THERE must be a large number of persons who, though they have not the equipment necessary to probe into questions of translation, are nevertheless interested in the results of such enquiries.

      In the first part of this book an attempt is made to satisfy that interest to a degree by the presentation of a number of studies in New Testament language, particularly with reference to individual words of importance. For the sake of the reader who has no Greek, the characters of Greek words are printed in English. This fact involves some limitations; for example, no attempt is made to distinguish short and long vowels. But the citing of the Greek words will enable a reader to follow up his studies by consulting works such as the Englishman's Greek Concordance or Young's Analytical Concordance for the purpose of ascertaining what Greek term is used in any given passage.

      The second part of the book deals with studies of a more general character. It will be observed, however, that these chapters are not unrelated to word studies, while they include the fruit of research into what may be called the background of the New Testament.

      The more we know of the Greek and Roman civilisation of the period, the better can we appreciate the New Testament record.

RANDALL T. PITTMAN.      
Hampton, Melbourne.      

      THERE was a time when students of the New Testament language were divided into two hostile camps. Scholars of the one group insisted that New Testament Greek was in the Attic as used by Plato and Thucydides, and that Classical lexicons could be used as the basis of appeal. Those in the other group claimed that the New Testament was in a "Biblical Greek"--i.  e., a language so influenced by Hebraisms as to be rendered quite distinct from ordinary Greek, and consequently not yielding to the tests of ordinary language as to grammar and meanings of words.

      So great was the confusion resulting from the wordy warfare concerning New Testament language that one writer (Jowett) declared: "There seem to be reasons for doubting whether any considerable light can be thrown on the New Testament from inquiry into language." As Prof. A. T. Robertson says in his Grammar of the New Testament: "That prophecy is now almost amusing in the light of historical research."

      Recent discoveries have shown conclusively that both groups were wrong, and that the New Testament language was the normal Greek of its own period--

not the stately, polished phrasing of the Attic writers, nor yet a "Biblical Greek," but simply the language of everyday life as used throughout the Empire. After the conquests of Alexander the Great, the Greek language was carried far and wide, until it became practically a universal speech. Naturally, it tended to lose something of its Attic dignity, and became modified in the course of time by the various elements which affect all speech. To an extent the language of the study gave place to the language of the street. Hence colloquialisms became frequent, grammar less rigid, and the vocabulary was considerably enlarged. This "common" Greek--the Koine--was so widespread that Roman decrees were issued in it, and a Roman boy who had the advantages of education learned Greek from his schoolmaster, who, in all probability, was a Greek by birth.

      When the New Testament came to be written the Koine was the language used. It can even be called the Vernacular Koine, but it was used with a restraint which kept it free from vulgarism, and its vocabulary was strongly influenced by its religious environment and its holy purpose. At first it may seem that the fact that the common speech was used must detract from its excellence; but full consideration of the facts will dispel that notion. Literary language is apt to be over-refined, and make its appeal chiefly to the cultured taste; whereas the vernacular is a speech which the common people can hear gladly, and it reaches all. It is, moreover, a language which can be

translated into other tongues more readily than its Classic parent-speech.

      A language always tends to absorb elements from other speeches. So the New Testament Greek discloses a certain amount of Hebrew influence, and also a number of forms from Latin and other sources. But a great number of the words which once were supposed to be Hebraisms or peculiar to Biblical Greek have now been shown to have parallels in the papyri and inscriptions of the period. The Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament, by Moulton and Milligan, has many surprises for the student. He finds, for example, that the word diakonoi was applied in inscriptions to dedicators of a statue of Hermes, presbuteroi to members of a corporation, and the word translated evangelist to a "chief priest of Daphne and the god". The New Testament language was not an isolated speech, nor was its vocabulary a list of coined words.

      Probably the greatest results in New Testament linguistic research will come in the field wherein the light from inscriptions is breaking upon words of Scripture. It was in 1897 that the new era of papyri discovery began. In that year two young scholars, B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, commenced to dig at Oxyrhynchus, in Upper Egypt. So great was the mass of papyri discovered that when the store boxes containing these treasures reached London they were weighed by the ton. Camden M. Cobern, in his New Archæological Discoveries, writes: "In 1897 these men

gave their first official report, having examined at Oxford the contents of some 1,300 of these documents. This first volume contained 158 texts, though four-fifths of the whole collection had not yet been unpacked, and the best part of what they had obtained had been left at the Cairo Museum."

      Adolf Deissmann, to whom the honour is given that he was the first to recognise that "these papyri were written exactly in the language of the New Testament", in his latest edition of Light from the Ancient East wrote: "The period of excavations for papyri in Egypt is by no means ended, and many workers are still required for the systematic collection and preservation of the despised ostraca." The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, the first part of which was prepared by Moulton and Milligan, began publication in 1914 and was completed by Dr. Milligan in 1929.

      Dr. Deissmann claimed that there was need of a new lexicon. He said that this lexicon must fulfil three main tasks: (1) "to place the New Testament vocabulary in living linguistic connection with the contemporary world"; (2) "to ascertain carefully the phases in changes of meaning"; (3) "to simplify once more and put warmth again into the popular concepts of Primitive Christianity, which have been artificially complicated and deprived of life by scholastic prejudice and a too anxious process of isolation. The new lexicon must bring out once more afresh the simplicity, inwardness, and force of the utterances of evangelists and apostles."

      About the time of the publication of Deissmann's book, a Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, by Abbott-Smith, a work of very great value, appeared. The great Classical Lexicon by Liddell and Scott has been revised and augmented by Sir Henry Stuart Jones, D.Litt., with the co-operation of many scholars. This work was completed in 1940, and will be of immense value to Classical and New Testament Greek students.

      Every hour spent in the field of linguistic enquiry will be richly repaid. Only the expert can do the foundation research work in bringing the treasures to the surface, but every student of the Word can be alert to view the treasures when they are brought to the light. As Deissmann said, in closing his great book: "It is always the New Testament itself that calls the man of research back from his wandering thoughts to work on the New Testament again. Daily it bears witness to him of its own veriest nature: the little Book is not one of the paralysing and enslaving forces of the past, but it is full of eternal and present strength to make strong and to make free."

1. Military and Naval Metaphors

      METAPHOR enters largely into New Testament language. In most instances the metaphor is preserved in the translation, but some words lose much in the process. The following are a few examples of military and naval metaphors which deserve to be made more explicit.

      Atakteo occurs but once in the New Testament, and is rendered in the Authorised Version and Revised Version "behave disorderly" (2 Thess. iii. 7). Paul said, "For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us; for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you". In its primary sense, the word was used to describe soldiers marching out of order. Moffatt's rendering, "We did not loaf", is from a secondary meaning.

      Thriambeuo is found twice (2 Cor. ii. 14; Col. ii. 15), with the meanings "cause to triumph" and "triumph". The former passage reads: "Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of His knowledge by us in every place." The Authorised Version

rendering suggests the idea of victory, but does not go far enough. The Revised Version gets nearer the original when it renders, "leadeth us in triumph". Moffatt's rendering is better still: "He makes my life a constant pageant of triumph in Christ."

      Thriambos was a Festal Hymn to Bacchus, sung in processions. In Roman times the verb was applied to triumphal processions wherein prisoners were led as a spectacle exhibiting the glorious victory of the warrior. Paul was living victoriously, and bringing many captives to grace the Lord's triumphal procession.

      Opsonion. In Rom. vi. 23, Paul says that the wages of sin is death. A translation must fail to tell all that can be said about the word rendered "wages". Originally the term denoted little dainties in the way of food. It came to be used of rations portioned out to soldiers, and then passed to the meaning of a soldier's pay. Finally, it broadened into the sense of "reward" generally.

      Pleroma is a great New Testament word, in the sense of "fulness", in such passages as Eph. i. 22, 23--"the church, which is His body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all". To give an adequate treatment of its use in the New Testament would require a chapter to itself. But one of its uses in Classic writers and also in the inscriptions is most suggestive. Picture a Greek ship of war--its three ranks of rowers in position, the men of war fully equipped, the time setter or boatswain ready to give the rhythmic beat for the rowers, the naval commander

and his staff alert for the attack. Under such conditions a trireme had its Pleromaits full complement. With caution this usage of the word could be employed to illustrate the thought that the church--the pleroma of Him that filleth all in all--must be fully equipped and ready for action.

      Kubernesis. Another naval metaphor is found in the word translated "governments" in 1 Cor. xii. 28: "God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues." Moffatt renders it "administrators". The word occurs in this passage only in the New Testament. Now a kubernetes was a steersman or pilot, and kubernesis is the act of steering. Among the gifts God has set in the church is the power to act like one who skilfully steers a vessel. Certainly there are many rocks upon which churches may be wrecked.

2. Metaphors Based on Athletics

      In New Testament days, athletics entered largely into public life. It is not surprising, then, that New Testament writers based some graphic metaphors upon games and contests. Agonia is used in one passage only--Luke xxii. 44--and is translated "agony", the reference being to the experience of Jesus in Gethsemane. This word strictly denotes the feeling of an athlete before the contest, the Greek word for which is agon. He is anxious about the

result; he enters the contest with a certain amount of trepidation. The word fittingly describes the "intense struggle and pressure of spirit" which Jesus felt as He approached the awful mystery of His passion.

      Theatron was a term used both of the semi-circular building in which plays were acted, and also of a show held therein. In 1 Cor. iv. 9, Paul says: "For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle (theatron) unto the world." This is a contrast to the picture presented in thriambeus. In the use of that word he was depicting the Lord's triumph and his share therein. Here the apostles are likened to death-doomed gladiators forced to fight in the arena. The words appear in a context largely ironical, for Paul is referring to his critics, but in this verse his emotions, deeply stirred by the injustice done him, lead him to a strong statement of the sufferings endured for Christ's sake by the apostles.

      Enkopto is used in Gal. v. 7: "Ye did run well; who did hinder you?" The word means "cut in", and suggests the putting of an obstacle in the way of a runner. Originally it was a metaphor from military operations, "to break up a road by destroying bridges, etc." In Acts xxiv. 4, Tertullus uses the word in stating to Felix the accusation against Paul. In the Authorised Version the passage reads: "Notwithstanding, that I be not further tedious unto thee, I pray thee that thou wouldest hear us of thy

clemency a few words." Tertullus was fearful lest he was interrupting Felix in his many duties.

      Ekneuo is found in John v. 13 only. Jesus had healed a lame man on the Sabbath day. The Jews asked the cured man who it was that healed him. He did not know, for "Jesus had conveyed Himself away". Moffatt renders, "Jesus had slipped away". "Had turned aside" would be a good translation, for the metaphor in the word is from the action of bending the head aside to avoid a blow. The simple verbneuo means "to nod".

      Hupopiazo occurs in two places in the New Testament--Luke xviii. 5; 1 Cor. ix. 27. In the former, the verse reads, "Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me". Moffatt renders, "Not to have her for ever coming and pestering me". In 1 Cor. ix. 27, Paul says, "I keep under my body", where Moffatt gives, "I maul and master my body". By etymology the word refers to that part of the face under the eyes, and gives the meaning, "I strike under the eye", or "I give a black eye". Paul took strong measures with himself, even if he let himself go a little with his language!

3. Metaphors Based on Physical Gestures and Features

      Gesture is closely related to speech. At times it becomes practically a language in itself, as in codes for signalling. Usually, however, it is employed as an aid to speech, to give emphasis to certain words,

or to point direction where ambiguity is in the words alone. Gestures are most frequently used when the passions are roused, or the emotions stirred as in fear. New Testament metaphors from gestures and features are most prominent in narratives relating to mocking or affected behaviour, but they are also used in other relations.

      Mukterizo is a word which occurs in Gal. vi. 7 only, so far as the New Testament is concerned: "God is not mocked." A compound form of the word occurs in Luke xvi. 14; xxiii. 35, where the reference is to those who mocked Jesus. Literally, the word means "to turn up the nose" (mukter meaning the nose) in derision.

      Muopazo occurs once only in the New Testament--2 Pet. i. 9: "But he that lacketh these things is blind and cannot see afar off." Moffatt gives "short-sighted". Our word "myopia" is derived from the term. The physical action suggested is the half-closing of the eyes in the effort to see. Spiritual myopia is a dangerous symptom!

      Sunpnigo in Luke viii. 42 is translated: "But as He went the people thronged Him." It is the same word as is used in the Parable of the Sower concerning the action of the thorns. It means "to choke", and was evidently used colloquially, as we use the expression, "I am stifled".

      Khleuazo is another word expressive of scoffing. It is found in Acts ii. 13; xvii. 32, where the reference is to those who mocked the truth preached. Khleue

was a jest or joke, and the verb means scoffing by action and word.

      Perpereuomai is used once only in the New Testament. 1 Cor. xiii. 4 says that love "vaunts not itself". Moffatt renders, "Love makes no parade". "To play the braggart" is the meaning given by Moulton and Milligan. Cicero used a compound form of the word to describe one who employed "rhetorical embellishments in extolling another excessively".

      Phrisso occurs in Jas. ii. 19 only: "The devils believe and tremble." Strictly the word refers to the hair standing on end through fear. In the Septuagint Version the word is used in job iv. 15, where the translation is given, "A spirit came before my face; and my hair and flesh quivered".

      Apokaradokia, which is translated in the Authorised Version "earnest expectation" in the two passages where it occurs (Rom. viii. 19; Phil. i. 20) is a metaphor based on the action of stretching out the head in concentrated attention to catch the first glimpse of an object. The kindred verb was used by several writers, and Deissmann cites a parallel to Rom. viii. 19 from the inscriptions in which certain oppressed peasants petition an official whose parousia (coming) they have been expecting.

4. A Miscellaneous Group of Metaphors

      There is a great variety in the metaphorical language of the New Testament.

      The following examples do not readily yield to

classification, but are of sufficient interest to merit special treatment:-

      Kubeia, which occurs in Eph. iv. 14 only, "by sleight of men", is rendered "adroitness" by Moffatt. it is a metaphor from dice-playing, so often accompanied by the trick of the hand which deceives the eye. Our word "cube" is derived from the Greek root.

      Prokope is used three times in the New Testament. Twice it is translated "furtherance", and once "profiting". The passages are: Phil. i:12, "But I would ye should understand, brethren, that the things which happened unto me have fallen out rather unto the furtherance of the gospel"; Phil. i. 25, "And having this confidence, I know that I shall abide and continue with you all for your furtherance and joy of faith". 1 Tim. iv. 1:5 reads, "Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all". This word is a compound formed from a preposition giving the meaning "before" and a verb meaning "to cut". Hence there is concealed in the term a metaphor from a pioneer cutting his way through brush-wood a fitting illustration whether applied to the progress of the gospel or to advance in spiritual life.

      Saino appears in 1 Thess. iii. 3 only. Paul had been anxious over the Thessalonian Christians, because persecution had broken out. He had sent Timothy to ascertain how they were enduring their trials,

and Timothy's report of their faithfulness had greatly encouraged the apostle., In his Epistle he told the brethren at Thessalonica that he had sent Timothy to comfort them, and then added the words among which saino occurs: "That no man should be moved by these afflictions." A strange metaphor is here. The word is used properly of dogs wagging their tails! It came to be used of persons fawning upon others and so beguiling them. In 1 Thess. iii it is in the passive, and must mean "drawn aside" or "disturbed". Emendations of the text have been suggested.

      Stigma, appearing only in Gal. vi. 17: "I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus," is from a root meaning "to prick", and was used of the brand-marks burnt or cut into the skin of a slave. Paul regarded his scars as marks of his willing service to Christ, though others regarded them as marks of shame.

      Trokhos is found only in a rather obscure text, Jas. iii. 6. Speaking of the tongue, James says that it "setteth on fire the course of nature". In the Revised Version, the word is rendered by "wheel" while Moffatt has the tautological phrase, "the round circle of existence". In the New Commentary on Holy Scripture this note is given on the phrase: "Nature (genesis) means all human life. The tongue is like the axle of a wheel which gets red-hot, and then sends the fire along the spokes, until the whole wheel is ablaze. Furious and uncontrolled speech

makes the individual man as unapproachable and useless as a burning mass, and then spreads into society around him and sets all ablaze. Contrast the fire of the Spirit, which at Pentecost consecrated tongues to the service of Christ." Others explain the phrase to mean "our changeful life", from the rapid motion of a wheel, or the "orb or cycle of creation".

      Hupogrammos is another word confined to a single passage--1 Pet. ii. 21--"Christ also suffered for us; leaving us an example, that ye should follow His steps." Etymologically, the word means "writing under". It was used of words given to children to copy, both as a writing exercise and as a means of impressing a moral, in much the same style as a modern copybook, only with ancient writing materials. Sometimes it was employed with reference to the act of tracing over written letters. Hence there is an easy change of metaphor in Peter's words from tracing over to planting the feet in the prints left by another.

      Aggareuo is used three times in the Gospels in the sense of "compel". Matt. v. 41 reads, "Whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain." Matt. xxvii. 32, "As they came out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name: him they compelled to bear His cross." Mark xv. 21 is a parallel to Matt. xxvii. 32. The word was of Persian origin, and was used of public couriers whose duty it was to carry royal messages from stage to stage. These

postmen had the power to impress into the service horses, vessels and men.

      There are many other metaphors but these are sufficient to show the wealth of illustrative material that lies buried in our New Testament vocabulary.

      IN the Greek New Testament there are many words which conjure up pictures in the mind of the reader. Sometimes these pictures are dissolved in the process of translation, because the English word chosen as the nearest equivalent does not have the same associations as the Greek.

      A good instance is the word agonizomai, which is variously rendered in the Authorised Version by "strive" (Luke xiii. 24; 1 Cor. ix. 25; Col. i. 29), "fight" (John xviii. 36; 1 Tim. vi. 12; 2 Tim. iv. 7), and "labour fervently" (Col. iv. 12). In the Revised Version, 1 Tim. iv. 10, the word is rendered "strive". The Authorised Version has "suffer reproach", but this is a translation of oneidizomai, the change in the Revised Version being due to a revised Greek text.

      The picture which agonizomai calls up is of the games which were so prominent in the life of the Greeks. These games, which were associated with religious festivals, were so highly esteemed that rival Greek States would even suspend war to compete in them. They were celebrated with great enthusiasm

by lyric poets, such as Pindar, who wrote many beautiful poems in honour of victors in the athletic contests.

      In Classical Greek, the word had other meanings and references which are of significance for New Testament study. In addition to the thought of competing in the games and in dramatic contests, the word took on a more sinister meaning. From contending in friendly rivalry it moved to fighting an opponent. It was also used of contesting a case at law, and more generally of exerting oneself in any enterprise.

      The word does not appear in the Greek Old Testament except in the apocryphal books and in Theodotion's Version of Dan. vi. 14. We read such phrases as "to contend for truth", "to contend for the high-priesthood", "to strive nobly" against an enemy, and "the king exerted himself to deliver him". In the inscriptions contemporary with New Testament times the word is common in connection with warfare.

      New Testament references show the influence of the Classical meanings. In 1 Cor. ix. 25, the background is obviously the effort of the athlete in the games to gain the crown of laurel. Not so obvious is the reference in Luke xiii. 24, where the term implies the continuous striving, the straining of every nerve to enter the narrow door. Clearly John xviii. 36 means the fighting of opponents, and 1 Tim. vi. 12 speaks of a conflict against moral and spiritual foes. In 2 Tim. iv. 7 the ideas of athletics and warfare are

blended. The more general idea of "striving" is found in Col. i. 29; iv. 12, and 1 Tim. iv. 10, but it is a striving which implies struggle, toil, and even suffering.

      It is an easy transfer from this last usage to the English word "agony", which is from the same Greek root. Though it is used more of "anguish" than of a "contest", to the reader of Greek the word is suggestive of the ancient agon, applied to the place where games were held, and also to the contest itself.

      There is a Greek word, anastrophe, which in the Authorised Version is always translated "conversation". The Revised Version renders it variously: "life" (Heb. xiii. 7; Jas. iii. 13; 2 Pet. ii. 7); "living" (2 Pet. iii. ii); "manner of life" (Gal. i. 13; Eph. iv. 22; 1 Tim. iv. 1:2; 1 Pet. i. 18; iii. 16); "manner of living" (1 Pet. i. 15); "behaviour" (1 Pet. ii. 1:2; iii. 1, 2). Different Greek words are used in Phil. iii. 20 (politeuma), Heb. xiii. 5 (tropos).

      It should be noted that the English word "conversation", which to-day is used of "talk", once had a much wider meaning. At the time when the Authorised Version was made, the word was used of "the action of living or having one's being among", and so "behaviour". The usage may be illustrated from Shakespeare. In the Second Part of Henry IV, Act V, Scene 5, Lancaster tells how the prince, on becoming

King Henry V, determined to banish his former riotous companions:

      Doubtless their "conversations" in the modern sense needed correction, but the word was used of their behaviour in general.

      The Latin word from which "conversation" is derived involved the idea of turning, and so did the Greek word anastrophe. This Greek word in its primary Classical use meant "a turning upside down". Then it came to be used of "a turning back", such as the wheeling round of horses and soldiers, or the turning of a ship in its course. A further development gave the sense "a turning about in a place", or "dwelling in a place". In late Greek we find parallels to the New Testament usage, "a mode of life".

      Thus the picture brought to the mind by the English word " conversation" and the Greek word anastrophe is that of a person turning about among his fellows in the everyday affairs of life.

      Another Greek word which conjures up a picture to the mind is entugkhano. This word is used five times

in the New Testament--Acts xxv. 24; Rom. viii. 27, 34; xi. 2; Heb. vii. 25. In the Authorised Version the rendering is "make intercession", except in Acts xxv. 24, where the translation is, "The Jews have dealt with me". The Revised Version translates the word in this passage by "made suit to", and in Rom. xi. 2 the term is rendered by "pleadeth with". These variations become clearer when evidence of the history of the word has been produced.

      The primary use of entugkhano in Classical authors is "to light upon", "fall in with", and calls up the picture of two persons happening to meet. Then the word came to be used of "obtaining an audience or interview". As a chance meeting or a formal interview involves the interchange of words, the further meaning was developed of meeting for purposes of conversation, consultation or supplication. This last took the form of presenting a petition, and the cognate noun enteuxis was used of a technical petition to a king.

      The English "make intercession" suggests going between two parties on behalf of a suppliant, but in two of the five instances of entugkhano it is obvious that there is another meaning. In Acts xxv. 24 the Jews are said to have "made suit to" Festus in order to bring about Paul's death, and in Rom. xi. 2, Elijah is said to have pleaded with God against (kata) Israel. In the remaining instances, the pleading is "for" or "on behalf of" persons. Both these uses may be seen in secular writers and in the Septuagint. It will be

clear, then, that the word entugkhano in itself indicates the meeting or interview, but other words are needed to determine its exact nature.

      When a word is used only once in the Greek New Testament, the translator must use all available evidence from extra-Biblical sources to decide its meaning. If that evidence shows that the word, like most others, underwent processes of change in its history, he must make a choice of renderings after due consideration of the context. It will not be surprising if translators differ somewhat in their renderings but it is puzzling for readers when the various translations are compared. If the obscure word has a pictorial background, it is profitable to see it, even though it may be that in the particular text the metaphor must not be pressed.

      A good instance to illustrate the foregoing is brabeuo, a verb used in Col. iii. 15. First note some translations. The Authorised Version gives, "Let the peace of God rule in your hearts." The Revised Version agrees, but gives a marginal alternative "arbitrate". Moffatt renders the verb, "be supreme"; Goodspeed, "be the ruling principle". Weymouth gives "settle all questions", while Rotherham has "act as umpire".

      Lexicographers, summarising evidence from instances of the word in secular authors, papyri and a single instance in the Greek Old Testament (Wisd. of

Sol. x. 12), trace its development as follows:--It primarily meant to "act as umpire" (brabeus) in a contest. Then it was used in the sense "to arbitrate", "decide". In later writers it was employed in the sense "to direct", "rule", "control". It will be seen that translators have arrived at various conclusions as to the best rendering in Col. iii. 15. Lightfoot has strongly argued that "the idea of a decision and an award is prominent in the word", and many scholars support him. "Wherever there is a conflict of motives or impulses or reasons, the peace of Christ must step in and decide which is to prevail". Others argue in favour of the Authorised Version rendering "rule". In any case, it is helpful to see the picture called up by the word in its primary use.

      A compound form of the word, katabrabeuo, is used in Col. ii. 18 and nowhere else in the Greek Bible. It is very rare in profane literature and other secular sources. It was used by one writer of a person "who by bribing the judges causes another to be condemned". It also occurs "in a Ptolemaic dispute regarding succession". The prefix kata frequently has the meaning "against ", and the verb in Col. ii. 18 has the idea "decide against". Lightfoot writes, "the false teachers at Colossæ are not regarded as umpires nor as successful rivals, but simply as persons frustrating those who otherwise would have won the prize". Meyer says that the word suggests "the notion of hostility, and of a certain unfairness or selfishness". Dr. Milligan states, "A certain sense of 'assumption' and 'officialism'

connected with the word may have led Paul to prefer it to katakrino," ("condemn").

      Another Greek word which calls up a vivid picture when its history is known, is leitourgia, which is used six times in the New Testament. In three passages (2 Cor. ix. 12; Phil. ii. 17, 30) it is translated in the Authorised Version "service"; in Luke i. 23 it is rendered "ministration"; and "ministry" is given in Heb. viii. 6; ix. 21. Cognates are also used: the masculine noun in Rom. xiii. 6; xv. 16; Phil. ii. 25; Heb. i. 7; viii. 2; the verb in Acts xiii. 2; Rom. xv. 27; Heb. x. ii; and an adjective in Heb. i. 14. All of these are associated with two words--laos, people, and ergon, work.

      It is necessary to get the Classical background of leitourgia. Primarily it was used at Athens and elsewhere of a public service performed by a private citizen at his own expense. This service could take many forms, but the most important were the training and equipment of the persons who formed the "chorus" of a Greek drama; the training of competitors for the torch race; the sending of a sacred embassy to pan-hellenic festivals; the providing of a banquet for members of a tribe at a festival; and the equipment of a vessel of the fleet. Some of these services involved considerable expense, as high as the equivalent of £400, and it is no wonder that some citizens

tried to evade the liability. It is said that in the fifth century B.C., some 12,000 citizens were liable to these charges. In a secondary sense, the Greek word came to be used of any service such as a military duty and also of help rendered in any matter. A more religious atmosphere is found with the word in its use concerning public service rendered to the Greek gods, and one reference is made to sacerdotal ministrations by the priests of Egypt.

      Recent evidence from papyri shows that these meanings were carried over into Koine Greek, wherein many parallels to New Testament usage are being found. In one papyrus of the second or third century A.D. a man claims exemption from a public service. He says: "I am a doctor by profession, and I have treated these very persons who have assigned me a public burden."

      In the light of these facts, the Biblical use of leitourgia can be better understood. In the Septuagint it is used frequently of religious service or ministration, and occasionally of secular service. In the New Testament, where the word is translated "ministration" or "ministry", the usage is akin to that prevailing in the Septuagint, and calls up the picture of persons doing priestly service. The word in Phil. ii. 17 has a similar background, but the usage is metaphorical, as in Rom. xv. 16, where the cognate noun is used. Dr. Moule says, "These are the only two passages where the apostle connects the language of sacerdotalism with the distinctive work of the Christian

ministry; and both passages have the tone of figure and, so to speak, poetry." The other two references--2 Cor. ix. 1:2 and Phil. ii. 30--have to do with the more general usage of the word, though the religious element is present, for it is Christian benevolence. Something of the picture called up by the original Classical use may be seen, in that the service referred to was at the expense of those who rendered it.

      It may be added that leitourgia came to be used among Christians of public worship, especially of the Eucharist, and that it has entered the English vocabulary as "liturgy".

      There is a word used in Luke xii. 29, and nowhere else in the New Testament, which has presented a problem to translators, as a comparison of the versions will show. It is a passive form of meteorizo, translated in the Authorised and Revised Versions "be of doubtful mind". Moffatt gives "be worried", Goodspeed "be anxious", Rotherham "be held in suspense", while Weymouth has "waver between hope and fear".

      A study of the history of the verb will help us to appreciate the translator's problem. The word is associated with meteoros, "in midair" (compare our word "meteor"), and its primary meaning was "to raise on high ". It was used of a ship on the crest of a wave, and of fortifications with high walls. Metaphorically, the meaning "to buoy up with hope" was used, as when Thucydides said that "all Hellas was

excited by the coming conflict. Another use of the verb was "to be elated" or "inflated with pride". Thus in a play of Aristophanes entitled The Birds, the following occurs:

Sycophant: So, words are wings, you say?

Peisthetairos: No doubt of it.
I say it, and I repeat it; human nature
Is marvellously raised and elevated
By words.

      Later writers used the word in the sense "to be of unsettled mind", and also "to be anxious". Josephus employed it of a criminal awaiting punishment. In the papyri the literal sense is found where a certain Flavius complains that he has been maltreated, "being daily suspended by ropes and having my body belaboured with blows". The metaphorical sense is supported by a third century papyrus, "Do not be anxious, we are well".

      Support can be found, then, for the renderings of Luke xii. 29 cited above, though it may be difficult to make a choice between them. The context seems to favour the view that the words are a warning against undue anxiety. There is evidence for another translation, however, which cannot be set aside without consideration. The Greek Version of the Old Testament has exerted a strong influence upon the vocabulary of the New Testament. Now the word we are

discussing occurs in the literal sense in the Septuagint, and also in the sense "to be elated with pride", but not in the sense "be anxious". For the meaning "elated with pride", see Psalm cxxxi. 1, where the Septuagint has, "Neither have mine eyes been haughtily raised". Similarly Obadiah i. 4, "If thou shouldest mount up as the eagle, and if thou shouldest make thy nest among the stars, thence will I bring thee down, saith the Lord". Instances in the second Book of Maccabees have a similar meaning. Further, the Latin Vulgate gives as the equivalent of the words in Luke xii. 29, Nolite in sublime tolli, "lift not yourselves up to lofty claims". Luther favoured the rendering, "Be not high-minded", and the learned German commentator Meyer gives his support by saying that the Vulgate is right in its translation.

      Still, the majority of scholars to-day, it seems, favour the rendering which makes the words a warning against distracting worry. Some years ago the picture in the word meteorizo caught the imagination of Samuel Cox, who at the time was editor of The Expositor. He saw in the word "a new parable ' which he stated thus, "Do not toss about on the wide dangerous sea of Care, on which so many make shipwreck, but rather take shelter in the safe and tranquil harbour of Trust in God".

      AN interesting excursion into New Testament language may be made in the field of rare words upon which light has been thrown by discoveries among the papyri and inscriptions. Some examples of these will now be given.

      Allotrioepiscopos appears in 1 Pet. iv. 15 only, "But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evildoer, or as a busybody in other men's matters". Various meanings have been given to the word translated "busybody in other men's matters", but synonymous words used in the papyri support the Authorised Version. By etymology, the word suggests "acting as an overseer in other folk's affairs". Some Christians were regarded as social nuisances. The writer in The Expositor's Greek Testament says: "The word was apparently coined to express the idea of the itinerant philosopher of whatever sect current among the unphilosophic. Epictetus defends the true Cynic against this very calumny." As the word includes reference to "others", it has been suggested that the enemies of the Cross used it against Christians as a sneer at the sentence, "He saved others".

      Andrapodistes, found in 1 Tim. i. 10 only, is translated "men-stealers". It occurs in a list of lawbreakers. Formed from a verb "to kidnap", its etymology, says the Vocabulary of the New Testament, by Moulton and Milligan, is a "reminder of the principle which made quadruped and human chattels differ only in the number of their legs". Andrapoda is formed after the analogy of tetrapoda, four-legged.

      Asteios is found in Acts vii. 20 and Heb. xi. 2,3. In both passages the adjective is applied to Moses; in the former being translated "fair", in the latter "proper". It is the epithet applied to the child Moses in the Septuagint. By etymology the word means "of the town", and hence the derived meaning "polite" was common. But its connection with the city was forgotten, and it came to be used in the sense of "fine" or "elegant".

      Glossokomon in John xii. 6; xiii. 29, is rendered "bag". Judas was a thief, and had the bag. The original meaning of this word was "a receptacle for the tongues or mouthpieces of flutes". Glossa meant a tongue; compare our words "glossary" and "epiglottis". But in the vernacular the original meaning gave place to that of money-box. Judas evidently had a small box, in which the coins were kept.

      Goes appears in 2 Tim. iii. 13 only, "But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived". The root idea in the word translated "seducers" is to "cry aloud", to "wail". It was used of enchanters because they whined incantations with

their spells. Perhaps in this passage there is an allusion to the Egyptian magicians, Jannes and Jambres. In an inscription the term seems to imply the supposed existence of a god called "The Wizard"

      Epoptes is used in 2 Pet. i. 16 only, and is translated "eyewitness ". "We were eyewitnesses of His majesty," says Peter, referring to the transfiguration. In the Septuagint the term is applied to God, who sees all. In the inscriptions the word was used of spectators, especially of those who had been initiated into the secrets of the sacred mysteries. This fact may give added point to the reference to "cunningly devised fables".

      Katastema is translated "behaviour" in Titus ii. 3, the only place where it occurs in the New Testament: "The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness." Souter gives its meaning: a person's "outward bearing, including gait, posture, expression of countenance, dress, etc., involving the idea of calmness and composure; demeanour, deportment". A passage in the inscriptions in which the word occurs is translated, "They cultivated the due mean, the best of courses".

      Neokoros, which is used in Acts xix. 35 only, is translated "Worshipper". Ephesus is said to be a worshipper of the great goddess Diana. Some scholars say that the term is derived from two words giving the meaning "temple-sweeper", and Classic Greek writers used it in that sense. But it came to be used of a temple-warden, and the inscriptions give instances

wherein it is applied to a functionary of a temple and also of a synagogue. The earliest trace of Ephesus as Temple-Warden is said to be on a coin of A.D. 65. A note in the Expositor's Greek Testament says: "The title 'Warden of the Temple of Ephesus' was a boast of the city, just as other cities boasted of the same title in relation to other deities. It would seem that the title at Ephesus was generally used in connection with the imperial cultus; in the period of this narrative, Ephesus could claim the title as Warden of one Temple of this cultus, and later on she enjoyed the title of dis, tris neokoros (twice, thrice Temple-Warden), as the number of temples in the imperial cultus increased. But there is ample justification from inscriptions for the mention of the title in the verse before us in connection with the Artemis worship."

      Pera is the word in Matt. x. 10, translated in the A.V. "scrip". Jesus said, "Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses, nor scrip for your journey". This is a good rendering, when we observe that the archaic word "scrip" was used of a beggar's or traveller's wallet, the term being related to "scrap"--that which was carried within it. Shakespeare wrote:

      Deissmann says: "The meaning of the 'wallet' (A.V. 'scrip') has seldom been questioned, because

it seems so obvious: most commentators probably think of it as a travelling-bag, or, more precisely defined, as a bread-bag. The word in the original Greek Pera is capable of either meaning, according to circumstances. In the context 'travelling-bag' would do very well; 'bread-bag' not so well, being superfluous after the mention of 'bread', and tautology seems out of place in these brief, pointed commands given by Jesus. But there is a special meaning, suggested by one of the monuments, which suits the context at least as well as the more general sense of 'bag' or 'travelling-bag'. The monument in question was erected in the Roman Imperial period at Kefr-Hauar in Syria by a person who calls himself, in the Greek inscription, a 'Slave' of the Syrian goddess. 'Sent by the lady', as he says himself, this heathen apostle tells of the journeys on which he went begging for the 'lady', and boasts triumphantly that 'each journey brought in seventy bags'. The word here employed is Pera. Of course it has nothing to do with well-filled provision--bags for the journey: it clearly means the beggar's collecting-bag. The same special meaning makes excellent sense in our text, particularly in St. Matthew's version: there is to be no earning, and also no begging of money. With this possible explanation of the word the divine simplicity of Jesus stands out afresh against the background suggested by the heathen inscription. While Christianity was still young the beggar-priest was making his rounds in the land of Syria on behalf of the national goddess. The caravan conveying the

pious robber's booty to the shrine lengthens as he passes from village to village, and assuredly the lady will not forget her slave. In the same age and country One who had not where to lay His head sent forth His apostles, saying: 'Freely ye have received, freely give. Get you no gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses: no wallet for your journey.'"

      Prostatis is found in Rom xvi. 2 only, where the Authorised Version says of Phoebe: "She hath been a succourer of many." This feminine form is evidently used as the equivalent of prostates, which like the Latin patronus meant "a legal representative of foreigners". The title was used of a citizen of Athens, who looked after foreigners and those without civil rights, and also in Imperial times of an office-bearer in a heathen religious association. Phoebe was probably a woman of wealth who could render valuable services to the Christian community.

      Prosphagion appears in John xxi. 5 only, where Jesus says to the disciples who were fishing, "Children, have you any meat?" The word was used of any relish eaten with bread, chiefly of fish. The Revised Version makes the sentence, "Have you anything to eat?" and there is some support for this in textual evidence. But probably the meaning is, "Have you taken any fish?" and a negative answer is anticipated. Having said this, Jesus directed the disciples to cast the net on the right side, and a great catch resulted.

      A STUDY of the New Testament vocabulary of prayer will not only disclose the difficulty of framing a comprehensive definition, but also will be a corrective of any tendency to limit prayer to the mere presentation of petitions.

      1. Prayer implies the feeling of a sense of need. The word for prayer (deesis) which is employed with this meaning was used in the making of requests from man to man, especially in the approach of a subject to the ruling sovereign with the request to have some want supplied. But in the New Testament the word is used always of requests addressed to God. We approach the throne of grace in confidence that the Lord will supply our need.

      2. Prayer is supplication. The sense of need leads to the attitude of the suppliant. A special term (hiketeria), used only once in the New Testament, occurs in Heb. v. 7. It is found in the Classics with reference to a suppliant bearing an olive-branch. Herodotus, for example, tells how Aristagoras of Miletus sought to gain the help of Sparta in a revolt against the Persians. When he could not persuade the Spartan

king, Cleomenes, by presenting his plans, he sought other means. Taking an olive-branch in his hand, Aristagoras went as a suppliant to Cleomenes, but when he gained audience he tried to bribe the Spartan king to favour his plan. Cleomenes, warned by his little daughter, broke off the audience. The New Testament word is strictly an adjective meaning "of a suppliant", with the noun for "branch" understood.

      3. Prayer is a presentation of requests. In Classical Greek two words were in use with the sense of "ask", but there was a distinction. One (erotao) was to ask for the answer to a question; the other (aiteo) for the granting of a petition. In later Greek, as in the New Testament, both words were used in the latter sense. Sometimes, however, the distinction is retained. In John xvi. 23, the Authorised Version and the Revised Version translate the two Greek words by the one English term "ask". This tends to obscure the meaning. "In that day ye shall ask Me nothing" refers back to the questions of verse 19. "If ye shall ask anything of the Father, He will give it you in My name" refers to the granting of petitions. Moffat translates: "On that day you will not ask Me any questions. Truly, truly, I tell you, whatever you ask the Father, He will give you in My name." The use of the term relating to questions suggests, also, that prayer may be a seeking of answers to the many problems which beset the human mind.

      4. Prayer involves devotion. There is a group of

words which, like the English term "devote", have the root idea of vowing. It is true that the words have become more general, to express the wishes of the suppliant, but probably the root notion is not lost. The verbs are eukhomai and proseukhomai, and the related nouns eukhe and proseukhe. These words are the most frequently employed of all the terms pertaining to prayer. In Acts xvi. 13, 16, proseukhe is used of a place of prayer, such as Jews used to build, as well as of the synagogue.

      5. Prayer is a calling upon God, especially for help. The word which carries this thought is from the root which underlies the term "Comforter" or "Advocate" (parakletos). The verb parakaleo was used of "beseeching" God and also men, as well as in the sense of "admonish", "exhort," "comfort ". Its etymology suggests "call beside." In prayer the emphasis is on the calling; in the other meanings stress is laid on the purpose for which aid is invoked. It seems that the term was used in a technical sense by pagans of Paul's day in beseeching healing from the god Asclepius. Dr. Deissmann noted a marble stele with the inscription, "And concerning this thing I besought the god", in which the same verb occurs as that which Paul used when asking for the removal of the thorn in the flesh.

      6. Prayer is fellowship. The word (enteuxis) translated "intercession" in 1 Tim. ii. 1 and "prayer" in 1 Tim. iv. 5 had a wider meaning than offering prayer on behalf of another. Its root suggests a meeting of two persons, and "probably the leading idea in the word

is that of boldness of access, of confidence". A secondary meaning was to make petition, and a compound form in Rom. viii. 26 is used of the Spirit making intercession on behalf of the Christian. (For a discussion of the verb form, see Chapter iii, section 3.)

      7. Prayer includes praise and confession. This is sufficiently brought out by the Revised Version translation of Heb. xiii. 15--"Through Him then let us offer up a sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips which make confession to His name". The "Century Bible" note on this verse is helpful. "Jesus has offered the great atoning sacrifice, and Christians cannot therefore offer such sacrifices for sin, but they may offer up a sacrifice of praise to God; yet even this only through Christ, who by His sin-offering has made access to God possible. Praise should be offered 'continually', for it can never adequately express the goodness of God, and it should be the constant attitude of our mind towards Him. The spontaneous praise of the heart does not wait for fixed seasons of worship. 'The fruit of the lips' is borrowed from the LXX of Hos. xiv. 2."

      8. Prayer includes thanksgiving. The word "eucharist" is derived from the term used for giving thanks in connection with the Lord's Supper (eukharisteo). Giving thanks to God has a large place in the prayers recorded in the New Testament, and it is fitting that our prayers also, both public and private, should have a large element of thanksgiving.

      WHEN the apostle wrote in 1 Pet. v. 5, "Gird yourselves with humility, to serve one another" (see R.V.), he used a verb which sometimes was applied to the act of a slave in putting on a little white garment over his tunic before engaging in his duties. Probably Peter was thinking of the incident in the upper room when the Lord girded Himself with a towel and rendered a lowly service to him and to the other disciples. The word translated "humility" in this passage occurs only seven times in the New Testament. It is translated "humility" also in Col. ii. 1:8, 23, where a pseudo-humility is exposed by Paul. In Acts xx. 19 Paul, in his address to the Ephesian elders, used the word when he said that he had served with all "humility of mind", and he employed the term in Eph. iv. 2, where it is translated "lowliness", in Phil. ii. 3, where the phrase "lowliness of mind" occurs, and in Col. iii. 1:2, where the rendering is "humbleness of mind".

      The Greek word is tapeinophrosune, formed from tapeinos, lowly, and phren, the mind. Rare outside the New Testament, the term does not appear in extant pre-Christian authors. Kindred words are used, and

in the Old Testament is to be found the nearest approach to the Christian grace. In secular authors these words are generally employed in a bad sense. For "humility" would have no place in the vocabulary of the average pagan. He would think of "lowness" rather than "lowliness", and would associate with the word a "mean-spirited or grovelling attitude of mind". A recent writer says, "In Greek pre-Christian writers tapeinos is, with a few exceptions in Plato and Platonic writers, used in a bad or inferior sense--as denoting something evil or unworthy. The prominence it gained in Christian thought indicates the new conception of man in relation to God, to himself, and to his fellows, which is due to Christianity". The few exceptions mentioned refer to the use of tapeinos in the sense which falls short of the Christian word "humility". Dr. Vincent, in his Word Studies in the New Testament, cites Plato, "To that law (of God) he would be happy who holds fast, and follows it in all humility and order; but he who is lifted up with pride, or money, or honour, or beauty, who has a soul hot with folly, and youth, and insolence, and thinks that he has no need of a guide or ruler, but is able himself to be a guide of others, he, I say, is left deserted of God". And Aristotle says, "He who is worthy of small things, and deems himself so, is wise". "At best, however," says Dr. Vincent, "the Classical conception is only modesty, absence of assumption. It is an element of wisdom and in no way opposed to self-righteousness." "The highest and most inclusive

type of heathen virtue," says a writer in the Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics, "is essentially an exalted form of self-esteem, implying contempt of others."

      In his great work on Synonyms of the New Testament, Dr. Trench wrote concerning the word translated "humility": "The work for which Christ's gospel came into the world was no other than to put down the mighty from their seat, and to exalt the humble and the meek. It was then only in accordance with this its mission that it should dethrone the heathen virtue megalopsuchia ['magnanimity', but often used in sense of 'arrogance'], and set up the despised grace tapeinophrosune in its room, stripping that of the honour it had unjustly assumed, delivering this from the dishonour which as unjustly had clung to it hitherto; and in this direction advancing so far that a Christian writer [Basil] has called this last not merely a grace, but the casket in which all other graces are contained."

      This important Greek word, which is used in the New Testament more than one hundred and eighty times, is translated in the Authorised Version by "world" in every instance but one--1 Peter iii. 3, where it is rendered "adorning". As will be shown, these two renderings are not so far apart as they may appear to be. "World" is also a translation of aion (age), aionios (age-abiding), ge (earth), and oikoumene

(inhabited world), but in this article only kosmos will be discussed.

      The Classical Lexicon by Liddell and Scott (revised edition) gives as the primary meaning of kosmos "order", and shows that that sense is retained by Greek writers in such words and phrases as "good order", "good behaviour", "form", "fashion", "government", especially of the Spartan constitution. A second meaning was "ornament", "decoration"; metaphorically "honour", "credit". Thirdly, it was used of a "ruler", especially as a title of the chief magistrate in Crete. Fourthly, it was used philosophically of the "world-order", or "universe", first in Pythagoras; then of any region of the universe. It was used by Democritus of man as a "microcosm", and in later Greek was employed to describe the known or inhabited world.

      In the New Testament several of the Classical meanings are found. (1) In 1 Pet. iii. 3, where kosmos is translated "adorning", the reference is to the true and false adornment of women. This use is paralleled in the papyri, where a reference to a bride's trousseau is made. Behind the word "adorning" is the idea of orderly arrangement, and thus the connection with other meanings becomes obvious. (2) In the sense of "universe" as an ordered system, kosmos is found in Acts xvii. 24; 1 Cor. iii. 22; Phil. ii. 15; Heb. iv. 3, etc. (3) "The earth" is the sense of some passages, especially as the abode of mankind (cf. Matt. iv. 8; Mark xvi. 15, etc.). (4) The "human inhabitants" of the world

are in mind in most passages where kosmos is employed. This usage finds an interesting parallel in an inscription dated 9 B.C., "where the birthday of the divine Augustus is referred to as the beginning of good news to the world".

      In the New Testament, kosmos is frequently used to denote the world as alienated from God or worldly affairs which come between man and God. In the Old Testament the idea is expressed in Isaiah xiii. 11--"I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity." In the writings of John, this sense is very prominent. John speaks of the world as lying in the power of the evil one (1 John v. 19); as failing to acknowledge the Logos; as hating the righteous. Yet God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son. The Son came not to condemn the world, but to save. He is the light of the world. Final victory is with Christ, for the prince of this world is judged. "In the world ye shall have tribulation; but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world."

      Finally, John uses the term kosmos in different senses in a single sentence. With his characteristic love of antithesis he writes: "He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not" (John i. 10). In the first two clauses, kosmos is used in the comprehensive sense--"the world in which the Logos was, and of which He was the Creator". In the last clause, the reference is to those who did not acknowledge Him. "Thus we have the ordered

world of creation, good and pure from the hand of its Maker, and within, yet over against it, the world of men, who by wrong use of their will have declined to recognise their Maker."

      The English word "character" does not appear in the Authorised Version of the Bible. In fact, the sense in which we most commonly use the word--"the combination of qualities distinguishing a person"--was just coming into currency in the period when the Authorised Version appeared. The Greek term, of which the English word is practically a transliteration, occurs once only in the New Testament (Heb. i. 3), where the Son is said to be the "express image" of God. It is not difficult to trace the development of meaning. Derived from a verb meaning "to scratch", or "to engrave ", the Greek noun was used of an engraver, a graving tool, and of a die or stamp. It then came to be used of the mark engraved, especially of figures or letters, and metaphorically of the "distinctive mark or token impressed (as it were) on a person or thing, by which it is known from others". The metaphorical meaning is the use in Heb. i. 3, and it approximates to the modern application. Shakespeare gets close to the modern use when in "Measure for Measure" he makes the Duke say to his deputy, Angelo:

      Undoubtedly the New Testament has much to say upon the idea of character, in pointing out those qualities which determine a good or evil life.

      It is necessary to distinguish character and reputation. One writer has said, "Character is what one is; reputation is what one is thought to be". Another has put it, "Character is like an inward and spiritual grace, of which reputation is, or should be, the outward and visible sign".

      Christian character has its basis in the righteousness of God. Herein is the difference between the merely "moral" man and the Christian. By adherence to certain principles of conduct, such as those of the Stoics, a man may discipline himself so that he will not give way to excess; he may even achieve positive goodness and become a blessing to his fellows, though at the risk of self-righteousness. But the Christian is a "new creature", and can say with Paul, "By the grace of God I am what I am". Laying hold of the righteousness of God by faith, he receives a new life-principle. Delivered from the guilt and bondage of sin by the redemption in Christ, he dwells in the sustaining environment of the divine life. In response to the love of God shed abroad in his heart by the Holy Spirit, his desire is no longer for "the lusts of the flesh", but for the service of Christ. There is no room for

self-righteousness, but the highest motives for striving after perfection.

      Christian character is the blend of those qualities which make up the Christ-like life. The Greek ideal of education--a sound mind in a sound body--was good as far as it went, and produced some fine examples of human achievement. But it fell short of the Christian ideal, which is expressed in the prayer of Paul, "May your spirit and soul and body be preserved entire, without blame" (1 Thess. v. 23, R.V.)--H. W. Beecher said, "Many men build as cathedrals were built, the part nearest the ground finished, but that which soars toward heaven, the turrets and spires, forever incomplete". The fully developed Christian character is like a mature, luxuriant tree, bringing forth "fruits of the Spirit"--"love, joy, peace, good-temper, kindliness, generosity, fidelity, gentleness, self-control". Good works will not be wrought in the spirit of the Pharisee who thanked God he was not as other men, but as the due expression of faith working by love.

      Christian character can be developed. We are to grow in grace. The trials and afflictions which beset the Christian may be a means of development. In this connection there is a passage of special interest and import. In Rom. v. 3, 4 we read, "We glory in tribulations also, knowing that tribulation worketh patience; and patience, experience; and experience, hope". The word translated "experience" is used in two senses in the New Testament. It means "testing", and is sometimes used of the process, as in 2 Cor. viii. 2,

and sometimes of the result, as in this passage. just as the "temper" given to steel is the result of a process of "testing", so character is the result of Christian endurance. Dr. Weymouth translates the word in this passage "ripeness of character" and Dr. Moffatt and Dr. Goodspeed give the rendering "character". A similar thought is in Jas. i. 2-4, where the "perfect work" of patience is "that ye may be perfect and entire".

      IN the majestic prologue to John's Gospel there are several utterances of great interest to the expositor. The fifth verse concerns the conflict between light and darkness, and offers much material for examination and reflection by the seeker after divine truth. Speaking of the Logos who became flesh, John says that creation was through Him; He is the Source of life and light. There is a parallel with the opening words of "Genesis", but the apostle rapidly passes from the natural to the spiritual. It is characteristic of him to use natural things in a spiritual sense, though of course this is by no means peculiar to him. In the Old Testament such usage is common, as for example, "The Lord is my light, and my salvation; whom shall I fear?" (Psa. xxvii. i). Presenting light and darkness in contrast, John seems to regard them not as positive and negative, but as two positive forces in active opposition.

      In the Authorised Version John i. 5 is translated, "And the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not." This translation, which has

had, and still has, many supporters, is cited as an instance of what is called the "tragic tone" in John's writings. In pre-Christian times, when the light shone out, it was often misunderstood and unappreciated. Job said concerning the wicked, "They are of those that rebel against the light"; and Isaiah cried, "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness" (Isa. v. 20). When God revealed His will through the prophets, many even of those who claimed to be the chosen people rejected the message and persecuted the messengers. At length, when the Messiah came, He came unto His own possessions, as John says in i. 2, and His own people did not receive Him. The world did not know Him, and several passages in this Gospel tell us of the rejection of the testimony to Christ. It may be said then, that, whether the Authorised Version gives the correct translation or not, it was true that when the light shone out the darkness failed to appreciate it. Even today we must lament the fact that so few take heed to God's glorious revelation of Himself.

      But from very early times there have been those who thought that John's words should be differently translated. The Revised Version has employed a somewhat ambiguous term, "apprehended" in place of "comprehended", but in the margin has suggested the translation "overcame". Many modern commentators and translators give their support to the marginal rendering of the Revised Version, although

there has been much discussion. As the matter depends upon a rather technical point of Greek grammar, this is not the place for presenting the pros and cons; but it is in order to say that Scriptural support can be given both from the Old and the New Testaments for the rendering "overcame". Two passages in the New Testament are very strongly in favour. Jesus said, "Walk while ye have the light, that darkness overtake you not" (John xii. 35, R.V.). Paul wrote to the Thessalonian Christians, "But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief" (1 Thess. v. 4). In both these sentences, the same verb is used as in John i. 5.

      If this rendering can be accepted, the passage is turned from a lament to a claim for victory in a great conflict. John is claiming that the darkness did not overcome the light, or, as Goodspeed translates, "the darkness has never put it out". There is another significant fact in the tense of the word "shineth". It is a present tense. Some have taken it as an historic present, but as it is the only principal verb in the present tense in the whole section, it seems far more likely that John means that at the time of his writing the light was still shining, triumphant over all efforts to stay its beams. John had witnessed the crucifixion of his Lord and the persecution of Christians, and yet was confident of victory for the light.

      Are there any other facts which would lend support to the change from the Authorised Version of this passage? A study of John's writings as a whole will

show that the conflict between light and darkness is prominent in his thought. He does not underestimate the power of darkness, and he realises to the full the stubbornness of men's hearts and the wiles of the devil. But he is confident that the overcoming power is with God. It seems to me that the prologue of John's Gospel is in two parts. The first part is a brief statement of his "thesis", ending with the victorious note of verse five. The second part then introduces the earthly ministry of Jesus. In the body of the Gospel the victory of the light is asserted even when the power of darkness seems at its height. Jesus said, "I am the Light of the world" (John viii. 12); and again, "I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on Me may not abide in darkness" (John xii. 46); "Be of good cheer; I have overcome the world" (John xvi. 33). Similarly in one of John's Epistles we read, "The darkness is passing away, and the true light already shineth" (1 John ii. 8). The Revelation of John tells of the victory of Christ over Satan, and of the rich inheritance of the overcoming believer. In the city which has no need of the sun, the Lamb is the Light thereof.

      Thus the rendering suggested in the Revised margin, which is certainly possible on linguistic grounds, is supported strongly by other evidence. Thank God for the victory of the Light!

      In the later part of the Galilean ministry of Jesus, following upon two miracles wherein the Lord demonstrated His power over material elements, a notable discourse was given in the presence of a great company of people. From various motives the multitudes had followed the Master. Some had come seeking further material benefits; some, "the Jews", had joined the group as members of the hostile party; others had come as disciples, among these "the twelve". As Jesus directed the attention of His hearers away from the bread which perishes to Himself as the bread of life, and then gave utterance to deeper teaching concerning the eating of His flesh and the drinking of His blood, the thoughtless began to lose interest, the Jews commenced to murmur and to argue, and many of the disciples uttered terms of dissent. The crowd melted away, and Jesus was left with the twelve.

      This is the first mention, in John's Gospel, of "the twelve", but the reference is so made as to imply that they were a well-known body. They were all Galileans, except Judas Iscariot. "The band held within it a number of men of strongly contrasted types of character. Allusion need only be made to the impetuous Peter, the contemplative John, the matter-of-fact Philip, the cautious Thomas, the zealous Simon, the conservative Matthew, the administrative Judas."

      No detail is given in the narrative as to the feelings of Jesus when His disciples turned their backs on Him. A divinely-imposed restraint is upon the New Testament writers. They do not enlarge, as most writers do, upon such incidents. Yet enough is said to show that Jesus felt keenly His position as the "rejected of men". Observe the little word "also" in the question of Jesus to the twelve. He noted the withdrawal of disciples among the crowd. Perhaps some lingered near, halting between two opinions. He even knew that of the twelve who remained one should betray Him! Hence there was deep emotional appeal in the question which He asked.

      As rendered in the Authorised Version, the question asked was, "Will ye also go away?" In the Revised Version the rendering is, "Would ye also go away?" Neither of these does full justice to the original. Moffatt's rendering, "You do not want to go, too?" is much better. One of the subtleties of the Greek language is in the use of various forms of interrogation. When the answer "yes" is expected, a certain negative form (ou) is used at the beginning of the question. When the answer "no" is expected, or where there is hesitancy, another negative (me) is employed. Professor A. T. Robertson, in his exhaustive Grammar of the Greek New Testament, says: "The use of me varies greatly in tone. The precise emotion in each case (protest, indignation, scorn, excitement, sympathy, etc.) depends on the context." A few examples will illustrate: In Matt. vii. 9 Jesus says, "Or what

man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone?" The English equivalent to the Greek is best secured by a circumlocution, "Surely he will not give him a stone, will he?" In Rom. iii. 3 Paul writes, "Shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?" The meaning is, "Surely their unbelief will not render inoperative the faithfulness of God, will it?" When Paul asks in 1 Cor. i. 13, "Was Paul crucified for you?" he means, "Surely Paul was not crucified for you, was he?" When the woman of Samaria told of the wonderful things Jesus had said, she did not affirm that Jesus was the Christ, but in a hesitant way she said, "Can this be the Christ?" (John iv. 29, R.V.). Professor Robertson says of this passage, "There is certainly a feminine touch in the use of me by the woman at Jacob's well when she came to the village. She refused to arouse opposition by using ou (expecting the answer 'yes') and excited their curiosity by using me (a hesitant question)."

      Now the question which Jesus asked His disciples in John vi. 67 is introduced by me, and the context favours the view that He was appealing to the disciples and rallying them to Himself by the words, "Surely you also do not wish to go away, do you?" In harmony with this expectant question, Peter made his first great confession. Speaking for the others he answered by another question, followed by an affirmation, "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed and know that Thou art the Holy One of God." Thus the appeal

in the question of Jesus was answered. One indeed would betray Him, but the others had been chosen for a great mission, and, though later in the hour of sore trial they forsook Jesus, they ultimately became the champions of His cause. Realising that "there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved", these men "of strongly contrasted types", became united in their fearless testimony of the risen Christ.

      "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom. v. i, Authorised Version).

      "Being therefore justified by faith, let us have peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Revised Version).

      Why have the revisers made this change from affirmation to exhortation? It is partly a question of text, involving what might seem to be a slight variation. Whether the word is in the affirmative sense or in the mood of exhortation depends upon whether one Greek letter is short or long. The Greek word is ekhomen. In the indicative mood, "we have", the "o" in ekhomen is short; in the subjunctive mood, "let us have", the "o" is long.

      Two facts are claimed in support of the Revised rendering: (a) The weight of manuscript authority favours the subjunctive mood; (b) it is the less obvious

reading. The latter statement is based on a principle of textual criticism: if of two readings one is less obvious, it is more likely to be correct. The reason for this is that a copyist would be more likely to slip in making a difficult reading easy than in making an easy reading difficult. In reply, those who support the Authorised Version translation point out that in the texts, and also in the papyri, there was frequent confusion between short "o" and long "o", and they claim that the matter depends on interpretation rather than text. They are confident that the context supports the indicative mood in this passage. Paul has been declaring the great principle of justification by faith, and now he states that as a result of that justification believers have peace with God.

      But even if the argument from textual criticism is not conclusive, in the judgment of many recent scholars the context decides in favour of the Revised rendering. "The mood of exhortation is clearly required by the context," says Parry in the Cambridge Greek Testament: "Paul is passing from the description of the fundamental initial act of God in bringing man into this state, to the character and duties of the state so given".

      It will be seen that there is ground for difference of opinion when the meaning must be decided by an appeal to the scope of Paul's argument. There is an additional fact, however, in support of the mood of exhortation in this passage, which the Revised Version has not made clear. The verb "have" is sometimes

used in the sense of "keep". In Rom. i. 28, the Authorised Version translation reads, "Even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge"; and in 1 Tim. i. 19, "Holding faith, and a good conscience". In both these passages, the word which normally means "have" is used.

      It can be argued, then, that the sense of Rom. v. 1 is, "let us maintain peace". The verb is an instance of what is technically called "durative". "This requires further activities in man, and continual help of the Lord." And since "to have" may be "to possess" and even "to enjoy", Dr. Moffatt probably has not gone beyond the evidence in translating, "As we are justified by faith, then, let us enjoy the peace we have with God through our Lord Jesus Christ".

      ON a bleak ridge five miles south of Jerusalem stands the town of Bethlehem. The names which have been given to the place in its long history speak of fruitfulness and prosperity. Its modern name means "house of flesh"; "Ephrathah", a name which helped to distinguish from a less known Bethlehem in Zebulun (Josh. xix. 15) has the meaning "fruitful"; and the familiar "Bethlehem" means "house of bread". "The ridge upon which the town stands descends steeply in terraced slopes of vine and olive to deep valleys on the north and south, and falls away to a broad plain or plateau on the east."

      While the Old Testament references to Bethlehem are not numerous, some of them are very significant. Here it was that Ruth, the brave young woman of Moab, made her home with Naomi and became a gleaner in the fields. And as

she found favour with Boaz, who later married her. Ruth became an ancestress of David, and of the Messiah.

      When Samuel, directed by the Lord to anoint a successor to Saul, set out on his mission, it was to Bethlehem that he went. When the sons of Jesse passed before him, his own choice was overruled, and David was selected, for "the Lord looketh on the heart". This was the youth who had kept the flocks on the hills about Bethlehem, guarding them from the lions and bears which then preyed upon the animals, as wolves and jackals do to-day. Amid pastoral scenes his mind receives images which found expression in many a psalm. As king, exercising prophetic and priestly functions, he established "the throne of David ", and in due time there came of David's line Jesus, the Messiah, Prophet, Priest and King.

      Bethlehem was not blessed with a great water-supply, but there was a well by the gate which David remembered during a trying experience of his outlaw life as a fugitive from Saul. The town was in the hands of the Philistines, but David was desperate, and cried, "Oh, that one would give me water to drink of the well of Bethlehem, which is by the gate!" Thereupon three of his mighty men broke through the host of the Philistines, and fetched water to their leader. Overwhelmed by this brave and kindly act, David would not drink, but consecrated the water to the Lord.

      It seems that Bethlehem fell into obscurity, but a sudden prophetic gleam again brought the little town into bold relief. Micah, a prophet of the country at the time when Isaiah was prophet at the court of

Judah, stood up as champion of the people. He denounced the crimes of the nobles and false prophets, and predicted the fall of Jerusalem. Nevertheless, in the latter days, there would be peace and prosperity for the house of the Lord. Especially would Bethlehem be exalted, for out of the little town would come the Messiah (Micah v. 2).

      And so the light of sacred story shines upon Bethlehem. With the birth of Messiah, the lowly town becomes the focal point of history and prophecy. Other strangers, coming from a region more distant than Moab, lay their gifts before Jesus, "King of the Jews", as if to signify the Gentile world's acknowledgment of the Saviour. Other shepherds on the hills of Bethlehem guarded their flocks, and their minds were filled with a psalm not their own as they listened to the heavenly host "praising God, and saying, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men in whom He is well pleased". Thirsting souls in all generations could learn that

      Not all the eyes directed to Bethlehem at the time of Messiah's birth were friendly, however. Herod,

the King of Judea, was troubled when he heard of One born "King of the Jews", and instigated a massacre of the infants of Bethlehem. Although his evil designs to murder Jesus was thwarted by divine intervention, Bethlehem experienced a period of barbaric cruelty, and the land was filled with lamentation and mourning. Matthew associates this with a remarkable passage in Jeremiah xxxi. 15. Jeremiah pictures Rachel as weeping over the captivity of her descendants. Rachel had died at the birth of Benjamin, and was buried "in the way to Ephrath". "The evangelist pictures Rachel's grief reawakened by the slaughter of the infants at Bethlehem." With reference to this incident, P. Whitwell Wilson, in The Christ We Forget, wrote: "Not once in later years did Jesus refer to the crime which, at Bethlehem, was aimed against Him. So far from denouncing the Herods, He was ready to suffer in their stead. He did not attempt to avenge the innocent children who had died in His cause, by stirring up insurrection against the ruling and guilty house." It is of interest to note that, so far as the record tells, Jesus never again entered the little town where He was born.

      Another ruler who turned hostile eyes toward Bethlehem was the Roman Emperor of Spanish birth, Hadrian. During his reign (A.D. 117-138), he proved himself a man of great ability, an able ruler, a lover of literature and philosophy, deeply imbued with Greek culture. He travelled much, and visited many parts

of his empire, including Britain, where he built a famous wall which bears his name. But Hadrian was a pagan, and added to the list of infamous deeds perpetrated by the opponents of Christianity. It is on record that Hadrian, "imagining that he could kill the Christian faith by defacing the place, consecrated an image of Jupiter on the site of the Passion". He also devastated Bethlehem, and set up there a sacred grove to Adonis. Incidentally, this act shows that Bethlehem was regarded as a hallowed spot at that time. The efforts of Hadrian and other emperors to stamp out the Christian faith utterly failed, and two centuries later Constantine pulled down the temple of Adonis, and erected a basilica over the cave-stable which tradition pointed out as the scene of the nativity. H. V. Morton says, "Beneath the church is a warren of underground passages. In one of them, a dark rock chamber, St. Jerome conducted a number of his keen controversies and translated the Vulgate." Thus the message of good tidings again was heard from Bethlehem.

      Since that day Bethlehem has remained a centre of Christian worship, and now it has been found possible, by means of radio, for the bells of the Church of the Nativity to be heard in earth's remotest bounds.

      PAUL makes the demand, as the Revised rendering of Rom. x. 9 shows, that the believer must confess with the mouth that Jesus is Lord. An examination of the immediate context will disclose the fact that the apostle is making allusion to a passage in Deut. xxx. 11-14, where it is taught that the word of commandment is not far-off--in heaven or beyond the sea--but near, "in thy mouth and in thy heart". So Paul argues that the word of faith which he preaches presents no obstacle because of its being out of reach, but it simply demands the expression of faith. It must be remembered that the whole section (Rom. ix. to xi) is a discussion of Israel's rejection of the gospel, and that chapter x declares that Israel's failure was due to neglect of knowledge within easy grasp. Nevertheless the principle laid down is of wider application. There is no need for any attempt to bring Christ down from heaven--He has already come. Nor is there need for any to seek His resurrection--He has already been raised, and has ascended to the Father's right hand. No further divine demonstration is necessary; what remains is for the sinner to accept the righteousness which is of faith. This is true for all time; hence we

are right in urging believers to make this good confession to-day.

      Recent research among the buried treasures of antiquity has caused a brilliant and almost fierce light to shine on this and other passages of Scripture which demand open confession. It is in all probability the case that Paul, writing to a people in the imperial city, intended his words to place the Lordship of Jesus over against the lordship of Cæsar. If the Israelite of old was compelled to choose between Moses and Pharaoh, the disciple in the days of Paul must choose between Christ and the Emperor.

      In order to make this clear, it will be necessary to trace a few facts in the development of Cæsar-worship. The idea of men becoming gods was familiar in early Greek and other mythology, although in the more enlightened days of the Greek Republic apotheosis, or enrolment of men among the gods, was not common. Ancestor-worship was practised by the Romans, and in very early times departed rulers received divine honours. "Consecratio" was the Latin word for apotheosis, and it was used for the deification of emperors. Immediately after his death, Julius Cæsar was added to the gods of Rome by a decree of the Senate and people (42 B.C.), and the event was celebrated by elaborate ceremonies. There followed a worship of the Roman Emperor which took a threefold shape: (1) The Emperor Augustus was worshipped by certain cults as a god during his lifetime; (2) the institution of the "Divi", dead emperors and their

relations being worshipped; (3) the worship of "Rome and Augustus", not so much the name of a particular man as the title of the supreme ruler.

      These are facts well supported in Roman literature, but the recent discoveries throw fresh light upon this Cæsar-worship. The title "Saviour of the World" was bestowed on Julius Cæsar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan and others, while Domitian allowed himself to be called "our lord and god". "It may be said with certainty," says Deissmann in Light from the Ancient East, "that at the time when Christianity originated 'Lord' was a divine predicate intelligible to the whole Eastern world." Again, "there is literary record that Caligula allowed himself to be called 'lord'. An Egyptian document of the year 49 and an ostracon from Thebes of the year 54 call Claudius 'the lord'. For Nero 'the lord' .  .  . the number of examples suddenly rushes up tremendously." In view of these facts, it is important to note that the Epistle to the Romans was written about 56, two years after the succession of Nero to the imperial throne.

      Now Rome was tolerant in matters of religion. When Emperor-worship was established, it did not become the State religion in the sense that no other worship was permitted, but it demanded a place above any other. The Jews were exempted from Cæsar-worship, but Caligula attempted, without success, to secure the erection of a statue to himself in the Temple at Jerusalem. Later on attempts were made in some parts to enforce this false worship on the Jews. Josephus

tells us that in Alexandria certain Jews were persecuted, but when all sorts of torments and vexations of their bodies that could be devised were made use of to them, they could not get any one of them to comply so far as to confess that Cæsar was their lord".

      For some time Christians were identified with the Jews by the Roman Emperors, and consequently were tolerated. But as Deissmann says, "We cannot escape the conclusion that the Christians of the East who heard Paul preach in the style of Phil. ii. 9, 11, and 1 Cor. viii. 5, 6 must have found in the solemn confession that Jesus Christ is 'the Lord', a silent protest against other 'lords' and against 'the lord', as people were beginning to call the Roman Cæsar". Active persecution of Christians by Rome did not break out till after the great fire in A.D. 64, but Cæsar-worship and other idolatrous practices made it impossible for followers of Christ to join the clubs and guilds of the day. "Ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils." So the "table of the Lord Serapis in the house of Claudius Serapean ", an invitation to which has been discovered (Milligan, Greek Papyri), would not be a fit place for a Christian.

      Soon after the death of Paul, the Christians came into deadly conflict With Rome, and the refusal to call Cæsar lord was made a crucial test. Many gave their lives rather than acknowledge Emperor-worship, prominent among those in the second century being Polycarp, who, when asked, "What harm is it to say,

lord Cæsar!--and to sacrifice, and be safe?" replied, "I will not follow your advice".

      It can readily be seen, then, that the open confession demanded in Rom. x. 9 was of the utmost importance. "No man can serve two masters"; the Christian must declare his faith whenever the demand is made. Furthermore, in the words of Dr. Cobern, "for the first time we possess a new argument for the deity of Jesus Christ, since the title 'lord' could be used only after the Cæsar had been acknowledged as God. We now see that the term Lord Jesus was a distinct ascription of deity to Christ, and that its use must almost have been accounted an act of direct antagonism to the claims of the Roman Emperor".

      "WHEREFORE the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster"--(Gal. iii. 24, 25).

      "Schoolmaster" is the rendering in the Authorised Version of the Greek word which appears as the title of this chapter. In the Revised Version "tutor" is given as the translation; Weymouth has "tutor-slave"; and Moffatt paraphrases: "The Law thus held us as wards in discipline." It is well for us to appreciate the difficulty of the translators, which arises from the fact that we have no one word in English which adequately represents the Greek term, nor have we any recognised class of persons who exercise the functions implied by it. Our word "pedagogue" is used in the sense of "teacher", and is derived from the Greek paidagogos, but, as often happens with words, the derivative has moved from the meaning of the parent term.

      Breaking the word into its component parts, we find that it is formed from pais, a boy, and ago, I lead. just as we frequently hear men referred to as boys, sometimes pais was used of a man in the position of a

slave. It may be that our English word "page" (a boy attending a person of rank) carries this meaning over to English, for some philologists think that "page" is derived from paidion, a diminutive of pais. In harmony with these facts, Classical usage of the term paidagogos shows that the person indicated was certainly not a schoolmaster. Nor, indeed, was he a private tutor in our sense of that word.

      What, then, were the functions of a paidagogos? He was a guardian, usually a trusty slave hot fitted for hard toil, whose duty it was to take charge of a boy as soon as he left the nursery, and to see that the child did not get into bad habits. He would watch the boy at his meals, and correct his faults in "table-manners". He would keep an eye on the morals of his charge, and deal severely with any delinquencies. Part of his duty was to take the boy to school, perhaps carrying his writing-tablets and other school requisites, and when lessons were over see that he returned safely home. His guardianship did not cease till the boy was entering manhood.

      Quotations from Classical authors will be of use in presenting the functions of this boy-leader. In Plato's Lysis, Socrates comes upon a group of boys "playing together at knuckle-bones, all in their holiday dress". Lysis is one of these boys, and Socrates, engaging him in conversation, twits him with being under the authority of various persons who limit his freedom. The dialogue refers to restraints imposed

by parental control, and then a reference to his governor or guardian is made. Socrates reports himself as asking:

      "Do they (your parents) let you rule yourself, or not even allow you this? "

      "Rule myself! I should think not," said he.

      "You have some one to rule you, then?"

      "Yes, my governor here."

      "Not a slave?"

      "Yes, but he is, though, ours."

      "Shocking!" I exclaimed "A free man to be ruled by a slave. But how, pray, does this governor exercise his authority? "

      "He takes me to school, of course."

      "And do you mean to say that they rule you there, too--the schoolmasters?"

      "Most certainly they do."

      The dialogue was continued for a while, and then was abruptly terminated by the appearance of a guardian, who took Lysis off, grumbling at his expostulations in "sad Greek".

      In Plutarch's Lives, there is another reference to a Paidagogos. The life of Fabius, the famous Roman Dictator, is under review. Appointed to meet the crisis brought about through Hannibal's descent upon Italy, Fabius adopted the tactics of delaying a pitched battle until the moment most favourable to himself. His commander of horse, Minucius, eager for action, encouraged a feeling of restlessness among the soldiers, who began to reproach Fabius, "calling him Hannibal's

pedagogue, since he did nothing else but follow him up and down and wait upon him".

      These quotations distinguish the Paidagogos from the teacher, and show the difficulty of finding an English equivalent for the word. Apart from Gal. iii. 24, 25, there is only one other instance of the term in the New Testament. This is in 1 Cor. iv. 1:5, where the Authorised Version gives "instructor" as the translation. Rather is Paul thinking of those guardians, sometimes harsh, who were ever ready to find fault. It has been suggested that Paul was drawing upon his own boyhood experience; whether that be so or not, his words here show a familiarity with these guardian-slaves as a class. His readers, too, would readily appreciate the distinction between these and "fathers", when he says: "You may have thousands to superintend you, but you have not more than one father. It was I who in Christ Jesus became your father by means of the gospel" (Moffatt's rendering).

      In the light of the facts thus collated, what is the function of the law indicated in Gal. iii. 24, 25? That Paul had the Greek and Roman usage of the term in mind seems evident from the fact that he chose the term paidagogos, when a word meaning "teacher" (didaskalos) was ready to hand, especially when we find that the former word is not used in the Greek versions of the Old Testament. One tempting interpretation is that the law acted as a leader for those under its authority to guide them to Christ, the great Teacher. Although the words "to bring us" are not

in the Greek text, the idea suggested can be gathered from the etymology of the word "boy-leader" and the construction of the sentence; but the figure of leading to a teacher cannot be pressed. The context is against this view. As the closing words of verse 24 declare, justification, not teaching, is the blessing which is here said to come to the believer in Christ. When, therefore, the law is said to be a paidagogos, the thought is that the law acts as a guardian of morals, exposing faults, revealing to those under its authority that they are sinners in need of justification. The law convicts of sin and brings condemnation, but those under it are thereby led to look for Another for justification-Christ, who is "the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth". Justified by faith, the believer enters into the full status and privileges of sonship.

      Thus the passage under consideration is similar in thought to the opening verses of the fourth chapter, which draw an illustration from an heir who is under age. In childhood he is under guardians (epitropos) and trustees (oikonomos), but upon reaching manhood he enjoys freedom in the possessions to which he is heir.

      IN the very heart of Athens, "the Classic University of the ancient world", was the sunlit Agora. Surrounded by temples and colonnades, with their exquisite sculptures and statuary, it was rather a "quadrangle" than a market-place. Within a quarter of a mile towered the Acropolis, "clear-cut against the bright background of an Attic sky", while nearer still was the glorious Theseion and the rugged Areopagus. No wonder modern writers speak of the Agora as "tradition-haunted", for here from time immemorial philosophers of all schools had met and debated, orators had swayed the people from its bema or rostrum, merchants had bartered their wares. Because of his teaching here and elsewhere, Socrates had been charged with bringing in strange divinities. Self-restrained Stoics and easy-going Epicureans had taught their doctrines to numerous disciples, and many, in doubt between rival theories, looked for "some new thing". It was a meeting-place for men of all grades of culture, and on its pavements stood visitors from all parts of the world.

      Into the Agora came Paul the dauntless. Stirred to the depths of his soul by the innumerable evidences of idolatry all about him, he entered into discussion with those whom he met. He had commenced his teaching in the synagogue, but soon found that he could not remain silent among the citizens in the Agora. At length the philosophers entered into discussion with him, and a difference of opinion arose concerning him. Some challenged his credentials; others his message. "What will this babbler say?" cried some, as they sought to dismiss him with contempt.

      What is the meaning of the word rendered "babbler"? That the term, which occurs in this passage alone in the New Testament, is difficult to translate becomes apparent when the various versions are consulted. In the margin of the Authorised Version, "base fellow" is given; Weymouth gives "beggarly babbler"; Rotherham has "picker-up-of-scraps"; Goodspeed gives "rag-picker"; and Moffatt renders, "Whatever does this fellow mean with his scraps of learning?" Etymologically, the word spermologos suggests the picking up of seeds, and Aristophanes, the comic poet, used the term of birds pecking up seeds from the ground. In his play, The Birds, Aristophanes represents Peisthetairos, an Athenian citizen tired of law-courts, seeking his fortune in the kingdom of the birds. He is confident that the birds can occupy their Cloudtown in safety, and claims that if men on earth interfere

      Plutarch, too, in his biography of Demetrius, says of certain people that their "partnership he said he would scatter asunder with a single stone and a single shout, as if they were a flock of granivorous (grain-devouring) birds". In a newly recovered papyrus the term is applied to the crumbs and scraps thrown out in the streets to dogs. Eustathius, a commentator on Homer, says that the Athenians applied the term to those who spend their time about the markets picking up scraps of food, and also in a metaphorical sense to "hangers on", "good-for-nothing fellows".

      Demosthenes called Æschines, a rival orator, spermologos, evidently meaning "parasite", or "hanger on". Other references in Greek literature give evidence of a usage of the word to describe those who make much sound but little sense, or "ignorant plagiarists" who retailed other men's thoughts. Shakespeare has a parallel in Love's Labour's Lost. Biron says of another lord:

      It seems, then, that some Athenians regarded Paul as a mere pretender to learning, or as a shallow

plagiarist echoing some words he had picked up in his travels. Sir William. Ramsay thinks that "probably the nearest and most instructive parallel in modern English life to spermologos is 'Bounder', allowing for the difference between England and Athens".

      It is well that not all who heard Paul treated him so contemptuously. Our immediate purpose, however, is to show how far astray the wisdom of this world may be. It is not enough to say that the Athenians at this time were degenerate. In the great age which produced Plato, Aristophanes, Thucydides and many other men of world renown, Socrates fared no better than Paul. If the cross of Christ was to the Greeks "foolishness", we need not be surprised that Paul was regarded as a retailer of folly. But what a tragedy it is! The pearl of great price is trampled upon by those who consider themselves anything but swine. When offered the bread of life, these self-satisfied worldlings regard it as a stone! And so Paul, champion of a philosophy which can change the world, ambassador of the King of kings, skilled dialectician who can grapple with giants in intellect, is dismissed by some as a charlatan dabbling in things he does not understand!

      But stay, worthy Poet; no, not "for ever", for "hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world "?

and shall not we see the day dawn when the message which Paul preached shall be regarded as the power of God, the solution of all the problems that vex this sin-weary world?

      THUS, according to the Authorised Version, did Paul begin his speech to the Athenians on Mar's Hill, the far-famed Areopagus. A comparison of versions will show a variety of renderings. In the Revised Version "too superstitious" is toned down to "somewhat superstitious", while others make more important changes. The Greek word of which these are the renderings--deisidaimonesterous--is an adjective in the comparative degree, and concerning it two points must be settled by the translator: (1) What is the precise meaning of the word? (2) What is the force of the comparative?

      Etymologically, it is easy to break up the word into its parts, and it is profitable to do so, but it must be observed that etymology is not final as to the usage of a word at any period of its history. Deisi comes from a Classical verb (deido), not found in the New Testament, which has the meaning "I fear". Daimon is a noun common in the Classics, and it occurs once in the New Testament according to the Revised Texts (Matt. viii. A, though the Text upon which the

Authorised Version is based has the word in four other passages. In Classical Greek daimon was used in several senses as will be shown in the course of this chapter. In the New Testament it is equivalent with daimonion, a demon.

      Some translators and commentators, because of the etymology of the term, have given an English rendering, "reverent of the demons" or "demon-fearing". If we could keep in mind the content of the word "demon" as used by the Greeks, the translation would be legitimate, but unfortunately the relationship with the New Testament use of daimonion (an evil spirit) suggests a thought foreign to Paul's speech. Surely the apostle did not commence his address, which is a model of courtesy and tact, with a charge of devil-worship against the Athenians!

      That the adjective in our text was used by some authors in the sense of "superstitious" can be verified by reference to Greek literature. For example, Plutarch wrote: "Ignorance regarding the gods divides at its source into two channels, engendering in the hard soil of refractory natures atheism (atheotes), and in the moist soil of softer natures superstition (deisidaimonia)." It must be admitted, also, that there were superstitious elements in Greek religion. But a similar objection to that given above holds good against the Authorised Version and the Revised Version. Paul would not seek to win his audience by words which could be taken only as rebuke.

      A further examination of the Classic usage of the word discloses the fact that it was used in good senses. Xenophon, referring to soldiers under Cyrus, wrote: "While they were yet beyond reach of the enemy's weapons, Cyrus gave out the watchword, 'Jupiter our Ally and Leader!' When the word came round to him again, he commenced the usual paean; and all the soldiers devoutly accompanied him with a loud voice; for in such circumstances they who fear the gods are less in fear of men." Daimon was used by the Greeks: (1) of a god or goddess; (2) of the Deity, especially in the sense of divine power; fate, destiny, fortune, good or bad; (3) of souls of heroes, and later of the departed generally. It was employed frequently like the Latin genius, and could be used of good or bad. If a man was fortunate, he was under the influence of good demons; if unfortunate, the bad demons had control of his fate.

      Now the Athenians had the reputation of being reverent to the gods. Aristotle, describing the character of a tyrant (ruler, in the Greek sense of the term), wrote: "Moreover, he ought always to seem to pay particular attention to the worship of the gods, for from persons of such a character, men entertain less fears of suffering anything contrary to the law, while they suppose that he who governs them is religious and reverences the gods." Sophocles, the famous tragic poet, made Oedipus to say, when threatened with dismissal from Athens as an alien:

      Paul, then, may have used the term in a good sense. But, if so, how far did he go in his commendation? Before answering this question, it is necessary to recall the second point to be settled: What is the force of the comparative? If we accept a good sense in Paul's meaning, the "too" of the Authorised Version cannot stand. But that does not create a difficulty, for probably there is a real comparison here, though the other member of the comparison is not mentioned. Some think that the comparative form is used in the intensive sense of "very" or even "most" (cf. Moffatt). But if we seek for comparison, we have not far to look. It may be in the speaker's mind ("more than I thought"), or it may be, "more than the rest of the Greeks or other Gentiles".

      Many scholars think that the best word to represent Paul's adjective is "religious". While it does not bring out all that is in the Greek word, its very vagueness makes it the more suitable. Paul did not sanction the religious practices of the Athenians, or praise them unduly, but simply stated a fact which made a skilful introduction to a speech in which he was to enlighten them as to true worship. Other words in the sentence support this translation. Standing upon

an elevated position, Paul could take within the range of his vision numerous statues and temples, and the word "perceive" suggests actual observation. Prof. David Smith renders the sentence: "At every turn your exceptional religiousness is before my eyes." Probably Paul chose the word because it was the best possible link between their views and his own. He could concede that they were "remarkably religious" (Weymouth) or "much in awe of the higher powers" (Green), but the word enabled him to make his commendation with reserve, so that he could move off from that starting-point to an exposition of true religion. He passed on to mention the objects of devotion which he had seen as he passed through Athens, and the altar to an unknown God, and declared the truth concerning the One God after whom they were groping. Paul's introduction is a lesson for soul-winners.

      IT is interesting to find Paul quoting Greek poets. Because of the fact that in his address to the Athenians and in certain Epistles Paul cites lines from Classic authors, learned writers have argued as to the extent of Paul's knowledge of ancient literature, some taking the view that the apostle must have had a liberal education in the literature of Greece, others claiming that his allusions prove no more than that certain Classic lines had become proverbial. This is not the place to state the pros and cons of such a controversy, but it is of some profit to know who the "certain poets" are, and to consider Paul's reason for introducing them into his address to the Athenians.

      There are two passages in extant Greek literature which include Paul's line, or words giving the same idea. Aratus, who lived in the earlier part of the third century before Christ, wrote an astronomical poem "Phænomena", which was popular in ancient times. Cicero translated it into Latin. This poem, which contains the very words cited by Paul, was written at the request of the King of Macedon, and was

considered of sufficient importance to merit a commentary in four volumes by Hipparchus, a great astronomer. One personal detail is of special interest. His place of birth was Soli, in Cilicia, very near to Paul's early home.

      Cleanthes, a philosopher, was the author of the second poem. This is entitled "Hymn to Zeus", and commences:

      This hymn is the only remnant of his writings, but some facts of the author's life are known. He was born at Assos in Troas, about 300 B.C. In youth he became a boxer, but began to take an interest in philosophy. He attended lectures under Crates and Zeno in Athens. He was charged by the authorities of the city with having insufficient means of support, but he proved, to their delight, that he earned enough money to study philosophy in the daytime by carrying water at night! Upon the death of Zeno, Cleanthes became head of the Stoic school.

      Both Aratus and Cleanthes were Stoics. This is an important fact, for it shows that while these poets used the words cited by Paul they employed them in a pantheistic sense. Stoic philosophy was an ethical system chiefly, but theology was included, the doctrine being taught that "God was a certain living force immanent in nature".

      Whether Paul was expert in Greek literature and philosophy or not, he certainly knew his audience in Athens, and made his speech accordingly. As was pointed out in a previous study, he did not denounce the beliefs of his hearers, but sought a point of contact, and led their thoughts towards the knowledge of God in Christ. He had observed their altar dedicated to an unknown God; he knew their vague and imperfect notions of the Creator; and he enforced his argument by showing that these Stoic authors had written better than they knew. Addressing the Christians in Rome, Paul tore the mask off paganism and exposed its hideous travesty of the Divine Nature. Speaking to a pagan audience in Athens, he found what good there was to find and used it to win his hearers. It was in this way that Paul was all things to all men that by any means he might save some. This is no plea to dilute the truths of Christianity, as some writers on comparative religion do in seeking common factors in the beliefs of men; rather is it a plea to illumine with the light of heaven the dim avenues walked by those who are feeling after God.

      THIS severe indictment by "a prophet of their own", which is quoted by the Apostle Paul, arouses curiosity. It may be a matter of surprise that a dignified apostle of Jesus Christ should pen such a judgment. Certainly there is that in it which demands some investigation. One recent commentator has written: "However such words may have befitted the pagan seer, it is not pleasant to regard them as taken up and endorsed by the great Christian apostle, who is thus made to stigmatise as liars, beasts and gluttons a whole people, among whom he had so successfully laboured that several churches had been founded in a short time. They are strange words from a venerable Christian minister to a younger minister to whom he had entrusted the care of those very souls; and in any case are superfluous, as addressed to one who must have known the characteristics of the Cretans quite as well as the writer himself." Other writers consider Paul's utterance as "unpastoral tactlessness". These strictures, like the statement criticised, urge the Bible student to investigation.

      As a starting point we may take the profane quotation itself, and trace it to its source. Who was the "prophet of their own"?

      In the sixth century B.C. Epimenides, a Cretan poet, prophet and philosopher, wrote a poem on "Oracles" in which was the line quoted by Paul. Various magic powers were assigned to this writer, and his reputation as a prophet led to the circulation of many strange legends concerning him. After his death his name was greatly honoured among the Cretans, so that they even sacrificed to him as a god. It is said that the particular lie Epimenides had in mind was the statement that the tomb of Zeus. the supreme god of the Greeks, was on the island of Crete! Callimachus, keeper of manuscripts in the famous library of Alexandria about 250 B.C., quoted the first part of the line in his "Hymn to Zeus":

      Cretans are always liars"; thy grave, has been claimed by the Cretans,

      Thine, O King immortal, who livest and reignest for ever. "

      There is abundant support for giving a bad name to the Cretans. Polybius, the Greek historian, who wrote a lengthy work on the period 220-146 B.C., described the inhabitants of the island thus: "The Cretans, on account of their innate avarice, live in a perpetual state of private quarrel and public feud and civil strife .  .  . and you will hardly find anywhere

characters more tricky and deceitful than those of the Cretans."

      Plutarch, speaking of the flight of Perseus, King of Macedonia, from L. Æmilius Paulus, says that "of the common soldiers there followed him only those from Crete, not out of any good-will, but because they were as constant to his riches as the bees to their hive". Indeed, so bad was the reputation of these islanders that a proverb, in an alliterative line, classifies them amongst the three very bad K's of antiquity:

      Kretes, Kappadokai, Kilikes, tria kappa kakista.

      In Greek, the letter K is used as the initial letter of all such words as "Crete", there being no C in the language. To put the above line into modern form, we may write:

      Cretans, Cappadocians, Cilicians, the three worst C's.

      Other testimonies can be cited against the character of the Cretans. An epigram asks, as if demanding the impossible, "Who knows of a righteous Cretan?" and describes the race as always robbers and pirates, and unjust. As a climax to this unsavoury array, let it be said that, just as a Greek verb formed from the word Corinth meant "to act the wanton", so a word formed from Cretan came to mean "to cheat" or "to lie".

      Paul, then, used a quotation concerning the Cretans which must have been often on the lips of those who had dealings with them. But in what sense did he make use of the expression? Did he mean to imply, as his critics seem to have thought, that every person

on the island was worthy of this damaging description? Surely not; else, where would be found those worthy to be ordained elders in every city? Much of the advice given by Paul to Titus receives point for us when we know of the general environment of these Christians, but the special application the apostle has in mind is to those Judaising teachers who everywhere hampered his work. These false teachers seem to have exercised their evil influence with peculiar power in Crete, and not a few were listening to Jewish "fables" rather than to sound doctrine. Amongst the Cretans, it was an easy matter for those seekers after "filthy lucre" to overthrow "whole houses" from the faith, for they had but to appeal to the very passions most common among the people of their race.

      Hence, such outspokenness on the part of Paul is not a lowering of his dignity, or an example of "pastoral tactlessness", or an instance of superfluous abuse. Rather is it, as Dr. Horton says, "the privilege of an apostle who has 'felt the spirit of the Highest'". If Paul could write to the Philippians concerning the same class: "Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers; beware of the concision" (Phil. iii. 2), we need not be surprised that he used strong language when these false teachers were at work amongst a community such as that in Cretan cities. He had the authority to praise or to blame, and he used it in the name of the Lord.

      Perhaps it would be well for us to be reminded of the fact that the words of Epimenides did not give a

complete picture of Cretan civilisation. He was speaking of his own time, and subsequent criticisms show that the evil name clung to the people, but in earlier times they had characteristics of a nobler type. Recently Crete has become a place of great interest, particularly to those concerned with the study of antiquities, through the efforts of archæologists to unearth evidence of early civilisation in the Mediterranean. Not only has the famous palace of Cnossus been identified--in itself sufficient to show that on the island in early times a comparatively advanced civilisation existed--but it has now been proven that Crete was an important centre of the Mediterranean world in the pre-Homeric period. It was a land of flourishing communities, and a considerable sea-power. One scholar writes: "The remains of this period at Cnossus, Phæstus, Hagia Triada, and other lesser sites, mostly situated in East Crete, show us a luxurious, sport-loving people whose princes lived in elaborately decorated structures of stone, with well-developed systems of lighting, ventilation, drainage, and sanitation; while even the common folk had good stone houses. The dress of both men and women among the better class was full and rich. The precious metals were abundant; the arts of sculpture, painting and engraving were far advanced; and a system of writing in linear syllabic or alphabetic characters was perfected. The clay tablets, found in great numbers, prove that book-keeping was understood, and that a decimal system of reckoning was in use." Professor

Bury says. "The Cretans hold a distinct place in the history of civilisation by inventing the first method of writing that was ever practised in Europe." Crete is thought to be the link between Egypt and Greece in the development of European civilisation, and this makes many scholars regard the island as of great importance.

      It would seem, then, that in early times the Cretans were more than "idle gluttons", whatever other undesirable epithets they merited. But moral decay often sets in in the midst of material prosperity, and perhaps their degeneration is another occasion for the lament, "How are the mighty fallen!"

      WHEN Paul entered the Greek city of Corinth, with its populace of "Jews, ex-soldiers, philosophers, merchants, sailors, freedmen, slaves, tradespeople, hucksters, and agents of every form of vice", he found plenty of scope for his missionary zeal. Rejected by his own countrymen, he turned to the Gentiles, who gave him a better hearing. As he preached in the house of Justus, next door to the synagogue, his efforts were attended with considerable success, and even Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, became a convert to the new faith. But when a new representative of Rome became Proconsul, the Jews seized the opportunity to lay hands on the apostle, probably thinking that the new official would not be sufficiently versed in Jewish matters to discern the real motive of their act, and charged him before Gallio's judgment-seat with teaching men to worship God contrary to the law. Paul was about to speak in his own defence when Gallio anticipated him, and declined to act as judge in a matter of Jewish law. Perceiving the attitude of the Proconsul the onlookers took the law into their own hands and beat Sosthenes, successor of Crispus

as chief ruler of the synagogue. "And Gallio cared for none of these things."

      This brief narrative in Acts is supplemented by information derived from extra-Biblical sources. Gallio's original name was M. Annæus Novatus, and he was the son of M. Annæus Seneca, a rhetorician, of Cordova, Spain. His brother was the famous philosopher Seneca, author of the well-known Letters, and his nephew was Lucan, the poet who wrote the heroic poem Pharsalia. He was brought to Rome at an early age, and adopted by. L. Junius Gallio, an orator, and probably received from him his training for public office. His rise to prominence is doubtless partly due to the fact that his brother Seneca, as tutor to Nero, had considerable influence. He became Proconsul of Achaia--that is, of Greece--but became the victim of a fever, which led him to take a sea voyage. Pliny mentions that he subsequently returned to Rome, and became Consul. Seneca became involved in a conspiracy, which led to his receiving sentence of death from Nero. Gallio was implicated, but begged for his life and for the time being was spared. Testimonies from his contemporaries show that Gallio was popular, and that he was regarded as genial and lovable. Seneca, who dedicated two of his works to Gallio, wrote of his brother, "No mortal man is so sweet to any single person as he is to all mankind", and described him as possessing "civility and extraordinary agreeableness". He also said, "Even those who love my brother Gallio to the very utmost

of their power yet do not love him enough". Papinius Statius, a contemporary, who wrote a poem in five books under the title Silvæ, referred to "sweet Gallio" ("Dulcis Gallio"). Dion Cassius, who wrote a history of Rome, attested Gallio's reputation for humour by referring to a "very witty joke" still current about a century and a half after Gallio's day. Farrar, writing out of full knowledge of the evidence, summed up Gallio's character thus: "He was the very flower of pagan courtesy and pagan culture--a Roman with all a Roman's dignity and seriousness, and yet with all the grace and versatility of a polished Greek."

      From the incident in Acts many have drawn the conclusion that Gallio was indifferent to the claims of religion and callous to human suffering. But when the facts are made clear, such an estimate is at least made doubtful. As a "religio licita"--a religion licensed by the State--Judaism had a right to protection from Roman law, but Gallio, who, as Sir W. M. Ramsay suggests, had probably made careful inquiries, was able to discern the truth that the charge against Paul was not concerning a civil wrong or a matter of public morality. He saw in it merely a strife about words and names in Jewish law, with which he had nothing to do. He, therefore, caused his lictors to "clear the court". Then the bystanders, in all probability Greeks, (1) who lost no love over the Jews

maltreated Sosthenes. Gallio did not interfere, probably thinking that the victim deserved the chastisement he received. Gallio's conduct, then, was typically Roman. He did not wish to meddle with matters which did not concern him, and would not interfere even with the outbreak of violence because it did not directly affect Roman administration.

      There are several reasons why we should be interested in this narrative in Acts.

      1. Here we have a record which can be tested by external evidence. Does that evidence support the narrative? Decidedly, yes.

      (a) Gallio is said to have been "Proconsul of Achaia". Now Achaia had been a Senatorial province, governed by a Proconsul, from 27 B.C. to A.D. 15. Then under Tiberius it became an Imperial province. Subsequently, in A.D. 44, it became a Senatorial province again, and was administered by Roman officials after holding the Prætorship, and generally before the Consulship. With such changes in government, it would have been easy for a writer to slip in giving the title of the governor. But Luke is accurate.

      (b) Some twenty years ago a stone was found in Delphi with an inscription in which Gallio is mentioned as Proconsul, and on the evidence of this inscription it is argued by Dr. Deissmann, agreeing with Ramsay, that Gallio entered on his Proconsulship in the summer of A.D. 51. Not only does this discovery support the narrative in Acts, but it

- 110 -

gives these scholars "a fixed point" for determining the chronology of Paul's life.

      (c) A little earlier than the above discovery, excavators working in the ruins of an old street in Corinth, found a door lintel, on which was written in Greek the inscription, "Synagogue of the Hebrews". Deissmann says concerning this: "It is a possibility seriously to be reckoned with that we have here the inscription to the door of the Corinthian synagogue mentioned in Acts xviii. 4, in which Paul preached."

     

      3. If Gallio's conduct does not give us a text for indifference to religion, it at least causes reflection

over what to us must seem nothing short of tragic. Gallio's chief claim to the notice of our generation is that he came face to face with the great Apostle. Yet he, ignorant of what he was missing, prevented his speech and so heard nothing of the Christ whom Paul preached. Whether he would have been interested in Paul's message or would have preserved his Roman unconcern it is idle to speculate. Probably Gallio and Paul never met again. But this we know, that Paul lived his noble life for Christ and at last died for his faith by the decree of Nero; and this is stated by some, though doubted by others, that Gallio fell into disgrace with Nero, and was compelled to take his own life by the Emperor's decree.

      AFTER the reign of Augustus, Rome was not happy in her Emperors for many years. Though Jesus was born in an era in which civil strife was hushed, the empire was organised, arts and letters flourished, and philosophy and religion were encouraged, ere He died internal strife was developing, informers were at their deadly work, suicides were frequent, and the government was in the hands of a tyrant who could exclaim, "After my death, perish the world in fire!" Tiberius was followed by Caius Caligula (A.D. 37-41), a cruel profligate who is said to have spent £80,000 in a single banquet, and to have commanded the works of Virgil and Livy to be removed from the libraries as wanting in learning and genius. Caius was murdered by the tribunes, and some began to clamour for a return to republican rule. But certain of the prætorian guards came upon a person of royal blood, who had concealed himself in fear, and in a moment of freakish behaviour compelled the Senate to declare him Emperor. This was Claudius, nephew of Tiberius, related through his

mother to Augustus. He was fifty years of age when he came to the throne of the Cæsars, and his reign covered the period A.D. 41-54.

      Roman writers present a very unfavourable picture of the personal qualities of Claudius. They refer to his feeble health, shambling gait, deformed limbs and weak intellect. Suetonius declares that his mother called him a "monster of a man", and that if she wished to accuse anyone of dullness she would say that he was "a bigger fool than her son Claudius". Augustus himself feared to present the youth in public lest the people should scoff. It is even suggested that Claudius used his own stupidity as an excuse to escape from a difficult position. Modern historians, however, place him in a better light. They show that he occupied himself in historical and literary pursuits, and set himself to work for the public welfare. He conciliated the Senate, and gave considerable power to his officers. He had definite views on citizenship, and admitted Gallic nobles to the Senate, arguing ancient precedent. Under his orders, a harbour was constructed on the right bank of the Tiber, two and a half miles from the mouth, to avert floods, and a mighty aqueduct was built, which brought water to the city over a distance of forty-five miles, spanning the Campagna by arches, ruins of which can be seen to this day. "He devoted himself personally to the administration of law, tiring out his judges and assessors by his unwearied application to business." Some things related of him are not to his credit. He was given to self-indulgence, and his

bad habits undermined his already weak constitution. Gladiatorial shows had become popular, and writers state that to outdo his rivals he ordered a naval battle to be fought on Lake Fucinus. Under the gaze of multitudes of spectators who lined the sloping banks, nineteen thousand gladiators manned the fleets, and the fighting was so grim that the waters of the lake were stained with blood.

      Claudius Cæsar is of interest to us, however, in a much more direct way. It was he who conquered Britain and named it "Britannia" as a Roman province (A.D. 43). Caractacus, who offered a stubborn resistance, was at last taken captive. Brought to Rome, he was astonished at the magnificence of the city, and exclaimed, "How can people possessed of such splendour at home envy Caractacus his humble cottage in Britain!" Claudius, moved by a speech from the prisoner, spared his life, and thus put a check to the practice of slaying defeated generals brought to grace the triumph of the conqueror.

      Although Claudius is mentioned in the New Testament only twice, the references involve important matters, and his contact with sacred history is closer than it seems. One thing which helps us to picture the "background" of the New Testament narrative is the fact that Claudius was a friend of Herod Agrippa I. This persecutor of the apostles, who slew James, was grandson of Herod the Great. He was educated at Rome with Claudius, and made friends with Caius Caligula, when the latter was heir presumptive to the

throne. His advocacy of Caligula's claims led to his imprisonment by Tiberius, but when Caligula gained the imperial crown he liberated Herod and made him king over a portion of Palestine. When the crown was pressed upon Claudius, it was Agrippa who urged him to accept it. In consequence, Judea and Samaria were added to his domain in A.D. 40. Agrippa's death was tragic. He held a festival in honour of Cæsar, and appeared in a garment made of silver. As the light shone upon this costly raiment, and as his voice was heard in eloquent speech, a cry went up from the spectators that he was a god--a compliment which he accepted without rebuke. Immediately he complained of illness, and after five days of agony died a wretched death (cf. Acts. xii. 21-23; Josephus, Ant. XIX, ch. 8).

      In Acts xi. 28, it is recorded that a famine, predicted by Agabus, came in the days of Claudius Cæsar. It seems that famines were rather frequent during the reign of Claudius in various parts of the Empire, so much so that the Emperor became sensitive of criticism of his administration, and allowed a dream of approaching dearth to influence his mind and thus compass the ruin of two Roman knights. But there was one famine which specially attacked Jerusalem and Judea, and Josephus records that the Syrian Queen Helena of Adiabene supplied the city with corn and figs. This help was due to the fact that Queen Helena and her son had embraced the Jewish faith.

      In Acts xviii. 2, mention is made of the fact that Claudius had issued a decree by which all Jews were

compelled to leave Rome. In consequence of this Aquila and Priscilla were found by Paul at Corinth. This decree by the Emperor is somewhat surprising, in view of the fact that, by reason of his friendship with Herod, his attitude to Jews was on the whole favourable. But that such a decree was issued is attested by Suetonius, who records in his Claudius: Judæos impulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantes Roma expulit. Translated literally, this sentence becomes: "He banished from Rome Jews continuously making uproar, Chrestus being instigator." There is some ambiguity. The words may refer (1) to riots headed by someone actually called "Chrestus"; or (2) to disturbances due to disputes among the Jews about the Christ, the name "Chrestus" being a variant of "Christus". Perhaps Suetonius thought that Christ was actually in the flesh at that date. Whatever the precise meaning of the decree, it is obvious that it cannot have been strictly enforced, or at the most was of temporary application, for there were many Jews in Rome shortly after this, and a few years later Paul could address his epistle to a strong church in Rome, composed of Jewish and Gentile Christians.

      Claudius, then, makes definite contact with Scripture history, and a knowledge of his life helps the Bible student to sketch the background of the New Testament record. Secular history completes the story of his reign. In his last alliance by marriage, he took as wife Agrippina, mother of the cruel Nero. This infamous woman made Nero's position secure, on a

level with that of Britannicus, son of Claudius by a former wife. She then set herself to remove Claudius, and so make the way to the throne clear for her son. Giving her husband a dish of mushrooms, a favourite delicacy, she effected his death by poison.

      Dr. Deissmann cites inscriptions which prove that Claudius shared with other Emperors the honours of deification. Nero is called "Son of the greatest of the gods, Tiberius Claudius". The title of honour, "Saviour of the World", was also bestowed upon Claudius Cæsar. While, as a modern annotator, writes, "this deification of the Emperors was no mere act of flattery, but grew naturally out of the old Roman worship of the Manes and Lares, the departed spirits of the dead", in the case of Claudius, some Romans did not regard it seriously. Seneca wrote a skit on the deification (commonly called the "pumpkinification") of Claudius Cæsar, in which he depicted the Emperor being refused a place in heaven because of his crimes, and being condemned to play dice for ever with a bottomless dice-box. "Facilis descensus Averno!"

      UPON the north coast of a little island in the Mediterranean is St. Paul's Bay. The island is Malta, the ancient Melita, and the bay is so named because it was at this spot that the vessel bearing Paul as prisoner was driven shorewards a total wreck.

      "No island so small as Malta has had so great a history." Although it is but seventeen miles in length and nine in breadth, for centuries it has been regarded as a desirable possession, chiefly owing to its central position in the Mediterranean. To-day it is a British naval base and coaling station, enduring many bomb-attacks, and during the Great War was an Allied base, and "about 130,000 British service men passed through its hospitals and convalescent homes".

      A recent writer on the history of Malta says that the earliest civilisation goes back to 3000 B.C., and describes remains of megalithic structures--menhirs (tall, rough pillars of stone), dolmens (slabs supported by blocks), and cromlechs (stone circles). One of the problems awaiting solution is the presence of numerous "cart-tracks", indentations on the rocky surface, varying in depth but regular in distance apart. Apparently these tracks were cut artificially for

wheels. Until recently, it was thought that the earliest inhabitants were Phœnicians, but these came about the sixteenth century B.C. Later, Malta was occupied by the Greeks, then by the Carthaginians, and the Romans took it from Carthage during the Second Punic War (218 B.C.) and attached it to Sicily. It remained under the Roman power till the Goths overran it in the fifth century A.D. From then on it passed under the control of several powers, till at last it was ceded to Great Britain in 1814. At one period (1530-1798) the Knights of Malta ruled,--members of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem. That was a prosperous period, and many fine buildings were erected.

      In Luke's narrative of Paul's sojourn in Melita (Acts xxviii. 1-10) there are several expressions which are better understood when help from extra-Biblical sources is gained. Who were the "barbarous people" who "shewed us no little kindness"? What is meant by "the chief man of the island"? And what of Luke as an historian in this section?

      In the use of the word barbaroi, Luke is not speaking of uncivilised islanders. This word originated probably by imitation, in some such way as our words "cluck", "clash", "clang", and was used of unintelligible speech. Every language which was not Greek was barbarian. So the term came to be used of non-Greeks. Sometimes the word "Greeks" as opposed to "barbarians" seems to have meant those who were possessed of Greek culture and language, and from

this point of view the Romans would not be called barbarians. But others who were not recognised as having that culture and language would be so termed, and no doubt in the minds of most Greeks the term "barbarians" implied inferior persons, as frequently the term "foreigners" does to-day. But the behaviour of these islanders was in keeping with what the history of Melita would lead us to expect. They showed Paul and his companions no ordinary kindness; the chief man lodged them for "three days courteously"; and the people treated them liberally upon their departure. Their conclusion that Paul was under the doom of "Vengeance" or "Justice", and their rapid change of mind which led them to call Paul a god, were indications of beliefs common in the pagan world. According to the early Greek writer Hesiod, Dike (justice) is the goddess who presides over legal order, and is enthroned by the side of Zeus, whom she acquaints with all unjust decisions. In the tragic poets she is mentioned with the Furies as a divinity who is relentless in exacting punishment. When the islanders showered honours upon the departing guests, they were but doing as Virgil says Acestes did to Æneas when he was leaving the Trinacrian shore. In the period of Roman rule, the inhabitants of Melita became famous for their industry, especially in textile fabrics, and a fine cloth which they manufactured, vestis Militensis, was valued as a material for robes and furniture-covering. Their language was Semitic, and akin to Arabic.

      Publius was the "chief man of the island". Since Melita was attached to Sicily at that time, the chief man would be a deputy of the Prætor of Sicily. No inscription has been found in Malta to verify the title "chief man (governor)" of the island, but on the neighbouring island of Gaulus an inscription was discovered which included the words Protos Melitaion, a phrase equivalent with that used by Luke. A Latin inscription also resembles the title. "As the leading official in Malta, he was responsible for any Roman soldiers and their prisoners who might. land there, but the account in Acts xxviii. 7 implies that he displayed more than ordinary solicitude for Paul and his shipwrecked company." The apocryphal Acts of St. Paul states that "he did for them many acts of great kindness and charity". Tradition relates that Publius accepted Christianity, and became first bishop of Malta. Later he became bishop of Athens. and, according to Jerome, he died a martyr's death.

      Searching criticism has resulted in establishing the accuracy of Luke's record to a remarkable degree. Even the Encyclopædia Biblica declares: "The question as to the identity of the island upon which Paul was shipwrecked (Acts xxviii. 1) may be regarded as finally settled. The indications in Acts stamp the account of the entire voyage as that of an eyewitness and give it great value." Most writers on Paul's experience of shipwreck on Malta refer to a book which was published in 1856 (second edition) by James Smith on The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul.

      This scholar made an elaborate study of his subject, and, while his own conclusions on some minor topographical matters have been challenged, it is conceded that his work has verified the accuracy of Luke. A recent writer states: "A bay two and a half miles Northwest of Valetta, the mouth of which is held by tradition to be the place where the vessel that bore Paul ran ashore, tallies admirably with the description of the locality in Acts. The Admiralty charts indicate places near the West side of the entrance to the bay, where the depth is first twenty feet, and then fifteen feet, while the rush of the breakers in front of the little island of Salmoneta and behind it suits the reference to a place 'where two seas met' (Acts xxvii. 41)."

      Luke's use of medical terms finds illustration from this section of Acts. When Paul shook the viper from his hand, the onlookers watched intently to see symptoms of poisoning. "They expected that he would have swollen." The word employed (pimpremi) occurs only here in the New Testament. It combined the ideas of inflammation and swelling, and was the usual medical term to describe such. The people looked for him to have "fallen down dead suddenly". Medical writers used the verb "to fall down" (katapipto) of those who suffered from epileptic fits or wounds which caused them to stagger. Luke alone uses the term in the New Testament. Of interest is a parallel in Antony and Cleopatra, where Shakespeare wrote of Charmian bitten by an asp,

      "Tremblingly she stood, and on the sudden dropped."

      Terms used in connection with the sickness of the father of Publius, also, bear witness to Luke's use of medical language. The word translated "fever" (puretos) is employed by other writers in the New Testament, but in the plural only by Luke. Evidently he is using a technical term for successive and varying attacks of a malady resembling malaria. Such fevers were prevalent in Melita. It has been suggested by some writers that Luke supplemented Paul's miraculous healing with his own medical skill, the argument for this resting on the use of different verbs to express healing. Whilst this may be so, the evidence is not conclusive.

      Maltese people, now Roman Catholic, cherish many traditions concerning Paul's visit to the island. Certainly there is very definite evidence that Christianity was early implanted there, for there are numerous catacombs similar to those at Rome, and there are not wanting indications of the burial of Christian martyrs.

      ON a rocky eminence, about twenty miles from the West Coast of Asia Minor, stood the proud city of Pergamum, "unequalled for majesty in the whole ancient world". Unlike many other cities of the time, the history of which went back to the dawn of Greek civilisation, Pergamum rose to a position of prominence in the first half of the third century before Christ. During the troublous period when Alexander's generals were dividing his empire, one of them, Lysimachos, put his treasures in the fortress on the lofty site of Pergamum, in charge of an officer named Philetairos. The latter seized an opportunity to get the power, and became ruler of Pergamum as an independent kingdom. Successful in repelling the hordes of Gauls who overran the district, the kingdom prospered. It reached its zenith in 197 B.C., under Eumenes II. At this time the Romans were making their influence felt in the East, and Eumenes thought it wise to ally with the Roman legions. In 133 B.C., Attalos III, the last king of Pergamum, died, and by his

will left the kingdom to the Romans. Pergamum then became the capital of the Roman province of Asia.

      Christian interest in Pergamum centres in the fact that one of the letters in "Revelation" was addressed to the church in that city. In Rev. ii. 13 a startling phrase is used to describe the church's dwelling-place: it is "where Satan's throne is". What was it that marked out the city for such unenviable distinction? Can modern discoveries throw any light upon this interesting phrase?

      Excavations were made on the site as early as 1878 by German archæologists, and since that time many important finds have been made. We are told that in the days of its glory the citadel was adorned with temples and other buildings, public and private, which made it of surpassing beauty and magnificence. Chief among these was the famous Great Altar of Zeus. This huge altar of sacrifice stood upon a base about one hundred feet square, surrounded on three sides by colonnades, and approached on the western side by a broad staircase. A frieze of sculpture depicting the Battle of the Giants adorned the base, one hundred and fifty yards in length. Elevated some eight hundred feet above the plain, with its smoke ascending far, the Altar of Zeus must have attracted the gaze of all eyes. Some scholars think that this was the throne of Satan mentioned in "Revelation". Adolf Deissmann, in his Light from the Ancient East (the title of this book, by the way, was suggested by

the brilliant sunshine which bathes the citadel of Pergamum and other Eastern sites), writes: "Actual inspection of the place suggests that 'Satan's throne' can only have been the altar of Zeus; no other shrine of the hill-city was visible to such a great distance and could therefore rank so typically as the representative of Satanic heathendom."

      Rival theories have been advocated, however. Some think that the reference is to the worship of Asclepius, called the Saviour. To the temple of Asclepius, "royal patients came for healing from every land". The temple was "the centre of a medical school, with the right of asylum". Asclepius was represented by the snake-symbol, which to the Christian was a symbol of evil. Deissmann mentions a magician's outfit which was discovered at Pergamum, where magic was widely practised.

      A strong claim has also been made that the reference in Rev. ii. 13 is to the fact that "Pergamum was the headquarters of the official worship of the Roman Emperors in Asia". Dr. Charles, in his commentary on "Revelation", says: "But from the standpoint of our author the most important cult was that of the Roman Emperors, which was established in Pergamum--as the chief city of the province--in 29 B.C., where a temple was dedicated to Augustus and Rome by the Provincial Synod. .  .  . Thus Pergamum won the honour of the Neocorate (Temple guardianship) before Smyrna, which did not obtain it till 26 B.C., and Ephesus, which was not so honoured till the reign of

Claudius or Nero. A second temple was built in Pergamum in honour of Trajan, and a third in honour of Severus. The imperial cult had thus its centre at Pergamum; and as the imperial cult was the keystone of the imperial policy, Pergamum summed up in itself the intolerable offence and horror that such a cult, the observance of which was synonymous with loyalty to Empire, provoked in the mind of our author." Christianity certainly met with strong opposition in Pergamum, for Antipas died as a martyr there for his faith (Rev. ii. 13).

      Some other matters are worthy of mention. The English word "parchment" is derived from pergamena, meaning "of Pergamum". In the ancient city was a library second only to that of Alexandria. The librarians of Alexandria became jealous of their rival, and prohibited the export of writing material (papyrus) to Pergamum. Thereupon the scribes of Pergamum produced a substitute from the skins of sheep or goats--parchment. When the library at Alexandria was partly destroyed, Cleopatra requested Mark Antony to make a grant of books from Pergamum. It is said that 200,000 books were taken to Alexandria.

      Among the many inscriptions found at Pergamum, one only will be cited. It is an interesting parallel to Jas. ii. 8, which speaks of the "royal law". This inscription reads: "He set up the royal law out of his own means." Deissmann says: "The law is called 'royal' because it was made by one of the kings of

Pergamum. So, too, in the Epistle of James we must probably understand the term in the first place with reference to the origin of the law." It came from the divine King.

"And there followed Him great multitudes of people, from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judæa, and from beyond Jordan."--Matt. iv. 25.

"And he (the man who had been possessed with demons) departed, and began to publish in Decapolis, how great things Jesus had done for him."--Mark v. 20.

"And again departing from the coasts of Tyre and Sidon He came unto the sea of Galilee, through the midst of the coasts of Decapolis."--Mark vii. 31.

      IN the New Testament, the name Decapolis appears in the above passages only. One word is likely to mislead the modern reader. "Coasts" to-day suggests territory bordering on the sea. But the word so translated means "boundaries ", and was used like the Latin fines to signify "region" or "territory". It so happens that part of the region called Decapolis bordered on the Sea of Galilee, but that is not the reason for the use of the term "coasts". Where, then, was Decapolis? The name itself is suggestive, and indicates

a direction of enquiry. It is a Greek name implying a region of ten cities. In an article in A New Standard Dictionary, the writer says: "The name applied in Roman times to a region E. of the Jordan including parts of Gilead, Golan, and Ammonitis, with Scythopolis (W. of the Jordan). The boundaries of Decapolis were never defined geographically, as it was not a geographical unit with connected territory, but consisted of city districts, most of which were contiguous."

      Ancient authorities vary somewhat in their descriptions of the Decapolis. Eusebius the historian speaks of the region as "lying in the Peræa, round Hippos, Pella and Gadara". Pliny in his Historia Naturalis names the ten cities as Scythopolis, Hippos, Gadara, Pella, Philadelphia, Gerasa, Dion, Kanatha, Damascus and Raphana. Ptolemy, a geographer of the second century, perhaps speaking of       a later period in the history of Decapolis, gives eighteen cities, "omitting Raphana, and adding other nine, mostly towards Damascus". Josephus, who makes several references to the cities, does not include Damascus.

      How did the Greek influence reach the region "over Jordan"? "The oldest Greek settlements in Eastern Palestine," says George Adam Smith, author of The Historical Geography of the Holy Land, "were Pella and Dion, which, as their Macedonian names suggest, were probably founded by Alexander's own soldiers." Other cities soon sprang up. Jewish princes gained control, until the great Roman general Pompeius freed the Greek cities in 63 B.C., and placed them under

the Syrian Legate. Herod, who had Hellenic sympathies, received Hippos and Gadara as gifts from the Roman Emperor, Augustus. Under the Roman Republic, and under the Empire, leagues of Greek cities were common. The cities of the Decapolis were leagued to promote commerce and Greek culture, and probably to resist Semitic influences. "In the time of Christ the Decapolis was a great intellectual and commercial centre, Greek being everywhere spoken."

      Space will not allow a detailed treatment of the Greek cities, but a general statement may be of interest. There is evidence that from Scythopolis on the west of Jordan three roads led across the river into Eastern Palestine, and that the cities were for the most part situated on these roads. On one of these a Roman milestone was discovered. H. V. Morton writes, "The roads that brought the life-blood to the cities of the Decapolis have vanished long ago. Sometimes you see a marble pillar standing bravely on a hill, or you see an ancient paving running off at any angle into nowhere, and you realise that such are the last signs of the great roads which brought life to the old cities." There is also evidence that in the cities along these roads was a flourishing Greek civilisation, including the usual buildings of a Greek city of the Roman period. Stately temples, fifty to seventy feet long and thirty to fifty feet broad, with double rows of columns in front, were centres of pagan worship. Graceful arches spanned the paved roadways, and bridges of Roman design crossed the waterways. Chariots

clattered along the streets, their wheel-ruts being still visible. The forum or agora was a centre of social and business intercourse, often enlivened by philosophical discussion or impassioned oratory. Colonnades offered shady retreats for leisured conversation. Vast amphitheatres cut from the rock contained lofty tiers of benches for the thousands of spectators who witnessed the athletic games or the gladiatorial fights. Plays were acted in great theatres, the one at Philadelphia having accommodation for seven thousand people. Amusement was also provided by the Naumachia, a sham seafight produced at great cost. Aqueducts and drains bore testimony to the engineering skill of the period, and huge baths added to the comfort of the citizens. Epigrams carved on ruins bear testimony to a great literary activity. Philosophers, epigrammatists, rhetoricians, satirists, and tutors flourished. Such is a glimpse into the life of the Decapolis.

      What bearing has this on the New Testament narratives? While it is true that the direct references in the Gospels are vague, certain claims can be advanced with some confidence. It seems evident that Palestine was not in a remote corner, but was in close contact not only with Roman but also with Greek life. The Local Colour of the Bible, by Budden and Hastings, has the following statement: "We must bear in mind the fact that it was in the midst of a great industrial centre that Jesus delivered His message. The coasts of Gennesaret were girdled with populous towns, with

wharves, docks, factories, synagogues and temples: Herod's palace at Tiberias; the colonnaded baths at Emmaus; at Tarichæa a hippodrome; at Gadara an amphitheatre, with the acropolis above--towns with paved streets, stone houses, and triumphal arches, an environment of Greek cities and Roman camps."

      This proximity of Greek culture gives support to a claim which has been made by reason of recent discoveries concerning the widespread use of the "Koine", namely, that Jesus knew and made use of the Greek language as well as the Aramaic. Sir Frederick George Kenyon, Director and Principal Librarian of the British Museum, has written: "Palestine, at the time of Jesus Christ's life in it, may probably be described as a bilingual country. The native tongue was Aramaic, akin to Hebrew but different from it. .  .  . The second language generally known in Palestine was Greek. As the result of the conquests of Alexander, Greek became the common language of the East, known not only by the highly educated, but by all who were not illiterate." Dr. Simpson has also stated, "With Greek as the international language, with Roman roads and Roman organisation of means of communication, East and West were coming closer to each other than ever before". This was surely all to the good for the spread of a gospel which was for all mankind.

      Some light is thrown upon the narrative concerning the demoniac (Mark v. 1-20) and concerning the prodigal son. Swine-keeping was unlawful to the Jew,

and could not have been practised on so large a scale in more Jewish regions, but in the neighbourhood of Decapolis such a business could thrive because of the mixed population. According to a writer on New Testament archæology, the "far country" in the parable of the prodigal was a reference to the luxurious cities of the Decapolis, which would enable the young man easily to spend his all in riotous living.

      It may be that the Greeks east of Jordan heard the message of Christ from the man who had been delivered from demons, and even from Christ Himself. H. V. Morton says, "I like to imagine that when Jesus 'came through the midst of the coasts of the Decapolis' He entered these stately Greek cities, sought the shade of their lovely colonnades, listened to the talk in the forum, and, with His kind, charitable eye, saw something good there which had escaped the attention of His fanatical contemporaries." Whether this was so or not, at least we know that Christianity found a contact there, for during the siege of Jerusalem some Christians found shelter in Pella, a city of the Decapolis, and in another city the ruins of a Christian basilica bear silent but potent witness that the gospel is the power of God "also to the Greek".

aggareuo, 25
ago, 82
agon, 18
agonia, 18
agonizomai, 27
aion, 51
aionios, 51
aiteo, 46
allotrioepiscopos, 39
anastrophe, 29
andrapoda, 40
andrapodistes, 40
apokaradokia, 22
asteios, 40
atakteo, 16
atheotes, 93

barbaroi, 119
brabeuo, 32
brabcus, 33

daimon, 92
daimonion, 93
deesis, 45
deido, 92
deisidaimonesterous, 92
deisidaimonia, 93
diakonoi, 13
didaskalos, 85

ekhomen, 65
ekneuo, 20
enkopto, 19
enteuxis, 47
entugkhano, 30
epitropos, 86
epoptes, 41
ergon, 34
erotao, 46
eukharisteo, 48
eukhe, 47
eukhomai, 47

ge, 51
glossa, 40
glossokomon, 40
goes, 40

hiketeria, 45
hupogramma, 25
hupopiazo, 20

kata, 31, 33
katabrabeuo, 33
katakrino, 34
katapipto, 122
katastema, 41
khleuazo, 21
khleue, 21
kosmos, 52
kubeia, 23
kubernesis, 18
kubernetes, 18

laos, 34
leitourgia, 34

me, 63
megalopsukhia, 51
meteorizo, 36
meteoros, 36
mukter, 21
mukterizo, 21
muopazo, 21

neokoros, 41
neuo, 20

oikonomos, 86
oikoumene, 51

- 138 -

opsonion, 17
ou, 63

paidagogos, chap. 3
paidion, 82
pais, 82
parakaleo, 47
parakletos, 47
parousia, 22
pera, 42
perpereuomai, 22
phren, 49
phrisso, 22
pimpremi, 122
pleroma, 17
presbuteroi, 13
prokope, 23
proseukhe, 47
proseukhomai, 47
prosphagion, 44
prostates, 44
prostatis, 44
puretos, 123

saino, 23
spermologos, 88
stigma, 24
sunpnigo, 21

tapeinophrosune, 49
tapeinos, 49
tetrapoda, 40
theatron, 19
thriambeuo, 16, 19
thriambos, 17
trokhos, 24
tropos, 29

Gen. 1:1-3 58
Deut. 30:11--14 77
Joshua 19:15 71
Job 4:15 22
Psalm 27:1 58
Psalm 131:1 38
Isaiah 5:20 59
Isaiah 13:11 53
Jeremiah 31:15 74
Daniel 6:14 28
Hosea 14:2 48
Obadiah 1:4 38
Micah 5:2 72
Wisdom 10:12 32
Matthew
      4:8 52
      4:25 130
      5:41 25
      7:9 63
      8:31 92
      10:10 42
      27:32 25
Mark
      5:20 134
      7:31 130
      15:21 25
      16:15 52
Luke
      1:23 34
      8:42 21
      12:29 36
      13:24 27
      16:14 21
      18:5 20
      22:44 18
      23:35 21
John
      1:5 58
      1:10 53
      4:29 64
      5:13 20
      6:67 62
      8:12 61

- 139 -

John--contd.
      12:6 40
      12:35 60
      12:46 61
      13:29 40
      16:23 46
      16:33 61
      18:36 27
      21:5 44
Acts
      2:13 21
      7:20 40
      11:28 112
      12:21-23 115
      13:2 34
      16:13-16 47
      17:18 87
      17:22 92
      17:24 52
      17:28 97
      17:32 32
      18:2 112
      18:4 110
      18:12-17 106
      19:35 41
      20:19 49
      24:4 19
      25:24 31
      27:41 122
      28:1-10 119
Romans
      1:28 67
      3:3 64
      5:1 65
      5:3, 4 56
      6:23 17
      8:19 22
      8:26 48
      8:27, 34 31
      10:9 77
      11:2 31
      13:6 34
      15:16 34
      15:27 34
      16:2 44
1 Corinthians
      1:13 64
      3:22 52
      4:9 19
      4:15 85
      9:25 27, 28
      9:27 20
      12:28 18
      13:4 22
2 Corinthians
      2:14 16
      8:2 56
      9:12 34
Galatians
      1:13 29
      3:24, 25 82
      5:7 19
      6:7 21
      6:17 24
Ephesians
      1:22, 23 17
      4:2 49
      4:14 23
      4:22 29
Philippians
      1:12 23
      1:20 22
      1:25 23
      2:3 49
      2:9, 11 80
      2:15 52
      2:17, 30 34
      2:25 34
      3:2 103
      3:20 29
Colossians
      1:29 27
      2:15 16
      2:18 32, 49
      2:23 49
      3:12 49
      3:15 32
      4:12 27

- 140 -

1 Thessalonians
      3:3 23
      5:4 60
      5:23 56
2 Thessalonians
      3:7 16
1 Timothy
      1:10 40
      1:19 67
      2:1 47
      4:5 47
      4:10 27
      4:12 29
      4:15 23
      6:12 27
2 Timothy
      3:13 40
      4:7 27
Titus
      1:12 100
      2:3 41
Hebrews
      1:3 54
      1:7 34
      1:14 34
      4:3 52
      5:7 45
      7:25 31
      8:2 34
      8:6 34
      9:21 34
      10:11 34
      11:23 40
      3:5 29
      3:7 29
      3:15 48
James
      1:2-4 57
      2:8 128
      2:19 22
      3:6 24
      3:13 29
1 Peter
      1:15 29
      1:18 29
      2:12 29
      2:21 25
      3:1, 2 29
      3:3 51
      3:16 29
      4:15 39
      5:5 49
2 Peter
      1:9 21
      1:16 41
      2:7 29
      3:11 29
1 John
      2:8 61
      5:19 53
Revelation
      2:13 125

Abbott-Smith, Dr. G., 15
Acropolis, 87
Acts of St. Paul, 121
Æschines, 89
Agony, 18
Agora, 87
Agrippa, Herod, 112
Apotheosis, 78
Aquila, 116
Aratus, 97
Areopagus, 87
Aristogoras, 45
Aristophanes, 36, 88
Aristotle, 50, 94

- 141 -

Asclepius, 47
Athens, 34, 87, 92, 97, 121
Athletics, 18, 27
Augustus, 53, 78, 113, 132

Basil, 51
Beecher, H. W., 56
Bethlehem, 71
Britain, 114
Bury, Prof. J. B., 105

Cæsar, Julius, 78
Caligula, 79, 112
Callimachus, 101
Cambridge Greek Testament, 66
Century Bible (Heb.), 48
Character, 54
Charles, Dr. R. H., 127
Cicero, 97
Claudius, 79, 112
Cleanthes, 98
Cleomenes, 46
Cleopatra, 122, 128
Cobern, Dr. Camden M., 13, 81
Comforter, 47
Constantine, 75
Conversation, 29
Corinth, 106, 110
Cox, Dr. S., 38
Crete, 52, 100

Decapolis, 130
Deissmann, Dr. Adolf, 14, 42, 47, 79, 80, 109, 126
Democritus, 52
Demosthenes, 89
Dion Cassius, 108
Domitian, 79

Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics, 51
Epictetus, 39
Epicureans, 87
Epimenides, 101
Eusebius, 131
Eustathius, 89
Expositor's Greek Testament, 39, 42

Farrar, Dr. F. W., 108
Felix, 19
Festus, 31

Gallio, 106
Games, 27
Gesture, 20
Goodspeed, Dr. E. J., 32, 57, 60, 88
Green, Dr. S. G., 96
Grenfell, Dr. B. P., 13

Hadrian, 74
Herod the Great, 115, 132
Herodotus, 45
Hesiod, 120
Hipparchus, 98
Horton, Dr. R. F., 103
Humility, 49
Hunt, Dr. A. S., 13

Intercession, 47

Jerome, 75
Jones, Sir H. S., 15
Josephus, 79, 115, 131

Kenyon, Sir F. G., 134
Koine, 134

Lexicon (Liddell-Scott), 15, 52
Lightfoot, Dr. J. B., 33
Livy, 112
Local Colour of the Bible, 133
Lucan, 107
Luther, 38
LXX (see Septuagint)

Malta, 118
Melita, 118
Metaphor, 16
Meyer, Dr. H. A. W., 33, 38
Milligan, Prof. G., 13, 22, 33, 40
Moffatt, Dr. J., 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 32, 36, 46, 57, 63, 67, 82, 85, 95
Morton, H. V., 75, 132, 135
Moule, Dr. H. C. G., 35

- 142 -
Moulton, Dr. J. H., 13, 22, 40

Nero, 79, 107, 111, 117
New Commentary on Holy Scripture, 24
New Standard Dictionary, 131

Parry, R. St. John, 66
Pergamum, 125
Phoebe, 44
Pindar, 28
Plato, 11, 50, 83, 90
Pliny, 107, 131
Plutarch, 84, 89, 93, 102
Polybius, 101
Polycarp, 80
Pompeius, 131
Priscilla, 116
Ptolemy, 131
Publius, 121
Pythagoras, 52

Ramsay, Sir W. M., 90, 108
Robertson Dr. A. T., 11, 63
Rotherham, J. B., 32, 36, 88

Schoolmaster, 82
Seneca, 107
Septuagint (LXX) 31, 35, 38, 41, 48
Shakespeare, 29, 42, 54, 89, 122
Simpson, Dr., 134
Smith, Dr. David, 96
Smith, Sir G. A., 131
Smith, James, 121
Socrates, 83, 87, 90
Sophocles, 94
Sosthenes, 106
Souter, Alexander, 41
Statius, 108
Stoics, 55, 87, 99
Suetonius, 113, 116

Tertullus, 19
Thucydides, 11, 36, 90
Tiberius, 109, 112
Titus, 8
Trajan, 78
Trench, Dr. R. C., 51

Vespasian, 78
Vincent, Dr. M. R., 50
Virgil, 112, 120
Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, 13
Vulgate, 38, 75

Weymouth Dr. R. F., 32, 36, 57, 82, 88, 96
Wilson, P. Whitwell, 74
World, 51

Xenophon, 94

      NOTE: This book was published in 1942 by Marshall, Morgan and Scott, Ltd., London and Edinburgh. That firm was taken over by Harper Collins, but when I contacted them about permission to publish on the RMAU web site they advised: "I am afraid that since the book you are referring to is not published by HarperCollins, I am unable to advise you on the permissions situation. I am also unable to find any reference to Marshall Morgan and Scott in the Writers' and Artists' Handbook, so I would suggest that you contact The Publishers Association for information." On October 25, 1999 I wrote to the Association but have had no reply. As there appears to be no record of a renewal of the original term of the copright, it is assumed that the book is now in the public domain.

Colvil Smith.      
19 November 1999.