Handbook for Bible Students

“F” Entries

Fasting, Scriptural Idea of.—The custom of fasting has been more or less conspicuous in many of the religions which have prevailed in the world. Among the religious observances of the Greeks and Romans, fasting, though not entirely unknown, held a less important place than elsewhere. In Egypt we find nothing of compulsory general fasts, though a rigorous temporary abstinence was required of persons about to be initiated into the mysteries of Isis and Osiris. In the remote East the custom of fasting obtained more generally. Climate, the habits of a people, and their creed, gave it at different periods different characteristics; but it may be pronounced to have been a recognized institution with all the more civilized nations, especially those of Asia, throughout all historic times. We find it in high estimation among the ancient Parsees of Irania. It formed a prominent feature among the mysteries of Mithras; and found its way, together with these, over Armenia, Cappadocia, Pontus, and Asia Minor to Palestine, and northward to the wilds of Scythia. The ancient Chinese and Hindoos carried fasting to an unnatural excess. The Pavaka, by the due observance of which the Hindoo believer is supposed to be purified from all his sins, requires, among other things, an uninterrupted fast for twelve days (Chambers’ Cyclopedia, art. “Fast”). The Mohammedans, during the ninth month, Ramadan, fast rigorously every day, from sunrise till the stars appear at evening. HBS 183.3

In the Scriptures fasting assumes a new and higher significance. Here it is purely an act of piety. The Bible represents fasting in the true sense as the accompaniment of supplication, as being in itself an act of prayer. Apart from its relation and reference to the divine Being, the mere act of fasting has in the Bible no significance. Of its sanitary value we hear nothing; in its Scriptural aspect it appears as a religious act, a penitential act, a prayer in itself. Such being the case, we cease to wonder that there is no direct mention made of “prayer” in the book of Esther. A Jew would no more think of fasting without prayer -without putting up a petition to Jehovah-than he would think of eating without drinking, or of sleeping without reclining. Fasting was invariably attended with prayer, though prayer was not in every case accompanied by fasting. It is clear that fasting in the Scriptural sense comprises: (1) Abstinence from food and drink for a longer or shorter period. Without this abstinence there is no proper “fast.” (2) Abstinence from all earthly pleasures. Daniel 9:3; 10:3. (3) Abstinence to the extent of afflicting the body more or less. This physical suffering, this refusal to gratify the demands of appetite, is not to be regarded as a penance, but as an act of self-denial subordinating the lower nature to the higher, the physical to the spiritual part of man. HBS 183.4

Generally speaking, fasting viewed as a religious mortification or humiliation, was intended: (1) As an expression of penitence and humility before God, in view of one’s sins. It was not a self-inflicted punishment for sin, but an expression of sorrow on account of sin. 1 Samuel 7:6; Nehemiah 1:4. (2) It was often a prayer for the removal of some present affliction or calamity under which the individual or the nation was suffering (see Judges 20:26; Joshua 7:6, where fasting is evidently implied). (3) At other times the object was to deprecate some imminent evil, to avert some impending judgment of God. 2 Samuel 12:16; 1 Kings 21:27; 2 Chronicles 20:3; Jonah 3:5-10. (4) Often fasting was preparatory to seeking by prayer some special blessing from God. Matthew 17:21; Luke 2:37; Acts 10:30; 13:3; 14:23; 1 Corinthians 7:5. HBS 184.1

Among the Jews but one day of fasting seems to have been observed by divine command-that of the day of atonement (compare Leviticus 16:29; 23:27; Numbers 29:7). During the time of the captivity, the Jews observed four other annual fasts,-on the seventeenth of the fourth month, in memory of the capture of Jerusalem (Jeremiah 52:6, 7); on the ninth day of the fifth month, in memory of the burning of the temple (Zechariah 7:3; 8:19); on the third of the seventh month, in memory of the slaughter of Gedaliah (Jeremiah 41:2); and on the tenth day of the tenth month, as a memorial of the inception of the attack upon Jerusalem (Zechariah 8:19). To these was added the fast of Esther, observed on the thirteenth day of the twelfth month, Adar. At a later period other fasts were added, so that the Jewish calendar includes at present some twenty-eight fast days for each year. John Allen in his “Modern Judaism” (pp. 384, 385), mentions six principal fasts (see also Rabbi David Levi’s “Ceremonies of the Jews,” pp. 70, 71, 85, 120, 125; “Jewish Ceremonies,” by Gamaliel Ben Pedahzur, pp. 34-68). The latter very rare and curious work specifies and describes nine fast days, and refers to several others. The Pharisees, as appears from Luke 18:12, were accustomed to fast twice in each week. These fasts are said to have occurred on Mondays and Thursdays, because the tradition was that Moses ascended Mt. Sinai the second time to receive the law on a Thursday, and descended upon Monday (Schaff-Herzog, Cyclopedia, art. “Fasting”). The Talmudic treatise entitled Taanith, gives very minute directions respecting the proper method of fasting. HBS 184.2

It would be beside our purpose to give a sketch of the custom of fasting as it has obtained in the Christian church. We close with the remark of Calvin: “Holy and legitimate fasting is directed to three ends. For we practise it, either as a restraint on the flesh, to preserve it from licentiousness; or as a preparation for prayers and pious meditations; or as a testimony of our humiliation in the presence of God, when we are desirous of confessing our guilt before him” (“Institutes,” book 4, chap. 12, sec. 15).—“The Book of Esther, A New Translation,” edited by Rev. John W. Haley, M. A., pp. 149-151. Andover: Warren F. Draper, 1885. HBS 184.3

Fatherhood.—He [Christ] makes the fatherhood the basis of all the duties which man owes to God. Supreme love to God is possible only because God is love. On the ground of mere sovereignty or judicial and autocratic authority, the first commandment could never be enjoined. We cannot love simply because we will or wish or are commanded, but only because we are loved. Supreme affection is possible only through the sovereign fatherhood. And what is true of this first is true of all our other duties. Worship is to be in spirit and in truth, because it is worship of the Father. Prayer is to be constant and simple and sincere because it is offered to the Father. We are to give alms in simplicity and without ostentation, because the Father sees in secret. We are to be forgiving, because the Father forgives. Obedience is imitation of God, a being perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect. In a word, duty is but the habit of the filial spirit; and it is possible and incumbent on all men, because all are sons.—“The Place of Christ in Modern Theology,” Andrew Martin Fairbairn, M. A., D. D., p. 488. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1893. HBS 185.1

Fathers, Cyprian.—Thascius Cacilius Cyprianus was born of a wealthy patrician family about 200 a. d. While yet a young man he was a brilliant teacher of rhetoric at Carthage, and during that period seems to have disputed with members of the rising Christian church. Their arguments or evidence must have been too strong for his disbelief, for he became converted, and at once assumed an influential position among the Christians of the city. HBS 185.2

He spent most of his wealth on the poor, and grew to be so popular that the whole Christian populace called him to the head of the Carthaginian church. This made him a buffer against the imperial persecutions. Several times he was driven into hiding or exile, and at last he was brought before the magistrate and condemned to death in accordance with the decree of Valerian, because he would not sacrifice to the emperor.—“The Library of Original Sources,” Vol. IV, p. 35. Milwaukee, Wis.: University Research Extension Company, copyright 1907. HBS 185.3

Feasts, New Year.—It is altogether probable that the beginning of the year was celebrated from ancient times in some special way, like the New Moon festival. The earliest reference, however, to such a custom is, probably, in the account of the vision of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 40:1) which, as stated above, took place at the beginning of the year, on the tenth day of the month (Tishri?). On the same day the beginning of the year of jubilee was to be proclaimed by the blowing of trumpets. Leviticus 25:9. According to the Septuagint rendering of Ezekiel 45:20, special sacrifices were to be offered on the first day of the seventh month as well as on the first day of the first month. This first day of the seventh month was appointed by the law to be “a day of blowing of trumpets” (äoaeú íeé). There was to be a holy convocation; no servile work was to be done; and special sacrifices were to be offered. Leviticus 23:23-25; Numbers 29:1-6 (comp. ib. 10:1-10). This day was not expressly called New Year’s Day, but it was evidently so regarde d by the Jews at a very early period.... HBS 185.4

The observance of the 1st of Tishri as Rosh ha-Shanah, the most solemn day next to Yom Kippur, is based principally on the traditional law to which the mention of “Zikkaron” (==“memorial day;” Leviticus 23:24) and the reference of Ezra to the day as one “holy to the Lord” (Nehemiah 8:9), seem to point. The passage in Psalm 81:5 referring to the solemn feast which is held on New Moon day, when the shofar is sounded, as a day of “mishpat” (judgment) of “the God of Jacob,” is taken to indicate the character of Rosh ha-Shanah. Rosh ha-Shanah is the most important judgment day, on which all the inhabitants of the world pass for judgment before the Creator, as sheep pass for examination before the shepherd. Three books of account are opened on Rosh ha-Shanah, wherein the fate of the wicked, the righteous, and those of an intermediate class (not utterly wicked) are recorded. The names of the righteous are immediately inscribed, and they are sealed “to live.” The middle class are allowed a respite of ten days till Yom Kippur, to repent and become righteous; the wicked are “blotted out of the book of the living.” Psalm 69:28:-The Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. IX, art. “New Year,” p. 256. HBS 185.5

Flood, Testimony of Facts to.—Such, then, are the teachings of the Mosaic narrative. Let us note how science brings to our view the results of this work. HBS 186.1

It is well known that the bones of the great extinct mammals, as well as those of the immense reptiles of the “secondary” rocks, are almost always found in comparatively superficial deposits, quite generally also among the foothills of ranges of mountains like the Rockies or the Himalayas. More than this, they are found together in such heaps, such vast numbers, as utterly to preclude the idea that they died and were buried in any ordinary way-unless, indeed, those ancient animals had graveyards and buried their dead together. Thus, in speaking of the remains of the Zeuglodon (a kind of whale), Professor Nicholson says: HBS 186.2

“Remains of these gigantic whales are very common in the ‘Jackson beds’ of the Southern United States. So common are they that, according to Dana, ‘the large vertebra, some of them a foot and a half long and a foot in diameter, were formerly so abundant over the country in Alabama that they were used for making walls, or were burned to rid the fields of them.’” HBS 186.3

Concerning some of the deposits of the Western United States we are told that “remains of the Oreodontida [extinct pig-like animals] occur in such vast numbers as to indicate that these animals must have lived in large herds around the borders of the lake basins in which their remains have been entombed.” HBS 186.4

Whether Professor Marsh’s attempt at explanation really explains, I shall leave the reader to judge. It was the best he could do as a uniformitarian. But such collections of ancient remains are just what the sincere believer of Moses’ record would expect to find. HBS 186.5

I might refer to the remains of the Hipparion, also found in immense quantities in Europe and India, but shall confine myself to a more familiar example, those of the mammoth and other semitropical species found in such profusion in the arctic regions. These in many cases have been so suddenly overwhelmed and embalmed in the ice that their undigested food, consisting of the boughs, bulbs, and leaves of semitropical plants, which, as we have seen, grew in that locality abundantly at that time, has been found in the stomachs of these beasts, as if the latter had been killed yesterday, proving that they were “quietly feeding when the crisis came.” Most persons have read of the first specimen of the mammoth found by a fisherman in 1799, on the bank of the Lena River near its mouth. When it finally tumbled out of the ice, after five years occupied in the latter melting around it, the naturalist who wished to secure the specimen and pelt for the museum at St. Petersburg had great difficulty in saving it from the dogs and wolves, for its flesh was in a state of perfect preservation after its millenniums of entombment. But we are speaking now only of the abundance of these remains. HBS 186.6

“So abundant, indeed, are the remains of the mammoth that for many years they have actually been quarried for the sake of the ivory-in 1821 no less a quantity than 20,000 pounds of this product having been obtained from New Siberia alone.” ... HBS 187.1

We might multiply such testimony to almost any extent, showing that almost all the so-called Secondary and Tertiary rocks reveal a similar state of things,-remains of land and marine life all heaped together in certain sections in such vast numbers as to prove conclusively to any unbiased mind that they were destroyed all together and in some very extraordinary way. The elemental tumult described in Genesis 7 and 8 seems by far the most reasonable explanation of the facts as we know them. And there is, of course, no stratigraphical evidence-the only evidence of real value-to show that all these deposits referred to above might not have been laid down at approximately one and the same time.—“Outlines of Modern Christianity and Modern Science,” George McCready Price, pp. 161-164. Oakland, Calif.: Pacific Press Publishing Company, copyright 1902. HBS 187.2

The same strong evidence to the historic truth of Genesis is given us when we consider the question of climate. Every “age,” from “Silurian times” down to the “recent,” bears witness, through its coral limestones, or remains of plant and land animal life, that the climate in which these forms lived was of the most mild and genial description, and singularly uniform, “periods during which the whole northern hemisphere enjoyed a kind of perpetual summer.” The same species have been found distributed over all this continent from Florida to Labrador, and even far within the arctic circle, a singular uniformity of climate that we can scarcely comprehend. HBS 187.3

These facts agree well with what we know of antediluvian times. The cloudless, rainless skies of those glorious days when the earth was young betoken a vastly different condition of the atmosphere from what we have today. But what is our astonishment when we are told, almost in the same breath, that every formation, from the “Silurian” to the “recent,” presents unmistakable evidence of “ice action” over the same areas and practically at the same time! Talk about credulity! What, then, becomes of our “one great act of faith,-faith in the uniformity of nature,”-about which we used to hear so much from Professor Huxley? Why, this invoking the power of ice action in a semitropical climate is contrary to their own favorite “law of parsimony,” which, we are told, “forbids us to invoke the operation of higher causes to account for effects which lower causes suffice to explain.” How can they have the assurance to bid us leave the plain, consistent, and eminently reasonable explanation of Moses, and accept this “rotation of climates,” as James Geikie calls it, without the most undoubted evidence that the phenomenon spoken of was really caused by ice action? No wonder the latter author exclaims: HBS 187.4

“Geologists are staggered by the appearance of glacial deposits in the Permian, a formation whose fossils indicate mild and genial rather than cold climatal conditions. The occurrence in the Eocene, also, of huge, ice-carried blocks seems incomprehensible when the general character of the Eocene fossils is taken into account, for these have a somewhat tropical aspect. So likewise the appearance of ice-transported blocks in the Miocene is a sore puzzle.” HBS 187.5

That is, palms and other tropical plants grew abundantly in England, and the cinnamon and fig, with palms, etc., grew in North America, in both Eocene and Miocene “times;” while in the latter, many evergreens, together with luxuriant ivies and vines, large-leaved oaks, and walnuts, and even Sequoias (like the pines and “big trees” of California) and magnolias, grew in northern Greenland, “within twelve degrees of the pole.” I should think that glaciers over Europe in such a climate were rather a “sore puzzle” for the most ingenious “uniformitarian.” HBS 187.6

To make the matter worse, they are finding these evidences of “glacial action” over such enormous areas that many of our leading investigators are becoming dazed at the problems involved in making their theories appear even moderately reasonable. For a long time they have taught us that a great winding-sheet of ice extended over the northern regions down to about 40° north in America, and to about 50° in the Old World, though curiously enough confined between the Missouri River and the Dakotas on the west and the Ural Mountains on the east. Agassiz, indeed, and others of the older geologists, taught that the glacial winter was cosmic, i. e., encrusted the whole globe with ice; and ... the strong evidence of this comparative universality at least was made the basis of the “interval” or “restitution theory” of creation, which was started by Buckland and advocated by many others. But this idea of a universal coat of ice has been gradually hushed down by the ridicule of modern geologists, most of whom, as evolutionists, of course cannot believe in the great break in the succession of life which this would involve. Besides, it would labor under the grave inconvenience of harmonizing too closely with the Biblical story of a universal deluge, if for ice we only substitute water. But more recently they have been finding abundant traces of the same phenomena in different parts of Australia, India, South Africa, and South America,-tropical or semitropical countries,-though in some cases they are obliged to locate them in “Permo-Carboniferous times,” that is, contemporary with the luxuriant vegetation of the coal beds, and though in each case they say the deposits are stratified, and therefore could not have been produced by glaciers. HBS 188.1

But these things are no longer puzzles, nor are such minor occurrences as marine forms mixed up with the coal and land plants with the deep-sea limestones, already referred to, if we only forget this everhaunting specter of the succession of life, and remember that all these deposits were laid down at that universal churning up of the soil of the ancient world, the Noachian Deluge.—“Outlines of Modern Christianity and Modern Science,” George McCready Price, pp. 170-174. Oakland, Calif.: Pacific Press Publishing Company, copyright 1902. HBS 188.2

Flood, Universality of.—The universality and northerly course, in general, of the deluge, appear to be fully established by well-attested accounts of the fossil remains of foreign animals and vegetables, found all over the globe, in places and at elevations where they could not have been naturally produced. HBS 188.3

1. At Port Julian, on the eastern coast of South America, in 49 degrees south latitude, Sir John Narborough, in 1670, found on the tops of the hills, and in the ground, very large oyster shells, six or seven inches broad, and yet not one oyster was to be found in the harbor.... HBS 188.4

2. On the Andes, near the western coast of South America, Ulloa found bivalve shells at the elevation of 13,869 English feet; and in the same rocks containing these, petrified wood, which must have been drifted thither at the same time the shells were deposited.... HBS 188.5

3. The Alps and Pyrenean Mountains in Europe abound with fossil shells, at considerable elevations. HBS 188.6

4. In the Tauric Mountains of the Crimea are found petrifactions of foreign shells, not to be met with in the adjacent seas.... HBS 188.7

5. At the mountain of St. Peter’s, near Maestricht, in Germany, among other fossil remains have been found the head of a crocodile; large jawbones and vertebra, a thigh bone and shoulder blade of some large species of animal; tortoise shells; fragments of branched horns resembling those of the elk; the teeth of various species of sharks, and of some unknown fishes; sea shells of various kinds; silicious wood, perforated by worms, madrepores, and fungites.... HBS 188.8

6. The same observations may be applied to the petrified skeletons of the elephant, rhinoceros, hippopotamus, etc., which abound in the steppes, or table-lands, of Tartary and Siberia. Most of the fossil crocodiles which have been discovered in the different parts of Europe, are referred by St. Fond to the Gavial, or Asiatic species.... HBS 189.1

7. In a gravel pit in the parish of Newton St. Loe, three miles from Bath, in the valley adjoining the Bristol road, were found, in 1801, several fossil remains of foreign animals, now in the possession of Jacob Wilkinson, Esq. Among them is a great tusk, probably of a mammoth, which is seven feet long, and measures, at the butt, thirteen inches round; a large shoulder blade, probably belonging to the same animal; and the petrified jaws of an alligator, in which the teeth are perfect, and locked in each other.... HBS 189.2

8. In the year 1775, the Russian government sent a surveyor, Chvoinoff, to explore the shores of the icy sea, who found, near the promontory of Swatoi Noss, an island about 150 versts long, and 80 broad in the widest part, which was “formed,” to use his own expressions, “of the bones of that extraordinary animal, the mammoth, mixed with the heads and horns of the buffalo, or something like it, and some horns of the rhinoceros.” HBS 189.3

9. Also during the expedition for exploring the north and east coasts of Russia, in 1785-94, on the high, sandy shores of the river Kovima, which runs into the icy sea, in latitude 69 degrees 16 minutes, were found in great abundance the tusks of the mammoth.... HBS 189.4

10. M. Pallas, who had formerly espoused the opinion of Buffon, that Siberia was once the abode of elephants, was convinced by later observations that such, whose remains are there found in considerable numbers, must either have fled to these high grounds to avoid an increasing deluge, or that their carcasses had been wafted thither by its waters. In his observations on the formation of mountains, this author says that the relics of those large animals, inhabitants of Hindustan,-the elephant, rhinoceros, and monstrous buffaloes,-are to be found in great quantities near the course of rivers, and chiefly wherever there is any considerable opening in the chain of Oural Mountains, which bound Siberia on the south. They are deposited at no great depth, under beds of sand or slime, accompanied with various sea shells, bones of fish, and wood covered with ocher,-an evident proof that they were transported thither by water [and that they did not travel thither by land]. A rhinoceros, still covered with its skin entire, found in the frozen soil of the borders of the Viloui, “is a convincing proof,” says he, “that it must have been the most rapid inundation, which could have hurried this carcass to these frozen countries, before corruption had time to destroy its tenderest parts.” ... HBS 189.5

11. “A complete mammoth has lately been found in a state of perfect preservation on the borders of the frozen ocean. It was discovered by Schoumakoff, a Tungoose chief, in the autumn of 1799, in the midst of a rock of ice; but it was not till the fifth year after finding it that the ice had melted sufficiently to disengage the mammoth, when it fell over on its side on a bank of sand.... HBS 189.6

12. In the heart of North America, also, some years ago, in a salt marsh near the river Ohio, were dug up several skeletons of animals of enormous size. One tooth, belonging to a large row, weighed upwards of eleven pounds. A thigh bone of a quadruped was found in the same place, which was more than four feet in length.... HBS 189.7

13. In the year 1783, a huge skeleton, probably of this kind, was discovered in a marl pit, under a peat moss, surrounded by a stratum of sea shells, and other marine productions, on the lands of Dr. Percy, bishop of Dromore, in Ireland. The horns were seven feet and one inch long; the length of the skull, one foot eleven inches; the breadth of the forehead above the eyes, eleven inches. All the bones were of a gigantic size, not in the least petrified, but as fresh as if the animal had only died a week before.... HBS 190.1

These instances seem fully sufficient to establish the universality of the deluge, and its general progress northward from the southern polar regions.—“A New Analysis of Chronology and Geography,” Rev. William Hales, D. D., Vol. I, pp. 327-331. London: C. J. G. & F. Rivington, 1830. HBS 190.2

Flood, Changes Due to.—It seems evident that the chief difference between the world as we know it and the world before the flood, is due to some great change in the atmospheric conditions. Those rainless skies, with a semitropical climate universal over the globe, are proof of this; as is also the long life of man and the great vigor and luxuriance of the animal and vegetable forms found fossil in the rocks. They all speak to us of an atmosphere more vitalizing than we have now. It would even seem probable that ordinary decay and fermentation were then comparatively unknown, for in the first recorded instance of the kind, it seems to have been altogether a new and unexpected result. Whether there was more carbonic acid gas in the air then, and whether any material increase of this would be consistent with the great vigor of the animals, I know not. It would seem to account for the luxuriance of the plant life. Simply a denser atmosphere might allow far more water vapor to be suspended in it without precipitation, and might, as Tyndall thought, account for that singularly uniform climate over all the world. I have already suggested that some mass of burning hydrogen floating in space might have been attracted into our atmosphere, and might in that case have robbed us of a large share of our oxygen, leaving our breath supply in the impoverished condition in which it is at present. What has really produced the change, we may never know in this life; but certain it is that there has been a great alteration in our atmosphere since those glorious, balmy, springlike days when the earth was young.—“Outlines of Modern Christianity and Modern Science,” George McCready Price, p. 181. HBS 190.3

Flood, According to Berosus.—The account which Berosus gives of the deluge is still more strikingly in accordance with the narrative of Scripture. “Xisuthrus,” he says, “was warned by Saturn in a dream that all mankind would be destroyed shortly by a deluge of rain. He was bidden to bury in the city of Sippara (or Sepharvaim) such written documents as existed; and then to build a huge vessel or ark, in length five furlongs, and two furlongs in width, wherein was to be placed good store of provisions, together with winged fowl and four-footed beasts of the earth; and in which he was himself to embark with his wife and children, and his close friends. HBS 190.4

“Xisuthrus did accordingly, and the flood came at the time appointed. The ark drifted toward Armenia; and Xisuthrus, on the third day after the rain abated, sent out from the ark a bird, which, after flying for a while over the illimitable sea of waters, and finding neither food nor a spot on which it could settle, returned to him. Some days later, Xisuthrus sent out other birds, which likewise returned, but with feet covered with mud. Sent out a third time, the birds returned no more; and Xisuthrus knew that the earth had reappeared. So he removed some of the covering of the ark, and looked, and behold the vessel had grounded upon a high mountain, and remained fixed. Then he went forth from the ark, with his wife, his daughter, and his pilot, and built an altar, and offered sacrifice; after which he suddenly disappeared from sight, together with those who had accompanied him. HBS 190.5

“They who had remained in the ark, surprised that he did not return, sought him, when they heard his voice in the sky, exhorting them to continue religious, and bidding them go back to Babylonia from the land of Armenia, where they were, and recover the buried documents, and make them once more known among men. So they obeyed, and went back to the land of Babylon, and built many cities and temples, and raised up Babylon from its ruins.” HBS 191.1

Such is the account of Berosus; and a description substantially the same is given by Abydenus, an ancient writer of whom less is known, but whose fragments are generally of great value and importance. It is plain that we have here a tradition not drawn from the Hebrew record, much less the foundation of that record, yet coinciding with it in the most remarkable way. The Babylonian version is tricked out with a few extravagances, as the monstrous size of the vessel, and the translation of Xisuthrus; but otherwise it is the Hebrew history down to its minutia. The previous warning, the divine direction as to the ark and its dimensions, the introduction into it of birds and beasts, the threefold sending out of the bird, the place of the ark’s resting, the egress by removal of the covering, the altar straightway built, and the sacrifice offered, constitute an array of exact coincidences which cannot possibly be the result of chance, and of which I see no plausible account that can be given except that it is the harmony of truth.—“The Historical Evidences of the Truth of the Scripture Records,” George Rawlinson, M. A., pp. 67-69. New York: John B. Alden, 1883. HBS 191.2

Flood, Babylonian Account of.—The greatest of all the Babylonian epics is the story of Gilgames, for in it the greatest of the myths seem to pour into one great stream of epic. It was written upon twelve big tablets in the library of Ashurbanipal, some of which have been badly broken. It was, however, copied from earlier tablets which go back to the first dynasty of Babylon. The whole story is interesting and important, but its greatest significance lies in the eleventh tablet, which contains a description of the great flood, and is curiously parallel to the flood story in the book of Genesis.—The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, edited by James Orr, M. A., D. D., Vol. I, art. “Babylonia and Assyria, The Religion of,” p. 374. HBS 191.3

Flood, Chaldean Account of.— HBS 191.4

As soon as dawn appeared, There rose from the north a dark cloud. The weather god (Ramman) thundered in its midst. God Nebo and god, the king, went in front of him. There came they that oppress mountain and country. God Uragal tore loose the anchor. There came (also) Adar, storm he poured down. The gods the Anunnaki lifted on high (their) torches, With whose light they illuminate the land. The storm, excited by Ramman, reached up to heaven. All light was turned into darkness. He overflooded the land like [....], he devastated. With violence he blew and in one (?) day the storm rose above the mountains. HBS 191.5

Like as an onslaught in battle it came against the people. Not could brother see his brother; not did recognize one another the people; Even in heaven the gods were afraid of the deluge; They retired, went up to the heaven of god Anu (i. e., the sky). There the gods crouched down like as dogs, on the surrounding walls (perhaps “the firmament”) they sat down. Then cried out Ishtar full of wrath (variant: like a woman in travail); There called out the goddess, the lofty, she whose cry is powerful: This people (?) has been turned into clay, and The evil that I have predicted before (or in the assembly of) the gods, As I have predicted the evil in the assembly of the gods, (It has come about namely:) To destroy my people completely, I predicted the storm. But I will bear my people again (i. e., bring them to life again), Though now, like young fishes, they fill the sea. The gods wailed with her over the Anunnaki; The gods sat there bowed down in weeping; Their lips were pressed together (in fear and in terror). Six days and (seven) nights continued the storm, Raged cyclone and tempest. When the seventh day arrived that (fearful) cyclone ceased, the battle Which they had fought like as a battle army rested; The waters of the deep narrowed down (sank), the terrible storm, the deluge, was at an end. I looked up over the sea and raised my voice. But the whole race had returned to the clay. Like as the surrounding field had become the bed of the rivers. (i. e., no difference could be seen, everything was covered with water). I opened an air-hole and light fell upon my cheeks; Dazzled I sank backward, sitting down weeping, Down my cheeks flowed my tears. I looked up: “The world a wide ocean!” (I cried). On the twelfth (day?) there arose (out of the water) a strip of land. On Mount Nicir the ship settled. The mountain of the land Nicir took hold of the ship and did not let it move again. One day, two days, Mount Nicir took hold of the ship and did not let it move again. The third and fourth day Mount Nicir, the same. The same on the fifth and sixth day. On the seventh day, in the morning, I let go a dove; she flew hither and thither, But as there was no place of rest for her, she returned. I then sent out a swallow, the bird left, it also flew hither and thither, And returned again, as there was no place of rest. At last I sent out a raven, it left; The raven went and saw the decrease of the waters. It settled down to feed (either on the carcasses still floating about or on the slimy mud), went off, and no more returned. Then I disembarked and to the four winds I offered a sacrifice. A peace offering I made upon the height of the mountain. Each time I placed seven censers, Poured into them calmus, cedar wood, and sweet-smelling lollium. The gods inhaled the savor, yea, the gods inhaled the sweet savor; The gods gathered like flies around the sacrificer. But when now the lofty goddess arrived, She took the great lightnings of Anu and did according to her desire. HBS 192.1

“These gods! (she said) not, by my necklace, will I forget; These days will I remember forever, not will I forget; The gods may come to the sacrifice, But Bel shall not come to the sacrifice, Because rashly did he cause the deluge And delivered my people to destruction.” But when god Bel arrived, He saw the vessel and grew angry, wrath filled his heart against the gods, the Igigi (and he said): “What soul has escaped here; no man must survive the universal destruction.” God Adar opened his mouth and spake, saying unto Bel, the warlike: “Who beside Ea could have thought this out? But Ea knows everything.” Ea opened his mouth and spake, saying unto Bel, the warlike: “Thou, mighty among the gods, warrior, Thus, thus rashly hast thou caused the deluge. May the sinner bear his sin’s reward, and the wicked his wickedness. Be lenient, let not (all) be crushed; be merciful, let not (everything) be destroyed. Instead of causing a flood, lions might have come and diminished mankind; Instead of causing a flood, hyenas might have come and diminished mankind; Instead of causing a flood, famine might have arisen and seized the land; Instead of causing a flood, pestilence might be brought about and killed the people. I did not reveal the decision of the great gods. Atrachasis I let see (it) in a dream, the decision of the gods he heard.” Then came Bel to his senses, Bel mounted to the ship, Took me by the hand and raised me up. He raised up and placed my wife at my side. Then he turned toward us, sat down between us and blessed us, saying: “Ere this Pernapishtim was a man; Now Pernapishtim and his wife shall be like unto the gods and lifted up on high; Let Pernapishtim live afar off at the mouth of the (two?) rivers.” And he took us and made us dwell afar off at the mouth of the rivers. HBS 193.1

Flood, Babylonian Story of.—The Babylonian story of the deluge is so well known that it is not necessary to recapitulate it here. The striking resemblances to the Biblical story have so frequently been noted that they need not be repeated; nor is it necessary to emphasize the fact that they show a common origin for both narratives. In so far all scholars are agreed. HBS 193.3

Gunkel, however, taking the position generally held, thinks that those who are unwilling to agree that the Hebrew account is dependent on the Babylonian, but who say that both are versions of the same event, have overanxious temperaments. He claims that inasmuch as the stories coincide in so many minor details, they are related as narratives. To prove that the Israelitish story was borrowed from Babylonia, he sums up his views in his “Israel und Babylonien” (p. 19) in two arguments: First, the great age of Babylonian civilization and of the deluge narrative as well; second, the frequent occurrence of floods is very natural in the flat plain of Babylonia, which lies close to the sea and is watered by two great streams. HBS 193.4

The argument advanced by Zimmern, who holds also that the narrative was transplanted from Babylonia, its birthplace, is practically the same as the arguments of Gunkel. He says that the story, which was primitive, was indigenous in Babylonia, and was transplanted to Palestine; because the very essence of the Babylonian narrative presupposes a country liable to inundations, like Babylonia. He regards the story simply as a “nature myth,” representing the phenomena of winter, which in Babylonia is a time of rain. HBS 194.1

These writers hold [that] the theory advanced by Dillman, as well as by others, that there was a common Semitic tradition which developed in Israel in one way and in Babylonia in another, is to be rejected. Those who fail to be convinced that there was no such common source are accused by Gunkel of being possessed with anxious piety in a sad combination with a pitiful lack of culture. HBS 194.2

Besides the eleventh tablet of the Gilgamesh epic, which contains the deluge story, three other fragments have been found. The one, which is too small to be of any value, belonging to the early age, refers to the Babylonian hero. The second, now in the library of Mr. J. Pierpont Morgan, was written in the reign of Ammizaduga, about 2000 b. c., and represents a god calling upon Adad to cause a destructive rainstorm, and Ea interposing in order to save the diluvian hero. There are indications that even this is a copy of an earlier tablet. Scheil, who has given an account of the tablet, thinks this story was current in Sippara. We, therefore, have a Babylonian version of a deluge, distinct from the other, several centuries prior to the time of Moses. A third is in the Berlin Museum. Moreover, early seal-cylinders clearly indicate that scenes from the Gilgamesh epic were favorite themes for the lapidary of Babylonia or Shumer in a very early period. It is not improbable that some represent a Sumerian Noah in his ark. But this only proves the antiquity of some of the elements of which the epic is composed. HBS 194.3

It is a well-recognized fact that the Gilgamesh series is a collection of stories which became the national epic of the late Babylonians. Its composite character has already been pointed out, the work of the redactor in combining the different elements being an accepted fact. In the epic are found relics of ancient Sumerian mythology combined with Semitic sun myths; and some of the latter at least, the writer claims, have come from an ancient stock of legends possessed by the Western Semites. HBS 194.4

It is not a question whether Israel borrowed the deluge story from this Babylonian composition, or the Babylonians from Israel, but whether the Semitic elements in the Gilgamesh epic are indigenous to southern Babylonia (i. e., to the Sumerians); or whether they had their origin with the Semitic Babylonians who entered the land; or whether they go back to that Semitic center from which they came. It seems that most of the theories on the subject which result in saying the Hebrews borrowed their story from the Babylonians, emanate from a very contracted view of the situation; as if the only civilized peoples in Western Asia that possessed a literature or mythology were the Babylonians or Sumerians and Israel. That the Babylonian legend is of a great antiquity offers no difficulty. The almost universal character of a tradition of the event, which marked an epoch for ancient peoples, the writer thinks, is based upon the recollection of an actual inundation of an extraordinary character. The Babylonian and the Hebrew narratives, both of which can be said to belong to a comparatively late period in the history of man, have many points, as we have seen, in common. Doubtless the Sumerians also possessed a narrative, which may yet be found, some of the elements of which are included in the Gilgamesh series; but which may have been a story altogether different in character from the Hebrew and the Babylonian. HBS 194.5

A fact to be constantly kept before us is that the Biblical account makes the ark rest upon the mountains of Ararat (i. e., Urartu of the inscriptions), while the Babylonian fixes the place at Mt. Nisir. If Nisir is a mountain east of the Tigris, across the Little Zab, as has been declared, it can be said to be in Urartu, for that country included the highlands north of Assyria. It is a question whether in ancient times Urartu included the lofty mountainous plateau now known as Armenia. But the point to be emphasized is that both the Hebrew and the Babylonian stories localized the second beginning of man’s history, not only in the same region, but also outside of Babylonia. HBS 195.1

The Biblical story contains some features which are acknowledged to be distinctively Palestinian. These, it is claimed, made their appearance after the story reached Palestine and was appropriated by the Hebrews. They are “Noah,” “the olive leaf,” which is characteristic of Palestine; “the ark,” instead of a ship, because there are no. large navigable rivers in that land; and the beginning of the deluge on the seventeenth day of the second month, as that is the month the rains begin in Canaan, whereas the Babylonian deluge began in the eleventh month, the time the rains begin to fall in Babylonia. This latter is based on the fact that the epic was written on twelve tablets, which Rawlinson suggested represented the months; the eleventh tablet, therefore, corresponding to the eleventh month. There seems to be about as much proof for this assertion as if it were said that all books containing 365 pages represent the days of the year. Further, I fail to see that “Noah” is distinctively Palestinian. There is but one Noah known in the literature of Palestine, whereas the element Nuh is frequently found in Babylonian nomenclature. It would seem that the Pan-Babylonists have here overlooked an important argument. HBS 195.2

The statement that “olives” are characteristic of Palestine is most interesting, but it would have been more correct to have said Palestine and Syria, or still more appropriately Amurru, for at Beirut and Tripolis there are olive groves five miles square. Little or nothing is known of the origin of the word “ark” (tebah), although some declare it is of Egyptian origin. These supposed features, due to Palestinian influences after the story was borrowed from the Babylonian, do not offer very weighty arguments in support of the theory that the deluge story originated in southern Babylonia. [pp. 71-76] ... HBS 195.3

We may conclude that predominant elements in this and other parts of the Gilgamesh epic are connected with the sun deity and the land of the Western Semites, and that the origin of the Semitic portion of the epic, which doubtless includes those features which are common to the Biblical narrative, goes back to a West Semitic narrative, which is parent also to the Biblical version. HBS 195.4

We are, therefore, led to conclude, in the light of these facts, that the influence of Babylonia upon Israel or even Amurru has been greatly overestimated. In fact, exactly the reverse seems to be the case, i. e., many of the elements of the Semitic Babylonian religion and literature are not indigenous to the land, but in all probability came from the West; at least they had their natural development in that part of Western Asia. The ultimate origin may belong elsewhere, but that does not affect these conclusions. [p. 82]-“Amurru, The Home of the Northern Semites,” Albert T. Clay, Ph. D., pp. 71-76, 82. Philadelphia: The Sunday School Times Company, 1909. HBS 195.5

Forever, Two Senses of.—The word “Olam” has two senses, though the connection between the two is obvious. Its first and original sense is to “conceal,” or “hide,” or something “hidden.” Hence it came to mean “time hidden from man,” or “time indefinite.” In our version it is often translated “forever,” and in certain places it may mean “time unmeasured,” “for an age,” or “for ages.” But that strictly speaking it expresses a limited time is clear, not only from many passages where the time referred to can only be a lifetime, or till the year of jubilee, or for the period of the Jewish dispensation, but from other passages, where the word is redoubled or used in the plural (which it could not be if it meant “forever”), where its meaning is “for ages,” or “from age to age.”-“The Names of God in Holy Scripture,” Andrew Jukes, pp. 137, 138. London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1892. HBS 195.6

Forgeries, Prevalence of, in Early Centuries.—In the history of the rise and gradual development of the papal claims the historian must never lose sight of a force which was for centuries at work in favor of the Papacy, i. e., the falsifications and interpolations of passages in the books of the ancient Fathers, or in the acts and canons of the councils, in order to defend or promote the interests, the dignity, and the grandeur of the Roman see. It is true these frauds do not explain by themselves the gradual development of the exaggerated claims of the Papacy, but no historian of independent judgment and learning will ever be able to deny that those frauds helped, to a great extent, the growth of the papal claims, and contributed very largely to their being recognized as of divine appointment. HBS 196.1

For instance, the Roman theologians for centuries appealed to the false decretals and to the interpolated text of St. Cyprian’s “De Unitate Ecclesia” as to authentic documents witnessing to the belief of the universal church with regard to the Papacy, and the learned never dared call in question such momentous evidences, though on other and reasonable grounds well inclined to do so. Yet the false decretals and Cyprian’s interpolated passages were shameless fabrications. HBS 196.2

As a matter of fact, as Rufinus in his book, “De Adulteratione Librorum Origenis,” rightly remarks, it was pretty common in the early centuries of the church [and, we may add, all through the Middle Ages till the invention of the press], to corrupt the writings of the great ecclesiastical writers, forging new books or passages, altering the genuine ones, adding to them explanatory phrases, correcting what they believed to be misspellings of ignorant amanuenses, or mistranslations, as the case may be, suppressing this or that, reducing this text to a more orthodox tenor, and the like. Thus, says he, were corrupted and interpolated the writings of Tertullian, of St. Hilary, of St. Cyprian, and above all, of Origen.”-“The Primitive Church and the Primacy of Rome,” Prof. Giorgio Bartoli, pp. 104-106. New York: Hodder and Stoughton. HBS 196.3

Forgeries, The Sardican and Nicene Canons.—The conduct of the popes since Innocent I and Zosimus, in constantly quoting the Sardican Canon on appeals as a canon of Nice, cannot be exactly ascribed to conscious fraud-the arrangement of their collection of canons misled them. There was more deliberate purpose in inserting in the Roman manuscript of the sixth Nicene canon, “The Roman Church always had the primacy,” of which there is no syllable in the original,-a fraud exposed at the Council of Chalcedon, to the confusion of the Roman legates, by reading the original. Toward the end of the fifth and beginning of the sixth century, the process of forgeries and fictions in the interests of Rome was actively carried on there.—“The Pope and the Council,” Janus (Dr. J. J. Ign. von Döllinger) (R. C.), pp. 122, 123. London: Rivingtons, 1869. HBS 196.4

Forgeries, Interpolating St. Cyprian.—Toward the end of the sixth century a fabrication was undertaken in Rome, the full effect of which did not appear till long afterward. The famous passage in St. Cyprian’s book, “On the Unity of the Church,” was adorned, in Pope Pelagius II’s letter to the Istrian bishops, with such additions as the Roman pretensions required. St. Cyprian said that all the apostles had received from Christ equal power and authority with Peter, and this was too glaring a contradiction of the theory set up since the time of Gelasius. So the following words were interpolated: “The primacy was given to Peter to show the unity of the church and of the chair. How can he believe himself to be in the church who forsakes the chair of Peter, on which the church is built?”-“The Pope and the Council,” Janus (Dr. J. J. Ign. von Döllinger) (R. C.), p. 127. London: Rivingtons, 1859. HBS 197.1

Forgeries, Donation of Constantine.—After the middle of the eighth century, the famous Donation of Constantine was concocted at Rome. It is based on the earlier fifth-century legend of his cure from leprosy, and baptism by Pope Silvester, which is repeated at length, and the emperor is said, out of gratitude, to have bestowed Italy and the western provinces on the Pope, and also to have made many regulations about the honorary prerogatives and dress of the Roman clergy. The Pope is, moreover, represented as lord and master of all bishops, and having authority over the four great thrones of Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople, and Jerusalem. HBS 197.2

The forgery betrayed its Roman authorship in every line; it is self-evident that a cleric of the Lateran Church was the composer.—Id., pp. 131, 132. HBS 197.3

Donatio Constantini.—By this name is understood, since the end of the Middle Ages, a forged document of Emperor Constantine the Great, by which large privileges and rich possessions were conferred on the Pope and the Roman Church. In the oldest known (ninth century) manuscript (Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris, MS. Latin 2777) and in many other manuscripts the document bears the title: “Constitutum Domni Constantini Imperatoris.” ... This document is without doubt a forgery, fabricated somewhere between the years 750 and 850.—The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. V, art. “Donation,” pp. 118, 119. HBS 197.4

Forgeries, Gratian’s Work.—The corruption of the thirty-sixth canon of the ecumenical council of 692 is Gratian’s own doing. It renewed the canon of Chalcedon (451), which gave the Patriarch of New Rome, or Constantinople, equal rights with the Roman Patriarch. Gratian, by a change of two words, gives it a precisely opposite sense, and suppresses the reference to the canon of Chalcedon. He also reduces the five patriarchs to four; for the ancient equality of position of the Roman Bishop and the four chief bishops of the East was now to disappear, though even the Gregorians, as, e. g., Anselm, had treated him as one of the patriarchs.—“The Pope and the Council,” Janus (Dr. J. J. Ign. von Döllinger [R. C.]), pp. 144, 145. London: Rivingtons, 1869. HBS 197.5

Forgeries, A Canon Changed.—The canon of the African Synod,-that immovable stumblingblock of all papalists,-which forbids any appeal beyond the seas, i. e., to Rome, Gratian adapted to the service of the new system by an addition which made the synod affirm precisely what it denies. If Isidore undertook by his fabrications to annul the old law forbidding bishops being moved from one see to another, Gratian, following Anselm and Cardinal Gregory, improved on this by a fresh forgery, appropriating to the Pope alone the right of translation.—Id., pp. 146, 147. HBS 197.6

Forgeries, St. Cyprian’s Treatise.—The reader may have remarked that I gave the most beautiful extract of Cyprian’s treatise “On the Unity of the Church” according to the Oxford translation. I did so in order to leave out the shameful Roman interpolations of the same passage. The words interpolated are well known: HBS 198.1

“He builds His church upon that one [Peter], and to him intrusts his sheep to be fed. ... HBS 198.2

“He established one chair and ... HBS 198.3

“And primacy is given to Peter, that one church of Christ and one chair may be pointed out; and all are pastors and one flock is shown, to be fed by all the apostles with one-hearted accord. HBS 198.4

“He who deserts the chair of Peter, on which the church was founded, does he trust that he is in the church?” HBS 198.5

Now, the words in italics are spurious. “The history of their interpolation,” says Archbishop Benson, “may be distinctly traced even now, and it is as singular as their controversial importance has been unmeasured. Their insertion in the pages of “De Unitate Ecclesia” [“On the Unity of the Church”] is a forgery which has deceived an army of scholars and caused the allegiance of unwilling thousands to Rome. HBS 198.6

-“The Primitive Church and the Primacy of Rome,” Prof. Giorgio Bartoli, pp. 88, 89. New York: Hodder and Stoughton. HBS 198.7

I do not mention here the attempts that have been made to find a trace of the interpolated passages in the writings of Prudentius, Ambrose, and Augustine, because they all failed miserably. The interpolation, therefore, is certain, and is admitted now by all scholars, Catholic as well as Protestant, although in most Roman seminaries this is still simply ignored.—Id., p. 93. HBS 198.8