzmann, Wellhausen, etc.) on Aramaic Meaning: These Rejected (Dalman, etc.):
In 1896, Hans Lietzmann, a young German scholar, startled the learned World with a speculation on the "Son of man." Making the assumption that Aramaic was the language spoken by Jesus, he contended that Jesus could not have applied to Himself the Messianic title, because there is nothing corresponding with it in Aramaic. The only term approximating to it is barnash, which means something very vague, like "anyone" or "everyman" (in the sense of the old morality play thus entitled). Many supposed Lietzmann to be arguing that Jesus had called Himself Anyone or Everyman; but this was not his intention. He tried to prove that the Messianic title had been applied to Jesus in Asia Minor in the first half of the 2nd century and that the Gospels had been revised with the effect of substituting it for the first personal pronoun. But he failed to show how the manuscripts could have been so universally altered as to leave no traces of this operation, or how, if the text of the New Testament was then in so fluid a state as to admit of such a substitution, the phrase should not have overflowed into other books besides the Gospels. Although the hypothesis has secured wide attention through being partially adopted by Wellhausen, whose view is to be found in Skizzen und Vorarbeiten, VI, and at p. 66 of his Commentary on Mark, it may be reckoned among the ghosts which appear for an hour on the stage of learning, attracting attention and admiration, but have no permanent connection with the world of reality. Dalman, the leading authority on Aramaic, denies the foundation on which the views of both Lietzmann and Wellhausen rest, and holds that, had the Messianic title existed, the Aramaic language would have been quite capable of expressing it. And in 1911 Wellhausen himself explicitly admitted this (Einleitung in die drei eraten Evangelien(2), 130).
LITERATURE.
See the books on New Testament Theology by Weiss, Beyschlag, Holtzmann, Feine, Schlatter, Weinel, Stevens, Sheldon; and on the Teaching of Jesus by Wentit, Bruce, Dalman; Abbott, The Son of Man, 1910; very full bibliography in Stalker, The Teaching of Jesus concerning Himself.
James Stalker
Son; Sons
Son; Sons - sun, sunz: (1) In Biblical language the word "son" is used first of all in its strictly literal sense of male issue or offspring of a man or woman. In a few cases in the Old Testament, as in Genesis 3:16; Joshua 17:2; Jeremiah 20:15, the Hebrew word ben, is translated correctly in the English by the word "child" or "children" as it includes both sexes, as in Genesis 3:16, or is limited to males by the use of the modifying term "male." Closely connected with this meaning of direct male issue or of children is its use to denote descendants, posterity in the more general sense. This usage which, as in the case of the sons (children) of Israel, may be regarded perhaps as originating in the conception of direct descent from the common ancestor Israel, came in the course of time to be a mere ethnographic designation, so that the term "the children of Israel" and "the children of Ammon" meant no more than Israelites or Ammonites, that is, inhabitants of the lands of Israel or Ammon respectively. An extension of this usage is to be found in the designation of a people as the sons or children of a land or city; so in Amos 9:7 "children of the Ethiopians," or Ezekiel 16:28, where the literal rendering would be "sons of Asshur," instead of the Assyrians, and "the children of Jerus" in Joel 3:6.
(2) More characteristic of Biblical usage is the employment of the word "son" to indicate membership in a class or guild, as in the common phrase "sons of the prophets," which implies nothing whatever as to the ancestry, but states that the individuals concerned are members of the prophetic guilds or schools. In the New Testament the word "sons" (huioi) in Luke 11:19, rendered "children" in Matthew 12:27 the King James Version, means, not physical descendants, but members of the class or sect; according to Mt the Pharisees, who were attacking Christ.
(3) The word "son" is used with a following genitive of quality to indicate some characteristic of the person or persons described. In the English the word "son" is usually omitted and the phrase is paraphrased as in 2 Samuel 3:34, where the words translated "wicked men" in the King James Version mean literally, sons or children of wickedness. Two examples of this usage may be cited: the familiar phrase "sons of Belial" in the Old Testament (Deuteronomy 15:13 the King James Version, and often), where the meaning is simply base or worthless fellows (compare Numbers 24:17, margin "children of Sheth" (Expository Times, XIII, 64b)); and in the New Testament the phrase "sons of thunder," which is given in Mark 3:17 as the explanation of the epithet "Boanerges." This use is common in the New Testament, as the phrases "children of the kingdom," "children of light," etc., indicate, the general meaning being that the noun in the genitive following the word children indicates some quality of the persons under consideration. The special phrases "Son of man" and "Son of God" are considered in separate articles.
See also RELATIONSHIPS, FAMILY.
Walter R. Betteridge
Song
Song - (shir, shirah): Besides the great collection of sacred songs contained in the Psalter, as well as the lyric outbursts, marked by strong religious feeling, on great national occasions, it is natural to believe, and we have evidence to show, that the Hebrews possessed a large number of popular songs of a secular kind. Song of Songs (which see) of itself proves this. Probably the very oldest song or fragment of song in the Old Testament is that "To the well" (Numbers 21:17).
W. R. Smith (Religions of the Semites, 167) regards this invocation of the waters to rise as in its origin hardly a mere poetic figure. He compares what Cazwini 1, 189, records of the well of Ilabistan: "When the water failed, a feast was held at its source with music and dancing, to induce it to flow again." If, however, the song had its origin in an early form of religious belief, it must have been secularized later.
But it is in the headings of the Psalms that we find the most numerous traces of the popular songs of the Hebrews. Here there are a number of words and phrases which are now believed to be the names or initial words of such lyrics. In the King James Version they are prefaced with the prep. "on," in the Revised Version (British and American) with "set to," i.e. "to the tune of." We give a list: (1) Aijeleth Shahar the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) Aijeleth hash-shahar, 'ayyeleth ha-shachar. The title means (Revised Version, margin) "The hind of the morning," but whether the original song so named was a hunting song or a morning serenade it is useless to conjecture. See HIND OF THE MORNING. (2) Al-taschith (the King James Version), Al-tashheth (Revised Version), 'al-tashcheth, i.e. "Destroy not," Psalms 57:1-11 through Psalms 59:1-17; Psalms 75:1-10, is apparently quoted in Isaiah 65:8, and in that case must refer to a vintage song. (3) Jonah elem rehokim or Yonath'elem rechoqim (Psalms 56:1-13), the Revised Version margin "The silent dove of them that are afar off," or--with a slightly different reading--"The dove of the distant terebinths." (4) Machalath (Psalms 53:1-6) and Machalath le`annoth (Psalms 88:1-18). Machalath may mean "sickness," and be the first word of a song. It might mean, on the other hand, a minor mode or rhythm. It has also been held to designate a musical instrument. (5) Muthlabben (Psalms 9:1-20) has given rise to many conjectures. Literally, it may mean "Die for the son," or "Death of the son." An ancient tradition referred the words to Goliath (death at the hand of the son [?]), and they have been applied to the fate of Absalom. Such guesses need only be quoted to show their worthlessness. (6) Lastly, we have Shoshannim = "Lilies" (Psalms 45:1-17; Psalms 69:1-36), Shushan `Edhuth = "The lily of testimony" (Psalms 60:1-12); and Shoshannim `Edhuth = "Lilies, a testimony" (Psalms 80:1-19), probably to be explained like the others.
The music to which these songs were sung is irretrievably lost, but it was, no doubt, very similar in character to that of the Arabs at the present day. While the music of the temple was probably much more elaborate, and of wider range, both in notes and expression of feeling, the popular song was almost certainly limited in compass to a very few notes repeated over and over in long recitations or ballads. This is characteristic of the performances of Arab minstrels of today. The melodies are plaintive, in spite of the majority of them being in major keys, owing to the 7th being flattened, as in genuine Scottish music. Arabic music, further, is marked by great variety and emphasis of rhythm, the various kinds of which have special names.
See SPIRITUAL SONGS.
James Millar
Song of Songs
Song of Songs - (shir hashirim; Septuagint Asma; Codices Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Ephraemi, Asma asmaton; Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) Canticum Canticorum):
I. CANONICITY
II. TEXT
III. AUTHORSHIP AND DATE
IV. HISTORY OF INTERPRETATION
1. The Allegorical Interpretation
2. The Typical Interpretation
3. The Literal Interpretation
V. CLOSING HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS
LITERATURE
The full title in Hebrew is "The Song of Songs, which is Solomon's." The book is called by some Canticles, and by others Solomon's Song. The Hebrew title implies that it is the choicest of all songs, in keeping with the dictum of Rabbi `Aqiba (90-135 AD) that "the entire world, from the beginning until now, does not outweigh the day in which Canticles was given to Israel."
I. Canonicity. Early Jewish and Christian writers are silent as to the Song of Songs. No use is made of it by Philo. There is no quotation from it in the New Testament, nor is there any clear allusion to it on the part of our Lord or the apostles. The earliest distinct references to the Song of Songs are found in Jewish writings of the 1st and 2nd centuries AD (4 Esdras 5:24,26; 7:26; Ta`anith 4:8). The question of the canonicity of the Song was debated as late as the Synod of Jamnia (circa 90 AD), when it was decided that Canticles was rightly reckoned to "defile the hands," i.e. was an inspired book. It should be borne in mind that the Song of Songs was already esteemed by the Jews as a sacred book, though prior to the Synod of Jamnia there was probably a goodly number of Jewish teachers who did not accept it as canonical. Selections from Canticles were sung at certain festivals in the temple at Jerusalem, prior to its destruction by Titus in 70 AD (Ta`anith 4:8). The Mishna pronounces an anathema on all who treat Canticles as a secular song (Sanhedhrin, 101a). The latest date for the composition of the Song of Songs, according to critics of the advanced school, is toward the close of the 3rd century BC. We may be sure that it was included in the Kethubhim before the ministry of our Lord, and so was for Him a part of the Scriptures.
II. Text. Most scholars regard the text of Canticles as comparatively free from corruption. Gratz, Bickell, Budde and Cheyne have suggested a good many emendations of the traditional text, a few of which commend themselves as probable corrections of a faulty text, but most of which are mere guesses without sufficient confirmation from either external or internal evidence. For details see Budde's able commentary, and articles by Cheyne inJQR and Expository Times for 1898-99 and in the The Expositor, February, 1899.
III. Authorship and Date. The title in the Hebrew text ascribes the poem to Solomon. That this superscription was prefixed by an editor of Canticles and not by the original writer is evident from the fact that the relative pronoun employed in the title is different from that employed throughout the poem. The beauty and power of the book seemed to later students and editors to make the writing worthy of the gifted king, whose fame as a composer of both proverbs and songs was handed on to later times (1 Kings 4:32). Moreover, the name of Solomon is prominent in the Song of Songs itself (1 Kings 1:5; 7, 9, 11; 8:11 f). If the traditional view that Solomon wooed and won the Shulammite be true, the Solomonic authorship may even yet be defended, though the linguistic argument for a later date is quite strong.
The question in debate among recent critics is whether the Song was composed in North Israel in preexilic days, or whether it is post-exilic. The author is at home in Hebrew. His vocabulary is extensive, and the movement of the poem is graceful. There is no suggestion of the use of lexicon and grammar by a writer living in the period of the decadence of the Hebrew language. The author is familiar with cities and mountains all over Palestine, especially in the northern section. He speaks of the beauty of Tirzah, the capital of North Israel in the 10th century BC, along with the glory of Jerusalem, the capital of Judah (Song of Solomon 6:4). The recollection of Solomon's glory and pomp seems to be fresh in the mind of the writer and his contemporaries. W.R. Smith regarded Canticles as a protest against the luxury and the extensive harem of Solomon. True love could not exist in such an environment. The fidelity of the Shulammite to her shepherd lover, notwithstanding the blandishments of the wealthy and gifted king, stands as a rebuke to the notion that every woman has her price. Driver seems inclined to accept a preexilic date, though the arguments from vocabulary and philology cause him to waver in his opinion (LOT, 8th edition, 450). An increasing number of critics place the composition of Canticles in the post-exilic period, many bringing it down into the Greek period. Among scholars who date Canticles in the 3rd century BC we may name Gratz, Kuenen, Cornill, Budde, Kautzsch, Martineau and Cheyne. The chief argument for bringing the Song into the time of the early Ptolemies is drawn from the language of the poem. There are many Hebrew words that are employed elsewhere only in later books of the Old Testament; the word pardec (Song of Solomon 4:13) is a Persian loan-word for "park"; the word for "palanquin" may be Indian, or possibly Greek. Moreover, the form of the relative pronoun is uniformly that which is found in some of the latest books of the Old Testament. The influence of Aramaic is apparent, both in the vocabulary and in a few constructions. This may be accounted for on theory of the northern origin of the Song, or on the hypothesis of a post-exilic date. The question of date is still open.
IV. History of Interpretation. 1. The Allegorical Interpretation: All interpreters of all ages agree in saying that Canticles is a poem of love; but who the lovers are is a subject of keen debate, especially in modern times.
First in point of time and in the number of adherents it has had is theory that the Song is a pure allegory of the love of Yahweh and His people. The Jewish rabbis, from the latter part of the 1st century AD down to our own day, taught that the poem celebrates a spiritual love, Yahweh being the bridegroom and Israel the bride. Canticles was supposed to be a vivid record of the loving intercourse between Israel and her Lord from the exodus on to the glad Messianic time. The Song is read by the Jews at Passover, which celebrates Yahweh's choice of Israel to be His spouse. The Targum interprets Canticles as an allegory of the marital love of Yahweh and Israel. Origen made the allegorical theory popular in the early church. As a Christian he represented the bride as the church or the soul of the believer. In more recent centuries the Christian allegorical interpreters have favored the idea that the soul of the believer was the bride, though the other type of the allegorical view has all along had its advocates.
Bernard of Clairvaux wrote 86 sermons on the first two chapters of Canticles; and a host of writers in the Roman church and among Protestants have composed similar mystical treatises on the Song. Devout souls have expressed their fervent love to God in the sensuous imagery of Canticles. The imagery could not become too fervid or ecstatic for some of these devout men and women in their highest moments of beatific vision. Whatever may be the final verdict of sane criticism as to the original purpose of the author of the Song, it is a fact that must not be overlooked by the student of Canticles that some of the noblest religious souls, both Hebrew and Christian, have fed the flame of devotion by interpreting the Song as an allegory.
What justification is there for theory that Canticles is an allegory of the love between Yahweh and His people, or of the love of Christ and the church, or of the love of the soul of the believer and Christ? It must be frankly confessed that there is not a hint in the Song itself that it is an allegory. If the modern reader of Canticles had never heard of the allegorical interpretation, nothing in the beginning, middle or end of the poem would be likely to suggest to his mind such a conception of the poet's meaning. How, then, did the early Jewish interpreters come to make this the orthodox interpretation of the Song? The question is not easy to answer. In the forefront of our answer we must recall the fact that the great prophets frequently represent the mutual love of Yahweh and Israel under the symbolism of marriage (Hosea 1:1-11 through Hosea 3:1-5; Jeremiah 3:1-25; Ezekiel 16:1-63; Ezekiel 23:1-49; Isaiah 50:1; Isaiah 54:5-6). The Hebrew interpreter might naturally expect to find some echo of this bold imagery in the poetry of the Kethubhim. In the Torah the frequent command to love Yahweh might suggest the marital relation as well as that of the father and son (Deuteronomy 6:5; Deuteronomy 7:7-9, 13; 12, 15; 16, 20), though it must be said that the language of Dt suggests the high ethical and religious teaching of Jesus in the matter of love to God, in which the sexual does not appear.
Cheyne suggests (EB, I, 683 f) that the Song was too joyous to be used, in its natural sense, by the Jews after the destruction of Jerusalem, and hence, they consecrated it by allegorical interpretation. The suggestion may contain an element of truth.
It is an interesting fact that the Psalter has so few expressions in which love to Yahweh is expressed (Psalms 31:23; 97:10; 145:20; compare Psalms 18:1; 42:1; 63:1). In this manual of devotion one would not be suprised to find the expansion of the image of wedlock as expressive of the soul's relation to God; but we look in vain for such a poem, unless Psalms 45:1-17 be capable of allegorical interpretation. Even that beautiful song of love and marriage contains no such highly sensuous imagery as is found in Canticles.
Christian scholars found it easy to follow the Jewish allegorical interpreters; for the figure of wedlock is employed in the New Testament by both Paul and John to represent the intimate and vital union of Christ and His church (2 Corinthians 11:2; Ephesians 5:22-33; Revelation 19:7-9; 2, 9 ff).
The entire body of true believers is conceived of as the bride of Christ. Naturally the purity of the church is sullied through the impure conduct of the individuals of whom it is composed. Hence, the appeal to individuals and to local churches to live pure lives (2 Corinthians 11:1). To the unmarried believer the Lord Jesus takes the place of the husband or wife as the person whom one is most eager to please (1 Corinthians 7:32 f). It is not difficult to understand how the fervid, sensuous imagery of Canticles would appeal to the mind of a man like Origen as a proper vehicle for the expression of his passionate love for Christ.
Sober inquiry discovers no sufficient justification of the allegorical interpretation of the Song of Songs. The pages of the mystical commentators are filled with artificial interpretations and conceits. Many of them practice a familiarity with Christ that is without example in the Biblical devotional literature.
2. The Typical Interpretation: The allegorical interpreters, for the most part, saw in the Song of Songs no historic basis. Solomon and the Shulammite are introduced merely as figures through whom God and His people, or Christ and the soul, can express their mutual love. In modern times interpreters have arisen who regard the Song as primarily the expression of strong and passionate human love between Solomon and a beautiful maiden, but by virtue of the typical relation of the old dispensation, secondarily, the fitting expression of the love of Christ and the church.
The way for this modern typical interpretation was prepared by Lowth (Sacred Poetry of the Hebrews, Lectionaries XXX, XXXI) in his modified allegorical view, which is thus described by Canon Driver: "Bishop Lowth, though not abandoning the allegorical view, sought to free it from its extravagances; and while refusing to press details, held that the poem, while describing the actual nuptials of Solomon with the daughter of Pharaoh, contained also an allegoric reference to Christ espousing a church chosen from among the Gentiles" (LOT, 451). Few interpreters have been found to follow Theodore of Mopsuestia and Lowth in their view that the Song celebrates the marriage of Solomon and an Egyptian princess; and Lowth's notion of a reference to the espousal of a church chosen from among the Gentiles is one of the curiosities of criticism. Of the typical interpreters Delitzsch is perhaps the ablest (Commentary on Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs).
The typical commentators are superior to the allegorical in their recognition of Canticles as the expression of the mutual love of two human beings. The further application of the language to Yahweh and His people (Keil), or to Christ and the church (Delitzsch), or to God and the soul (M. Stuart) becomes largely a matter of individual taste, interpreters differing widely in details.
3. The Literal Interpretation: Jewish interpreters were deterred from the literal interpretation of Canticles by the anathema in the Mishna upon all who should treat the poem as a secular song (Sanhedhrin, 101a). Cheyne says of Ibn Ezra, a great medieval Jewish scholar, he "is so thorough in his literal exegesis that it is doubtful whether he is serious when he proceeds to allegorize." Among Christian scholars Theodore of Mopsuestia interpreted Canticles as a song in celebration of the marriage of Solomon and Pharaoh's daughter. This strictly literal interpretation of the Song was condemned at the second council of Constantinople (553 AD). For the next thousand years the allegorical theory reigned supreme among Christian interpreters. In 1544 Sebastian Castellio revived the literal theory of the Song, though the allegorical view remained dominant until the 19th century.
Herder in 1778 published a remarkable little treatise entitled Lieder der Liebe, die altesten und schonsten aus dem Morgenlande, in which he advanced theory that Canticles is a collection of independent erotic songs, about 21 in number, which have been so arranged by a collector as to trace "the gradual growth of true love in its various nuances and stages, till it finds its consummation in wedlock" (Cheyne). But the greatest and most influential advocate of the literal interpretation of Canticles was Heinrich Ewald, who published the 1st edition of his commentary in 1826. It was Ewald who first developed and made popular theory that two suitors compete for the hand of the Shulammite, the one a shepherd and poor, the other a wise and wealthy king. In the Song he ascribes to Wisdom of Solomon 1:9-11, 15; 2:2; Wisdom of Solomon 4:1-7; Wisdom of Solomon 6:4-13 (quoting the dialogue between the Shulammite and the ladies of the court in 6:10-13); 7:1-9. To the shepherd lover he assigns few verses, and these are repeated by the Shulammite in her accounts of imaginary or real interviews with her lover. In the following passages the lover described is supposed to be the shepherd to whom the Shulammite had plighted her troth: 1:2-7,9-14; 1:16 through 2:1; 2:3-7,8-17; 3:1-5; 4:8 through 5:1; 5:2-8; 5:10-16; 6:2 f; 7:10 through 8:4; 8:5-14. The shepherd lover is thus supposed to be present in the Shulammite's dreams, and in her waking moments she is ever thinking of him and describing to herself and others his many charms. Not until the closing scene (Song of Solomon 8:5-14) does Ewald introduce the shepherd as an actor in the drama. Ewald had an imperial imagination and a certain strength of mind and innate dignity of character which prevented him from dragging into the mud any section of the Biblical literature. While rejecting entirely the allegorical theory of Canticles, he yet attributed to it an ethical quality which made the Song worthy of a place in the Old Testament. A drama in praise of fidelity between human lovers may well hold a place beside Ecclesiastes and Proverbs in the Canon. Many of the ablest Old Testament critics have followed Ewald in his general theory that Canticles is a drama celebrating the loyalty of a lowly maiden to her shepherd lover. Not even Solomon in all his glory could persuade her to become his queen.
Within the past quarter of a century the unity of Canticles has been again sharply challenged. An account of the customs of the Syrian peasants in connection with weddings was given by the Prussian consul at Damascus, J. G. Wetzstein, in 1873, in an article in Bastian's Zeitschrift fur Ethnologie, 270 ff, on "Die syrische Dreschtafel," in which he illustrated the Old Testament from modern Syrian customs. Driver thus describes the customs that are supposed to throw light upon Canticles: "In modern Syria, the first seven days after a wedding are called the `king's week'; the young pair play during this time king and queen; the `threshing-board' is turned into a mock-throne, on which they are seated, while songs are sung before them by the villagers and others, celebrating them on their happiness, among which the watsf, or poetical `description' of the physical beauty of the bride and bridegroom, holds a prominent place. The first of these watsfs is sung on the evening of the wedding-day itself: brandishing a naked sword in her right hand, and with a handkerchief in her left, the bride dances in her wedding array, lighted by fires, and surrounded by a circle of guests, half men and half women, accompanying her dance with a watsf in praise of her charms" (LOT, 452). Wetzstein suggested the view that Canticles was composed of the wedding-songs sung during "the king's week." This theory has been most fully elaborated by Budde in an article in the New World, March, 1894, and in his commentary (1898). According to Budde, the bridegroom is called King Solomon, and the bride Shulammith. The companions of the bridegroom are the 60 valiant men who form his escort (Song of Solomon 3:7). As a bride, the maiden is called the most beautiful of women (Song of Solomon 1:8; 5:9; 6:1). The pictures of wedded bliss are sung by the men and women present, the words being attributed to the bride and the bridegroom. Thus the festivities continue throughout the week. Budde's theory has some decided advantages over Ewald's view that the poem is a drama; but the loss in moral quality is considerable; the book becomes a collection of wedding-songs in praise of the joys of wedlock.
V. Closing Hints and Suggestions. Having given a good deal of attention to Canticles during the past 15 years, the author of this article wishes to record a few of his views and impressions.
(1) Canticles is lyric poetry touched with the dramatic spirit. It is not properly classed as drama, for the Hebrews had no stage, though much of the Old Testament is dramatic in spirit. The descriptions of the charms of the lovers were to be sung or chanted.
(2) The amount that has to be read between the lines by the advocates of the various dramatic theories is so great that, in the absence of any hints in the body of the book itself, reasonable certitude can never be attained.
(3) The correct translation of the refrain in Song of Solomon 2:7 and Song of Solomon 3:5 (compare Song of Solomon 8:4) is important for an understanding of the purpose of Canticles. It should be rendered as follows:
`I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem,
By the gazelles, or by the hinds of the field,
That ye stir not up, nor awaken love,
Until it please.'
Love between man and woman should not be excited by unnatural stimulants, but should be free and spontaneous. In Song of Solomon 8:4 it seems to be implied that the women of the capital are guilty of employing artifices to awaken love:
`I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem,
Why do ye stir up, or awaken love,
Until it please?'
That this refrain is in keeping with the purpose of the writer is clear from the striking words toward the close of the book:
"Set me as a seal upon thy heart,
As a seal upon thine arm:
For love is strong as death;
Jealousy is cruel as Sheol;
The flashes thereof are flashes of fire,
A very flame of Yahweh.
Many waters cannot quench love,
Neither can floods drown it:
If a man would give all the substance of his house for love,
He would utterly be contemned" (Song of Solomon 8:6 f).
(4) Canticles discloses all the secret intimacies of wedded life without becoming obscene. The imagery is too sensuous for our taste in western lands, so that words of caution are often timely, lest the sensuous degenerate into the sensual; but I have been told by several Syrian and Palestinian students whom I have had the privilege of teaching, that Canticles is considered quite chaste among their people, the wedding-songs now in use among them being more minute in their description of the physical charms of the lovers.
(5) Canticles is by no means excluded from the Canon by the acceptance of the literal interpretation. Ewald's theory makes it an ethical treatise of great and permanent value. Even if Canticles is merely a collection of songs describing the bliss of true lovers in wedlock, it is not thereby rendered unworthy of a place in the Bible, unless marriage is to be regarded as a fall from a state of innocency. If Canticles should be rejected because of its sensuous imagery in describing the joys of passionate lovers, portions of Proverbs would also have to be excised (Proverbs 5:15-20). Perhaps most persons need to enlarge their conception of the Bible as a repository for all things that minister to the welfare of men. The entire range of man's legitimate joys finds sympathetic and appreciative description in the Bible. Two young lovers in Paradise need not fear to rise and meet their Creator, should He visit them in the cool of the day.
LITERATURE.
C. D. Ginsburg, The Song of Songs, with a Commentary, Historical and Critical, 1857; H. Ewald, Dichter des Alten Bundes, III, 333-426, 1867; F. C. Cook, in Biblical Commentary, 1874; Franz Delitzsch, Hoheslied u. Koheleth, 1875 (also translation); O. Zockler, in Lange's Comm., 1875; S. Oettli, Kurzgefasster Kommentar, 1889; W. E. Griffis, The Lily among Thorns, 1890; J. W. Rothstein, Das Hohe Lied, 1893; K. Budde, article in New World, March, 1894. and Kommentar, 1898; C. Siegfried, Prediger u. Hoheslied, 1898; A. Harper, in Cambridge Bible, 1902; G. C. Martin, in Century Bible, 1908; article on "Canticles" by Cheyne in EB, 1899.
John Richard Sampey
Song of the Three Children
Song of the Three Children - 1. Name
2. Canonicity
3. Contents
4. Author and Date
5. Original Language
6. Text and Versions
LITERATURE
For general remarks concerning the Additions to Daniel see BEL AND THE DRAGON.
1. Name: This Addition has no separate title in any manuscript or version because in the Septuagint, Theod, Syriac and Latin (Old Latin and Vulgate) it follows Daniel 3:23 immediately, forming an integral portion of that chapter, namely, The Song of the Three Children (Azariah) 1:24-90 in the Septuagint and Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) It is the only one of the three Additions which has an organic connection with Daniel; as regards the others see preliminary remarks to BEL AND THE DRAGON. The title in English Versions of the Bible is "The Song of the Three Holy Children," a title describing its matter as formerly understood, though a more rigid analysis shows that in the 68 verses so designated, we have really two separate sections. See 3, below.
2. Canonicity: See introductory remarks to BEL AND THE DRAGON. The order in which the three "Additions to Daniel" are found in the (Separate Protestant) Apocrypha is decided by their sequence in the Vulgate, the Song of the Three Children forming part of chapter 3, Susanna of chapter 13, and Bel and the Dragon of chapter 14 of Daniel.
3. Contents: Though the English and other Protestant versions treat the 68 verses as one piece under the name given above, there are really two quite distinct compositions. These appear separately in the collection of Odes appended to the Psalter in Cod. A under the headings, "The Prayer of Azarias" (Proseuche Azariou, Azariah, Daniel 1:6 f) and "The Hymn of Our Fathers" (Humnos ton pateron hemon); see Swete, The Old Testament in Greek, 3804 ff, and Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek, 253 f. Luther with his usual independence makes each of these into a separate book under the titles, "The Prayer of Azaria" (Das Gebet Asarjas) and "The Song of the Three Men in the Fire" (Der Gesang der drei Manner im Feuerofen).
(1) The Prayer of Azarias (The Song of the Three Children (Azariah) 1:1-22) (Daniel 3:24-30).
Azariah is the Hebrew name of Abed-nego (= Abednebo, "servant of Nebo"), the latter being the Babylonian name (see Daniel 1:7; 2:49, etc.). This prayer joins on to Daniel 3:23, where it is said that "Shadrach, Meshach and Abed-nego (Azariah) fell down bound into the midst of the burning fiery furnace." [?] (the version of Theodotion; see "Text and Versions" below) adds, "And they walked (Syr adds "in their chains") in the midst of the fire, praising God, and blessing the Lord." This addition forms a suitable connecting link, and it has been adopted by the Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) and in modern versions which are made from [?] and not from the Septuagint, which last was lost for many centuries (see BEL AND THE DRAGON,III ). In the Septuagint the words with which the Prayer was introduced are these: "Thus therefore prayed Hananias, and Azarias and Misael and sang praises (hymns) to the Lord when the king commanded that they should be cast into the furnace." The prayer (offered by Azarias) opens with words of adoration followed by an acknowledgment that the sufferings of the nation in Babylon were wholly deserved, and an earnest entreaty that God would intervene on behalf of His exiled and afflicted people. That this prayer was not composed for the occasion with which it is connected goes without saying. No one in a burning furnace could pray as Azarias does. There are no groans or sighs, nor prayer for help or deliverance of a personal nature. The deliverance sought is national.
(2) The Song of the Three Holy Children (The Song of the Three Children (Azariah) 1:28-68) (Daniel 3:30).
This is introduced by a brief connecting narrative (The Song of the Three Children (Azariah) 1:23-27). The king's servants continued to heat the furnace, but an angel came down and isolated an inner zone of the furnace within which no flames could enter; in this the three found safety. Rothstein (Kautzsch, Die Apok., 175) is inclined to think that this narrative section (The Song of the Three Children (Azariah) 1:23-27) stood between Daniel 3:23 and Daniel 3:24 in the original Hebrew text. The "Song" is really a psalm, probably a translation of a Hebrew original. It has nothing to do with the incident--the three young men in the furnace--except in The Song of the Three Children (Azariah) Daniel 1:21 (EV) where the three martyrs call upon themselves by name to praise and bless the Lord for delivering them from the midst of the furnace. This verse is an interpolation, for the rest of the Song is a long litany recalling Psalms 103:1-22 and especially Psalms 136:1-26; 148:1, and Sirach 43. The Song, in fact, has nothing to do with the sufferings of the three young men, but is an ordinary hymn of praise. It is well known from the fact that it forms a part of the Anglican Prayer-book, as it had formed part of many early Christian liturgies.
4. Author and Date: (1) Author. We know nothing whatever of the author besides what may be gathered from this Addition. It is quite evident that none of the three Additions belong to the original text of Daniel, and that they were added because they contained legends in keeping with the spirit of that book, and a song in a slight degree (The Song of the Three Children (Azariah) 1:66 English Version of the Bible) adapted to the situation of the three Hebrew youths in the furnace, though itself of an independent liturgical origin.
For a long time the three Additions must have circulated independently. Polychronius says that "The Song of the Three Holy Children" was, even in the 5th century AD, absent from the text of Daniel, both in the Peshitta and in the Septuagint proper. Rothstein (Kautzsch, Die Apok., 176) contends that the Additions formed a part of the Septuagint from the beginning, from which he infers that they were all composed before the Septuagint was made. What was the date of this version of Daniel? Since its use seems implied in 1 Maccabees 1:54 (compare Daniel 11:31; 12:11), it would be safe to conclude that it existed about 100 BC.
(2) Date of the Prayer of Azarias. In The Song of the Three Children (Azariah) 1:15 (English Versions of the Bible) it is said that at the time the prayer was offered, there was no prince, prophet or leader, nor sacrifice of any kind. This may point to the time between 168 and 165 BC, when Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) profaned the temple. If written in that interval, it must have been added to Dan at a much later time. But on more occasions than one, in later times, the temple-services were suspended, as e.g. during the invasion of Jerusalem by the Egyptian king, Ptolemy IV (Philopater).
(3) Date of the Song. We find references in the Song (The Song of the Three Children (Azariah) 1:62 f English Versions of the Bible) to priests and temple-servants, and in The Song of the Three Children (Azariah) 1:31 to the temple itself, suggesting that when the Song was written the temple-services were carried on. This, in itself, would suit a time soon after the purification of the temple, about 164 BC. But the terms of the Song are, except in verse 66 (English Versions of the Bible), so general that it is impossible to fix the date definitely. On the date of the historical connecting narrative (The Song of the Three Children (Azariah) 1:23-27) see 3, (2), above.
5. Original Language: (1) Romanist scholars in general and several Protestants (Eichhorn, Einleit., in das Altes Testament, IV, 24 f; Einleit. in die apok. Schriften, 419; Vatke; Delitzsch, De Habacuci, 50; Zockler, Bissell, Ball, Rothstein, etc.) hold that the original language was Hebrew. The evidence, which is weak, is as follows: (a) The style is Hebraistic throughout (not more so than in writings known to have been composed in Alexandrian Gr; the idiom kataischunesthai + apo = bosh min (The Song of the Three Children (Azariah) 1:44 English Versions of the Bible; the Septuagint 1:44), "to be ashamed of," occurs in parts of the Septuagint which are certainly not translations). (b) The three Hebrew martyrs bear Hebrew names (The Song of the Three Children (Azariah) 1:66 English Versions). This only shows that the tale is of Hebrew origin. (2) Most modern non-Romanist scholars hold that the original language of the Song (and Prayer) was Greek. So Keil, Fritzsche, De Wette, Schurer, Konig, Cornill, Strack, etc.
Some grounds: (1) The Hebraisms are comparatively few, and those which do exist can be paralleled in other writings composed in Hellenistic Greek (2) It can be proved that in Daniel and also in Bel and the Dragon (see Introduction to Bel in the Oxford Apocrypha, edition R.H. Charles), Theodotion corrects the Septuagint from the Hebrew (lost in the case of Bel); but in Three, Theodotion corrects according to Greek idiom or grammar. It must be admitted, however, that the evidence is not very decisive either way.
6. Text and Versions: As to the text and the various versions of the Song, see what is said in the article BEL AND THE DRAGON. It is important to note that the translations in English Versions of the Bible are made from Theodotion's Greek version, which occurs in ancient versions of the Septuagint (A B V Q dc) instead of the true Septuagint (Cod. 87).
LITERATURE.
See the article BEL AND THE DRAGON; Marshall (Hastings Dictionary of the Bible,IV , 754); W. H. Bennett (Oxford Apocrypha, edition R.H. Charles, 625 ff).
T. Witton Davies
Songs of Degrees
Songs of Degrees - See DEGREES, SONGS OF; DIAL OF AHAZ, 7.
Son-in-law
Son-in-law - See RELATIONSHIPS, FAMILY.
Sons of
Sons of - See SON, SONS.
Sons of God
Sons of God - (Old Testament) (bene ha-'elohim, "sons of God" (Genesis 6:2, 4; Job 1:6; 2:1); bene 'elohim, "sons of God" (Job 38:7); bene 'elim, "ye mighty," the King James Version; "ye sons of the mighty," King James Version margin, the Revised Version (British and American); "sons of God" or "sons of the gods," the Revised Version margin (Psalms 29:1); "sons of the mighty," the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American); "sons of God" or "sons of the gods," the Revised Version margin (Psalms 89:6 (Hebrews 7:1-28)); Septuagint huioi tou theou, hoi aggeloi tou theou (Genesis 6:2); huioi tou theou (Genesis 6:4); hoi aggeloi tou theou (Job 1:6; 2:1); aggeloi mou (Job 38:7); huioi theou (Psalms 29:1; 89:6; compare Daniel 3:25)):
1. Job and Psalms: This article will deal with this phrase as it is used in the above passages. In the passages from Job and Psalms it is applied to supernatural beings or angels. In Job the "sons of God" are represented as appearing before the throne of Yahweh in heaven, ready to do Him service, and as shouting for joy at the creation of the earth, In the Psalms they are summoned to celebrate the glory of Yahweh, for there is none among them to be compared to Him. The phrase in these passages has no physical or moral reference. These heavenly beings are called "sons of God" or "sons of the 'elohim" simply as belonging to the same class or guild as the 'elohim, just as "sons of the prophets" denotes those who belong to the prophetic order (see A.B. Davidson, Commentary on Job 1:6).
2. Genesis 6:2, 4: Different views, however, are taken of the passage in Genesis 6:2, 4: "The sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all that they chose ..... The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men."
(1) "Sons of God" is interpreted as referring to men, (a) to sons of the nobles, who married daughters of the common people. This is the view of many Jewish authorities, who hold that it is justified by the use of 'elohim in the sense of "judges" (Exodus 21:6; 22:8 f, etc.). But this cannot be the meaning of 'elohim here, for when 'adham, "men," is used to denote the lower classes, it is contrasted with 'ish, as in Psalms 49:2 (Hebrews 3:1-19), not with 'elohim. When contrasted with 'elohim it signifies the human race. (b) Some commentators hold that by "sons of God" is to be understood the pious race descended from Seth, and by "daughters of men" the daughters of worldly men. These commentators connect the passage with Genesis 4:25 f, where the race of Seth is characterized as the worshippers of Yahweh and is designated as a whole, a seed (compare Deuteronomy 14:1; 32:5; Hosea 1:10 (Hebrews 2:1)). They consider the restricted meaning they put upon "men" as warranted by the contrast (compare Jeremiah 32:20; Isaiah 43:4), and that as the term "daughters" expresses actual descent, it is natural to understand "sons" in a similar sense. The phrase "took wives," they contend also, supports the ethical view, being always used to signify real and lasting marriages, and cannot, therefore, be applied to the higher spirits in their unholy desire after flesh. On this view Genesis 6:1-4 are an introduction to the reason for the Flood, the great wickedness of man upon the earth (Genesis 6:5). It is held that nothing is said in Genesis 6:4 of a race of giants springing from the union of angels with human wives (see paragraph 2, below), and that the violence which is mentioned along with the corruption of the world (6:11) refers to the sin of the giants.
(2) Most scholars now reject this view and interpret "sons of God" as referring to supernatural beings in accordance with the meaning of the expression in the other passages. They hold that Deuteronomy 14:1, etc., cannot be regarded as supporting the ethical interpretation of the phrase in a historical narrative. The reference to Jeremiah 32:20, etc., too, is considered irrelevant, the contrast in these passages being between Israel and other nations, not, as here, between men and God. Nor can a narrower signification (daughters of worldly men) be attached to "men" in Genesis 6:2 than to "men" in Genesis 6:1, where the reference is to the human race in general. This passage (Genesis 6:1-4), therefore, which is the only one of its kind, is considered to be out of its place and to have been inserted here by the compiler as an introduction to the story of the Flood (Genesis 6:5-8). The intention of the original writer, however, was to account for the rise of the giant race of antiquity by the union of demigods with human wives. This interpretation accords with Enoch chapters 6 through 7, etc., and with Jude 1:6 f, where the unnatural sin of the men of Sodom who went after "strange flesh" is compared with that of the angels (compare 2 Peter 2:4 ff). (See Havernick, Introduction to the Pentateuch; Hengstenberg on the Pentateuch, I, 325; Oehler, Old Testament Theology, I, 196 f; Schultz, Old Testament Theology, I, 114 ff; Commentary on Genesis by Delitzsch, Dillmann, and Driver.)
See ANTEDILUVIANS, 3; CHILDREN OF GOD; GIANTS; NEPHILIM; REPHAIM.
James Crichton
Sons of God (New Testament)
Sons of God (New Testament) - 1. New Testament Terms: Two Greek words are translated "son," teknon, huios, both words indicating sonship by parentage, the former indicating that the sonship has taken place by physical descent, while the latter presents sonship more from the legal side than from the standpoint of relationship. John, who lays special emphasis on sonship by birth, uses teknon, while Paul, in emphasizing sonship from the legal side, as referring to adoption, which was current among the Romans but scarcely if at all known to, or if known, practiced by, the Jews, uses the word huios (John 1:12; Romans 8:14, 16, 19; Galatians 4:6-7; 1 John 3:1-2).
2. New Testament Doctrine: Men are not by nature the sons of God, at least not in the sense in which believers in Christ are so called. By nature those outside of Jesus Christ are "children of wrath" (Ephesians 2:3), "of disobedience" (Ephesians 2:2), controlled not by the Spirit of God (Romans 8:14), but by the spirit of disobedience (Ephesians 2:2-4). Men become sons of God in the regenerative and adoptive sense by the acceptance of Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour (John 1:12 f; Galatians 3:26). The universal brotherhood which the New Testament teaches is that brotherhood which is based on faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as the divine and only Saviour of the world. And the same is true of the universal Fatherhood of God. It is true that all men are "his offspring" (Acts 17:28 f) in the sense that they are God's created children; but that the New Testament makes a very clear and striking distinction between sonship by virtue of creation and sonship by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, there can be no reasonable doubt.
Sonship is the present possession of the believer in Christ (1 John 3:2). It will be completed at the second coming of our Lord (Romans 8:23), at which time the believer will throw off his incognito, by reason of which the world may not have recognized his sonship (1 John 3:1-2), and be fully and gloriously revealed as the son of God (2 Corinthians 5:10). It doth not yet appear, it hath not yet appeared, what we shall be; the revelation of the sons of God is reserved for a coming day of manifestation.
The blessings of sonship are too numerous to mention, save in the briefest way. His sons are objects of God's peculiar love (John 17:23), and His Fatherly care (Luke 12:27-33). They have the family name (Ephesians 3:14 f; 1 John 3:1); the family likeness (Romans 8:29); family love (John 13:35; 1 John 3:14); a filial spirit (Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:6); a family service (John 14:23 f; John 15:8). They receive fatherly chastisement (Hebrews 12:5-11); fatherly comfort (2 Corinthians 1:4), and an inheritance (Romans 8:17; 1 Peter 1:3-5).
Among the evidences of sonship are: being led by the Spirit (Romans 8:14; Galatians 5:18); having a childlike confidence in God (Galatians 4:5); having liberty of access (Ephesians 3:12); having love for the brethren (1 John 2:9-11; 5:1), and obedience (1 John 5:1-3).
William Evans
Soothsayers
Soothsayers - sooth'-sa-erz.
See ASTROLOGY, 1; DIVINATION.
Sop
Sop - sop (psomion): A thin, wafer-like piece of bread dipped into the common dish as a sort of improvised spoon, is thus designated in John 13:26 ff.
See MORSEL.
Sopater
Sopater - so'-pa-ter, sop'-a-ter (Sopatros): the Revised Version (British and American) the son of Pyrrhus; the King James Version omits. A man of Berea who is mentioned with some Thessalonians and others as accompanying Paul as far as Asia on his return to Jerusalem after his 3rd missionary journey (Acts 20:4). He is probably the same as the "Sosipater" of Romans 16:21.
Sope
Sope - sop.
See SOAP.
Sophereth
Sophereth - so-fe'-reth, sof'-e-reth, so'-fe-reth (cophereth): One of the remnant returning from captivity (Ezra 2:55 the King James Version; Nehemiah 7:57). In the Revised Version (British and American) of Ezra 2:55 it is "Hassophereth," the definite article being transliterated.
Sophonias
Sophonias - sof-o-ni'-as Septuagint Sophonias): The form in the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) of 2 Esdras 1:40 for Zephaniah the prophet.
Sorcerer; Sorcery
Sorcerer; Sorcery - sor'-ser-er, sor'-ser-i.
See ASTROLOGY, 1; DIVINATION; MAGIC;WITCHCRAFT .
Sore
Sore - sor (substantive) (negha`; helkos, verb helkoomai): In the account of the appearance of leprosy (Leviticus 13:42 f) the spot on the skin is called by this name, which in the King James Version is translated "sore," but in the Revised Version (British and American) "plague"; similarly in the Dedication Prayer (2 Chronicles 6:28 f) the Revised Version (British and American) has altered the rendering of negha` for "sore" to "plague" as it has done also in Psalms 38:11. The word literally means a "stroke" or "blow," and so is applied to a disease or infliction from God. makkah Teriyah, in the King James Version is rendered "putrifying sores," the English Revised Version "festering sores," the American Standard Revised Version and the English Revised Version margin "fresh stripes." See STRIPES. In the only other text in the Old Testament in which "sore" is used as a substantive in the King James Version (Psalms 77:2), the word used is yadh, which literally means the "outstretched hand," hence, the Revised Version (British and American) renders the text: "My hand was stretched out in the night and slacked not." In the New Testament the ulcers on the limbs of Lazarus which were the result of poverty and hardship (Luke 16:20), and were licked by the pariah dogs (Luke 16:21), are called "sores." Sores also which are called noisome and grievous, were the result of the outpouring of the first of the seven bowls of the wrath of God (Revelation 16:2-11).
Alex. Macalister
Sorek, Valley of
Sorek, Valley of - so'-rek (nachal soreq, "the valley of the choice (soreq) vine" (see VINE); sorech): "(Samson) loved a woman in the valley of Sorek, whose name was Delilah" (Judges 16:4). Jerome (OS, 153 f, 6) mentions a Capharsorec which was near Saraa (ancient ZORAH (which see)); this latter is undoubtedly the village of Sura`h, high up upon the northern slopes of the great Wady es Surar. About 3/4 of a mile West of this is Khurbet Surik, which is certainly the site referred to by Jerome, and possibly marks that of a more ancient town which gave its name to the whole valley. This valley is of importance in the historical geography of Palestine out of all proportion to its scanty mention in the Old Testament (HGHL, 218 ff). The Wady es Surar is an expansion of the ravine Wady Isma`in (which itself is formed by the junction of the great Wady Beit Chanineh, which rises near Bereh, and the Wady es Sikkeh, which drains the "Plain of Rephaim" near Jerusalem). The Jerus-Jaffa Railway traverses successively the Wady es Surar, the Wady Ismai`n and the Wady es Sikkeh to reach the Jerusalem plateau. The Valley of Sorek is a name which probably belonged only to the open, fertile valley, well suited for vineyards, which traverses the Shephelah. It is now given over almost entirely to the cultivation of wheat, barley and maize (durra). The valley passes between the lofty hill of Sara`h (Zorah) to the North and `Ain Shems (Beth-shemesh) and Tibneh (Timnah) on the South. Standing on the ruins of Beth-shemesh, one can watch the modern railway train winding for miles up the valley along almost the very road from Ekron (now `Akiv), upon which came the strange sight of the milch kine dragging the ark (1 Samuel 6:12). Very probably it was in this valley that the Philistines were defeated (1 Samuel 7:5-14) (PEF, III, 53, Sh XVII).
E. W. G. Masterman
Sorrel
Sorrel - sor'-el: the Revised Version (British and American) in Zechariah 1:8 for "speckled."
See COLORS .
Sorrow
Sorrow - sor'-o (chebhel, yaghon, makh'obh, etc.; lupe): The Old Testament has very many words translated "sorrow," those named being the most frequent; in the New Testament "sorrow" is usually the translation of lupe (Luke 22:45; John 16:6; 2 Corinthians 2:3, 7, etc.). Penthos, translated "sorrow" in Revelation 18:7; 21:4, is in the Revised Version (British and American) "mourning." Odune, of pain-and distress, is thus rendered in Romans 9:2; 1 Timothy 6:10 (compare the verb in Luke 2:48; Acts 20:38). the Revised Version (British and American) frequently gives a more literal rendering of the words used, as "toil" (Genesis 3:17), "pangs" (Exodus 15:14), "pining" (Deuteronomy 28:65), "distress" (Isaiah 5:30), "lamentation" (Isaiah 29:2), etc.; sometimes also it uses "sorrow" for other words, as for "grief" (2 Chronicles 6:29; Psalms 31:10; 69:26; etc.; 2 Corinthians 2:5), "heaviness" (Romans 9:2; 2 Corinthians 2:1).
Sorrow or grief is necessary for discipline, for the development of the finer feelings and higher nature of the soul and spirit (Ecclesiastes 7:3, "Sorrow is better than laughter; for by the sadness of the countenance the heart is made glad," margin "better"). Sorrow inevitably follows sin, and is its punishment, yet the righteous are not exempt from it. The "Servant of Yahweh" was "a man of sorrows" (Isaiah 53:3). Christians learn how to be "sorrowful, yet always rejoicing" (2 Corinthians 6:10; 7:4; Colossians 1:24; 1 Thessalonians 1:6; etc.). In the New Jerusalem it is predicted that there shall be no sorrow, for sorrow shall have done its work, and the first things have passed away (Revelation 21:4).
W. L. Walker
Sosipater
Sosipater - so-sip'-a-ter (Sosipatros): Sosipater unites with Lucius and Jason in sending greetings to the Roman Christians (Romans 16:21). He is a "kinsman" of Paul, by which Paul means a Jew (Romans 9:3; 11, 21). It is the same name as SOPATER (which see). "Sopater of Berea" was one of the companions of Paul on his journey from Philippi after his 3rd missionary journey (Acts 20:4). These two are probably the same person, Paul having with him in Corinth, at the time of writing to the Roman Christians, the two Macedonians, Sopater of Berea and Jason of Thessalonica. The name Sosipater is found on a list of politarchs of Thessalonica.
S. F. Hunter
Sosthenes
Sosthenes - sos'-the-nez (Sosthenes): Chief of the synagogue at Corinth (Acts 18:17). Possibly identical with the co-worker (afterward) of Paul mentioned in 1 Corinthians 1:1.
Sostratus
Sostratus - sos'-tra-tus (Sostratos, in Codex Venetus Sos-): "The governor of the citadel" of Jerusalem under Antiochus IV (Epiphanes). His duty was to gather the revenues of the city and province for the imperial treasury. He made a new departure in demanding from Menelaus direct the sum promised to the king in 2 Maccabees 4:27 ff (for Jason had the privilege of sending the money by his own messenger to the king (2 Maccabees 4:23)). This claim the usurper Menelaus disputed; consequently he and the governor were both summoned to appear before the king. No more is told, and Sostratus is otherwise unknown.
S. Angus
Sotai
Sotai - so'-ti, so'-ta-i, so-ta'-i (coTay): One of those who returned from captivity, being descendants of Solomon's servants (Ezra 2:55; Nehemiah 7:57).
Sottish
Sottish - sot'-ish (cakhal "thick-headed"): "They are sottish (stupid, very foolish) children" (Jeremiah 4:22).
Soul
Soul - sol (nephesh; psuche; Latin anima):
1. Shades of Meaning in the Old Testament: (1) Soul, like spirit, has various shades of meaning in the Old Testament, which may be summarized as follows: "Soul," "living being," "life," "self," "person," "desire," "appetite," "emotion" and "passion" (BDB under the word). In the first instance it meant that which breathes, and as such is distinguished from basar, "flesh" (Isaiah 10:18; Deuteronomy 12:23); from she'er, "the inner flesh," next the bones (Proverbs 11:17, "his own flesh"); from beTen, "belly" (Psalms 31:10, "My soul and my belly are consumed with grief"), etc.
(2) As the life-breath, it departs at death (Genesis 35:18; Jeremiah 15:2). Hence, the desire among Old Testament saints to be delivered from Sheol (Psalms 16:10, "Thou wilt not leave my soul to Sheol") and from shachath, "the pit" (Job 33:18, "He keepeth back his soul from the pit"; Isaiah 38:17, "Thou hast .... delivered it (my soul) from the pit of corruption").
(3) By an easy transition the word comes to stand for the individual, personal life, the person, with two distinct shades of meaning which might best be indicated by the Latin anima and animus. As anima, "soul," the life inherent in the body, the animating principle in the blood is denoted (compare Deuteronomy 12:23-24, `Only be sure that thou eat not the blood: for the blood is the soul; and thou shalt not eat the soul with the flesh'). As animus, "mind," the center of our mental activities and passivities is indicated. Thus we read of `a hungry soul' (Psalms 107:9), `a weary soul' (Jeremiah 31:25), `a loathing soul' (Leviticus 26:11), `a thirsty soul' (Psalms 42:2), `a grieved soul' (Job 30:25), `a loving soul' (Song of Solomon 1:7), and many kindred expressions. Cremer has characterized this use of the word in a sentence: "Nephesh (soul) in man is the subject of personal life, whereof pneuma or ruach (spirit) is the principle" (Lexicon, under the word, 795).
(4) This individuality of man, however, may be denoted by pneuma as well, but with a distinction. Nephesh or "soul" can only denote the individual life with a material organization or body. Pneuma or "spirit" is not so restricted. Scripture speaks of "spirits of just men made perfect" (Hebrews 12:23), where there can be no thought of a material or physical or corporeal organization. They are "spiritual beings freed from the assaults and defilements of the flesh" (Delitzsch, in the place cited.). For an exceptional use of psuche in the same sense see Revelation 6:9; 20:4, and (irrespective of the meaning of Psalms 16:10) Acts 2:27.
2. New Testament Distinctions: (1) In the New Testament psuche appears under more or less similar conditions as in the Old Testament. The contrast here is as carefully maintained as there. It is used where pneuma would be out of place; and yet it seems at times to be employed where pneuma might have been substituted. Thus in John 19:30 we read: "Jesus gave up his pneuma" to the Father, and, in the same Gospel (John 10:15), Jesus gave up His "psuche for the sheep," and in Matthew 20:28 He gave His psuche (not His pneuma) as a ransom--a difference which is characteristic. For the pneuma stands in quite a different relation to God from the psuche. The "spirit" (pneuma) is the outbreathing of God into the creature, the life-principle derived from God. The "sour" (psuche) is man's individual possession, that which distinguishes one man from another and from inanimate nature. The pneuma of Christ was surrendered to the Father in death; His psuche was surrendered, His individual life was given "a ransom for many." His life "was given for the sheep"
(2) This explains those expressions in the New Testament which bear on the salvation of the soul and its preservation in the regions of the dead. "Thou wilt not leave my soul unto Hades" (the world of shades) (Acts 2:27); "Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that worketh evil" (Romans 2:9); "We are .... of them that have faith unto the saving of the soul" (Hebrews 10:39); "Receive ..... the implanted word, which is able to save your souls" (James 1:21).
The same or similar expressions may be met with in the Old Testament in reference to the soul. Thus in Psalms 49:8, the King James Version "The redemption of their soul is precious" and again: "God will redeem my soul from the power of Sheol" (Psalms 49:15). Perhaps this may explain--at least this is Wendt's explanation--why even a corpse is called nephesh or soul in the Old Testament, because, in the region of the dead, the individuality is retained and, in a measure, separated from God (compare Haggai 2:13; Leviticus 21:11).
3. Oehler on Soul and Spirit: The distinction between psuche and pneuma, or nephesh and ruach, to which reference has been made, may best be described in the words of Oehler (Old Testament Theology, I, 217): "Man is not spirit, but has it: he is soul. .... In the soul, which sprang from the spirit, and exists continually through it, lies the individuality--in the case of man, his personality, his self, his ego." He draws attention to the words of Elihu in Job (33:4): `God's spirit made me,' the soul called into being; `and the breath of the Almighty animates me,' the soul kept in energy and strength, in continued existence, by the Almighty, into whose hands the inbreathed spirit is surrendered, when the soul departs or is taken from us (1 Kings 19:4). Hence, according to Oehler the phrases naphshi ("my soul"), naphshekha ("thy soul") may be rendered in Latin egomet, tu ipse; but not ruchi ("my spirit"), ruchakha ("thy spirit")--soul standing for the whole person, as in Genesis 12:5; 17:14; Ezekiel 18:4, etc.
See PSYCHOLOGY.
J. I. Marais
Sound
Sound - sound: In Isaiah 63:15 the King James Version has "the sounding of thy bowels," a painfully literal translation of hamon me'eykha, with the similar phrase, "my bowels shall sound like an harp," in Isaiah 16:11 (compare Jeremiah 48:36). The intestines were considered a seat of emotion, and at times of great excitement were thought (in poetry, at least) to become tense and to give forth a musical sound. The Revised Version (British and American) (following the King James Version in Jeremiah 48:36) substitutes "heart" for "bowels" in Isaiah 16:11, thus obscuring the figure but preserving the sense. In Isaiah 63:15 the Revised Version (British and American) paraphrases "the yearning of thy heart" (the English Revised Version "bowels"), a needless change from Isaiah 16:11.
See also BATH KOL; SOLEMN,SOLEMNITY .
Burton Scott Easton
Soundings
Soundings - sound'-ingz.
See SHIPS AND BOATS,III , 2.
Sour
Sour - sour: (1) bocer, "immature," "unripe": "The fathers have eaten sour grapes" (Jeremiah 31:29 f; Ezekiel 18:2; compare Isaiah 18:5 the King James Version). (2) cur, "to turn aside," "degenerate": "Their drink is turned sour" (the King James Version margin "gone," the Revised Version margin "Their carouse is over").
South
South - south: (1) neghebh, according BDB from [?] naghabh, meaning "to be dry," the word most often used, in the Revised Version (British and American) capitalized (South) in those places where it seems to denote a particular region, i.e. to the South of Judah. (2) yamin, "right hand," "right." The derived meaning, "south," seems to imply an eastern posture in prayer in which the right hand is toward the South; compare Arabic yamin, "right," and yemen, "Yemen," a region in Southwestern Arabia. (3) teman, from the same root as (2) is often used for the south; also for the south wind (Psalms 78:26; Song of Solomon 4:16). (4) yam, literally, "sea" (Psalms 107:3). (5) darom, etymology doubtful (Deuteronomy 33:23; Ezekiel 40:24). (6) midhbar, literally, "desert" (Psalms 75:6, reading doubtful).
(7) lips, "south west wind" (Acts 27:12). (8) mesembria, literally, "mid-day"; "south" (Acts 8:26); "noon" (Acts 22:6). (9) notos, "south wind" (Luke 12:55; Acts 27:13; 28:13); "south" (1 Maccabees 3:57; Matthew 12:42; Luke 11:31; 13:29; Revelation 21:13).
The south wind is often referred to: see Song of Solomon 4:16; Job 37:9 (compare Job 9:9); Zechariah 9:14 (of Isaiah 21:1); Luke 12:55.
Of the passages where South (neghebh) clearly refers to a particular region between Palestine and Sinai see: "And Abraham journeyed, going on still toward the South" (neghbah) (Genesis 12:9; 13:1; Deuteronomy 1:7). We read of "the South of the Jerahmeelites," "the South of the Kenites" (1 Samuel 27:10); "the South of the Cherethites," "the South of Caleb" (1 Samuel 30:14); "the South of Judah" (2 Chronicles 28:18); "Ramoth of the South" (1 Samuel 30:27).
In Psalms 126:4, "Turn again our captivity, O Yahweh, as the streams in the South," we have a figurative reference to the fact that, after a long period of drought, the dry watercourses are finally filled with rushing streams. The reference in Ezekiel 20:46 f to "the forest of the South" is to a condition of things very different from that which exists today, though the region is not incapable of supporting trees if they are only planted and protected.
Alfred Ely Day
South Ramoth
South Ramoth - See RAMOTH.
South, Chambers of The
South, Chambers of The - The twelve constellations of the Zodiac.
See ASTRONOMY, sec. II, 12.
South, Queen of The
South, Queen of The - (Matthew 12:42).
See QUEEN OF SHEBA.
Southeast
Southeast - See NORTHEAST.
Sow
Sow - sou.
See SWINE.
Sower; Sowing
Sower; Sowing - so'-er, so'-ing.
See AGRICULTURE.
Spain
Spain - span (Spania): The country in the Southwest of Europe which still bears this name. It was Paul's purpose, as stated in Romans 15:24, 28, to visit Spain. If, as is probable, he ultimately carried out this intention, it must have been after a release from his first imprisonment. Clement of Rome speaks of the apostle as having reached "the extreme limit of the West" (Epistle of Clement, v).
See PAUL,THE APOSTLE ; TARSHISH.
Span
Span - (zereth; spithame): A measure of length equal to half a cubit or about 9 in. (Exodus 28:16; 39:9; 1 Samuel 17:4, etc.). Lamentations 2:20 the King James Version is a mistranslation; see the Revised Version (British and American).
See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
Spark
Spark - spark.
See LEVIATHAN.
Sparrow
Sparrow - spar'-o (tsippor; strouthion; Latin passer): A small bird of the Fringillidae family. The Hebrew tsippor seems to have been a generic name under which were placed all small birds that frequented houses and gardens. The word occurs about 40 times in the Bible, and is indiscriminately translated "bird" "fowl" or "sparrow." Our translators have used the word "sparrow" where they felt that this bird best filled the requirements of the texts. Sparrows are small brown and gray birds of friendly habit that swarm over the northern part of Palestine, and West of the Sea of Galilee, where the hills, plains and fertile fields are scattered over with villages. They build in the vineyards, orchards and bushes of the walled gardens surrounding houses, on the ground or in nooks and crannies of vine-covered walls. They live on seeds, small green buds and tiny insects and worms. Some members of the family sing musically; all are great chatterers when about the business of life. Repeatedly they are mentioned by Bible writers, but most of the references lose force as applying to the bird family, because they are translated "bird" or "fowl." In a few instances the word "sparrow" is used, and in some of these, painstaking commentators feel that what is said does not apply to the sparrow. For example see Psalms 102:7:
"I watch, and am become like a sparrow
That is alone upon the housetop."
The feeling that this is not characteristic of the sparrow arises from the fact that it is such a friendly bird that if it were on the housetop it would be surrounded by half a dozen of its kind; so it has been suggested that a solitary thrush was intended. There is little force in the change. Thrushes of today are shy, timid birds of thickets and deep undergrowth. Occasionally a stray one comes around a house at migration, but once settled to the business of living they are the last and most infrequent bird to appear near the haunts of man. And bird habits do not change in one or two thousand years. In an overwhelmed hour the Psalmist poured out his heart before the Almighty. The reason he said he was like a "sparrow that is alone upon the housetop" was because it is the most unusual thing in the world for a sparrow to sit mourning alone, and therefore it attracted attention and made a forceful comparison. It only happens when the bird's mate has been killed or its nest and young destroyed, and this most cheerful of birds sitting solitary and dejected made a deep impression on the Psalmist who, when his hour of trouble came, said he was like the mourning sparrow--alone on the housetop. Another exquisite song describes the bird in its secure and happy hour:
"Yea, the sparrow hath found her a house,
And the swallow a nest for herself, where she may lay her young,
Even thine altars, O Yahweh of hosts,
My King, and my God" (Psalms 84:3).
When the mind of man was young and he looked on the commonest acts of creatures around him as filled with mystery, miracle and sign--he held in superstitious reverence any bird that built on a temple, because he thought it meant that the bird thus building claimed the protection of God in so doing. For these reasons all temple builders were so reverenced that authentic instances are given of people being put to death, if they disturbed temple nests or builders. Because he noticed the sparrow in joyful conditions is good reason why the Psalmist should have been attracted by its mourning. There is a reference to the widespread distribution of these birds in Proverbs 26:2:
"As the sparrow in her wandering, as the swallow in her flying,
So the curse that is causeless alighteth not."
Once settled in a location, no bird clings more faithfully to its nest and young, so this "wandering" could only mean that they scatter widely in choosing locations. Matthew 10:29: "Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? and not one of them shall fall on the ground without your Father." This is a reference to the common custom in the East of catching small birds, and selling them to be skinned, roasted and sold as tid-bits--a bird to a mouthful. These lines no doubt are the origin of the oft-quoted phrase, "He marks the fall of the sparrow." Then in verse 31 comes this comforting assurance: "Fear not therefore: ye are of more value than many sparrows." Luke 12:6: "Are not five sparrows sold for two pence? and not one of them is forgotten in the sight of God." This affirms the implication of Mark that these tiny birds were an article of commerce in the days of Jesus, just as they are now in the Far East.
Gene Stratton-Porter