Handbook for Bible Students

“U” Entries

Ultramontanism.—Ultramontanism, a term used to denote integral and active Catholicism, because it recognizes as its spiritual head the Pope, who, for the greater part of Europe, is a dweller beyond the mountains (ultra montes), that is, beyond the Alps.... According to the definition given in Leichtenberger, “Encycl. des Sciences Religieuses” (ed. 1882): “The character of ultramontanism is manifested chiefly in the ardor with which it combats every movement of independence in the national churches, the condemnation which it visits upon works written to defend that independence, its denial of the rights of the state in matters of government, of ecclesiastical administration and ecclesiastical control, the tenacity with which it has prosecuted the declaration of the dogma of the Pope’s infallibility and with which it incessantly advocates the restoration of his temporal power as a necessary guaranty of his spiritual sovereignty.”-The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. XV, art. “Ultramontanism,” p. 125. HBS 482.1

Ultramontanism, Triumph of.—The old names of “ultramontane,” and “Gallican,” not invented by Protestants, but watchwords of contending parties in the Roman Church, have almost dropped out of use, because the Gallican party has been crushed into insignificance and silence, while ultramontanism, swarming over the Alpine barriers which long shut it into Italy, has conquered the whole Latin obedience for a time.—“Plain Reasons Against Joining the Church of Rome,” Richard Frederick Littledale, LL. D., D. C. L., p. 198. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1905. HBS 482.2

Ur of the Chaldees, Location of.—In identifying a city, as Ur, there are a number of conditions which should be satisfactorily met. First, the city should be in Chaldea, preferably not in Shumer, but in Babylonia. Secondly, it should be explained why its location was lost sight of in the late pre-Christian centuries. Thirdly, it ought to be shown why an Aramaan or Western Semite should have come from that city. And fourthly, its name should be ‘Ur (eaa). HBS 482.3

For some time it has been known that there was a town in the vicinity of Sippar called Amurru, which is also written with the usual ideogram Martu. This can properly be included in lower Mesopotamia or Chaldea. HBS 482.4

This city, as far as the writer knows, while apparently a city of some prominence in the time of the first dynasty of Babylon, is not mentioned in the subsequent periods. HBS 482.5

As is known, a large proportion of the tablets belonging to this period that have been thus far published, come from Sippara and its vicinity. In these tablets it has been found that many of the names of the contracting parties, witnesses in the contracts, officials, and devotees in the temple documents, are West Semitic. Ranke, in his “Personal Names of the Hammurabi Dynasty,” p. 33, shows that these people were called “Children of the West Land.” His lists of names, as well as those of Poebel, which came from this district, namely, Sippar, show that a large percentage of the residents bore West Semitic names. HBS 482.6

Toffteen and others have even asserted that the Amorites of the West came from this district. Concerning the way these Western Semites came to live in this locality, we can only theorize. But knowing the later custom of deporting people, and knowing also the account of Chedorlaomer’s campaign, how he carried away Lot and the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, we might suggest that they or their ancestors had been carried into exile by some previous Elamite or Babylonian conqueror. HBS 483.1

A parallel to this case can be found in the “Business Documents of the Murashu Sons of Nippur.” In them, towns called Ashkelon, Gaza, Heshbon, Bit-Tabalai are located in the vicinity of Nippur in the fifth century b. c. In other words, West Semitic names are introduced for the towns occupied by the Jews in captivity. In these tablets also a great many Jewish names have been found, the descendants of the people whom Nebuchadrezzar placed there in exile. The name of the city Barsip above Carchemish of Gudea’s time doubtless is the origin of the Babylonian Borsippa. HBS 483.2

And finally, having shown that the West Semitic name Mar-tu = Amurru = aaa, or ‘Ur, and that this is the name of the town in the vicinity of Sippar, we have the only city name Ur of the time of Abraham that is known. HBS 483.3

Thus all the requirements that can reasonably be laid down in the identification of the city have been satisfied. The city is in Chaldea or Babylonia; it thrived at the time that the patriarch lived; its location was later lost sight of; it was inhabited by West Semitic people, and its name is the same as is written in the Old Testament.—“Amurru, the Home of the Northern Semites,” Albert T. Clay, Ph. D., pp. 172-174. Philadelphia: The Sunday School Times Company, 1909. HBS 483.4

Urim and Thummim, Explanation of.—The Urim and Thummim were probably two precious stones which were drawn out as a lot to give Jehovah’s judgment. “The lot is cast into the lap (Heb., bosom); but the whole judgment thereof is of the Lord.” Proverbs 16:33. Bosom here is put for the clothing or covering over it (cp. Exodus 4:6, 7; Ruth 4:16). Chçk (bosom = any hollow thing, as of a chariot, 1 Kings 22:35). The Hebrew Urim and Thummim mean “lights” and “perfections.” Probably these are the plurals of majesty, the singular “light” (being put by metonymy for what it brought to light, i. e., guilt), and “perfection” (put by metonymy for moral perfection, i. e., innocence). Thus, these two placed in the “bag,” and one drawn out, would give the judicial decision (the name connected with the breastplate (cp. v. 15), which would be “of the Lord.” Hence the breastplate itself was known as “the breastplate of judgment” (v. 15), because by that Jehovah’s judgment was obtained whenever it was needed. Hence, when the land was divided “by lot” (Numbers 26:55, etc.), Eleazar, the high priest, must be present (Numbers 34:17, cp. 27:21; Joshua 17:4). When he would decide it, the lot “came up” (Joshua 18:11); “came forth” (Joshua 19:1); “came out” (Joshua 19:17); i. e., “out” or “forth” from the bag of the ephod. HBS 483.5

In Ezra 2:61-63 and Nehemiah 7:63-65 no judgment could be given unless the high priest was present with the breastplate, with its bag, with the lots of Urim and Thummim, which gave Jehovah’s decision, “guilty” or “innocent,” “yes” or “no.”-“The Companion Bible,” Part I, “The Pentateuch,” p. 112. London: Oxford University Press. HBS 483.6

Urim and Thummim, Use of.—After the death of Moses, a different mode was appointed for consulting the oracle, by the high priest. HBS 483.7

He put on “the breastplate of judgment,” a principal part of the potifical dress, on which were inscribed the words “Urim” and “Thummim,” signifying “lights and perfections,” emblematical of divine illumination; as the inscription on his miter, “Holiness to the Lord,” was of sanctification, Exodus 28:30-37; Leviticus 8:8. Thus prepared, he presented himself before the Lord to ask counsel on public matters, not in the inner sanctuary, which he presumed not to enter but on the great day of national atonement, but without the veil, with his face toward the ark of the covenant, inside; and behind him, at some distance, without the sanctuary, stood Joshua, the judge, or person who wanted the response, which seems to have been given with an audible voice from within the veil (Numbers 27:21), as in the case of Joshua 6:6-15; of the Israelites during the civil war with Benjamin (Judges 20:27, 28); on the appointment of Saul to be king, when he hid himself (1 Samuel 10:22-24); of David (1 Samuel 22:10; 23:2-12; 30:8; 2 Samuel 5:23, 24); of Saul (1 Samuel 28:6). HBS 484.1

This mode of consultation subsisted under the tabernacle erected by Moses in the wilderness, and until the building of Solomon’s temple, after which we find no instances of it. The oracles of the Lord were thenceforth delivered by the prophets; as by Ahijah to Jeroboam (1 Kings 11:29); by Shemaiah to Rehoboam (1 Kings 12:22); by Elijah to Ahab (1 Kings 17:1; 21:17-29); by Michaiah to Ahab and Jehoshaphat (1 Kings 22:7); by Elisha to Jehoshaphat and Jehoram (2 Kings 3:11-14); by Isaiah to Hezekiah (2 Kings 19:6-34; 20:1-11); by Huldah to Josiah (2 Kings 22:13-20); by Jeremiah to Zedekiah (Jeremiah 32:3-5), etc. HBS 484.2

After the Babylonish captivity, and the last of the prophets, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the oracle ceased; but its revival was foretold by Ezra 2:63; and accomplished by Jesus Christ, who was himself the oracle, both under the old and new covenants (Genesis 15:1, etc.; John 1:1, etc.).—“A New Analysis of Chronology and Geography,” Rev. William Hales, D. D., Vol. II, pp. 240, 241. London: C. J. G. & F. Rivington, 1830. HBS 484.3