Standard Jet DBnb` Ugr@?~1y0̝cßFNg7C؜( *`J{6߱ihC33*y[)|*|.f_Љ$g'DeFx -bT4.08 k &  Y `kS  Y   Y Y  Y Y  Y  @xY  Y   Y  Y  Y  Y  Y 2KY  Y   Y  Y ConnectDatabaseDateCreateDateUpdate FlagsForeignNameIdLvLvExtraLvModule LvPropName OwnerParentIdRmtInfoLongRmtInfoShortTypeYYIdParentIdName        OYS Y Y Y  Y 2ACMFInheritableObjectIdSID YObjectId Y4,;SY  Y HY Y  Y j Y {Y  Y |AttributeExpressionFlagLvExtra Name1 Name2ObjectId Order | Y"ObjectIdAttribute -Y  SY Y Y  Y r Y t Y  Y  Y ccolumn grbiticolumnszColumnszObject$szReferencedColumn$szReferencedObjectszRelationshiptis   YYYszObject$szReferencedObjectszRelationshipYv1b N  : k & W  C t/ h4h4h4h4@@X  @@OJmJLJkQkiQ^JmYdbkWYfkmJL^Qk`kvkJMQk`kvkdL[QMmk`kvkhoQiYQk`kvkiQ^JmYdbkWYfkmdfYMbdmQk`kvkOL  @~  @ @4i 4i 4i 4i 4i 4i4i4i4i4i4i4i4i4i4i4i4i4i      d k f  &*P@x*P@Topic Notesr@j4DDD88888886 @(P@(P@MSysRelationshipssDDDDDDDDDDB (P@(P@MSysQueriess88888888886 (P@(P@MSysACEss22222222220 (P@(P@MSysObjectss88888888886 (P@(P@MSysDbr.........., (P@(P@Relationshipss<<<<<<<<<<: (P@(P@Databasess44444444442 (P@(P@Tabless.........., jY@NY Y d YTID TitleCommentsS4+YYIDPrimaryKeyw 2 \?@ pLq`@@;L 1>@) 0H0@?@@=}pf@"w<?1<   +P4?@ pLq`@@;L 1>@) 0H0@?@@=}pf@"w<?1<   1C0|`18F@ 0L2y&7H9O88䟥 `!`Cz @ A&(8xp@` Of1@@~`8 C B@2@9> @D!O@p C@9BEP<~~y?`@H?ύ~ ܃xlgCē88Xxy" xw><9O`{8wG1G!w '@`0f>4 ??= "19&ppb<@ Ó@2P80sd~@N!|h80 gp'88  g e La$  @p)2 @@@@  @  @@ @@@ @ @@@@LVALh{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Georgia;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\lang1033\f0\fs28 SALVATION\par Salvation\par (properly Heb yeshua Gk solteria, both meaning originally deliverance or safety). No idea was more ingrained in the Jewish mind than the truth that God was a Savior, a Helper, a Deliverer, a Rescuer, a Defender, and a Preserver to his people. Their whole history was a history of salvation, and an unfolding of the nature and purposes of the Divine Being. Israel was a saved people (Deut 33:29); saved from Egypt (Ex 14:30), delivered from enemies on every side, preserved in prosperity, and restored from adversity \emdash all by that One Person whom they had been taught to call Jehovah. Though human instruments were constantly used as saviors \emdash as, for instance, the judges \emdash the people were always taught that it was God who saved by their hand (2 Sam 3:18; 2 Kings 13:5; 14:27; Neh 9:27), and that there was not power in man to be his own savior (Job 40:14; Ps 33:16; 44:3,7), so that he must look to God alone for help (Isa 43:11; 45:22; Hos 13:4,10). This the Scriptures express in varied forms, usually in phrases, in which the Hebrews rarely use concrete terms, as they are called, but often abstract terms. Thus, instead of saying, God saves them and protects them, they say, God is their salvation. So, a voice of salvation, tidings of salvation, a word of salvation, etc., is equivalent to a voice declaring deliverance, etc. Similarly, to work great salvation in Israel signifies to deliver Israel from some imminent danger, to obtain a great victory over enemies. Most of these phrases explain themselves, while others are of nearly equal facility of apprehension, e.g. the application of "the cup of salvation" to gratitude and joy for deliverance (Ps 106:13); the "rock of salvation" to a rock where any one takes refuge, and is in safety (2 Sam 22:47); "the LVALshield of salvation" and "helmet of salvation" to protection from the attack of an enemy (Ps 18:35; Isa 59:17); the "horn of salvation" to the power by which deliverance is effected (Ps 18:2); "the garments of salvation" to the beauty and protection of holiness (Isa 61:10); the "wells of salvation" to the abundant sources of the mercies of salvation, free, overflowing, and refreshing (Isa 12:3). See each of these associated terms in its alphabetical place.\par "When we come to inquire into the nature of this salvation thus drawn from God, and the conditions on which it was granted during the Old Test. dispensation, we learn that it implied every kind of assistance for body and soul, and that it was freely offered to God's people (Ps 28:9; 69:35); to the needy (Ps 72:4,13), to the meek (Ps 76:9), to the contrite (Ps 34:18), but not to the wicked (Ps 18:41) unless they repented and turned to him. Salvation consisted not only of deliverance from enemies, and from the snares of the wicked (Ps 37:40; 59:2; 106:20), but also of forgiveness (Ps 79:9), of answers to prayer (Ps 69:13), of spiritual gifts (Ps 68:19), of joy (Ps 51:12), of truth (Ps 25:5), and of righteousness (Ps 24:5; Isa 45:8; 46:13; 53:5). Many of the beautiful promises in Isaiah refer to an everlasting and spiritual salvation, and God described himself as coming to earth to bring salvation to his people (Isa 62:11; Zech 9:9). Thus was the way prepared for the coming of him who was to be called Jesus, because he should save his people from their sins. See MESSIAH.\par "In the New Testament the spiritual idea of salvation strongly predominates, though the idea of temporal deliverance occasionally appears. Perhaps the word restoration most clearly represents the great truth of the Gospel. The Son of God came to a lost world to restore those who would commit themselves unto him to that harmony with God which they had lost by sin. He appeared among men as the Restorer. Disease, hunger, mourning, and spiritual depression fled from before him. A.LVAL>ll the sufferings to which the human race is subject were overcome by him. Death itself, the last enemy, was vanquished; and in his own resurrection Christ proclaimed to all believers the glad tidings that God's purpose of bringing many sons unto glory was yet to be carried out. During his lifetime Jesus Christ was especially a healer and restorer of the body, and his ministrations were confined to the lost sheep of the house of Israel; but by his death for the sins of the whole world, and by his subsequent resurrection and exaltation, he was enabled to fulfil the mission for which he had taken our nature. He became generally the Savior of the lost. All who come to him are brought by him to God; they have spiritual life, forgiveness, and peace, and they are adopted into the family of God. Their bodies are made temples of the Holy Ghost, by whose inworking power Christ is formed within them. Their heart being purified by faith in him as the Son of God, they receive from him the gifts and graces of God, and thus they have an earnest of the final inheritance, the complete restoration, which is the object of every Christian's hope. If it be asked when a man is saved, the answer is that the new life which is implanted by faith in Christ is salvation in the germ, so that every believer is a saved man. But during the whole Christian life salvation is worked out, in proportion to our faith, which is the connecting link between the Savior and the saved \emdash the vine and the branches. Salvation in its completion is ready to be revealed' in the day of Christ's appearing, when he who is now justified by Christ's blood shall be saved from wrath through him, and when there shall be that complete restoration of body and soul which shall make us fit to dwell with God as his children for evermore." See SAVIOR.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \cf1\f1\fs29\par \par \par } :J{HK( X /  ^ 3 y F  P j 3 Ac@pApK}8 j-j9jJSACK, BRETHREN@."ISACK, AUGUST FRIEDRICH WILHELMdhNBHSACHSE, CHRISTIAN FRIEDRICH HEINRICH @ZNGSACHS, MICHAELh."FSACHS, MARCUSj@, ESACHS, HANS.h(DSACHEVERELL, HENRYV@6*CSACERDOTAL ORDERh2&BSACERDOTAL CONSECRATIONh@4ASACERDOTAL CITIESB@4(@SACERDOSX@"?SACER, GOTTFRIED WILHELM @B6>SACELLUM@"=SACELLIUS@$<SACELLANUS, THE GRAND@<0;SACCUS@:SACCOPHORI @&9SACCHINI, FRANCESCO@8,8SACCHI, ANDREA@."7SACAR@6SACAEA@5SABUREANS@$4SABTECHA@"3SABTAh2SABOTIERS @$1SABINIANUS@&0SABINA, POPPAEAvh0$/SABINAh.SABIN, ELIJAH ROBINSONh>2-SABIANSD)h ,SABI@+SABELLIUS:-h$*SABBATUM MAGNUM.@0$)SABBATISM\@$(SABBATINI, LUIGI ANTONIO@B6'SABBATINI, LORENZOF@6*&SABBATINI, ANDREA@4(%SABBATIER, PIERRE@4($SABBATICAL YEARΙh0$#SABBATIC RIVER@.""SABBATIANS@&!SABBATHAI ZEBI*h." SABBATH, JEWISHuh0$SABBATH, DAY AFTER THEsh>2SABBATH, COURT OF THE@]<0SABBATH, CHRISTIANch6*SABBATH DAY'S JOURNEY.@^h<0SABBATATI$@]$SABBATARIANS @\*SABBASZ@[SABBAN@[SABBAEUSb@Z"SABBA, ABRAHAM IBN-@Z8,SABAZIUS@Y"SABATUSZ@Y SABATNIKI @X$SABATAEAS@W$SABAT@TSABAOTH(Uh SABANUSz@T SABAI VERSION@P,  SABAEANSZ Qh" SABACHTHANI@P( SABA, MONASTERY OFL @O6* SABA-Lh SAALSCHTZ, JOSEPH LEVINTJhB6SAADIABOEhSAADHS(@DSA, MANOEL DEd@D, UNITARIANSBh&UNITARIANISMj+h*SOTERIOLOGYp)h(SAVIOR3hSALVATION/h$LVALh{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Georgia;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\lang1033\f0\fs28 SAVIOR\par Savior\par a title applied in Scripture, in its highest sense, to Jesus Christ, but in a subordinate way to earthly deliverers. We present a comparatively brief abstract of this very extensive subject. See SOTERIOLOGY.\par I. The Word itself. \emdash The term "Savior," as applied to our Lord Jesus Christ, represents the Greek soter, which in turn represents certain derivatives from the Hebrew root yasha (<START HEBREW>uv^y*<END HEBREW>\par ), particularly the participle of the Hiphil form moshia (<START HEBREW>u^yv!om<END HEBREW>\par ), which is usually rendered "Savior" in the A.V. (e.g. Isa 46:15; 49:26). In considering the true import of "Savior," it is essential for us to examine the original terms answering to it, including in our view the use of soter in the Sept., whence it was more immediately derived by the writers of the New Test., and further noticing the cognate terms "to save" and "salvation," which express respectively the action and the results of the Savior"s office. See JESUS.\par 1. The term soter is of more frequent occurrence in the Sept. than the term "Savior" in the A.V. of the Old Test. It represents not only the word moshia above mentioned, but also very frequently the nouns yesha (<START HEBREW>uv^y#<END HEBREW>\par ) and yeshuah (<START HEBREW>hu*Wvy!<END HEBREW>\par ), which, though properly expressive of the abstract notion "salvation," are yet sometimes used in a concrete sense for "Savior." We may cite as an example Isa 52:11, "Behold, thy salvation cometh, his reward is with him," where evidently "salvation" = Savior. So again in passages where these terms are connected immediately with the person of the Godhead, as in Ps 58:20, "the God our Savior" (A.V. "God of our salvation"). Not only in such cases as these, but in many others where tLVALhe sense does not require it, the Sept. has soter where the A.V. has "salvation;" and thus the word "Savior" was more familiar to the ear of the reader of the Old Test. in our Lord"s age than it is to us.\par 2. The same observation holds good with regard to the verb <START GREEK>\par sw/zein<END GREEK>\par , and the substantive <START GREEK>\par swthri/a<END GREEK>\par , as used in the Sept. An examination of the passages in which they occur shows that they stand as equivalents for words conveying the notions of well being, succor, peace, and the like. We have further to notice <START GREEK>\par swthri/a<END GREEK>\par in the sense of recovery of the bodily health (2 Macc 3:32), together with the etymological connection supposed to exist between the terms <START GREEK>\par swth/r<END GREEK>\par and <START GREEK>\par sw=ma<END GREEK>\par , to which Paul evidently alludes in Eph 5:23; Phil 3:20,21.\par 3. If we turn to the Hebrew terms, we cannot fail to be struck with their comprehensiveness. Our verb "to save" implies, in its ordinary sense, the rescue of a person from actual or impending danger. This is undoubtedly included in the Hebrew root yasha, and may be said to be its ordinary sense, as testified by the frequent accompaniment of the preposition min (<START HEBREW>/m!<END HEBREW>\par comp. the <START GREEK>\par sw/sei a)po/<END GREEK>\par which the angel gives in explanation of the name Jesus, Matt 1:21). But yasha, beyond this, expresses assistance and protection of every kind \emdash assistance in aggressive measures, protection against attack; and, in a secondary sense, the results of such assistance victory, safety, prosperity, and happiness. We may, cite as an instance of the aggressive sense, Deut 20:4, "To fight for you against your enemies, to save you;" of protection against attack, Isa 26:1," Salvation will God appoint for walls and bulwarks;" of victory, 2 Sam 8:6, "The Lord preserved David," i.e. gave him victory; of prosperity and happiness, Isa 60:18, "Thou shLVALalt call thy walls Salvation;" Isa 56:10, "He hath clothed me with the garments of salvation." No better instance of this last sense can be adduced than the exclamation "Hosanna," meaning,"( Save, I beseech thee," which was uttered as a prayer for God's blessing on any joyous occasion (Ps 118:25), as at our Lord's entry into Jerusalem, when the etymological connection of the terms Hosanna and Jesus could not have been lost on the ear of the Hebrew (Matt 21:9,15). It thus appears that the Hebrew and Greek terms had their positive as well as their negative side; in other words, that they expressed the presence of blessing as well as the absence of danger, actual security as well as the removal of insecurity. The Latin language possessed in the classical period no proper equivalent for the Greek <START GREEK>\par swth/r<END GREEK>\par . This appears from the introduction of the Greek word itself in a Latinized form, and from Cicero"s remark (in Verr. Acts 2:2, 63) that there was no one word which expressed the notion qui salutem dedit. Tacitus (Ann. 15, 71) uses conservator, and Pliny (22, 5) servator. The term salvator appears appended as a title of Jupiter in an inscription of the age of Trajan (Gruter, p. 19, No. 5). This was adopted by Christian writers as the most adequate equivalent for <START GREEK>\par swth/r<END GREEK>\par , though objections were evidently raised against it (Augustine, Serm. 299, \'a7 6). Another term, salutificator, was occasionally used by Tertullian (De Resurr. Carn. 47; De Carn. Chr. 14).\par 4. The historical personages to whom the terms are applied further illustrate this view. The judges are styled "saviors," as having rescued their country from a state of bondage (Judg 3:9,15, A.V. "deliverer;" Neh 9:27); a "savior" was subsequently raised up in the person of Jeroboam II to deliver Israel from the Syrians (2 Kings 13:5); and in the same sense Josephus styles the deliverance from Egypt a "salvation" (Ant. 3, 1, 1). Joshua, on the other hand, verified the promise conLVALtained in his name by his conquests over the Canaanites: the Lord was his helper in an aggressive sense. Similarly, the office of the "saviors" promised in Obad 21 was to execute vengeance on Edom. The names Isaiah, Jeshua, Ishi, Hosea, Hoshea, and, lastly, Jesus, are all expressive of the general idea of assistance from the Lord. The Greek soter was in a similar manner applied in the double sense of a deliverer from foreign foes, as in the case of Ptolemy Soter, and a general protector, as in the numerous instances where it was appended as the title of heathen deities.\par 5. There are many indications in the Old Test. that the idea of a spiritual salvation, to be effected by God alone, was by no means foreign to the mind of the pious Hebrew. In the Psalms there are numerous petitions to God to save from the effects of sin (e.g. Ps 39:8; 79:9). Isaiah, in particular, appropriates the term "savior" to Jehovah (Isa 43:11), and connects it with the notions of justice and righteousness (Isa 45:21; 55:16, 17): he adduces it as the special manner in which Jehovah reveals himself to man (Isa 45:15): he hints at the means to be adopted for effecting salvation in passages where he connects the term "savior" with "redeemer" (goal), as in Isa 41:14; 49:26; 55:16, and again with "ransom," as in 43:3. Similar notices are scattered over the prophetical books (e.g. Zech 9:9; Hos 1:7), and though in many instances these notices admitted of a reference to proximate events of a temporal nature, they evidently looked to higher things, and thus fostered in the mind of the Hebrew the idea of a "Savior" who should far surpass in his achievements the "saviors" that had as yet appeared. The mere sound of the word would conjure up before his imagination visions of deliverance, security, peace, and prosperity.\par II. The Work of the Savior. \emdash This we propose to trace as developed in the several portions of the New Testament. . \par 1. The first three evangelists, as we know, agree in showing that Jesus unfolded hisLVAL message to the disciples by degrees. He wrought the miracles that were to be the credentials of the Messiah; he laid down the great principles of the Gospel morality, until he had established in the minds of the Twelve the conviction that he was the Christ of God. Then, as the clouds of doom grew darker, and the malice of the Jews became more intense, he turned a new page in his teaching. Drawing from his disciples the confession of their faith in him as Christ, he then passed abruptly, so to speak, to the truth that remained to be learned in the last few months of his ministry, that his work included suffering as well as teaching (Matt 16:20,21). He was instant in pressing this unpalatable doctrine home to his disciples from this time to the end. Four occasions when he prophesied his bitter death are on record, and they are probably only examples out of many more (ver. 21). We grant that in none of these places does the word "sacrifice" occur; and that the mode of speaking is somewhat obscure, as addressed to minds unprepared, even then, to bear the full weight of a doctrine so repugnant to their hopes. But that he must (<START GREEK>\par dei=<END GREEK>\par ) go and meet death; that the powers of sin and of this world are let loose against him for a time, so that he shall be betrayed to the Jews, rejected, delivered by them to the Gentiles, and by them be mocked and scourged, crucified, and slain; and that all this shall be done to achieve a foreseen work, and accomplish all things written of him by the prophets \emdash these we do certainly find. They invest the death of Jesus with a peculiar significance; they set the mind inquiring what the meaning can be of this hard necessity that is laid on him. For the answer we look to other places; but at least there is here no contradiction to the doctrine of sacrifice, though the Lord does not yet say, "I bear the wrath of God against your sins in your stead; I become a curse for you." Of the two sides of this mysterious doctrine \emdash that Jesus dLVALies for us willingly, and that" he dies to bear a doom laid on him as of necessity, because some one must bear it \emdash it is the latter side that is made prominent. In all the passages it pleases Jesus to speak, not of his desire to die, but of the burden laid on him, and the power given to others against him.\par 2. Had the doctrine been explained no further, there would have been much to wait for. But the series of announcements in these passages leads up to one more definite and complete. It cannot he denied that the words of the institution of the Lord"s supper speak most distinctly of a sacrifice: "Drink ye all of this, for this is my blood of the new covenant;" or, to follow Luke, "the new covenant in my blood." We are carried back by these words to the first covenant, to the altar with twelve pillars, and the burned offerings and peace offerings of oxen, and the blood of the victims sprinkled on the altar and on the people, and the words of Moses as he sprinkled it: "Behold the blood of the covenant which the Lord hath made with you concerning all these words" (Ex 24). No interpreter has ever failed to draw from these passages the true meaning: "When my sacrifice is accomplished, my blood shall be the sanction of the new covenant." The word "sacrifice" is wanting; but sacrifice, and nothing else, is described. And the words are no mere figure used for illustration, and laid aside when they have served that turn. "Do this in remembrance of me." They are the words in which the Church is to interpret the act of Jesus to the end of time. They are reproduced exactly by Paul (1 Cor 11:25). Then, as now, Christians met together, and by a solemn act declared that they counted the blood of Jesus as a sacrifice wherein a new covenant was sealed; and of the blood of that sacrifice they partook by faith, professing themselves thereby willing to enter the covenant and be sprinkled with the blood.\par 3. So far we have examined the three "synoptic" Gospels. They follow a historical order. In the early LVALchapters of all three the doctrine of our Lord"s sacrifice is not found, because he will first answer the question about himself, "Who is this?" before he shows them "What is his work." But at length the announcement is made, enforced, repeated; until, when the feet of the betrayer are ready for their wicked errand, a command is given which secures that the death of Jesus shall be described forever as a sacrifice and nothing else, sealing a new covenant and carrying good to many. Lest the doctrine of atonement should seem to be an after thought, as, indeed, De Wette has tried to represent it, John preserves the conversation with Nicodemus, which took place early in the ministry; and there, under the figure of the brazen serpent lifted up, the atoning virtue of the Lord"s death is fully set forth. "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life" (John 3:14,15). As in this intercessory act the image pf the deadly, hateful, and accursed (Gen 3:14,15) reptile became by God"s decree the means of health to all who looked on it earnestly, so does Jesus in the form of sinful man, of a deceiver of the people (Matt 27:63), of Antichrist (12:24; John 18:33), of one accursed (Gal 3:13), become the means of our salvation; so that whoever fastens the earnest gaze of faith on him shall not perish, but have eternal life. There is even a significance in the words "lifted up;" the Lord used, probably, the word <START HEBREW>[qd<END HEBREW>\par , which, in older Hebrew, meant to "lift up" in the widest sense, but began in the Aramaic to have the restricted meaning of "lifting up for punishment." With Christ the lifting up was a seeming disgrace, a true triumph and elevation. But the context in which these verses occur is as important as the verses themselves. Nicodemus comes as an inquirer; he is told that a man must be born again, and then he is directed to the death of Jesus as the means of that regenLVALeration. The earnest gaze of the wounded soul is to be the condition of its cure; and that gaze is to be turned, not to Jesus on the mountain or in the temple, but on the cross. This, then, is no passing allusion, but it is the substance of the Christian teaching addressed to an earnest seeker after truth.\par Another passage claims a reverent attention \emdash "If any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world" (John 6:51). He is the bread; and he will give the bread. If his presence on earth were the expected food, it was given already; but would he speak of "drinking his blood" (ver. 53), which can only refer to the dead? It is on the cross that he will afford this food to his disciples. We grant that this whole passage has occasioned as much disputing among Christian commentators as it did among the Jews who heard it; and for the same reason \emdash for the hardness of the saying. But there stands the saying; and no candid person can refuse to see a reference in it to the death of him that speaks.\par In that discourse, which has well been called the prayer of consecration offered by our High priest, there is another passage which cannot be alleged as evidence to one who thinks that any word applied by Jesus to his disciples and himself must bear in both cases precisely the same sense, but which is really pertinent to this inquiry \emdash "Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify myself that they also might be sanctified through the truth" (John 17:17-19). The word <START GREEK>\par a(gia/zein<END GREEK>\par , "sanctify," "consecrate," is used in the Sept. for the offering of sacrifice (Lev 22:2) and for the dedication of a man to the divine service (Num 3:15). Here the present tense, "I consecrate," used in a discourse in which our Lord says he is "no more in the world," is conLVALclusive against the interpretation "I dedicate my life to thee;" for life is over. No self dedication, except that by death, can now be spoken of as present. "I dedicate myself to thee, in my death, that these may be a people consecrated to thee;" such is the great thought in this sublime passage, which suits well with his other declaration that the blood of his sacrifice sprinkles them for a new covenant with God. To the great majority of expositors from Chrysostom and Cyril the doctrine of reconciliation through the death of Jesus is asserted in these verses.\par The Redeemer has already described himself as the Good Shepherd who lays down his life for the sheep (John 10:11,17,18), taking care to distinguish his death from that of one who dies against his will in striving to compass some other aim \emdash "Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again."\par Other passages that relate to his death will occur to the memory of any Bible reader. The corn of wheat that dies in the ground to bear much fruit (John 10:24) is explained by his own words elsewhere, where he says that he came "to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many" (Matt 20:28).\par 4. Thus, then, speaks Jesus of himself. What say his witnesses of him? "Behold the Lamb of God," says the Baptist, "which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). Commentators differ about the allusion implied in that name. But take any one of their opinions, and a sacrifice is implied. Is it the paschal lamb that is referred to? Is it the lamb of the daily sacrifice? Either way the death of the victim is brought before us. But the allusion, in all probability, is to the well known prophecy of Isaiah (ch. 54), to the Lamb brought to the slaughter, who bore our griefs and carried our sorrows. See this passage discussed fully in the notes of Meyer, Lange (Bibelwerke), and Alford. \emdasLVALh The reference to the paschal lamb finds favor with Grotius and others; the reference to Isaiah is approved by Chrysostom and many others. The taking away of sin (<START GREEK>\par ai&rein<END GREEK>\par ) of the Baptist, and the bearing it (<START GREEK>\par fe/rein<END GREEK>\par , Sept.) of Isaiah, have one meaning and answer to the Hebrew word <START HEBREW>ac*n*<END HEBREW>\par . To take the sins on himself is to remove them from the sinners; and how can this be through his death except in the way of expiation by that death itself?\par 5. The apostles, after the resurrection, preach no moral system, but a belief in and love of Christ, the crucified and risen Lord, through whom, if they repent, men shall obtain salvation. This was Peter"s preaching on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2); and he appealed boldly to the prophets on the ground of an expectation of a suffering Messiah (3:18). Philip traced out for the eunuch, in that picture of suffering holiness in the well known chapter of Isaiah, the lineaments of Jesus of Nazareth (Acts 8; Isa 53:1). The first sermon to a Gentile household proclaimed Christ slain and risen, and added "that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins" (Acts 10). Paul at Antioch preaches "a Savior Jesus" (Acts 13:23); "through this Man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins. and by him all that believe are justified from all things from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses" (ver. 38,39). At Thessalonica all that we learn of this apostle"s preaching is "that Christ must needs have suffered and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ" (Acts 17:3). Before Agrippa he declared that he had preached always "that Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead" (Acts 26:23); and it was this declaration that convinced his royal hearer that he was a crazed fanatic. The account of the first founding of the Church in the Acts of the Apostles is cLVAL oncise and fragmentary; and sometimes we have hardly any means of judging what place the sufferings of Jesus held in the teaching of the apostles; but when we read that they "preached Jesus," or the like, it is only fair to infer from other passages that the cross of Christ was never concealed, whether Jews or Greeks or barbarians were the listeners. And this very pertinacity shows how much weight they attached to the facts of the life of our Lord. They did not merely repeat in each new place the pure morality of Jesus as he uttered it in the Sermon on the Mount: of such lessons we have no record. They took in their hands, as the strongest weapon, the fact that a certain Jew crucified afar off in Jerusalem was the Son of God, who had died to save men from their sins; and they offered to all alike an interest, through faith, in the resurrection from the dead of this outcast of his own people. No wonder that Jews and Greeks, judging in their worldly way, thought this strain of preaching came of folly or madness, and turned from what they thought unmeaning jargon.\par 6. We are able to complete from the epistles our account of the teaching of the apostles on the doctrine of atonement. "The Man Christ Jesus" is the mediator between God and man, for in him the human nature, in its sinless purity, is lifted up to the divine, so that he, exempt from guilt, can plead for the guilty (1 Tim 2:5; 1 John 2:1,2; Heb 7:25). Thus he is the second Adam that shall redeem the sin of the first; the interests of men are bound up in him, since he has power to take them all into himself (Eph 5:29,30; Rom 5:12,17; 12:5; 1 Cor 15:22). This salvation was provided by the Father, to "reconcile us to himself" (2 Cor 5:18), to whom the name of "Savior" thus belongs (Luke 1:47); and our redemption is a signal proof of the love of God to us (1 John 4:10). Not less is it a proof of the love of Jesus, since he freely lays down his life for us \emdash offers it as a precious gift, capable of purchasing all the lost (1 Tim 2:6; TitusLVAL! 2:14; Eph 1:7; comp. Matt 20:28). But there is another side of the truth more painful to our natural reason. How came this exhibition of divine love to be needed? Because wrath had already gone out against man. The clouds of God's anger gathered thick over the whole human race; they discharged themselves on Jesus only. God has made him to be sin for us who knew no sin (2 Cor 5:21); he is made "a curse" (a thing accursed) for us that the curse that hangs over us may be removed (Gal 3:13); he bore our sins in his own body on the tree (1 Peter 2:24). There are those who would see on the page of the Bible only the sunshine of the divine love; but the muttering thunders of divine wrath against sin are heard there also; and he who alone was no child of wrath meets the shock of the thunderstorm, becomes a curse for us and a vessel of wrath; and the rays of love break out of that thunder gloom and shine on the bowed head of him who hangs on the cross, dead for our sins.\par 7. We have spoken, and advisedly, as if the New Test. were, as to this doctrine, one book in harmony with itself. That there are in the New Test. different types of the one true doctrine may be admitted without peril to the doctrine. The principal types are four in number.\par (1.) In the Epistle of James there is a remarkable absence of all explanations of the doctrine of the atonement; but this admission does not amount to so much as may at first appear. True, the keynote of the epistle is that the Gospel is the law made perfect, and that it is a practical moral system in which man finds himself free to keep the divine law. But with him Christ is no mere lawgiver appointed to impart the Jewish system. He knows that Elias is a man like himself, but of the person of Christ he speaks in a different spirit. He calls himself "a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ." who is "the Lord of glory." He speaks of the Word of Truth of which Jesus has been the utterer. He knows that faith in the Lord of glory is inconsistent with time servinLVAL"g and "respect of persons" (James 1:1,18; 2:1). "There is one lawgiver," he says," who is able to save and to destroy" (4:12); and this refers, no doubt, to Jesus, whose second coming he holds up as a motive to obedience (5:7-9). These and like expressions remove this epistle far out of the sphere of Ebionitish teaching. The inspired writer sees the Savior, in the Father"s glory, preparing to return to judge the quick and dead. He puts forth Christ as prophet and king, for he makes him teacher and judge of the world; but the office of the priest he does not dwell on. Far be it from us to say that he knows it not. Something must have taken place before he could treat his hearers with confidence, as free creatures able to resist temptations, and even to meet temptations with joy. He treats "your faith" as something founded already, not to be prepared by this epistle (1:2,3,21). His purpose is a purely practical one. There is no intention to unfold a Christology such as that which makes the Epistle to the Romans so valuable. Assuming that Jesus has manifested himself and begotten anew the human race, he seeks to make them pray with undivided hearts, and be considerate to the poor, and strive with lusts, for which they, and not God, are responsible; and bridle their tongues, and show their fruits by their works (see Neander, Pflanzung, b. 6, c. 3; Schmid, Theologie des N.T. pt. 2; and Dorner, Christologie, 1, 95).\par (2.) In the teaching of Peter the doctrine of the person of our Lord is connected strictly with that of his work as Savior and Messiah. The frequent mention of his sufferings shows the prominent place he would give them; and he puts forward as the ground of his own right to teach that he was "a witness of the sufferings of Christ" (1 Peter 5:1). The atoning virtue of those sufferings he dwells on with peculiar emphasis, and not less so on the purifying influence of the atonement on the hearts of believers. He repeats again and again that Christ died for us (2:21; 3:18; 4:1); that he bare ouLVAL#r sins in his own body on the tree (2:24). He bare them; and what does this phrase suggest but the goat that "shall bear" the iniquities of the people off into the land that was not inhabited? (Lev 16:22), or else the feeling the consequences of sin, as the word is used elsewhere (20:17,19)? We have to choose between the cognate ideas of sacrifice and substitution. Closely allied with these statements are those which connect moral reformation with the death of Jesus. He bare our sins that we might live unto righteousness. His death is our life. We are not to be content with a self-satisfied contemplation of our redeemed state, but to live a life worthy of it (1 Peter 2:21-25; 3:15-18). In these passages the whole Gospel is contained; we are justified by the death of Jesus, who bore our sins that we might be sanctified and renewed to a life of godliness. And from this apostle we hear again the name of "the lamb," as well as from John the Baptist; and the passage of Isaiah comes back upon us with unmistakable clearness. We are redeemed "with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot" (1:18,19, with Isa 53:7). Every word carries us back to the Old Test. and its sacrificial system: the spotless victim, the release from sin by its blood (elsewhere [1 Peter 1:2] by the sprinkling of its blood), are here; not the type and shadow, but the truth of them; not a ceremonial purgation, but an effectual reconcilement of man and God.\par (3.) In the inspired writings of John we are struck at once with the emphatic statements as to the divine and human natures of Christ. A right belief in the incarnation is the test of a Christian man (1 John 4:2; John 1:14; 2 John 7); we must believe that Jesus' Christ is come in the flesh, and that he is manifested to destroy the works of the devil (1 John 3:8). And, on the other hand, he who has come in the flesh is the one who alone has been in the bosom of the Father, seen the things that human eyes have never seen, and has come to de dare themLVAL$ unto us (1:2; 4:14; John 1:14-18). This person, at once divine and human, is "the propitiation for our sins," our advocate with the Father," sent into the world "that we might live through him;" and the means was his laying down his life for us, which should make us ready to lay down our lives for the brethren (1 John 1:7; 2:1,2; 3:16; 4:9,10; 5:6,11-13; John 11:51). And the moral effect of his redemption is that "the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin" (1 John 1:7). The intimate connection between his work and our holiness is the main subject of his first epistle, "Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin (1 John 3:9). As with Peter, so with John; every point of the doctrine of the atonement comes out with abundant clearness. The substitution of another, who can bear our sins, for us who cannot; the sufferings and death as the means of our redemption, our justification thereby and our progress in holiness as the result of our justification.\par (4.) To follow out as fully, in the more voluminous writings of Paul, the passages that speak of our salvation would far transgress the limits of our paper. Man, according to this apostle, is a transgressor of the law. His conscience tells him that he cannot act up to that law, which, the same conscience admits, is divine, and binding upon him. Through the old dispensations man remained in this condition. Even the law of Moses could not justify him it only by its strict behests held up a mirror to conscience that its frailness might be seen. Christ came, sent by the mercy of our Father who had never forgotten us; given to, not deserved by us. He came to reconcile men and God by dying on the cross for them, and bearing their punishment in their stead (2 Cor 5:14-21; Rom 5:6-8). He is "a propitiation through faith in his blood" (3:25,26; comp. Lev 16:15) (<START GREEK>\par i(lasth/reion<END GREEK>\par means "victim for expiation") \emdash words which most people will find unintelligible, except in reference to the Old Test. and its sacrifiLVAL%ces. He is the ransom, or price paid, for the redemption of man from all iniquity (Titus 2:14). Still stronger in 1 Tim 2:6, "ransom instead of (<START GREEK>\par a)nti/lutron<END GREEK>\par ); also Eph 1:7 (<START GREEK>\par a)polu/trwsi$<END GREEK>\par ); 1 Cor 6:20; 7:23. The wrath of God was against man, but it did not fall on man. God made his Son "to be sin for us," though he knew no sin; and Jesus suffered, though men had sinned. By this act God and man were reconciled (Rom 5:10; 2 Cor 5:18-20; Eph 2:16; Col 1:21). On the side of man, trust and love and hope take the place of fear and of an evil conscience; on the side of God, that terrible wrath of his, which is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, is turned away (Rom 1:18; 5:9; 1 Thess 1:10). The question whether we are reconciled to God only, or God is also reconciled to us, might be discussed on deep metaphysical grounds; but we purposely leave that on one side, content to show that at all events the intention of God to punish man is averted by this "propitiation" and "reconcilement." See RECONCILIATION.\par Different views are held about the authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews by modern critics, but its numerous points of contact with the other epistles of Paul must be recognized. In both the incompleteness of Judaism is dwelt on; redemption from sin and guilt is what religion has to do for men, and this the law failed to secure. In both, reconciliation and forgiveness and a new moral power in the believers are the fruits of the work of Jesus. In the Epistle to the Romans, Paul shows that the law failed to justify, and that faith in the blood of Jesus must be the ground of justification. In the Epistle to the Hebrews the same result follows from an argument rather different: all that the Jewish system aimed to do is accomplished in Christ in a far more perfect manner. The Gospel has a better priest, more effectual sacrifices, a more profound peace. In the one epistle the law seems set aside whoLVAL&lly for the system of faith; in the other the law is exalted and glorified in its Gospel shape; but the aim is precisely the same \emdash to show the weakness of the law and the effectual fruit of the Gospel.\par 8. We are now in a position to see how far the teaching of the New Test. on the effects of the death of Jesus is continuous and uniform. Are the declarations of our Lord about himself the same as those of James and Peter, John and Paul? and are those of the apostles consistent with each other? The several points of this mysterious transaction may be thus roughly described:\par (1.) God sent his Son into the world to redeem lost and ruined men from sin and death, and the Son willingly took upon him the form of a servant for this purpose; and thus the Father and the Son manifested their love for us.\par (2.) God the Father laid upon his Son the weight of the sins of the whole world, so that he bare in his own body the wrath which men must else have borne, because there was no other way of escape for them; and thus the atonement was a manifestation of divine justice.\par (3.) The effect of the atonement thus wrought is that man is placed in a new position, freed from the dominion of sin, and able to follow holiness; and thus the doctrine of the atonement ought to work in all the hearers a sense of love, of obedience, and of self sacrifice.\par In shorter words, the sacrifice of the death of Christ is a proof of divine love and of divine justice, and is for us a document of obedience. \par Of the four great writers of the New Test., Peter, Paul, and John set forth every one of these points. Peter, the "witness of the sufferings of Christ," tells us that we are redeemed with the blood of Jesus, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot; says that Christ bare our sins in his own body on the tree. If we "have tasted that the Lord is gracious" (1 Peter 2:3), we must not rest satisfied with a contemplation of our redeemed state, but must live a life worthy of it. No one can well doubt, who LVAL'reads the two epistles, that the love of God and Christ, and the justice of God, and the duties thereby laid on us, all have their value in them; but the love is less dwelt on than the justice, while the most prominent idea of all is the moral and practical working of the cross of Christ upon the lives of men.\par With John, again, all three points find place. That Jesus willingly laid down his life for us, and is an advocate with the Father; that he is also the propitiation, the suffering sacrifice, for our sins; and that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin, for that whoever is born of God doth not commit sin \emdash all are put forward. The death of Christ is both justice and love, both a propitiation and an act of loving self surrender; but the moral effect upon us is more prominent even than these.\par In the epistles of Paul the three elements are all present. In such expressions as a ransom, a propitiation, who was "made sin for us," the wrath of God against sin, and the mode in which it was turned away, are presented to us. Yet not wrath alone. "The love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge that if one died for all, then were all dead: and that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them and rose again" (2 Cor 5:14,15). Love in him begets love in us, and in our reconciled state the holiness which we could not practice before becomes easy.\par The reasons for not finding in James similar evidence we have spoken of already.\par Now, in which of these points is there the semblance of contradiction between the apostles and their Master? In none of them. In the gospels, as in the epistles, Jesus is held up as the sacrifice and victim, draining a cup from which his human nature shrank, feeling in himself a sense of desolation such as we fail utterly to comprehend on a theory of human motives. Yet no one takes from him his precious redeeming life; he lays it down of himself, out of his great love foLVAL(r men. But men are to deny themselves, and take up their cross and tread in his steps. They are his friends only if they keep his commands and follow his footsteps.\par We must consider it proved that these three points or elements are the doctrine of the whole New Test. What is there about this teaching that has provoked in times past and present so much disputation? Not the hardness of the doctrine \emdash for none of the theories put in its place are any easier \emdash but its want of logical completeness. Sketched out for us in a few broad lines, it tempts the fancy to fill it in and lend it color; and we do not always remember that the hands that attempt this are trying to make a mystery into a theory, an infinite truth into a finite one, and to reduce the great things of God into the narrower limits of our little field of view. To whom was the ransom paid? What was Satan's share of the transaction? How can one suffer for another? How could the Redeemer be miserable when he was conscious that his work was one which could bring happiness to the whole human race? Yet this condition of indefiniteness is one which is imposed on us in the reception of every mystery. Prayer, the incarnation, the immortality of the soul, are all subjects that pass far beyond our range of thought. Here we see the wisdom of God in connecting so closely our redemption with our reformation. If the object were to give us a complete theory of salvation, no doubt there would be in the Bible much to seek. The theory is gathered by fragments out of many an exhortation and warning; nowhere does it stand out entire, and without logical flaw. But if we assume that the New Test. is written for the guidance of sinful hearts, we find a wonderful aptness for that particular end. Jesus is proclaimed as the solace of our fears, as the founder of our moral life, as the restorer of our lost relation with our Father. If he had a cross, there is a cross for us; if he pleased not himself, let us deny ourselves; if he suffered for sin, let D LVALT us hate sin. And the question ought not to be. What do all these mysteries mean? but Are these thoughts really such as will serve to guide our life and to assuage our terrors in the hour of death? The answer is twofold one from history and one from experience. The preaching of the cross of the Lord even in this simple fashion converted the world. The same doctrine is now the ground of any definite hope that we find in ourselves of forgiveness of sins and of everlasting life. See Thomson, essay on the "Death of Christ," in Aids to Faith. \par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \cf1\f1\fs29\par \par } LVALh*{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Georgia;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\lang1033\f0\fs28 SOTERIOLOGY\par Soteriology\par (Gr. <START GREEK>\par swthri/a$ lo/go$<END GREEK>\par , doctrine of salvation) treats of the work of Christ as man's Redeemer, and its logical study requires that we should consecutively look at the deeds. Christ has wrought for the salvation of the world, and at their application, through faith, to individuals. The former is called Objective Soteriology, the latter Subjective Soteriology.\par a. Objective. \emdash Under this head are included the incarnation of Christ, his holy life, obedience unto death, the intermediate state, resurrection, exaltation to heaven. Christ's coming again, the threefold office of Christ, and the work of the Holy Ghost \emdash all of these entering into the work of atonement.\par b. Subjective. \emdash Under this head are discussed the several steps which constitute the way of salvation, the demands upon the sinner, and how he is enabled to satisfy these demands. These are, desire for salvation, saving faith, true repentance, good works, Christian sanctification, the work of grace (necessity, extent, character, result).\par Soteriology received little theoretical investigation in the ancient Church compared with that bestowed upon the Trinity and original sin. The chief defect in the patristic soteriology is that the distinction between justification and sanctification was not always so carefully drawn as to preserve the doctrine of atonement in its integrity. The holiness of the Christian is sometimes represented as cooperating with the death of Christ in constituting the ground of the remission of sin.\par The papal statements during the Middle Ages were too influential to allow of an improvement in soteriologv, and the Church was holding a theory of salvation wholly opposed to that which prevailed in the fourth cedLVALtntury. Anselm interrupted this dogmatic decline, and set the Church once more upon the true path of investigation. The leading features of his theory are:\par 1. Sin is an offense against the divine honor.\par 2. This offense cannot be waived, but must be satisfied for.\par 3. Man cannot make this satisfaction except by personal endless suffering.\par 4. God must, therefore, make it for him, if he is to be saved.\par 5. God does make it in the incarnation and atonement of the Son of God. The soteriology of Anselm exerted but little influence upon Roman Catholic Christendom, but Luther's assertion of justification by faith alone caused soteriology to become the center of dogmatic controversy between Protestant and Papist. The principal point of dispute between the Council of Trent and the Protestant theologians related to the appropriate place of sanctification. The Roman divine maintained that holiness of heart is necessary to the forgiveness of sin, as a meritorious cause; while the Protestant threw out the human element altogether, and claimed that the blood of Christ is the only meritorious cause and ground of forgiveness.\par In the Protestant Church discussions have been excited by the Socinian opposition and the Grotian modification.\par For the historical examination of this subject, see Baur [F.C.], Die christl. Lehre von der Versohnung (1838); Ritschi, Die christl. Lehre von der Rechtf. und Versohnung (1870), vol. 1. For other phases, see the Dogmatics of Lange, Martensen, Nitzsch; Evangelical Quar. Rev. Oct. 1868; Edwards, Justification and Wisdom in Redemption; Hodge, Theology, vol. 2; Grotius, Sacrifice of Christ; Pressensd, Sur la Redemption, in Bulletin Theol. 1867, 1 sq.; Schoberlein, art. Erlosung, in Herzog, 4, 129-140; Shedd, Hist. of Doct. p. 201-386.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \cf1\f1\fs29\par \par } LVALh,{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 UNITARIANISM\par \par Unitarianism\par \par belief in the unity of God. In a comprehensive sense it includes, with a part of Christendom, Jews, Mohammedans, Deists, and all who worship God as one. For this use, however, the accepted term is Monotheism. Within the ranks of Christendom the name Unitarian is given to those who reject the dogma of the Trinity in its varying phases of a threefold or tri-personal Deity, whether three in substance or only in name and form, and who maintain the essential unity of God as Creator and Father, and the created nature and subordinate rank of Jesus Christ. Within this range opinions about Jesus vary from those that assign him a pre-existent and super-angelic rank to an estimate purely human. While the name strictly touches this doctrine only, it is vitally related and gives character to the whole system of belief concerning human nature and need, human life and its purpose, this world and its meaning, and the future world and man's destiny.\par \par I. History of the Belief. \emdash \par \par 1. In the Early Church. Unitarianism has accompanied Christianity from the beginning, at least as one form of its faith. Unitarians maintain that their faith is that of the early Church as taught by Jesus Christ and his apostles. They appeal to Jesus as the supreme teacher of Christianity, finding in his word and character the essence of the Gospel. They state their chief tenets in the language of the New Test. without note or comment, "To us there is but one God, the Father;" "This is life eternal to know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." They hold that the doctrine of the Trinity, so startling to Jews trained in the worship of one God and expecting a Messiah of human lineage, would have required a statement more explicit than any found in the Bible record. ThLVAL-ey hold that the doctrine, at best, is an inference from texts of obscure meaning or doubtful genuineness, every one of which is separately abandoned by prominent Trinitarian scholars as not expressly\par teaching the doctrine; while the Roman Catholic holds it on the authority of the Church, deeming it not clearly taught in the Bible.\par \par Unitarians consider the doctrine of the Trinity a gradual development, as Gentiles came into the Church and subjected the Gospel to the influence of Oriental speculations and Greek philosophy. The followers of Zoroaster and Plato, teaching the eternal antagonism of spirit and matter, filled the time with speculations concerning God as a superior essence creating the world by inferior divinities. In the Platonic doctrine of the Logos began the gradual deification of Jesus, consummated only by votes of successive councils of the 4 th century. A succession of testimonies meanwhile show the continued existence of faith in the undivided unity of God. In the latter half of the 2 nd century, Justin Martyr says, "Some there are among ourselves who admit that Jesus is Christ while holding him to be man of men." Still later, Tertullian says, "Common people think of Christ as a man." About the year 200 Tertullian was himself the first to introduce into Christian theology the word "Trinitas." The unity of God was expressly taught by a sect called the "Monarchians." Some held that God the Father himself was born and suffered in human form, and hence were called "Patripassians." Of these were Beryllus, bishop of Bostria in Arabia; Praxeas, who came from Asia Minor to Rome; Noetus, of Smyrna; and, still later, Sabellius, a presbyter in the Church about 250, the most original and profound mind among the Monarchians. The teachings of Sabellius are variously represented by friend and foe, and are not now very accurately to be known. He had followers as late as the 5 th century in Mesopotamia and in Rome. Others held that Christ was in nature purely human, but exalted by his LVAL.superior measure of divine wisdom and inspiration. Of these were Theodotus of Byzantium, Artemon of Rome, and Paul of Samosata. This noted teacher, bishop of Antioch from the year\par 260, makes prominent the human personality of Christ, teaching that "Christ was a man," "exalted to peculiar union with the divine nature by the illumination of divine wisdom." Deposed in 269, his name became. a synonym for heresy and in the next century the celebrated historian Eusebius confirms the testimony that he taught "that Christ was in nature but a common man." Speculation and controversy thus went forward until, in the beginning of the 4 th century, the relation of God and Christ had become a question of substance or resemblance. In the famous theological struggle over the terms homo and homousian, whether God and Christ were of the same or only similar nature, Arius maintained that Jesus was a created being. He was opposed by the bishop Alexander, aided by Athanasius; and the controversy waxed hot and opinion was divided, until Constantine, recently come to the throne as the first Christian emperor, summoned in 325 the Council of Nice, in which the angry storm of the three hundred theologians was allayed and Arius and his doctrine condemned. The historian Eusebius naively says, "The emperor succeeded in bringing them into similarity of judgment and conformity of opinion on all controverted points." For another century controversy continued as to the Holy Spirit, the double nature of Christ, and Mary as Mother of God, all of which were gradually settled by majority votes of successive councils, culminating in the Creed long attributed to Athanasius, but now believed to have been written a hundred years after his death.\par \par In surveying the opinions of the early Church, it thus becomes clear that Unitarianism existed from the beginning; that the belief in the Trinity and the Deity of Christ was three or four centuries gradually forming; that during this period the range of opinions concerning Jesus was LVAL/as widely varied as at the present time; that two or three hundred years after the death of Christ it was still doubtful, and settled only by the majority of a council, whose decision was secured through the influence of a newly converted emperor, whether the Christian Church should regard Jesus-as a person in the Godhead, or, as the apostle Peter declared him, a man approved by signs and wonders which God did by him. 'The Unitarian deems the whole question a corruption of the pure Gospel by philosophic speculation, and seeks, as the essence of Christianity, the practical religion\par taught by Jesus Christ of love to God and man. It may be added as a fact of interest, and one significant of the aid rendered to Christianity by this branch of the Church, that one of the chief lights of Arianism, the Gothic Ulfiias, born near the Lower Danube at about the time of the Council of Nice, and consecrated bishop 'at the age of thirty, devoting himself to the religious 'and social development of his people, familiar with the Latin,-Greek, and Gothic languages, rendered his name forever to be honored by his translation of the Bible into his native tongue, which at once helped to give lasting form to the Gothic language aid to perpetuate Christianity among the Gothic people. For four centuries the Goths were accompanied in their migrations by this sacred national work, portions of which still re-' main in the University Library of Upsal, in Sweden. The sect of the Nestorians, also, who may fairly be counted on the Arian side, at about the 7 th century, were the first to carry Christianity to the far East, into Persia and China.\par \par 2. The Reformation reveals Unitarianism existing, and awakens it to renewed life. It accompanied Protestantism from its cradle, as it had accompanied primitive Christianity. Before Luther's death it had appeared in Italy, Hungary, Poland, Switzerland, Germany, and England. In the contest with the pope and is hierarchy, the majority of Protestants, absorbed in the struggle for LVAL0freedom, accepted, unchallenged, as their hereditary belief, the substance of doctrine of the Romish Church. Yet in every Protestant confession the doctrine of the Trinity is reiterated as if on the defensive; while the testimonies of Calvin, Melancthon, and others against the Unitarian heresy reveal its strength. Among the many who, before and after the Reformation, bore witness to their faith in persecution and death, Unitarianism has its own list of confessors and martyrs. In bishop Mant's History of Ireland is a brief account of Adam Duff, who for' his denial of the Trinity was burned alive, near Dublin, in 1326. The early theological repositories make record of a priest, William Taylour, put to death as an Arian, in England in 1422. Conspicuous among the Reformers were the Unitarians Servetus and the Socini, Michael Servetus, born in Villanueva, Aragon, in 1509, the year of' Calvin's birth, while studying law at Tonlouse, heard of the contest, left his home and\par his profession, and sought the Reformers AEcolampadius, at Basle, Bucer and Capito, at Strasburg, and Calvin, at Paris. His bold genius pushed past them in seeking a rejuvenated Christianity. Skilled in mathematics and the Oriental languages, in law, medicine, and theology, his fearless spirit of inquiry and eager thirst for truth gave the highest interest to his religious speculations. "Your trinity," he declares, "is a product of subtlety and madness. The Gospel knows nothing of it. The old fathers are strangers to these vain distinctions. It is from the school of Greek sophists that you, Athanasius, prince of tritheists, have borrowed it." Such sentiments provoked bitter hostility. Zwingli denounced him as "that wicked and cursed Spaniard;" Calvin spoke of him as the "frantic" Servetus, who "has thrown all things into confusion." When Servetus published his Seven Books on the Errors of the Trinity, and his more noted work on the Restoration of Christianity, severely criticizing Calvin's views, his doom was sealed. On his flight froLVAL1m persecutors at Vienne, as he stopped at Geneva, Calvin caused his arrest and trial. The flames of Protestant persecution dismissed into eternity, through frightful agony, this brave soul that dared assert the absolute unity of God. The leading Reformers expressed no regret, but silently or openly approved it. See SERVETUS.\par \par Laelius Socinus, born in Siena in 1525, of distinguished ancestry, familiar with Biblical languages, an able critic, a member of the famous Vicenza Secret Religious Society of Forty, on their dispersal fled to France, England, Poland, and at last to Zurich, where he died at the age of thirty-seven. A student rather than reformer or controversialist, he yet left behind him a deep impress of his free and original thought. His nephew, Faustus Socinus, born also in Siena in 1539, was expelled from Italy at twenty, studied at Basle, visited Poland and Transylvania, where, carrying forward his uncle's thought and work until his death in 1604, he became the more active and noted leader of Socinianism (q.v.).\par \par Less conspicuous, but with these, may be named in Germany, Cellarius, Capito, Johann Denk, Sebastian Frank, and the scholarly Ludwig Hetzer, one of the earliest, who, for writing against the Deity of Christ, was imprisoned by the magistrates of Constance, and suffered death in 1529; also Claudius of Savoy, George Blandrata in Transylvania, Gonesius and Farnovius in Poland, Stephen Dolet, friend and disciple of Servetus, who, at the age of thirty-seven, was tried for heresy and burned alive in Paris in 1546; and John Valentine Gentilis, who preached in France and Switzerland, and suffered death at Berne in 1566, saying, as he laid his head on the block, "Many have suffered for the glory of the Son, but none have died for the glory and supremacy of the Father."\par \par 3. In Italy, before the Reformation, the doctrine of the Trinity encountered dissent, the advocates of which were driven from the country, or were attracted by the larger freedom farther North. TLVAL2hus went forth many to Switzerland, Germany, Hungary, and Poland; among whom were the famous Socini and the celebrated preacher Bernardo Occhino. Hundreds also were put to death, among whom were James Palaeologus, burned at Rome, and Sega and Guirlanda, drowned at Venice. It was in this interest of reforming the faith that the society was formed in Vicenza, of forty persons of talents and learning, discarding the Trinity, meeting in secret, of whom, after 1546, many were imprisoned and others suffered death. From that time there has been no recognized or organized Unitarian body of any strength in Italy, although it is believed there are many who hold this faith. The advocate Magnani has for years conducted Unitarian service at Pisa. The astronomer Filopanti has lectured in Bologna, Milan, Rome, and Naples upon Channing, the distinguished American Unitarians leader, of whom further mention will be made below. Professor Ferdinando Bracciforti has translated Channing's works into Italian, and has for years conducted Unitarian service at Florence and at Reggio. Professor Sbabaro, in the Rivisa Europa of October, 1879, argues that Channing supplies the form and spirit of the religion needed by the craving heart of thoughtful Italy. He there says, "I have made choice of Channing as the most eloquent witness and an irrefragable proof of the new evolution of Christian thought in\par the world, and of the reform which is in process of initiation in human religiousness; because in the story of his career, and in the fortunes of his books, in the marvel of their rapid diffusion in all corners of the civilized earth, is to be seen the most luminous and triumphant proof of the reality of that movement which is inwardly transforming European society, and bringing it, little by little, to worship under the roof of a new temple, that Church really catholic, whose frontal shall bear, without untruth, the inscription 'To the One God,' which Mazzini hailed on the facades of the Unitarian churches of Hungary."\par \paLVAL3r 4. In France, reporting two million Protestants, since the martyrdom of Dolet in Paris, no specific Unitarian movement has been known. But during the last fifty years, in the Reformed Church, which is mostly Trinitarian, has been a growing liberal party; among whom the Coquerels, father and son, Martin Paschoud, Fontanes, Colani, Vincent, and the present liberals Parisian pastor Auguste Dide have substantially represented Unitarianism. Their papers were formerly Le Reformateur, and Le Disciple de Jesus, and at present La Renaissance. Says Renan, in a brilliant essay on Channing in 1863, "France has rejected Protestantism. She is the most orthodox country in the world, because she is the most indifferent in religious matters."\par \par 5. In Switzerlaad, where the early Unitarian martyrs (Hetzer, at Zurich, in 1529, and Servetus, at Genesa, in 1553) paid the penalty of their lives, the spirit of purity in Church as in State has prevailed; and, with) a, separate formal organization, Unitarian sentiments, were the first, have been steadily held. The Swiss Church has been committed to no dogmatic declaration, it only "to preach purely and fully the Word of God is maintained in the Holy Scriptures." The Genevan church, in general, denies the equality of the Son with 1 h1 X Father, and the Godhead of the Messiah. The correspondent of the Evangelical Christendom, Feb. 1,1875, says," The. Grand Council of Basle, on the question of the Deity of Christ, on May 2, 1871, decided in the negative by a vote of sixty-three voices against forty-eight." Stienne Chastel, professor of ecclesiastical history at Geneva, is among Channing's most ardent admirers. French Switzerland has itself produced two great liberals, Samuel Vincent and Alexander Vinet, who were largely in sympathy with Unitarian thought.\par \par \par 6. Holland, like Switzerland and America, always hospitable to those who are exiles for conscience, has never been wanting in representatives of a free theology. Of its two and a half million ProtesLVAL4tants, about four fifths belong to the Reformed Church; which, again, has its two parties-of Orthodox and Moderns. Since the burning of Flekwyk, a Dutch Baptist, for his denial of the Trinity in 1569, there has been continued progress. In a popular religious work by Dr. Matthes, it is a significant fact that the chapter on God has no allusion to the Trinity; but at the close occurs a foot-note in which, with the calm spirit of the historian rather than that of the controversialist, he speaks of the antiquated doctrine of the Trinity." The creed adopted at the Synod of Dort in 1618 has given place to the acceptance of the Bible as the standard of faith, together with the toleration and diversity of sentiment which are sure to follow.\par \par 7. Germany, that gave the world, along with Luther, some of the first Unitarian reformers, during the succeeding three and a half centuries, without any distinctly organized Unitarian movement, has, with its noted scholarship and philosophy, produced all shades of rationalism, from. extreme orthodoxy to extreme unbelief. In South Germany, governmental statistics of 1861 report 325,0000 Unitarians. Says Dr. Beard, "The Trinity subsists among the learned of Germany only in name. The patristical doctrine has been attenuated to a shadow or reduced to nothing; if brought down into scriptural form it is abandoned; if converted into three 'somewhat,' it is no longer such as the creeds declare or their advocates recognize. The doctrine once taught and held for an essential article of Christian faith is virtually repudiated and silently disowned." A translation of Channing's complete works, by Sydow and Schultze, was published in Berlin in 1850. After that, the chevalier Bunsen, in his God in History, speaks of Channing as "a grand Christian saint and man of God-nay, also a prophet of the Christian consciousness regarding the future." The Protestanten-Verein of Germany, established at Eisenach in 1865, a free Union Association, holding annual conference sessions, though LVAL5not organized on a dogmatic basis and not professedly Unitarian, welcomes and cherishes fellowship and sympathy with the Unitarians of England and America.\par \par 8. In Poland the Unitarian faith early took a firm hold and spread rapidly, aided by refugees who there found a hospitable asylum. Yet it was not without persecution at the start. In 1539, in the market-place in Cracow, was burned Katharine Vogel at the age of eighty, wife of a goldsmith, and alderman, condemned for denying the Deity of Christ and affirming the divine unity. In 1552 the Bible was translated, chiefly by Unitarian scholars, into the Polish language. Hither came Faustus Socinus, around whom flocked converts from all ranks and classes of society, among them many of the nobility. These, protected from persecution by the privileges of their rank, proved especially favorable to a movement which, more than any other of the time, seemed, destructive of the traditions and prestige of the Romish Church. The prosperous commercial city of Racow, with its large printing establishment publishing many of the best books of the day, became its headquarters. Here was issued the famous Racovian Catechism, which became widely known and influential, and was afterwards signally burned in London. King Sigismund II became a convert, and during his reign this party of reformers grew strong enough to form a church of their own. For a, century it flourished, till, in 1660, prince Casimir, a cardinal and a Jesuit, coming to the throne, with unrelenting persecution burned the homes of its adherents, drove them into silence, exile, or death. So effectually did he exterminate it, and with it the spirit of liberty in the state as in religion, that it may fairly be said that Jesuit tyranny at once obliterated a church and a nation.\par \par 9. In Transylvania, Unitarianism was earliest declared by Francis David, first Unitarian pastor and bishop; and afterwards by Socinus and by Georgio Blandrata, an Italian from Piedmont, who became court physician toLVAL6 Sigismund. In 1540 David preached to a multitude in the open streets of Thorda, asserting the Father to be the only God. By his preaching from place to place large numbers were converted, including the king himself, and nearly the whole city of Klausenburg, and many\par Unitarian churches were established. While persecution was rife in the rest of Europe, Transylvania was early conspicuous for religious liberty. Four forms of Christianity the Roman Catholic, the Reformed Evangelical, the Lutheran, and the Unitarian were recognized by law with equal rights, with penalties for those only who should infringe the rights of others. Under this broad tolerance, Unitarianism, which, was, indeed, instrumental in producing it, gained a strong foothold, which, under subsequent persecution, it has never wholly lost. Unhappily, the early tolerance was of short duration. The bishop, Francis David, himself became a martyr, this faith, dying in prison in November, 1579, an event, the tercentenary anniversary of which, in 1879, was celebrated in the land of his martyrdom. The Unitarians of Transylvania are said to have at one time possessed four hundred church buildings, eleven colleges, and three universities. Through the last two centuries the iron hand of Austrian and Jesuit oppression has largely dispossessed them of churches, schools, lands, and even of civil as well as religious rights. They were robbed of their churches, which were transferred to the Jesuits. During the present century, they are regaining privileges and strength, and are reported as having a population of 60,000, now increasing, with 126 churches; a university at Klausenburg with 12 professors and 300 students; two smaller colleges at Thorda and St. Kerezstur; a newspaper, The Seedsower; and many distinguished scholars and literary men, preachers and civilians, in their ranks. Their Church government is that of Episcopacy, strongly modified by Congregationalism, their present bishop being Joseph Ferencz. A special intimacy of fellowship has rLVAL7ecently been cherished and growing between them and the Unitarians of England and America. With their aid the translation of Channing's writings has been widely circulated among the people of Hungary of all sects. 10. England, though later than the Continent in receiving the Unitarian faith, was visited by Occhino, Socinus, and other reformers. In 1548, the priest John Asheton was cited to Lambeth for Arian sentiments, and saved his life only by recanting. Under a similar charge occurred several martyrdoms. George von Parris, a devout German surgeon, for denying the Trinity was burned at Smithfield in 1551, during the brief reign of Edward VI. During the reigns of Mary and Elizabeth, Hammont, Lewes, Ket, Wright, and many others met a similar fate. In the reign of James I, in 1611, the Unitarian Bartholomew\par \par Legate became the last of the Smithfield martyrs; and in 1612, at Lichfield, Edward Wightman, a Unitarian Baptist, was the last martyr who was burned for heresy in England. In the time of Cromwell, John Biddle formed in London the first English Unitarian Church, and gained the title of the father of the English Unitarians, but perished in prison for his faith. In 1640 the synods of London and York deemed it worth while to issue a special canon against Socinianism. And in 1652 the Racovian Catechism, which had been translated into English and actively circulated, was burned in London. To such strength and influence had Socinianism grown there during the century that in 1655 Dr. Owen writes of it, "The evil is at the door; there is not a city or town, scarce a village, in England wherein some of this poison is not poured forth." Before the close of the 17 th century, London had houses of Unitarian worship. Milton was an Arian, as has been proved since his death. Sir Isaac Newton is now known to have written anonymously on the Unitarian side. Locke wrote a work on The Reasonableness of Christianity, which is substantially Unitarian. The scholarly Lardner, author of The Credibility of the GosLVAL8pel History, one of the ablest defenses ever written, held Unitarian opinions. That these views had notably invaded the Established Church is testified by Palmer in 1705 writing that there were "troops of Unitarian and Socinian writers, and not a Dissenter among them." Rev. Thomas Emlyn preached the Unitarian faith in Dublin and London. The Act of Uniformity in 1662 expelled from the Church of England two thousand ministers, mostly Calvinistic Presbyterians. Free from dogmatic tests, many of these ministers and their followers gradually became Arminian, and ultimately Unitarian. After the passing of the Toleration Act in 1689 legalizing Nonconformity, the way was opened by which the prevailing faith largely passed into Unitarianism. Half the Unitarian churches in England today are of this Presbyterian origin. Until 1813 the law made it blasphemy to speak against the Trinity; but a more tolerant public sentiment had long rendered the law a dead letter. Unitarianism as an organized movement was most distinctly initiated by Dr. Theophilus Lindsey, who in 1774 resigned his charge in the Established Church and became pastor of a Unitarian congregation in Essex Street, London. A still more important apostle was the noted Dr. Joseph Priestley.\par \par Born in 1733, educated a Calvinist, distinguished for his scholarship and scientific attainments, in 1755 he became pastor of a small Dissenting congregation in Suffolk, and a conspicuous champion of the humanitarian theology. Believing in the Bible as a divine revelation, and in the miracles as credentials of Christ's authority, while continuing to hold some tenets of Calvinism, he rejected the Trinity and vicarious atonement as unscriptural, wrote to show how these dogmas came in as later corruptions of primitive Christianity, and held that Christ himself claimed to be simply a man. His views brought upon him obloquy and persecution; and, at the hands of a mob losing his books, manuscripts, and philosophical instruments, he was virtually banished from his LVAL9native land. In 1792 he removed to America, gave courses of lectures in Philadelphia, which added fresh stimulus to the rising Unitarianism, but retired for his closing years to the small neighboring village of Northumberland, where he died in 1804. In 1813 the Unitarians were first placed by law on an equality with other Dissenters. For some years sharp controversy continued as to the proprietary rights in certain Church properties held by them, but claimed by orthodox Dissenters. These claims were finally silenced in favor of the Unitarian occupants by the Dissenters Chapels Act of 1844. At the present time there are reported about 350 Unitarian churches in England, mostly Congregational in Church government, and of which one fourth have been formed within the last twenty-five years. In Northern Ireland there is a Unitarian population of about 10,000, still Presbyterians in Church government.\par \par In Scotland there are in the larger cities and towns about ten Unitarian churches. In that country occurred the last execution for blasphemy against the Trinity in the person of a young student, Thomas Aikenhead, hanged near Edinburgh in 1696. The present Unitarian Church of Edinburgh, originally strictly Calvinistic, having adopted the principle of free inquiry, became Arian and finally humanitarian under the pastorate of Dr. Southwood Smith in 1812. In Wales about thirty-four churches of this faith are reported; and there are several strong societies at Montreal, Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, and other places in the\par British colonies in Canada, India, and Australia. The English Unitarians maintain a missionary college in Manchester, a Presbyterian college at Carnlarthen which educates Unitarian and Independent ministers, and the larger unsectarian institution of Manchester New College, removed recently to London. In their interest are conducted several weekly religious papers: The Inquirer, The Christian Life, The Unitarian Herald, and the new periodical The Modern Review. Their representative mLVAL:issionary society is the British and Foreign Unitarian Association, formed in London, May 25, 1825. Among-the leading writers maybe named (besides Priestley, Lindsey, and Belsham early in the century), more recently, Revs. John James Tayler, Charles Beard, John Hamilton Thom, and James Martinean, one of the greatest living exponents of the higher philosophy of the spirit versus modern materialism. It may be truthfully added that the movement of English Unitarianism is outgrowing the legalism and literalism of a philosophy which narrowed its earlier faith, and is reaching a broader and deeper spirituality.\par \par 11. In America, the free inquiry and open field of thought from the beginning have been favorable to Unitarian views, and the movement for spiritual liberty found special stimulus in the public sentiment following the Revolution. The Pilgrims, bringing to America the parting injunction of their pastor, John Robinson, of Leyden, that there was "more light to break out from God's Word," organized the first Congregational churches in New England at Plymouth, Salem, and Boston upon covenants so broad and undogmatic that these have required no change in accepting the Unitarian faith. Without doubt, the prevailing sentiment was mainly Calvinistic at the start, yet with a measure of Arminianism intermingled that grew imperceptibly, until for the last century and a half the progress of Unitarian sentiments may be distinctly traced. Dr. Gay, of Hingham, ordained in 1717, is supposed to have been the first American preacher of Unitarianism. Before the Revolution, many lawyers, physicians, tradesmen, and farmers were Unitarians, according to the testimony of the elder president Adams, himself a Unitarian; and not the laity only, but many of the clergy, prominent among whom was Mayhew, of the West Church, Boston. In 1768 the famous Hopkins prepared a sermon especially against what he deemed the heresy of the Boston ministers.\par \par In 1783, under the lead of their young minister, Rev. James FreemLVAL;an, then recently ordained, the Episcopal Church of King's Chapel in Boston expunged from its Book of Common Prayer all reference to the Trinity and the worship of Christ, and thus became the first distinctively Unitarian Church in America. Its liturgy and Church organization continue substantially the same at the present time, Priestley's coming gave fresh impulse to this faith, and the writings of Lindsey and Belsham found their way hither. In a letter to Dr. Lindsey, in London, Rev. James Freeman writes that there were "many churches in which the worship was strictly Unitarian, and some of New England's most eminent clergymen openly avowed that creed." In 1801 the oldest Puritan Church in America, the original Church of the Mayflower, established at Plymouth in 1620, by a large majority vote declared itself Unitarian; and with no change in its covenant, using the identical statement of faith drawn up by its Pilgrim founders, it today accepts the Unitarian name and fellowship. Free from restraints of dogmatic creeds and tests, the New England Congregational churches were especially hospitable to inquiry and progress. By imperceptible degrees change came. In 1805 the Unitarian Rev. Dr. Ware was made professor of divinity at Harvard University, Cambridge. This fact excited opposition and controversy. In 1815 a controversy between Dr. Channing and Dr. Worcester resulted in open rupture between the Trinitarian and Unitarian Congregationalists; In 1816 the Divinity School at Cambridge was established by Unitarians. Harvard College was in their hands, and chiefly by their influence has maintained the undenominational position which it claims today. For ten years, from 1815 to 1825, the controversy waxed hot; lines of separation were drawn, and churches and men took sides. As the churches divided the majority carried their name and property to Trinitarian or Unitarian ranks. Meanwhile the seceding minorities organized anew on one side or the other. Thus the ancient parishes, each coextensive with its town,LVAL< were divided; and in many New England towns the oldest church, retaining its ancient Congregational liberty and usages, became in faith and fellowship Unitarian.\par \par \par II. Organization and Present Condition. \emdash During the eventful decade just reviewed, Rev. William Ellery Channing (born in Newport, R.I., April 7, 1780), then in the prime of manhood, with early ripeness of spiritual fruitage, became, by eloquence of tongue and pen, the conspicuous leader of the Unitarian movement. At the ordination of Jared Sparks, in 1819, as minister of the Unitarian Church in Baltimore, his discourse expounding Unitarian Christianity made a profound impression. His intense dislike and dread of sectarianism gave to his preaching an emphasis of individualism and spiritual liberty. Never permitting himself to become the devotee of a sect, to him Unitarianism owes much of its freedom from sectarian and dogmatic trammels. Less a controversialist than a devout and practical preacher, he fearlessly, yet reverently, sought the truth, brought into prominence the spiritual elements of human nature, subjected religious systems to the test of the soul's best instincts and sentiments, and made it his supreme aim to kindle the aspiration for holiness. His testimony was chiefly borne to the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man, to the worth of human nature and blessedness of human life, to the dignity of labor and the elevation of the working classes, to spiritual freedom and the divine mission and authority of Jesus Christ. He has come to be recognized by all sects as one of the foremost of American preachers and writers, a leading champion of religious and civil freedom, of education and philanthropy, a seeker for truth, a lover of mankind, and a devoted advocate of Christianity. In April, 1880, the centenary of his birth was celebrated in London and in several of the larger cities in America, many persons of other denominations joining, and the corner-stone was laid of a memorial church at Newport, hisLVAL= birthplace. See CHANNING.\par \par The division in the Church was not of Unitarian seeking. The Unitarian leaders were willing, in the large fellowship and free faith of Congregationalism, to maintain the unity of the Church unbroken. They would have borne their testimony to truth as they saw it, urging all others freely to do the same. The necessity of separation was enforced by fellowship withdrawn, controverted opinions put forward as tests, and by charges made that rendered it impossible to stay. After the break had come, it was with no desire to build a new sect or to prolong the bitterness of controversy it was to do their own part in the\par vineyard that the Unitarians went apart and worked in their own way. But, from the first, their attitude has never ceased to be that Church unity is to be found, not in identity of opinion, but in personal freedom and in brotherly love; and they have declared their readiness on this broad basis to join in fellowship with all who claim to hold the Christian faith and who prove their discipleship by consistent lives. In the exercise of freedom there have always been within the Unitarian fold varieties of individual opinion, while in the same freedom a few have gone into the Trinitarian household and others into a position antichristian or non-Christian. On May 24,1825, was formed in Boston "The American Unitarian Association." Its first article declares its purpose to be "to diffuse the knowledge and promote the interests of pure Christianity." It was incorporated in 1848, with the right to hold trust funds, and has at the present time about $200,000. Without ecclesiastical authority, it is purely a missionary organization, using annual contributions from the churches for publishing and distributing books and tracts, sustaining missionaries, aiding feeble churches, and planting new ones. Its operations are mainly in the home field of America. For forty years its activities were small, the missionary spirit of the denomination being checked by dread of theLVAL> sectarian spirit, and the benevolent gifts of the people, taking more the direction of education and general philanthropy. But within the last fifteen years its income has greatly increased, in 1866 and 1872 exceeding $100,000, although it by no means receives all of the denominational gifts for religious missionary purposes. On April 5, 1865, a convention, consisting of the pastor and two delegates from each church or parish in the Unitarian denomination, met in the city of New York and organized a National Conference, "to the end of energizing and stimulating the denomination with which they are connected to the largest exertions in the cause of Christian faith and work." Its preamble declared that "the great opportunities and demands for Christian labor and consecration at this time increase our sense of the obligations of all disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ to prove their faith by self-denial, and by the devotion of their lives and possessions to the service of God and the building-up of the kingdom of his Son." it is a representative body of pastors and delegates, chosen and meeting biennially, purely advisory in\par \par character, for counsel and fellowship. Its meetings are held in September at Saratoga, open to the public, and are steadily increasing in the numbers attending, also in interest and in practical purpose and value. Since its formation, the Unitarian churches of America have given more for missionary purposes than in all their previous history. Within smaller and more convenient territorial districts have been formed also local conferences with more frequent meetings, which have been successful in fostering fellowship and co-operation, and a more devout and earnest religious life. Without other ecclesiastical authority, the government of the churches and their usages and modes of worship are purely Congregational. The rites of baptism and of the Lord's supper are recognized and observed, not as having mystic value or binding authority, but as having spiritual worth and influLVAL?ence. The denominational Year-book for 1890 reports 407 churches, of which 240 are in New England, chiefly in Massachusetts, and 100 mainly in the West; 510 ministers, 20 local conferences, besides a number of organizations of purely benevolent aim and purpose. Two theological schools are sustained-one at Cambridge, founded in 1816, having six professors and about twenty students, and a library of 18,500 volumes, while the large University library of 240,000 volumes is also open to its use. About $140,000 have recently been added to its endowment fund to increase its corps of professors. The Theological School at Meadville, Pa., was formed in 1844, and has four resident professors, 18,000 volumes in its library, and about thirty students. The periodicals of the denomination are the Unitarian Review, the Christian Register, now in its fifty-ninth year; The Dayspring, a Sunday school paper, all published in Boston, while several smaller organs are published elsewhere. The denomination is rich in its literature, especially in the direction of practical and devout religious sentiment. The works of Channing, now widely circulated among English-speaking people all over the world, are translated in part or entire into the Dutch and German, French, Italian, Swedish, Hungarian, Icelandic, and Russian languages. There may also be mentioned as leading Unitarian preachers and writers, Henry Ware (father and son), James Walker, Theodore Parker, Edmund H. Sears, Orville Dewey, William H. Furness, Henry W. Bellows, James Freeman Clarke, Frederick H. Hedge, and Andrew P. Peabody. Unitarian writers are also largely represented in the walks of history and literature in America as in England. It may\par \par be added that Unitarian sentiments are held substantially by "Universalists," "Christians," "Hicksite Quakers," and "Progressive Friends."\par \par III. Doctrinal Views. \emdash In seeking the present form of Unitarian faith, it is needless to recount the speculations of earlier times. The tenets of Sabellius aLVAL@nd Paul of Samosata and Arius, also of Servetus and the Socini, in their special forms sharing the crudities of contemporaneous thought, have largely passed away. They are not to be quoted as authority. They are simply in the line of historical progress, agreeing only in the single fundamental thought that God is one, and Jesus Christ a created and subordinate being. Unitarianism is characteristically not a fixed dogmatic statement, but a movement of ever-enlarging faith. It welcomes inquiry, progress, and diversity of individual thought in the unity of spiritual fellowship. With faith in the unity of God as its key-note, it asserts the unity of all truth in nature, history, experience, and the Bible, the unity of the Church as based on character, not on dogma; and the unity of spiritual life in this world and the next. Its leading principles are, first, the freedom of every individual soul to seek the highest truth and to obey it; and, second, that character is the test of Christian discipleship. Unitarians declare life, not dogma, to be the essence of Christianity. They deem Christianity to be essentially a reasonable religion, according with the truths of nature, instructing reason and appealing to it as interpreter and judge. They hold it to be a progressive religion; that its principles, like the axioms of mathematics, are eternally true, but that its germs unfold with the increasing intelligence of mankind. Right belief they deem important for right living, and they emphasize the value of righteousness as establishing the kingdom of God on earth, and as alone fitting the soul for his kingdom above. They refuse to formulate their belief in fixed creeds of ecclesiastical and exclusive authority; because these never settle open questions, but only' start fresh controversy; because they limit inquiry and hinder progress; and because they make dogma instead of character, and opinion instead of spiritual purpose, the bases and tests of fellowship. Yet, while refusing\par \par any authoritative creedLVALA statement, there is an unwritten consensus of faith in which Unitarians are substantially agreed. They believe in the one God as the Creator of the universe and Father of all souls; a Father who wills man's welfare, desiring that not even the least shall perish; the Fatherly Friend in all worlds, who does not wait for forgiveness and favor to be purchased, but freely pours forth blessing on all who will accept it; Father of the sinner as of the saint, seeking every wanderer with his pursuing love, and punishing the erring not for his pleasure, but for their profit, that they may become partakers of his holiness. Unitarians believe in man as naturally neither, saint nor sinner; that his nature is not corrupt and ruined, but undeveloped and incomplete; that he inherits tendencies to good as well as to evil, and that he is sinful only as he knowingly and willfully does wrong; that he needs regeneration, the unfolding and renewal of his spiritual nature, which he experiences through obedience to the truth, under that divine influence which is called the Holy Spirit; that, as a child of the Infinite, allied to the Supreme Goodness by ties that cannot be sundered, having in him a spark of divinity that makes his ultimate redemption an inextinguishable hope, he yet needs to be taught and inspired of God, but with the aid of the divine grace, which is his birthright privilege, he is able to climb to celestial summits. Unitarians believe in Jesus Christ, as the four evangelists describe him, as at once Son of God and Son of man. They care little for metaphysical speculation about the mystery of his nature, but emphasize his word and life as a practical help for human salvation. They hold that he is our Savior as he becomes to us the Light of the World, the Fountain of Living Water, and the Bread of Life; our Savior by illustrating the eternal principles of right, inspiring his followers to holiness, and imparting to them true life more abundantly; our Savior so far as lie leads and helps us to be large-hearteLVALd, truth seeking, pure, loving, and devout; that he came into the world to bear testimony to the truth, and was here not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and that he proved himself humanity's Lord and Leader by his divine helpfulness. Under the influence of elevated views of man's spiritual nature, affirming his innate power of apprehending religious truth, Unitarianism, in declaring the humanity of Christ, does not bring Jesus down, but lifts\par \par humanity up. It asserts that Jesus was purely human only to show that human nature itself is, in the phrase of Athanasius, Homoiousion, of the same substance with God, and that Jesus is the best expression of that divine humanity which is the birthright and promised destiny of all souls. While they are jealous of ecclesiastical authority or dictation, and perpetually refuse to limit their belief by formula, the Unitarians have, in public assembly of the American Unitarian Association, and in representative meetings of their national and local conferences, repeatedly reaffirmed their attitude of Christian discipleship, and shown that they hold themselves to be a body of believers upon the Christian foundation and within the Christian Church. They deem the mind of Christ the best index of Christianity. For the sources of Unitarian thought, therefore, they refer to Unitarian literature, more especially to the New Test., and supremely to the word and life of Jesus Christ.\par \par R. R. S. \par \par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par \par \par \par \par } LVALhC{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 UNITARIANS\par \par Unitarians\par \par a general name for those bodies of professed Christians who do not fully recognize the equality of the three Persons in the Godhead. The essential errors of Unitarianism, as evangelical Trinitarians regard them, are a denial (a) of the true divinity of Jesus Christ; and (b) of the inherent and total moral depravity of human nature. These two are claimed to be not simply dogmas, but facts sustained by observation and history as well as by the plain and constant teachings of the Holy Scriptures. They are intimately correlated to each other; for if Christ be not truly divine, then there is no adequate atonement for human sin; and, conversely; if man be not essentially a sinner, he needs no such divine Savior. Hence our Lord in treating with Nicodemus announced the necessity of a radical, moral change as the first and all-important condition of Christianity (John 3:1-13). Accordingly the doctrine of a spiritual and fundamental regeneration will be found to be the true touchstone of all evangelical orthodoxy, and those branches of Christendom who lay most stress upon it prove to be the most efficient in the moral renovation of mankind. Humanitarianism alone can never be more than a negative and powerless, because a really false, view of the actual condition and relation of the race as respects their Creator and Redeemer. See HUMANITARIANS.\par \par In the same summary manner, Unitarians reject, as being to them unphilosophical and unintelligible, the divinity of the Holy Spirit, a doctrine which all who have passed through the pangs of true contrition into the joys of conscious pardon and heavenly communion find so comforting and necessary to the explanation of their own religious experience (Rom 5; 1:1-5:21; 1 Cor 2:10-14). See TRINITY.\par \par While pointing out these, as we de LVAL" em, radical defects in Unitarianism as a system of Christian faith, we nevertheless are bound to bear witness to the literary culture, social refinement, and moral virtues which Unitarians as a body have exhibited, and to their amenity and ameliorating influence in the defense of civil rights and the general cause of philanthropy. These we attribute, however, not so much to their creed as to the hereditary effect of early Puritan training and the power of a sound Christianity diffused through the community in the midst of which they live and operate. See UNITARIANISM.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par \par \par } bLVALt{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 SAADHS\par \par Saadhs,\par \par a sect in Hindostan who have rejected Hindu idolatry, substituting for it a species of deism. They are found chiefly at Delhi, Agra, Jyepore, and Furruckhabad. Their name implies Pure, or Puritans. The sect originated in A.D. 1658, with a person named Birbhan. They have no temples, but assemble at stated periods, more especially every full moon, in private houses, or in adjoining courts set apart for this purpose. They wear white garments, use no pigments, nor sectarian marks upon their forehead, and have no chaplets or rosaries or jewels.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par } {\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 SA, MANOEL DE\par \par Sa, Manoel De,\par \par a Portuguese theologian, was born in 1530 at Villa do Conde. At the age of fifteen he joined the Order of Jesuits, and became instructor in philosophy, first in the University of Coimbra, and afterwards at Gaudia. Being called to Rome in 1557, he spent his time in teaching, preaching, and editing a new version of the Bible, which appeared during the pontificate of Sixtus V. He also founded many religious houses in Upper Italy. After residing for a time at Genoa, he returned to the convent at Arona, where he died, Dec. 30, 1596. Of his works, we have Aphorismi Confessorum (1595): \emdash Scholia in IV Evangeliis (1596): \emdash Notationes in Totam S. Scripturam (1598).\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par } LVALhF{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Georgia;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\lang1033\f0\fs28 SAADIA\par Saadia(s), Hag-Gaon\par (<START HEBREW>/oaG*h^<END HEBREW>\par , the majesty), ben-Joseph Ha-Pithomi, Ha-Mizri, called in Arabic Said Ibn-Jaakub al-Fayumi, a learned Jewish rabbin, was born at Fayum, in Upper Egypt, A.D. 892. His contemporary was the Arabian historian Masudi. Saadia enjoyed the tuition of an eminent Karaite teacher. Salomon ben-Jerucham, an advantage that gave him an enlargement of mind beyond many of his colleagues in the Babylonian schools, though he never embraced the Karaite doctrines, but contended for the necessity of oral tradition. Saadia was distinguished alike as philosopher, Talmudist, theologian, orator, grammarian, and commentator, and, when little more than twenty-two (915), he published his first production, written in Arabic, entitled "A Refutation of Anan," or Kitab ar-rud ila Anan. This work has not as yet been found, but from Jerucham's rejoinder to it we learn that the import of it was to refute Anan's doctrines, and to show the necessity of the traditional explanation of the Scriptures as contained in the Rabbinic writings. "He urged in support of tradition that the simple words of the Bible are insufficient for the understanding and the performance of the law, since many of the enactments in the Pentateuch are only stated in outline, and require explanation; as in the case of the general prohibition to work on the Sabbath, where the nature of the labor is not defined; that prayer was not at all ordered in the Mosaic law, while the necessity of it is referred to an oral communication; that the advent of the Messiah and the resurrection of the dead are based upon traditional exegesis; and that the history of the Jews is derived entirely from tradition" (comp. Jerucham against Saadia, Alphabet 3, MS.). The rapid stride of Karaism, and the fact that theLVALG Karaites were now almost the sole possessors of the field of Biblical exegesis and grammatical research, while the orthodox Jews were satisfied with taking the Talmud as their rule of faith and practice, determined Saadia to undertake an Arabic translation of the Scriptures, accompanied by short annotations. His Biblical works are, <START HEBREW>la ryspt hrwt<END HEBREW>\par , A Translation of the Pentateuch, which he completed A.D. 915-920. The commentary accompanying this translation, and which Aben-Ezra and Saadia himself mention, has not as yet come to light, but the Arabic version has been published, first with the reputed Chaldee paraphrase of Onkelos, the Jewish Persian version of Jacob Taus, the Hebrew text, and Rashi's commentary (Constantinople, 1546); then in the Paris and London polyglots, with a Latin version: <START HEBREW>hyu?y ryspt<END HEBREW>\par , A Translation of Isaiah, which H.E.S. Paulus published from a MS. in the Bodleian Library (Cod. Pococke, No. 32) of the year 1244, under the title Rabbi Saadioe Phiumensis Versio Jesaioe Arabica, etc. (Jena, 1790-91), and which called forth a number of dissertations and criticizms, as well as corrections, as may be seen in Eichhorn's Allem. Bibliothek der biblischen Literatur, 3, 9 sq., 455 sq.; Michaelis, Neue oriental, Bibliothek, 8, 75 sq.; Gesenius, Der Prophet Jesaia, 1, 1, 88 sq.; Rappaport, in Bikkure Ha-Ittim, 5, 32, etc.; Munk. Notice sur Saadia, etc., p. 29-62: \emdash <START HEBREW>d\'c1ad rdbz ryspt<END HEBREW>\par (<START HEBREW>hr?<END HEBREW>\par ), A Translation of the Psalms of David, with annotations; only parts of this commentary, which is still extant in two MSS. of the Bodleian Library (Cod. Pococke, No. 281 [Uri, No. 39], and Cod, Hunt, No. 416 [Uri, No. 49]), and in one Munich MS., were published by Schnurrer, Hanneberg, and Ewald: \emdash <START HEBREW>bwya ryspt<END HEBREW>\par , A Translation of Job, with annotations, entitled <START HEBREW>lydut!la batk<END HEBREW>\par , The Book of Justification, or TLVALHheodicoea; excerpts of this version, and annotations from the only MS. extant (Bodleian Library, Cod. Hunt. No. 511). were published by Ewald: \emdash <START HEBREW><yry?h ry? lu? wryp<END HEBREW>\par , A Commentary on the Song of Songs, first published by Isaac Akrish (Constantinople, about 1579); then separately by Salomon ben-Moses David, under the title <START HEBREW>hydusr? wrp<END HEBREW>\par (Prague, 1608). Excerpts of the Constantinople edition, with an English translation. were published by Ginsburg in his Historical and Critical Commentary on the Song of Songs (Lond. 1857), p. 36, etc. From quotations made by Aben-Ezra, Kimchi, Salomon ben-Jermecham, and other Jewish expositors and lexicographers, we know that Saadia also wrote commentaries on other books, as on Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, and Esther, as well as the Minor Prophets and the book of Daniel. Of his grammatical and lexical works, only that on the seventy <START GREEK>\par a%pac lego/mena<END GREEK>\par , entitled <START HEBREW>ryspt<NL?hdrpla hfpl /yubsla<END HEBREW>\par , was published by Dukes, and again, with important corrections, by Geiger in his Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift (Leips. 1844), 5, 317-324.\par All these works Saadia wrote before he was thirty-six years of age, i.e. between A.D. 915 and 928. So great was the reputation which these works secured for him that he was called to Sora, in Babylon, where he was appointed gaon of the academy, a dignity which had never before been conferred upon any but the sages of Babylon, who were selected from the learned teachers of their own academies. After occupying this high position a little more than two years (928-930), he was deposed through the jealousy of others and his own unflinching integrity. In the presence of an anti-gaon, he retained his office fir nearly three years more (930-933), when he had to relinquish his dignity altogether. In Baghdad, where he now resided as a private individual from 933 to 937, he wrote against the celebrated Masorite Aaron bLVALIen-Asher, as well as those two philosophical works, viz. the commentary on the Book Jezira, and the treatise commonly entitled <START HEBREW>twurw twnwma<END HEBREW>\par , Faith and Doctrine, which were the foundation of the first system of ethical philosophy among the Jews. This latter work, which is intended to demonstrate the reasonableness of the articles of the Jewish faith, and the untenableness of the dogmas and philosophemes opposed to them, consists of ten sections, and discusses the following subjects:\par section 1, the creation of the world and all things therein;\par 2, the unity of the creation;\par 3, law and revelation;\par 4, obedience to God and disobedience, divine justice and freedom;\par 5, merit and demerit;\par 6, the soul and immortality;\par 7, the resurrection;\par 8, the redemption;\par 9, reward and punishment;\par 10. the moral law.\par The original of this work, entitled <START HEBREW>tanamala batk tadaqtualaw<END HEBREW>\par , sand written in Arabic, has not as yet been published. It is in Ibn-Tibbon's Hebrew translation of it, made in 1186, under the title <START HEBREW>tonWma$h* s@ touD@h@w=<END HEBREW>\par , and published in Constantinople (1562), Amsterdam (1648), Berlin (1789), in Furst's German translation (Leipsic, 1845), and in Ph. Bloch's translation in the Judisches Literaturblatt (Magdeburg, 1878), which shows that this treatise is accessible to scholars. Saadia also wrote an Agenda, containing prayers and hymns, which are specified by F\'fcrst. In the year 937 Saadia was reinstalled in his office as gaon of Sura, and died five years afterwards, in 942. See Rappaport, Biography of Saadia in Bikkure Ha-Ittim (Vienna, 1828), 9, 20-37; Geiger, Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift (Frankf.-on-the-Main, 1835), 1, 182; ibid. (Leipsic, 1844), 5, 261 sq.; Judische Zeitschrift. 1868, p. 309; 1872, p. 4 sq., 172 sq., 255; Munk, Notice sur Rabbi Saadia Gaon et sa Version Arabe, in Cahen's Bible (Paris, 1838), 9, 73 sq.; Ewald u. Dukes, Beitrage zur Geschichte der JLVALZaltesten Auslegung des Alten Testaments (Stuttgart, 1844), 1, 1-115; 2, 5-115; Furst, Bibliotheca Judaica, 1, 266-271; id. Geschichte des Karaerthums von 900-1575 (Leips. 1865), p. 20 sq.; Introduction to the Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon, p. 24 sq.; Steinschneider, Catalogus Librorum Hebr. in Bibliotheca Bodleiana, No. 2156-2224; Gratz, Geschichte der Juden, 5, 268 sq., 479 sq.; Bloch, in Gratz's Monatsschrift, 1870, p. 401 sq.; Turner. Biographical Notices of some of the most Distiguished Jewish Rabbis (N.Y. 1847), p. 63-65, 1851-90; Ueberweg, History of Philosophy (ibid. 1872), 1, 418, 423, 424; Ginsburg, in Kitto's Cyclop. s.v.; id. Commentary on the Song of Songs (Lond. 1857), p. 34 sq.; Etheridge, Introduction to Hebrew Literature, p. 226 sq.; Dessauer, Geschichte der Israeliten, p. 278 sq.; Steinschneider, Jewish Literature, p. 84, 125, 131, 132, 135, 159, 160, 165, 166; Schmiedel, Saadia Alfajumi und die negativen Vorzuge seiner Religionsphilosophie (Wien, 1870); Kalisch, Hebrew Grammar (Lond. 1863), 2, 5 sq.; Keil, Introduction to the Old Testament (Edinb. 1870), 2, 383; Bleek, Einleitung in das Alte Testament, p. 1101 sq., 104 sq., 744; De Rossi, Dizionario Storico, p. 97 (Germ. transl.); id. Bibliotheca Judaica Antichristiana, p. 98 sq.; Jost, Gesch. d. Judenth. u. s. Secten, 2, 274 sq., 279, 285, 345; Kaufmann, Die Attributenlehre des Saadjac Alfajjumi (Gotha, 1875); Eisler, Vorlesungen uber die judischen Philosophen des Mittelalters, I. Abtheilung (Wien, 1876), p. 1 sq.; Kaufmann, Geschichte der Attributenlehre in der j\'fcdischen Religionsphilosophie des Mittelalters von Saadja bis Maimuni (Gotha, 1877), and review of this work in Z. d. d. M. G. (1878), 32, 213 sq.; B\'e4ck, Geschichte des j\'fcdischen Volkes (Lissa, 1877), p. 255 sq.; Theologisches Universal-Lexikon, s.v.\par B. P. \par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \cf1\f1\fs29\par } LVALhK{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Georgia;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\lang1033\f0\fs28 SAALSCH\'dcTZ, JOSEPH LEVIN\par Saalsch\'fctz, Joseph Levin,\par a learned German rabbi, was born in K\'f6nigsberg, March 15, 1801, and was educated in his native place, where he was also made doctor of philosophy in 1824, having presented for this purpose to the faculty an elaborate treatise on the Urim and Thummin. In the following year he published Von der Form der hebr. Poesie, nebst einer Abhandlung uber die Musik der Hebraer (K\'f6nigsberg, 1825), which he republished with two additional treatises under the title Form und Geist der biblisch-hebr. Poesie (ibid. 1853). He then went to Berlin, where he was engaged in the Jewish public school (1825-29), at the same time prosecuting his archaeological researches. In 1829 he was called as rabbi to Vienna, where he remained until 1835, when he was called for the same position in his native place. Here he continued the remainder of his life, and published the following works: Forschungen im Gebiete der hebraisch-\'e4gyptischen Arch\'e4ologie (1838-49, 3 vols.): \emdash Das mosaische Recht (1846-48; 2 vols.; Berlin, 1863, 2 d ed.): \emdash Arch\'e4ologie der Hebr\'e4er (1856, 2 vols.) \emdash Die Ehe nach biblischer Vorstellung (1858) \emdash Die klassischen Studien und der Orient (1850). In 1849 he was appointed privat-docent in philosophy at the University of K\'f6nigsberg \emdash the first Jew who ever received such an appointment \emdash and was afterwards made honorary professor. He died Aug. 23, 1863. See F\'fcrst, Bibl. Jud. 3, 182 sq.; Zuchold, Bibl. Theologica, 2, 1103; Kitto, Cyclop. s.v.; Jost, Gesch. d. Judenth. u. s. Secten, 3, 362; Theologisches Universal-Lexikon, s.v.; Kayserling, Bibliothekj\'fcdischer Kanzelredner, 2, 85 sq.; Jolowicz, Gesch. d. Juden in K\'f6nigsberg (Posen, 1867), p. 130 sq.; Ben Chananya (1864), p. 749 sq.\par LVAL B. P. \par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \cf1\f1\fs29\par } LVALhM{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Georgia;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\lang1033\f0\fs28 SABA\par Saba Or Sabas\par (<START GREEK>\par Sa/ba$<END GREEK>\par ), the name of several saints of the Roman Catholic Church. See SABBAS.\par 1. A Gothic soldier who was martyred at Rome with 170 other persons under the emperor Aurelian (Martyr. Rom. April 24; Tillemont, Memoires, 4, 363).\par 2. Another Goth and martyr who suffered many cruel tortures in the persecution under Athanaric, king of the Goths, and was finally drowned in the river Mussaeus. His relics, together with a letter from the Gothic to the Cappadocian Church (which is preserved among the epistles of St. Basil), were sent to Cappadocia by the Roman governor on the Scythian border (Basil, Epp. 155, 164, 165; Martyr. Rom. and Acta SS. April 12; Stolberg, 12, 209).\par 3. A hermit of Mount Sinai who, according to a statement by the hermit Ammonius (Combefis, Acta SS.; Eust., etc. [Paris, 1660]), was mortally wounded in a surprise by the Saracens towards the close of the 4 th century (Tillemont, Memoires, 7, 575).\par 4. The name Sabas or Sabbas (according to Theodoret, Vit. Patr. c. 2, equivalent to <START GREEK>\par presbu/th$<END GREEK>\par ) was conferred upon the hermit Julian of Edessa by the Mesopotamians. Julian was accounted one of the leading hermits by Jerome and Chrysostom. He spent forty years of his life (about A.D. 330-370) in a narrow and damp cave in the desert of Osroene, practicing the utmost austerity, performing miracles \emdash chiefly works of healing and exorcisms, descriptions of which are given by Theodoret and instructing a band of nearly 100 pupils. The death of Julian the Apostate was revealed to tins saint at the moment when that emperor fell in battle ( A.D. 363), though twenty days journey separated him from the scene of conflict (Theodoret, H.E. 3, 24). In the reign of Valens the Arians of ALVALNntioch claimed that this hermit, whose fame extended over the entire East, belonged to their party; but Sabas, in response to the request of the Catholics, forsook his solitude for the first time in forty years, and appeared at Antioch to contradict the Arian boast, his journey to that place and back being signalized by the performance of numerous miracles. The recollection of this visit was still fresh when Chrysostom preached at Antioch. Sabas died in his cave, an old man. His festival is observed by the Greeks on Oct. 18 and 28, and by the Latins on Jan. 14 (Acta SS. Jan. 14; Tillemont, Memoires, 7, 581; Stolberg, 12, 198).\par 5. The most noted saint of this name appeared at the beginning of the 6 th century in connection with the Monophysite controversy. He was born about A.D. 439 at Mutalasca, in Cappadocia, of good family. At first a monk under the rule of St. Basil, he became a hermit in Palestine before completing the eighteenth year of his age, and was received into favor as a pupil by the hermit Euthymius, to whose prayers he owed the preservation of his life at a subsequent day, when he was dying of thirst in the desert (Stolberg, 17, 168). He was made a priest in A.D. 484, and placed over all the hermits in the neighborhood of Jerusalem, eventually filling his station with great success, though at first the strictness of his rule gave much dissatisfaction and caused his withdrawal to a distant solitude. At the time of the Monophysite controversy, the patriarch Elias of Jerusalem sent him with other hermits to Constantinople with a view to dispose the emperor Anastasius more favorably towards the Catholic cause, but his mission failed to produce lasting results. Elias having been superseded in the patriarchate by John, who belonged to the party of Severus (q.v.), Sabas and others induced the new primate to renounce his views and acknowledge the Council of Chalcedon. The emperor endeavored to reclaim John, but was met with a spirit of defiant opposition, which found further expression in<LVALL the pronouncing of a solemn anathema upon Nestorius, Eutyches, Severus, and all other opponents of the Council of Chalcedon. The revolt of Vitalian in the meantime diverted attention from the insubordinate monks, and in 518 the emperor Anastasius died. Sabas afterwards performed a second journey to Constantinople, a year before he died, for the purpose of obtaining a reduction of the oppressive imposts exacted from the population of Palestine, and also to counteract the influence of Origenism, which began to make itself felt among the monks under his direction. He was received with great pomp, the emperor Justinian sending Epiphanius, the patriarch, and a number of bishops and courtiers in the imperial galleys to meet him, and on his arrival prostrating himself before the aged hermit to receive his blessing. The petition in behalf of Palestine was granted, and a large sum of money was offered to Sabas for the use of his convent; but this Sabas declined to receive, and asked that it be appropriated to other useful purposes in Palestine. Nothing, however, was done against Origenism while Sabas lived. See ORIGENISTIC CONTROVERSY. A joyful welcome awaited him on his return to Palestine, after which he retired to his laura, and died Dec. 5, A.D. 531 or 532. There is a Greek liturgy entitled <START GREEK>\par Tupiko/n<END GREEK>\par , etc. (printed at Venice, 1603, 1613, 1643, fol.), attributed to St. Saba, but of unknown authorship. See Cyrilli Vita S. Saboe in Cotelerii. Monum. Eccl. Gr. 3, and Latin in Surius, Dec. 5; Tillemont, Memoires, 16, 701 sq.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \cf1\f1\fs29\par } LVAL{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Georgia;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\lang1033\f0\fs28 SABA, MONASTERY OF\par Saba (St.), Monastery Of,\par \par now called Deir Mar Saba, still exists on the brink of Wady Nar, the extension of the valley of the Kidron, near the Dead Sea. The surrounding scenery is of the wildest and most romantic character. See KIDRON. The convent hangs on the precipitous side of the ravine, being partly excavated out of the rock, and surrounded by a strong wall, accessible only on one side. The edifices within are extensive and commodious, being occupied by about sixty monks of the Greek rite, who are said to be quite rich. The original cell of the founder is shown, said to have been a cave occupied by a lion, which voluntarily relinquished it to the saint. The convent was plundered by the Persians in 533, and forty-four of the monks were then massacred; but it has survived all the vicissitudes of the Holy Land, of which it is one of the earliest monastic relics. No women are ever admitted within its portals, although the monks are hospitable to male visitors, provided they are furnished with the proper credentials. For a full description, see Robinson, Researches, 1, 382, 521; Thomson, Land and Book, 2, 435; Porter, Handbook for Pal. p. 229.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \cf1\f1\fs29\par } LVALR {\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 SABAI VERSION\par \par Sabai Version Of The Scriptures\par \par Sabai is spoken in several islands in Torres Strait, between Australia and Papua. The gospel of Mark was printed at Sydney in 1883 under the care of the Auxiliary of the British and Foreign Bible Society. The translation was made by a teacher, Elia, who had been fifteen years engaged on the work, and revised by the Reverend S. Macfarlane, of Murray Island. The gospel of Matthew has since then been added.\par \par B. P. \par \par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par } {\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 SABACHTHANI\par \par Sabach'thani\par \par [many sabachtha'ni] (\par <START GREEK>sabaxqani/\par <END GREEK>, a Graecized form of the Chaldee shebakta'ni, <START HEBREW>yn!T^q=b^v=\par <END HEBREW>, thou hast left me), quoted by our Lord upon the cross (Matt 17:46; Mark 15:34) from the Targum on Ps 22:2 (where the Heb. has azabta'ni, <START HEBREW>yn!T^b=z^u&\par <END HEBREW>, "thou hast forsaken me"). See Petersen, Erforschung des Wortes \par <START GREEK>sabaxqani/\par <END GREEK> (s.l. 1701). See AGONYY.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par } LVALhR{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Georgia;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\lang1033\f0\fs28 SABAEANS\par Sabae'an.\par As much confusion has been introduced by the variety of meanings which the name Saboeans has been made to bear, it may be proper to specify in this place their distinctive derivations and use. In our Authorized Version of Scripture the term seems to be applied to three different tribes.\par 1. The Sebaim (<START HEBREW><ya!b*s=<END HEBREW>\par , with a samech), the descendants of Seba or Saba, son of Cush, who ultimately settled in Ethiopia. See SEBA.\par 2. The Shebaim (<START HEBREW><ya!b*v=<END HEBREW>\par , with a shin), the descendants of Sheba, son of Joktan, the Saboei of the Greeks and Romans, who settled in Arabia Felix. They are the "Sabaeans" of Joel 3:8, to whom the Jews were to sell the captives of Tyre. The unpublished Arabic Version, quoted by Pocock, has "the people of Yemen." Hence they are called "a people afar off, "the very designation given in Jer 6:20 to Sheba, as the country of frankincense and the rich aromatic reed, and also by our Lord in Matt 12:42, who says the queen of Sheba, or "the south, "came <START GREEK>\par e)k tw=n pera/twn th=$ gh=$<END GREEK>\par , "from the earth's extremes." See SHEBA.\par 3. Another tribe of Shebans (Heb. sheba', <START HEBREW>ab*v=<END HEBREW>\par , also with a shin), a horde of Bedawin marauders in the days of Job (Job 1:15); for whether we place the land of Uz in Idumoea or in Ausitis, it is by no means likely that the Arabs of the south would extend their excursions so very far. We must therefore look for this tribe in Desert Arabia; and it is singular enough that, besides the Seba of Cush and the Shaba of Joktan, there is another Sheba, son of Jokshan, and grandson of Abraham, by Keturah (Gen 25:33); and his posterity appear to have been "men of the wilderness, "as were their kinsmen of Midian, Ephah, aLVALSnd Dedan. To them, however, the above-cited passage in the prophecy of Joel could not apply, because in respect neither to the lands of Judah nor of Uz could they be correctly described as a people "afar off." As for the Sabaim of Ezek 23:42 (which our version also renders by Sabaeans"), while the Keri has Sabaiyam', <START HEBREW><y*a!b*s*<END HEBREW>\par , the Kethib has Sobeim', <START HEBREW><ya!b=os<END HEBREW>\par , i.e. "drunkards," which better suits the context. See SHABA.\par 4. Yet, as if to increase the confusion in the use of this name of "Sabaeans," it has also been applied to the ancient star worshippers of Western Asia, though they ought properly to be styled Tsabians, and their religion not Sabaism, but Tsabaism, the name being most probably derived from the object of their adoration, tseba', <START HEBREW>ab*x=<END HEBREW>\par , the host, i.e. of heaven (see an excursus by Gesenius in his translation of Isaiah, On the Astral Worship of the Chaldoeans, and SABAOTH).\par 5. The name of Sabaeans, or Sabians, has also been given to a modern sect in the East, the Mandaites, or, as they are commonly but incorrectly called, the "Christians" of St. John; for they deny the Messiahship of Christ, and pay superior honor to John the Baptist. They are mentioned in the Koran under the name of Sabionna, and it is probable that the Arabs confounded them with the ancient Tsabians above mentioned. Norberg, however, says that they themselves derive their own name from that which they give to the Baptist, which is Abo Sabo Zakrio; from Abo, "father;" Sabo, "to grow old together;" and Zakrio, e.g. Zechariah. "The reason they assign for calling him Sabo is because his father, in his old age, had this son by his wife Aneshbat (Elizabeth), she being also in her old age" (see Norberg's Codex Nasaroeus, Liber Adami Appellatus, and Silvestre de Sacy, in the Journal des Savans for 1819). See SABIANISM.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006bLVALr by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \cf1\f1\fs29\par } LVAL{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 SABAT\par \par Sa'bat\par \par (\par <START GREEK>Saba/t\par <END GREEK>, v.r. in Esdr. \par <START GREEK>Safa/t\par <END GREEK> and \par <START GREEK>Safa/g\par <END GREEK>), the Graecized form of three names in the Apocrypha.\par \par 1. The head of one of the families of "Solomon's servants" who returned from the captivity with Zerubbabel, according to 1 Esd 5:34; but the Heb. lists (Ezra 2:57; Neh 7:59) have no corresponding name.\par \par 2. The Jewish month SHEBAT (q.v.) (1 Macc 16:14).\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par } {\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 SABANUS\par \par Sabanus\par \par (\par <START GREEK>sa)bano$\par <END GREEK>, classical \par <START GREEK>sa/banon\par <END GREEK>, a linen cloth), a white cloth with which the infant was covered in baptism. This was an ancient practice. From the 4 th century we find frequent mention of clothing the newly baptized in white garments. These garments, as emblems of purity, were delivered to them with a solemn charge to keep their robes of innocence unspotted till the day of Christ. The neophytes wore this dress from Easter eve until the Sunday after Easter, which was hence called Dominica in albis, that is, "the Sunday in white." This garment was usually made of white linen, but sometimes of more costly materials. See ALB; See CHRISOME.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par } LVALhV{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Georgia;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\lang1033\f0\fs28 SABAOTH\par Sab'aoth\par [some Saba'oth] (<START GREEK>\par sabaw/q<END GREEK>\par , a Graecized form of the Heb. tsebaoth', <START HEBREW>toab*x=<END HEBREW>\par , armies), a word occurring in this form only in the A.V. in Rom 9:29; James 5:4; but in the Heb. of frequent occurrence in the phrase "Jehovah of hosts," or "Jehovah, God of hosts." "It is familiar through its occurrence in the Sanctus of the Te Deum, 'Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of Sabaoth.' It is often considered to be a synonym of, or to have some connection with, Sabbath, and to express the idea of rest, and this not only popularly, but in some of our most classical writers. Thus Spenser, Faery Queene, canto 8, 2.\par 'But thenceforth all shall rest eternally\par With him that is the God of Sabaoth hight:\par O that great Sabaoth God, grant ire that Sabaoth's sight;' \par also Bacon, Advancement of Learning, 2, 24: '... sacred and inspired divinity, the Sabaoth and port of all men's labors and peregrinations;' Johnson, in the first edition of whose Dictionary (1755) Sabaoth and Sabbath are treated as the same word; Walter Scott, Ivanhoe, vol. 1, ch. 11 (1 st ed.): 'a week, aye the space between two Sabaoths.' But this connection is quite fictitious. The two words are not only entirely different, but have nothing in common." The Heb. term tsaba, <START HEBREW>ab*x^<END HEBREW>\par , signifies an army (see Deut 24:5; Ex 6:26). The plural is used in the sense of armies (Ex 7:4, and often). The singular is sometimes applied to the company of angels which surround the throne of Jehovah, who are called <START HEBREW><y!m^V*h^ ab*x*<END HEBREW>\par , tsaba hash-shamayim, "the host of heaven." The same phrase is also applied to the stars, for the most part as objects of idolatrous worship; indeed, the expression appears to include everLVALything in heaven, both angels and heavenly bodies. Isaiah uses the phrase <START HEBREW>ab*x* orM*h^<END HEBREW>\par , tsaba ham-marom, "the Host on High, "in opposition to the kings of the earth. God is called <START HEBREW>ho*hy= toab*x= yh@l)a#<END HEBREW>\par , Jehovah elohey' tsebaoth, "Jehovah God of hosts," which most commentators regard as synonymous with "God of heaven" (see Zenkei De Synonymis <START HEBREW>toab*x=<END HEBREW>\par et <START HEBREW>/oyl=u#<END HEBREW>\par , Lips. 1763), though others assert that it should be taken in a military sense, as the God of armies or wars. "It designates him as the supreme head and commander of all the heavenly forces; so that the host of Jehovah is all one with the host of heaven (1 Kings 22:19), and must be understood strictly of the angels, who are ever represented as the Lord's immediate and fitting agents, ready on all occasions to execute his will (Ps 103:21; 148:2). It is never applied to God with reference to the army of Israel. Once, indeed, the companies composing this are called the hosts of the Lord' (Ex 12:41), because they were under his direction and guardianship; but when employed with the view of heightening the idea of God's greatness and majesty, as the term 'hosts' is in the phrases in question, the hosts can only be those of the angelic or heavenly world" (see Gesenius, Thesaur. s.v.)' See HOST.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \cf1\f1\fs29\par }  LVAL( {\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 SABATAEAS\par \par Sabatae'as\par \par (\par <START GREEK>Sabatai/a$\par <END GREEK> v.r. \par <START GREEK>Sabbatai/a$\par <END GREEK> and \par <START GREEK>Sabatai=o$\par <END GREEK>), a Graecized form (1 Esd 9:48) of the Heb. name (Neh 7:7) SHABBETHAI See SHABBETHAI (q.v.).\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par } LVAL{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Georgia;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\lang1033\f0\fs28 SABATNIKI\par Sabatniki,\par a sect of Russian Sabbatarians, or "Sabbath-honorers," which arose in Novgorod (cir. A.D. 1470), where some clergy and laity were persuaded by a Jew of Kiev, named Zacharias, into a belief that the Mosaic dispensation alone was of divine origin. They accepted the Old Testament only, of which, being unacquainted with Hebrew, they used the Slavonic translation. Like the Jews, they were led to expect the advent of an earthly Messiah. Some of them denied the Resurrection; and, being accused of practicing several cabalistic arts, for which points of Jewish ceremonial may have been mistaken, were regarded by the common people as soothsayers and sorcerers. They were gradually becoming a powerful sect, one of their number, named Zosima, having even been elected archbishop of Moscow, when in A.D. 1490 they were condemned by a synod, and a fierce persecution nearly obliterated them. But here and there, in remote parts of Russia, travelers have within the last century discovered fragmentary communities holding Jewish views, which have been thought to be relics of the older sect of Sabatniki. In Irkutsk they continue to exist under the name of Selesnewschschini. See Platon, Present State of the Greek Church in Russia (Pinkerton's transl.), p. 273.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \cf1\f1\fs29\par } LVAL {\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 SABAZIUS\par \par Sabazius,\par \par a deity worshipped by the ancient Phrygians, alleged to have sprung from Rhea or Cybele. In later times he was identified both with Dionysus and Zeus. The worship of Sabazius was introduced into Greece, and his festivals, called Sabazia, were mingled with impurities. \emdash Gardner, Faiths of the World, s.v. See also Vollmer, Worterbuch der Mythol. s.v.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par } {\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 SABATUS\par \par Sab'atus\par \par (\par <START GREEK>Sa/bato$\par <END GREEK>, v. . r. \par <START GREEK>Sa/baqo$\par <END GREEK>), a Graecized form (1 Esd 9:28) of the Heb. name (Ezra 10:27) ZABAD See ZABAD (q.v.).\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par } LVAL:{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 SABBAEUS\par \par Sabbae'us\par \par (\par <START GREEK>Sabbai=o$\par <END GREEK>, v.r. \par <START GREEK>Sabbai/a$\par <END GREEK>), a corruptly Graecized form (1 Esd 9:22) of the Heb. name (Ezra 10:31) SHEMAIAH (q.v.).\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par } {\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 SABBA, ABRAHAM IBN-\par \par Sabba, Abraham IBN-\par \par a Jewish writer of the 16 th century, who was banished with thousands of Jews from Lisbon in 1499, is the author of a very extensive commentary on the Pentateuch, entitled The Bundle of Myrrh <START HEBREW>rwmh rwrx\par <END HEBREW>, in which he largely avails himself of the zohar and other early cabalistic works. The commentary was first published at Constantinople in 1514; then at Venice in 1523, 1546, 1566, and at Cracow in 1595. Pellican has translated this commentary into Latin, and the MS. of this version is in the Zurich library. See Furst, Bibl. Jud. s.v. Ginsburg, Kabbalah, page 123; Lindo, History of the Jews in Spain and Portugal, page 266; Jocher, Allgemeines Gelehrten-Lexikon, s.v.\par \par B. P. \par \par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par } LVAL {\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 SABBAS\par \par Sabbas, St. (Primoe Rasteo),\par \par a mediaeval ecclesiastic, was born during the latter part of the 12 th century. He was the son of Stephen Nemania, founder of the kingdom of Servia. Contrary to the wishes of his father, Rasteo embraced the monastic life, and, though young, was soon made abbot. He prevailed upon the patriarch of Constantinople to create a Servian archbishopric, and was himself the first to enjoy the position. He made an extended our through Egypt and the Holy Land, and, on his return, died at Truava, in Bulgaria, Jan. 14, 1237. His remains were placed in the monastery at Milechivo, but were burned in 1595 by the order of Sikan Pasha. The 14 th of January is kept in memory of this saint.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par } {\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 SABBAN\par \par Sab'ban\par \par (\par <START GREEK>Sa/bbano$\par <END GREEK>; Vulg. Bauni), a corrupt form (1 Esd 8:63) of the Heb. name (Ezra 8:33) BINNUI (q.v.).\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par } LVAL{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Georgia;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\lang1033\f0\fs28 SABBATARIANS\par Sabbatarians,\par those who keep the seventh day as the Sabbath. They are to be found principally, if not wholly, among the Baptists. They object to the reasons which are generally alleged for keeping the first day, and assert that the change from the seventh to the first was effected by Constantine on his conversion to Christianity. The three following propositions contain a summary of their principles as to this article of the Sabbath, by which they are distinguished: 1. That God has required that the seventh, or last, day of every week be observed by mankind universally for the weekly Sabbath. 2. That this command of God is perpetually binding on man till time shall be no more. 3. That this sacred rest of the seventh-day Sabbath is not (by divine authority) changed from the seventh and last to the first day of the week, or that the Scripture nowhere requires the observance of any other day of the week for the weekly Sabbath but; the seventh day only. They hold, in common with other Christians, the distinguishing doctrines of Christianity. See Evans, Sketches of the Denominations of the Christian World. See BAPTISTS, SEVENTH-DAY.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \cf1\f1\fs29\par }  LVAL 2{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 SABBATH, COURT OF THE\par \par Sabbath, Court Of The\par \par (<START HEBREW>tB*V^h Es^Wm\par <END HEBREW>, musak hash-shabbath; Sept. \par <START GREEK>o(q eme/lio$ th=$ kaqe/dra$ tw=n sabba/twn\par <END GREEK>; Vulg. Musach sabbati, 2 Kings 16:18), is understood to mean a canopy under which Ahaz used to stand, at the entrance of the porch of the Temple, when he attended the service; but which he removed when he became an idolater, to show his contempt, and his intention of not resorting thither any more. See COURT. So we see in 2 Chron 28:24 that "he shut up the doors of the house of God" that none might enter to worship. See AHAZ.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par } {\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang1033\f0\fs29 SABBATATI\par \par Sabbatati,\par \par a name applied sometimes to the Waldenses (q.v.), from the circumstance that their teachers wore mean or wooden shoes, which in French are called sabots. \par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \par } LVALh_{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Georgia;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\lang1033\f0\fs28 SABBATH DAY'S JOURNEY\par Sabbath Day's Journey\par \par (<START GREEK>\par sabba/tou o(do/$<END GREEK>\par , Acts 1:12; in Talmudical Heb. <START HEBREW>tB*V^h^ <ojT=<END HEBREW>\par , techim hashshabbath) is a phrase for the prescribed distance which may lawfully be traversed on a Sabbath, and beyond which no Jew can go without violating the sanctity of the day, except he adopts the means appointed for exceeding the canonical boundary.\par I. Distance of a Sabbath-way, and its Origin. \emdash From the injunction in Ex 16:29, that every man is to "abide in his place, "and not "go out of his place" on the Sabbath, the ancient Hebrew legislators deduced that an Israelite must not go 2000 yards, or 12,000 hand breadths \emdash as the ancient Hebrew yard consisted of six hand breadths \emdash five Greek stadia, for the Greek stadium measured 2400 hand breadths \emdash beyond the temporary or permanent place of his abode. Epiphanius's definition of the Sabbath day's journey at six stadia =14,400 hand breadths, or 750 Roman geographical paces (Hoer. p. 66, 82), is most probably based upon the larger yard, which the Jews adopted at a later period. See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. These 2000 yards are not to be measured from any and every spot, but according to definite and minute rules, the city having always to be reduced to a square. Thus if the Sabbath day's walk is to be fixed from a circular city, an imaginary square must be circumscribed about it, and the measurement is not to be taken from the corners a in a diagonal direction \emdash i.e. from a to e \emdash inasmuch as thereby the distance between will be less than 2000 yards, but from a to f, whereby the allowable distance is increased in the direction of a e, as will be seen from the annexed diagram.\par The permitted distance seems to haveLVAL` been grounded on the space to be kept between the ark and the people (Josh 3:4) in the wilderness, which tradition said was that between the ark and the tents. To repair to the ark being, of course, a duty on the Sabbath, the walking to it was no violation of the day; and it thus was taken as the measure of a lawful Sabbath day's journey. This prohibition is not repeated in the law, but the whole spirit of the Sabbath institution obviously forbade a Jew to make a proper journey on that day (Josephus, Ant. 13, 8, 4), especially as the beasts of burden and travel were to rest (comp. Matt 24:20). Whether the earlier Hebrews did or did not regard it thus, is not easy to say. Nevertheless, the natural inference from 2 Kings 4:23 is against the supposition of such a prohibition being known to the spokesman, Elisha almost certainly living \emdash as may be seen from the whole narrative \emdash much more than a Sabbath day's journey from Shunem. Heylin infers from the incidents of David's flight from Saul, and Elijah's from Jezebel, that neither felt bound by such a limitation. Their situation, however, being one of extremity, cannot be safely argued from. Our Savior seems to refer to this law in warning the disciples to pray that their flight from Jerusalem in the time of its judgment should not be "on the Sabbath day" (Matt 24:20). The Christians of Jerusalem would not, as in the case of Gentiles, feel free from the restrictions on journeying on that day; nor would their situation enable them to comply with the forms whereby such journeying, when necessary, was sanctified; nor would assistance from those around be procurable. The Jewish scruple to go more than 2000 paces from his city on the Sabbath is referred to by Origen (<START GREEK>\par peri\\ a)rxwn<END GREEK>\par , 4, 2), by Jerome (Ad Algasiam, qu. 10), and by Oecumenius \emdash with some apparent difference between them as to the measurement. Jerome gives Akiba, Simeon, and Hillel as the authorities for the lawful distance.\par Another reasLVALaon for fixing the distance of a Sabbath day's walk or journey at 2000 yards is that the fields of the suburbs for the pasture of the flocks and herds belonging to the Levites measured 2000 cubits or yards, and that in Ex 21:13 it is said, "I will appoint thee a place (<START HEBREW><wqm<END HEBREW>\par ) whither he shall flee" \emdash i.e. the Levitical suburbs or cities. Now, it is argued, if one who committed murder accidentally was allowed to undertake this journey of 2000 yards on a Sabbath without violating the sanctity of the day, innocent people may do the same. Besides, the place of refuge is termed <START HEBREW><wqm<END HEBREW>\par , which is the same word employed in Ex 16:29. As the one <START HEBREW><wqm<END HEBREW>\par , place, was 2000 yards distant, it is inferred, according to the rule the analogy of ideas or words (<START HEBREW>hw? hrzg<END HEBREW>\par ) that the command, "Let no man go out of his place (<START HEBREW>wmqmm<END HEBREW>\par ) on the seventh day" (Ex 16:29) means not to exceed the distance of the place 2000 yards off (Hillel I, rule 2, in Erubin, 51 a; Maccoth, 12 b; Zebachim, 117 a). Josephus (War, 5, 2, 3) makes the Mount of Olives to be about six stadia from Jerusalem; and it is the distance between these two places which in Acts 1:12 is given as a Sabbath day's journey. Josephus elsewhere determines the same distance as five stadia (Ant. 20, 8, 6); but both were probably loose statements rather than measured distances; and both are below the ordinary estimate of 2000 cubits. Taking all circumstances into account, it seems likely that the ordinary Sabbath day's journey was a somewhat loosely determined distance, seldom more than the whole and seldom less than three quarters of a geographical mile. See Selden, De Jure Nat. et Gent. 3, 9; Frischmuth, Dissert. de Itin. Sabbat. (1670); Walther, Dissert. de Itin. Sabbat.; both in Thesaurus Theolog. Philog. (Amsterd. 1720).\par II. Cases in which the Limits of a Sabbath day's Journey could be exceeded. \emdash ThLVALbough the laws about the Sabbath day's journey are very rigorous, and he who walked beyond the 2000 yards, or moved more than four yards farther than his temporary place of abode, when the Sabbath day's journey had not been determined beforehand, received forty stripes save one; yet in cases of public or private service, when life was in danger, people were allowed to overstep the prescribed boundary (Mishna, Erubin, 4; Rosh-hashanah, 2, 5). The Pharisees, or the orthodox Jews in the days of our Savior, also contrived other means whereby the fraternity of this order could exceed the Sabbath day's walk without transgressing the law. They ordained that all those who wished to join their social gatherings on the Sabbath were to deposit on Friday afternoon some article of food in a certain place at the end of the Sabbath day's journey, that it might thereby be constituted a domicile, and thus another Sabbath day's journey could be undertaken from the first terminus. See PHARISEES. This mode of connecting or amalgamating the distances (<START HEBREW>/ymwjnt bwryu<END HEBREW>\par ), as it is called, is observed by the orthodox Jews to the present day. Such importance have the Jews. since their return from the Babylonian captivity, attached to the Sabbath day's journey that a whole tractate in the Mishna (Erubin) is devoted to it. Hence the phrase is mentioned in the New Test. (Acts 1:12) as expressive of a well known law, and the so called Jerusalem Targum translates Ex 16:29, "And let no man go walking from his place beyond 2000 yards on the seventh day, "while the Chaldee paraphrase of Ruth 1:16 makes Naomi say to Ruth, "We are commanded to keep sabbaths and festivals, and not to walk beyond 2000 yards" (comp. Mishna, Erubin, c. 5; Rosh-hashanah, 2, 15; Babylon Talmud, Erubin, 56 b, 57 a; Zuckermann, in Frankel's Monatsschrift fur Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judenthums [Breslau, 1863], 12, 467 sq.).\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 20^LVALn06 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \cf1\f1\fs29\par } LVALhd{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Georgia;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\lang1033\f0\fs28 SABBATH, CHRISTIAN\par Sabbath, Christian.\par Under this head, we propose to treat of the sabbatical institution as one of general and permanent obligation.\par I. Concerning the time when the Sabbath was first instituted there have been different opinions. Some have maintained that the sanctification of the seventh day mentioned in Gen 2 is only there spoken of <START GREEK>\par dia\\ prolh/yew$<END GREEK>\par , or by anticipation, and is to be understood of the Sabbath afterwards enjoined in the wilderness; and that the historian, writing after it was instituted, there gives the reason of its institution, and this is supposed to be the case, as it is never mentioned during the patriarchal age. But against this sentiment it is urged\par (a) that it cannot be easily supposed that the inspired penman would have mentioned the sanctification of the seventh day among the primeval transactions if such sanctification had not taken place until 2500 years afterwards;\par (b) that, considering Adam was restored to favor through a Mediator, and a religious service instituted which man was required to observe, in testimony not only of his dependence on the Creator, but also of his faith and hope in the promise, it seems reasonable that an institution so grand and solemn, and so necessary to the observance of this service, should be then existent.\par Some find the institution of it in the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11); but the language employed is not apparently that of origination. The command to remember the Sabbath seems to imply that the Israelites were already acquainted with its existence and sacredness. But such injunctions, we are told, have often prospective significance, e.g. "Remember this day in which ye came out from Egypt" (Ex 13:3); "Remember the word which Moses the servant of the Lord LVALecommanded you" (Josh 1:13); "Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth" (Eccl 12:1). In all these citations the meaning is remember from this time. To this stricture it may be replied that such injunctions have always relation to the future, but that they also suppose antecedent knowledge. Children, for example, would not be told to remember their Creator unless they had been previously informed about creation unless they had been instructed that one God has made us, and that we are all his offspring. That an ordinance should be ushered into existence by the requirement to remember it is a strange idea to which facts give no countenance. Besides, the fourth commandment assigns a reason for observing the Sabbath, which, if good for the future, must have been always valid. We do not here enter into any disquisition about the days of creation. It is enough that God, in a manner befitting him, worked six days and rested on the seventh, and has required that, in a manner befitting us, we shall imitate his example. But how was it to be expected that this consideration should weigh much with the Jews in time to come, if, in preceding ages, God himself had made no account of it in his regulation of human conduct?\par Some, again, have contended that we do not require to go far back in order to find its commencement; they think they learn when and how it began in Ex 16:19-30, these verses have reference to the gathering and cooking of manna. That an institution so prominent as the Sabbath in the religion of the Jews should have been initiated in a manner so incidental, and almost unobservable, is in contradiction to the whole genius of the economy. Nor does the passage countenance any such notion. "It came to pass, "we are told (ver. 22), "that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread." In other words, they gathered on the sixth day enough for that day and for the day following. But why provide beforehand for the Sabbath in order to respect and keep its rest, if not in supposed obedience to LVALfthe will of God, as previously notified? It is alleged, in reply, that the order complied with is presented to us afterwards, and occurs in ver. 23, "This is that which the Lord hath said, Tomorrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord: bake that which ye will bake today, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you, to be kept until the morning." By this exegesis the practice (ver. 22) is first related, and then we come to the injunction (ver. 23), of which it was the fulfilment! In such inversion of natural order there is obvious unlikelihood. But the exposition in question is otherwise untenable. The verses alleged to exhibit first the obedience, and then the statute obeyed, have no such intimacy of connection. They refer, in fact, to different things. Ver. 23 does not touch on the collection of the manna at all, but has regard to the baking of it \emdash a new subject, and therefore the gathering of it on the sixth day in quantity sufficient also for the seventh day, not being here prescribed, remains without any explanation, except a previous appointment and prevalent knowledge of the sabbatical institution.\par It is objected, however, that the Sabbath disappears from the record during the antediluvian and patriarchal periods. Why this protracted silence about it if it had then a place among religious articles and usages? This evidence of its absence is negative, and cannot outweigh express contrary proof of its initiation. Of these times, be it also remarked, we have not detailed accounts, and we must therefore make allowance for great brevity and many omissions. Succeeding annals are more ample, and yet we have no indication of the observance of the Sabbath during four hundred years after its sacredness had been confessedly proclaimed from Mount Sinai. Even if neglect of the day could be established, such negligence would not disprove obligation. The Passover, during protracted periods, fell into disuse, and there was general and continued departure frLVALgom the marriage relation as originally constituted.\par It is not the case, however, that allusion to the Sabbath is wholly wanting during the time alleged. Occasional mention is made of weeks; and we know that the heathen world very extensively distributed days into sevens, with some notion of sacredness belonging to the seventh. This arrangement is traced by some to the lunar month, divided into quarters, each of seven days, by the phases of the moon. But this computation does not accord, except proximately, with fact, as the lunar month exceeds twenty-nine days in duration. It ascribes consequence also to the number four, as well as to the number seven \emdash partitioning the month into four divisions \emdash and four has no distinctive sacredness in any known country or language. The explanation, though ingenious, is simply a guess, without any support from Scripture or other writings, and has like validity with another conjecture, that the assignment of seven days to a week may have been derived from the supposed number of the planets.\par II. That the Sabbath owes its maintenance to its morality we will endeavor more expressly to substantiate. Here a consideration of first consequence is that it forms the subject of the fourth commandment. Some deny the ethical character of the decalogue. They allege it to be of a mixed nature, and insist that though particular elements in it are of inherent and enduring worth, yet, as a whole, it belonged to an economy of shadows, and has vanished with them. Therefore the presence of any statute in such a compendium is no decisive evidence of moral force.\par 1. But the decalogue in its integrity has a very distinctive place and consequence in the Bible. It was proclaimed with extraordinary solemnity, peculiar to itself, from Mount Sinai (Ex 19:16-24). God caused it to be written on tables of stone, and he made these stones to be deposited in the ark, representative of himself. "These words," says Moses, "the Lord spake to all your assembly in the mount, LVALhout of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice, and he added no more." The decalogue was frequently called the covenant, and the chest containing it the ark of the covenant. Would a fragmentary and heterogeneous compound create or warrant any such designation? Again, as often as Christ cited any of these commandments he enforced them emphatically. The Jews seem to have distributed them into greater and less, and to have treated the less as scarcely deserving consideration. But he impressively declared, "Whosoever shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven, but whosoever shall do and teach them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." The kingdom of heaven is the Gospel dispensation. Certain statutes our Lord declares to be congenial with that economy, and their observance he characterizes as a sure constituent or guarantee of its greatness. But what statutes could he speak of which verify this description, and are recognizable from others, unless those composing the decalogue? When, also, he resolved the law into two great commandments, he made evident reference to the two tables of the covenant, for he instituted the same classification of devotional and social duties; and when he further resolved all duty into love. with God and man for its objects, he impressed on the whole code a moral interpretation. What can be more truly or purely moral than charity? \emdash charity branching off into piety and benevolence? In a word, the decalogue is reproduced by the apostles. What it enjoins they enjoin in the identical terms, or with only verbal alterations; and how could they more decisively affix their seal to its indelible righteousness?\par 2. The decalogue, then, as a whole, is moral. See LAW OF MOSES. If the Sabbath be an exception, it is the only exception. But when we have found it in a code collectively moral \emdash the morality of which is attested by the clearest LVALiand most cumulative proof \emdash and when we find it sharing all the conspicuousness and honors of the allied enactments, it would require strong argument indeed to render credible its exceptional ritualism. Let us see whether good cause for so regarding it be discoverable in its own nature, or in prophecy, or min what Christ said of it expressly, or in the apostolic epistles. \par (1.) The Sabbath provides for rest and worship. Our sensuous being requires the one, and our spiritual being the other. To deny the laboring population any intermission of toil, or the heir of immortality any time for religious observances, would be to offend against the fundamental conditions of our state of existence. Under these aspects the Sabbath is not arbitrary. It is founded on the essentials and necessities of the human constitution, and nothing here below can be more solid and stable than its groundwork. To speak of our spiritual responsibilities more especially \emdash if it be a moral duty to worship God, it must also be a moral duty to observe that worship to the best advantage. For this the Sabbath provides. It is advantageous for worship that a certain day be set apart for it, and guarded from intrusive distractions. It is advantageous that the worshippers set apart the same day, both to the end that one may not draw another into temporal toil, and that religion may have the aids of social stimulus. It is advantageous that the day recur with suitable frequency. What frequency would be best it might be difficult or impossible for us to determine; but that would not show the proportioning of the time to be a matter of indifference. We can easily perceive that there are extremes to be avoided. If every day were a Sabbath, our terrestrial occupations would be suppressed. If the Sabbath returned once a year, it would be inadequate for the maintenance of habitual devotion. One of these arrangements would have been evidently incompatible with what we owe to this world, and the other with dutiful regard for the wLVALjorld to come. If we can judge thus far of the too often and the too seldom, why may not God descry unerringly the mean, and perceive that one day in seven is the best possible adjustment? \emdash the most conducive to moral good in our existing circumstances'? Experience has recommended no other division of time as preferable; on the contrary, every attempt to elongate or contract the week has utterly failed, and has owed the failure to a manifested impracticability or mischievousness. It follows that not only the duty, but the very timing of the duty, is of moral account, and that the Sabbath is entitled, by its nature, to the place it occupies in the decalogue \emdash fitly and justly ranking with statutes which transcend casualties, and will maintain their jurisdiction while the world lasts. On the same principle, if the sacredness of the Sabbath has been enhanced by rendering it commemorative of some great event, such as the natural creation, there may be religious benefit, and therefore moral suitableness, in transferring it to another day of the seven, in order to commemorate another event of analogous but superior consequence \emdash such as the accomplishment of a spiritual creation by the resurrection of Christ from the dead. See LORD'S DAY. Even the old economy, notwithstanding its necessary regard to times, did not show any rigid adherence to particular days, when a sufficient reason existed for departing from them. Thus, while circumcision was by the law fixed to the eighth day, the great mass of the people who had grown up in the wilderness were circumcised on the same day (Josh 5:1-9); and when any obstacle prevented men from the eating the Passover on the 14 th of the first month, they were allowed to postpone it to the next (Num 9:6).\par (2.) The prophets, speaking in the name of God, always express themselves in reverential language of the Sabbath. (See, in particular, Isa 56:6,7; 58:13,14; also 56:23.)\par It is objected that in these and like instances the Sabbath is allied wiLVALkth acknowledged constituents of the Mosaic law, and that such passages would therefore equally prove their permanency. It is in plain accordance, however, with the moral claims of the Sabbath that its continued observance should be foretold, and the absence of such prediction would have been urged in proof of its abrogation. Besides, these prophecies are in no part meaningless. They point to real and to improved worship in such diction as the Jews were familiar with and could alone comprehend. Shall we say, then, that the change in worship would be improvement, and the change as to the Sabbath abolition? We cannot see that this conclusion is called for "by parity of reasoning." On the contrary, these passages, to have sense or truth in any of their clauses, require a perpetuated Sabbath; for the effect would be to sweep away worship altogether if a day for it were not preserved.\par (3.) As regards Christ's express sayings on this subject, he discouraged, no doubt, such a traditional observance of the Sabbath as would have transformed it into a day of heartless neglects and sanctionless rigors. But he countenanced the keeping of it in its true spirit, as a day of personal privilege and beneficent usefulness avowing that "the Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." This seems to teach that the Sabbath was made for man not as a Jew or as a Christian, but as man, and therefore entitled to his regard in all conditions and through all ages. In reply, however, we are told that the expression in the original is the man. This must mean, it is said, "those for whom it was appointed, without specifying who they were, and not at all designating man in general." We see no grounds for such a paraphrase, but very much to demand its rejection. The article in such expressions defines the individual or the species. No individual man could be thus singled out as having the Sabbath made for him unless it were Adam; and none will assert that it was made for him in any sense exclusive of his posterity. AgLVALlain, the article may define the species, as we say the horse, the ass, the ostrich. Where the species is defined, all the individuals are comprehended, or such an allegation is made as would apply to any of them indifferently. For example, "If the salt have lost its savor, it is good for nothing but to be trodden under the feet of men" \emdash literally "the men," or the species, men without the distinction of Jew and Gentile. "Let your light so shine before men," literally "the men," in the sense of any or all men. "That which cometh out of the mouth this defileth a man" \emdash literally "the man," equivalent to man or any man. Practically the distinction here attempted to be made is visionary. Since man without the article is general, and the man, meaning the species man, is also general, the article may be dropped or retained without affecting the sense. Accordingly, these modes of expression are often used interchangeably. When Christ, then, declares that the Sabbath was made for man, we can only understand him as teaching that it was intended and instituted for our common humanity, and that it is to be so employed as to conduce to man's highest or spiritual good. But he also said that he was "Lord of the Sabbath; which shows," we are told, "that he had power to abrogate it partially or wholly." It seems as if some cannot think of power in connection with the Sabbath unless as exercised in abrogation. If it be placed in Christ's charge, they take for granted that more or less extinction must be the consequence. They speak as if Christ's scepter were an axe, and the only question were how much it would hew down and devastate! We maintain, on the contrary, that Christ would not be the Lord of the Sabbath to be its destroyer. In the language of the New Testament, this title points to assured prosperity. But though he will not superintend in order to annihilate either worship or worshippers, the designation "Lord" does suppose a manifested supremacy, and leads us to expect ameliorating modificationLVALm with essential preservation \emdash in other words, a Christian Sabbath or Lord's day.\par (4.) In the epistles, much stress has been laid by opponents of the Sabbath on some expressions of Paul. "One man esteemeth one day above another, another esteemeth every day alike. Let every one be fully persuaded in his own mind" (Rom 14:5). To us this language is vague and seems general; but it had relation to specific disputes, and we do not know, because we have not been told, what days are more particularly intended. They may have been festival days of human appointment, or cherished relics of Judaism unconnected with its Sabbath perfectly known, without danger of mistake, to the parties addressed. It is admitted that the apostles had stated religious services with assigned seasons for them; and if in the passage commented on we give his words the absolute and exceptionless sense claimed for them, it will follow that he courted contempt for his own ordering of worship. Assuredly he sanctioned no such sweeping indifference to days as would invalidate the injunction, "Forsake not the assembling of yourselves together, as the manner of some is."\par It is said (Col 2:16), "Let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ." This passage perfectly accords with a superseding of the Sabbath day as distinguished from the Lord's day, embodying substantially all that prior sabbatical observance had shadowed. In the same relation we would use the same language still. Independently of this answer to the objection, many have held, with bishop Horsley, that the word Sabbath is not here used in its strict acceptation, but with reference to other days observed by the Jewish Church with Sabbath like solemnity. Even if these passages had more difficulty than they present, two or three doubtful expressions, in relation to local circumstances and usages about which we have little infLVALnormation, are not to be balanced against the weighty and cumulative evidence which has been adduced for the morality of the Sabbath, and its consequent claims on the respect of all countries and ages.\par It may appear to some an objection to these views that if the Sabbath were moral, and therefore immutable, it would remain in heaven, whereas first and seventh days equally lose in the heavenly state their distinctive characters. There all duration is Sabbath \emdash all space sanctuary \emdash all engagement worship. It is sufficient to reply that morality supposes facts in demanding conformity to them. Filial duty implies the existing relation of parent and child, and is ever binding while that relation subsists, but is otherwise non-existent. So the Sabbath supposes a sensible world, and in such a world it must ever be a duty to have time expressly for temporal and time expressly for spiritual occupations. But in the world of spirits, where even the natural body becomes a spiritual body, and which flesh and blood cannot inherit, this discrimination disappears. It is the glory of the Sabbath that it prepares us for this consummation \emdash for inheriting blessings transcending its own privileges, and even induces approximations to celestial perfection under present adverse circumstances.\par III. Under the Christian dispensation, the Sabbath is altered from the seventh to the first day of the week (see Stone, in the Theol. Eclectic, 4, 542 sq.). The arguments for the change are these:\par 1. As the seventh day was observed by the Jewish Church in memory of the rest of God after the works of the creation, and their deliverance from Pharaoh's tyranny, so the first day of the week has always been observed by the Christian Church in memory of Christ's resurrection.\par 2. Christ conferred particular honor upon it by not only rising from the dead, but also by repeated visits to his disciples on that day.\par 3. It is called the Lord's day, <START GREEK>\par kuriakh/<END GREEK>\par , a term otLVALoherwise only used in the New Test. in reference to the sacred supper (1 Cor 11:20), and as in the latter passage it denotes that which specially commemorates the death of our Lord, it seems indisputable that it is applied in the former to that which specially commemorates his resurrection (Rev 1:10).\par 4. On this day the apostles were assembled, when the Holy Ghost came down so visibly upon them, to qualify them for the conversion of the world.\par 5. On this day we find Paul preaching in Troas, when the disciples came to break bread.\par 6. The directions which the apostles give to the Christians plainly allude to their religious assemblies on the first day.\par 7. Pliny refers to a certain day of the week being kept as a festival in honor of the resurrection of Christ; and the primitive Christians kept it in the most solemn manner. See LORD'S DAY,\par These arguments, it is true, are not satisfactory to some, and it must be confessed that there is no law in the New Test. concerning the first day. However, it may be observed that it is not so much the precise time that is universally binding, as that one day out of seven is to be regarded. "As it is impossible," says Dr. Doddridge, "certainly to determine which is the seventh day from the creation; and as, in consequence of the spherical form of the earth, and the absurdity of the scheme which supposes it one great plain, the change of place will necessarily occasion some alteration in the time of the beginning and ending of any day in question, it being always at the same time, somewhere or other, sun rising and sun setting, noon and midnight, it seems very unreasonable to lay such a stress upon the particular day as some do. It seems abundantly sufficient that there should be six days of labor and one of religious rest, which there will be upon the Christian and the Jewish scheme." See SUNDAY.\par As soon as Christianity was protected by the civil government, the Lord's day was ordered by law to be kept sacred. All proceedings in courts of LVALplaw, excepting such as were deemed of absolute necessity, or of charity, as setting slaves at liberty, etc., were strictly forbidden; and all secular business, excepting such as was of necessity or mercy, was prohibited; and by a law of Theodosius senior, and another by Theodosius junior, no public games or shows, no amusements or recreations, were permitted to be practiced on that day (see Cod. Theod. lib. 2, tit. 8, "De feriis;" Cod. Justin. lib. 3; Cod. Theod. lib. 15, "De spectaculis," lib. 5, leg. 2). The day was consecrated by all the primitive Christians to a regular and devout attendance upon the solemnities of public worship, and other religious exercises; and, as Bingham says in his Christian Antiquities, "they spent it in such employments as were proper to set forth the glory of the Lord, in holding religious assemblies for the celebration of the several parts of divine service \emdash psalmody, reading the Scriptures, preaching, praying, and receiving the Communion; and such was the flaming zeal of those pious votaries that nothing but sickness, or a great necessity, or imprisonment, or banishment, could detain them from it." A further proof of the sanctity in which they held the Sabbath was their pious and zealous observance of the Saturday evening, or, rather, from midnight to break of day on the Lord's day. This time the early Christians spent in the exercises of devotion; and persons of all ranks employed it in preparation for the sacred day. It must also be further observed that, in many places, particularly in cities, they usually had sermons twice a day in the churches, and that the evening was as well attended as the morning service; but in such churches as had no evening sermon, there were still the evening prayers, and the Christians of those times thought themselves obliged to attend this service as a necessary part of the public worship and solemnity of the Lord's day. The better to enforce this observance upon such as were ungodly or careless, ecclesiastical censures were infLVALqlicted upon them, whether they frequented places of public amusement or spent the day in indolence at home. These observations chiefly refer to the period between the publication of the Gospel by the apostles and the latter end of the 4 th century \emdash a period when this day might be expected to be observed more in accordance with the command of Christ and the will of the Holy Ghost.\par IV. As the Sabbath is of divine institution, so it is to be kept holy unto the Lord. Numerous have been the days appointed by men for religious services; but these are not binding, because of human institution. Not so the Sabbath. Hence the fourth commandment is ushered in with a peculiar emphasis \emdash "Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day." This institution is wise as to its ends, that God may be worshipped, man instructed, nations benefited, and families devoted to the service of God. It is lasting as to its duration. The abolition of it would be unreasonable, unscriptural (Ex 31:13), and every way disadvantageous to the body, to society, to the soul, and even to the brute creation. It is, however, awfully violated by visiting, feasting, indolence, buying and selling, working, worldly amusements, and traveling. "Look into the streets," says bishop Porteus, "on the Lord's day, and see whether they convey the idea of a day of rest. Do not our servants and our cattle seem to be almost as fully occupied on that day as on any other? As if this were not a sufficient infringement of their rights, we contrive, by needless entertainments at home and needless journeys abroad, which are often by choice and inclination reserved for this very day, to take up all the little remaining part of their leisure time. A Sabbath day's journey was among the Jews a proverbial expression for a very short one; among us it can have no such meaning affixed to it. That day seems to be considered by too many as set apart, by divine and human authority, for the purpose, not of rest, but of its direct opposite, the labor of travelLVALring, thus adding one day more of torment to those generous but wretched animals whose services they hire; and who, being generally strained beyond their strength the other six days of the week, have, of all creatures under heaven, the best and most equitable claim to suspension of labor on the seventh."\par The evils arising from Sabbath breaking are greatly to be lamented, they are an insult to God, an injury to ourselves, and an awful example to our servants, our children, and our friends. To sanctify this day, we should consider it \emdash \par (1)\tab a day of rest; not, indeed, to exclude works of mercy and charity, but a cessation from all labor and care;\par (2)\tab as a day of remembrance; of creation, preservation, redemption;\par (3)\tab as a day of meditation and prayer, in which we should cultivate communion with God (Rev 1:10);\par (4)\tab as a day of public worship (Acts 20:7; John 20:19);\par (5)\tab as a day of joy (Isa 56:2; Ps 118:24);\par (6)\tab as a day of praise (Ps 116:12-14);\par (7)\tab as a day of anticipation, looking forward to that holy, happy, and eternal Sabbath which remains for the people of God.\par V. The literature of the subject is very copious. The following are the chief standard works: Brerewood, Treatise of the Sabbath; Prideaux, Doctrine of the Sabbath; Bramhall, Discourses on the Controversy about the Sabbath; White, Treatise of the Sabbath Day; Heylin, History of the Sabbath; Chandler, Two Sermons on the Sabbath; Watts, Perpetuity of the Sabbath; Kennicott, Sermon and Dialogue on the Sabbath; Paley, Natural and Political Philosophy, bk. 5, ch. 7; Holden, Christian Sabbath; Burnside, On the Weekly Sabbath; Burder, Law of the Sabbath; Wardlaw, Wilson, and Agnew, severally, On the Sabbath; Modern Sabbath Examined (1832); James, On the Sacraments and Sabbath; Maurice, On the Sabbath; Kalisch, Commentary on Exodus (ad loc.); Proudhon, De la Celebration du Dimanche; Hessey, Bampton Lecture (Lond. 1866); Johnstone, Sunday and the Sabbath (ibid. 1853); DomLVALville, Inquiry into the Nature of the Sabbath (ibid. 1855, 2 vols.); Ellicott, History and Obligation of the Sabbath (ibid. 1844; N.Y. 1862); Hill, The Sabbath Made for Man (Lond. 1857); Coleman, in the Bibliotheca Sacra, 1, 526 sq.; and the literature cited by Malcolm, Theol. Index, s.v.; and especially by Cox, Literature of the Sabbath Question (Edinb. 1865, 2 vols. 8 vo). Articles on special points connected with the institution of the Sabbath may be found (in addition to those referred to in Poole's Index, s.v.) in the Meth. Quar. Rev. Jan. 1849; April, 1857; Journ. of Sac. Lit. Oct. 1851; July, 1857; Theol. and Lit. Journ. 1852; North Brit. Rev. Feb. 1853; Biblioth. Sacra, Oct. 1854; South. Quar. Rev. July 1857; New-Englander, Aug. 1858; United Presb. Rev. Jan. 1860; Amer. Theol. Rev. April, 1862; Brit. and For. Ev. Rev. Jan. 1863; Princeton Rev. Oct. 1863. See SUNDAY.\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \cf1\f1\fs29\par } LVALht{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Georgia;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\lang1033\f0\fs28 SABBATH, DAY AFTER THE\par Sabbath, Morrow After The.\par There has been from early times some difference of opinion as to the meaning of the words <START HEBREW>tB*V^h^ tr^j(m*<END HEBREW>\par , mochorath hashshabbath, thus rendered in the computation of the Passover (Lev 23:11,15). It has, however, been generally held, by both Jewish and Christian writers of all ages, that the Sabbath here spoken of is the first day of holy convocation of the Passover, the 15 th of Nisan, mentioned in Lev 23:7. In like manner the word <START HEBREW>tB*v^<END HEBREW>\par is evidently used as a designation of the day of atonement (Lev 23:32); and <START HEBREW>/otB*v^<END HEBREW>\par (sabbati observatio) is applied to the first and eighth days of Tabernacles and to the Feast of Trumpets. That the Sept. so understood the passage in question can hardly be doubted from their calling it "the morrow after the first day" (i.e. of the festival): <START GREEK>\par h( e)pau/rion th=$ prw/th$<END GREEK>\par . The word in ver. 15 and 16 has also been understood as "week, "used in the same manner as <START GREEK>\par sa/bbata<END GREEK>\par in the New Test. (Matt 28:1; Luke 18:12; John 20:1, etc.). But some have insisted on taking the Sabbath to mean' nothing but the seventh day of the week, or "the Sabbath of creation, "as the Jewish writers have called it; and they see a difficulty in understanding the same word in the general sense of week as a period of seven days, contending that it can only mean a regular week, beginning with the first day, and ending with the Sabbath. Hence the Baithusian (or Sadducaean) party, and in later times the Karaites, supposed that the omer was offered on the day following that weekly Sabbath which might happen to fall within the seven days of the Passover. The day of Pentecost would thLVALus always fall on the first day of the week. Hitzig (Ostern und Pfingsten [Heidelberg, 1837]) has put forth the notion that the Hebrews regularly began a new week at the commencement of the year, so that the 7 th, 14 th, and 21 st of Nisan were always Sabbath days. He imagines that "the morrow after the Sabbath" from which Pentecost was reckoned was the 22 d day of the month, the day after the proper termination of the Passover. He is well answered by Bahr (Symbolik, 2, 620), who refers especially to Josh 5:11, as proving, in connection with the law in Lev 23:14, that the omer was offered on the 16 th of the month. It should be observed that the words in that passage, <START HEBREW>Jr#a*h* rWbu&<END HEBREW>\par , mean merely corn of the land, not, as in the A.V., "the old corn of the land." "The morrow after the Passover" (<START HEBREW>js^P#h^ tr^j(m*<END HEBREW>\par ) might at first sight seem to express the 15 th of Nisan; but the expression may, on the whole, with more probability, be taken as equivalent to "the morrow after the Sabbath," that is, the 16 th day. See Keil on Josh 5:11; Masius and Drusius, on the same text, in the Crit. Sac.; Bahr, Symb. 2, 621; Selden, De Anno Civili, c. 7; Bartenora, in Chagigah, 2, 4; Buxtorf, Syn. Jud. vol. 20, Fagius, in Leviticus 23:15; Drusius, Notoe Majores in Leviticus 23:16. It is worthy of remark that the Sept. omits <START GREEK>\par th=| e)mau/rion tou= pa/sxa<END GREEK>\par , according to the texts of Tischendorf and Theile. See PASSOVER; See PENTECOST. But there is strong ground for the Karaitic interpretation. See SABBATH (Supra).\par (from McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, Electronic Database. Copyright \'a9 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)\par \cf1\f1\fs29\par } LVALhv{\rtf1\ansi\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fprq2\fcharset0 Georgia;}{\f1\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\lang1033\f0\fs28 SABBATH, JEWISH\par Sabbath, Jewish.\par The word Sabbath is, in Hebrew, shabbath', <START HEBREW>tB*v^<END HEBREW>\par (comp. Ewald, Ausfuhrl. Lehrb. p. 400; and see on the form shabbathon, <START HEBREW>/otB*v^<END HEBREW>\par , at the end of this art.); in the Graecized form <START GREEK>\par sa/bbaton<END GREEK>\par , or, in the plural form, <START GREEK>\par ta\\ sa/bbata<END GREEK>\par (comp. Horace, Sat. 1, 9, 69). The derivation and meaning of the word are well known. Josephus (Apion, 2, 2) explains it as a rest from all labor, <START GREEK>\par a)na/pauoi$ a)po\\ panto\\$ e&pgou<END GREEK>\par (comp. Ant. 1, 1, 1). Mistaken etymologies, by those ignorant of Hebrew, are found in Josephus, Apion, loc. cit.; Plutarch, Symp. 4, 6, 2; Lactantius, Institut. 7, 14. On Sabbath (G. <START GREEK>\par sa/bbata<END GREEK>\par ) in the sense of week, See WEEK. It is clear that the word <START GREEK>\par e(bdoma/$<END GREEK>\par (2 Macc 6:11) means the Sabbath (comp. Josephus, War, 2, 8, 9).\par This was the seventh day of the Hebrew week, extending from sunset on Friday to sunset on Saturday (comp. Lev 23:32, and see Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. p. 312 sq.). See DAY. The time during which the sun was going down was the eve of the Sabbath. See PREPARATION. Of course, the commencement and close of the Sabbath varied with the higher or lower position of the observer. Thus, Carpzov quotes from the book Musar this statement: "Tiberias lay in a valley, where the sun disappeared half an hour before setting; Zephore was on a mountain, where the sun shone longer than on the plains. The people in the former, therefore, began their Sabbath sooner, in the latter later, than the rest of the nation." By a law of Augustus (Josephus, Ant. 16, 6, 2), the Sabbath began at the ninth hour. According to the disciplLVALwes of the Gemara, the Sabbath began and ended in all Jewish cities at the sound of the trumpet (comp. Maimon. Hilkoth Shab. c. 5). Josephus records this custom of Jerusalem (War, 4, 9, 12). In the Temple, the trumpet was to be blown from the "covert for the Sabbath," or Sabbath roof, Heb. Mesak hash-shabbath, <START HEBREW>tB*V^h^ Es^ym@<END HEBREW>\par (2 Kings 16:18). See Rhenferd, Opera Philol. p. 770 sq.\par This day was celebrated by the Hebrews as a holy day (Deut 5:12). a day of rest and rejoicing (Isa 58:13; comp. Hos 2:11; 1 Macc 1:41), by ceasing from all labor, with their servants and all strangers, as well as cattle (Ex 20:10; 31:13 sq.; 34:21; 35:2; Deut 5:14, comp. Jer 17:21,24; Josephus, Apion, 2, 39; Dion Cass. 37, 17 [Philo, Opp. 2, 137, extends the Sabbath \emdash rest even to plants \emdash they were not to be eared or reaped on that day]), and by a special burned offering, presented in the Temple, in addition to the usual daily offering (q.v.) \emdash which was doubled on this day \emdash consisting of two yearling lambs, with the meat offerings and drink offerings belonging to it (Numbers 38:9; comp. 2 Chron 31:3; Neh 10:33; Ezek 46:4). In the holy place of the Temple, the shewbread was renewed (Lev 24:8; 1 Chron 9:32), and the new division of priests appointed for that week took their places (2 Kings 11:5,7,9; 2 Chron 23:4). The services of the priests and Levites in and about the tabernacle and Temple were not accounted labor (comp. Matt 12:5), and continued through the Sabbath. Circumcision, too, as a religious ceremony, took place on the Sabbath, when that was the eighth day (John 7:22 sq.; comp. Mishna, Shab. c. 19; Schottgen, Hor. Hebr. 1, 121; Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. p. 1028).\par Deliberate profanation of this day was punished with death (Ex 31:14 sq.; 35:2), which was inflicted by stoning (Num 15:32 sq.; Mishna, Sanhedr. 7, 8). But if the law of the Sabbath was broken through ignorance or mistake, a sin offering was required, and the offense pardoned (comp. Shab. 7,LVALx 1; 11, 6, Chrithuth, 3, 10). There were times, too, when the Jews dispensed with the extreme severity of their law (Isa 56:2; 58:13; Ezek 20:16; 22:8; Lam 2:6; Neh 13:16); and the legal observance of the Sabbath seems never to have been rigorously enforced until after the Exile. At this time, too, the meaning of the work which profaned the Sabbath was first strictly defined, since the lawgiver had left this to be determined by experience, and, in certain doubtful cases, the individual conscience, definitely prohibiting but one act \emdash the kindling of a fire in one's house (Ex 35:3; comp. Eichhorn, Repert. 9, 32; 13, 258) for cooking (Ex 16:23; Num 15:32; comp. Mishna, Terum. 2, 3). This was interpreted by the Jews, however, to include the lighting of lamps, and they used to do this before the Sabbath began (Mishna, Shab. 2, 7; 16, 8; comp. Seneca, Ep. 95, p. 423, Bip.). This prohibition compelled the Jews to cook and bake their food for the Sabbath on the preceding day, and it was often kept warm in vessels set in dry hay or chips (Mishna, Shab. 4, 1 sq.; comp. also Josephus, War, 2, 8, 9, on the Essenes). The intermission of labor was required on feast days as well as on the Sabbath, except the preparation of food (comp. Ex 12:16; see Mishna, Yom Tob., 5, 2; Megilla, 1, 5). A later age, which sought to observe painfully the letter of the law, and to confide as little as possible to the judgment and conscience of individuals, extended the meaning of this work much further, and strove to complete a formal code for Sabbath observance. Marketing and public trade ceased on the Sabbath, of course (Neh 10:31; 13:15,16); and it was merely an auxiliary police regulation of Nehemiah to close the gates on that day (Neh 13:19). It was in the spirit of the law, too, that traveling on the Sabbath was forbidden, with reference to Ex 16:29 (comp. Josephus, Ant. 13, 8, 4). See SABBATH DAYS JOURNEY. But the conduct of the Jewish armies in refusing to arm on the Sabbath, and suffering their enemies to cut them doLVALywn, certainly savored of fanaticism (1 Macc 1:2,32 sq.; 2 Macc 6:11, Josephus, Ant. 12, 6, 2, War, 2, 17, 10; Life, p. 32; comp. Plutarch, Superstit. p. 169). A parallel may be found in the Jewish steersman who left the helm at the moment of a squall because the Sabbath was beginning (Synes. Ep. 4, p. 163, ed Petav.). Yet the apprehension of the great advantage which would thus accrue to the enemy led prudent commanders to observe this rest from fighting only so far as to abstain on the Sabbath from offensive operations (1 Macc 11:34,43 sq.; Josephus, Ant. 13, 1, 3; 14, 4, 2 sq.). Marching armies halted on that day (Josephus, Ant. 13, 8, 4; comp. 14, 10, 12). The last passage seems to show that the Sabbath law was made a pretext by Jews to escape from foreign military service when they wished (see again Ant. 18, 9, 2; 10, 2; War, 4, 2, 3; Michaelis, Mos. Recht, 4, 133 sq.). Yet in the last Jewish war less caution was exercised, even in abstaining from offensive movement (Josephus, War, 2, 19, 2); and many an artifice was carried on by the aid of the Sabbath and its observances (ibid. 4, 2, 3. In this instance, it was less the fear of breaking the law than a shrewd calculation of advantage which prevented the Jews from engaging the enemy on the Sabbath).\par The Pharisees gave very minute directions on the observance of the Sabbath; and although different teachers differed in many points, yet in the New Testament period we find great rigor prevailing. The plucking of single ears of grain in passing (Matt 12:2; Mark 2:23 sq.; Luke 6:1 sq.), the healing of the sick (Matt 12:10; Mark 3:2; Luke 6:7; 13:14; John 9:14,16; Thilo, Apocr. p. 503), the walking of a cured patient with his bed (John 5:10), all were considered as desecrations of the Sabbath by the Pharisees and their disciples; although when property was in danger, many acts which were certainly waork were freely performed in case of pressing need (Matt 12:11; Luke 14:5; comp. Gemara, Shab. 128, 1); yet even in the care of cattle (comp. Luke 13:15LVALz) all work was to be shunned which was not really necessary (Shab. 24, 2 sq). The Essenes seem to have been yet stricter in observing this day. The Mishna (Shab. c. 17) has severe regulations against the removal of goods; yet certain exceptions were allowed (comp. Philo, Opp. 2, 569). On the severity of the Samaritans in this respect, see Gesen. De Theol. Samarit. p. 35 sq.; comp. Origen, Princip. 4, 17; tom. 1, p. 176). They refrained from sexual intercourse on the night of the Sabbath (Eichhorn, Repert. 13, 258). The Mishna, in the tract Shab. (2 d part), which treats the whole subject of this article, names in particular (7, 2) thirty-nine forms of labor which are forbidden on the Sabbath, each of which has, again, its variations and species. In the two-fold Gemara to this tract (the Tosiphta to the tract Shab. is found in Hebrew and Latin in Ugolini Thesaur. 17; the tract itself has been separately edited by J.B. Carpzov, Leips. 1661), and in the Rabbinical writings the matter is spun out still further and finer (see Hulsius, Theol. Jud. 1, 240 sq.; Buxtorf, Synag. Jud. c. 16; Schottgen, Hior. Hebr. 1, 121 sq.). As to the healing of the sick, the rabbins generally allowed the use of all proper remedies if life was in danger (see Mishna, Yoma, 8, 6; Schottgen, op. cit. p. 122 sq.; Danz, Christi Curatio Sabbathica Vindic. [Jen. 1699]; also in Meuschen, N.T. p. 569 sq.); but those which were only designed to make the sick more comfortable were rigorously forbidden (see, e.g. Gemara, Berachoth, p. 11. According to the Mishna [Shab. 22, 6], even a broken bone was not to be set nor dislocations poulticed on the Sabbath; yet see Maimonides, ad loc.). On the other forms of labor permitted on the Sabbath (Mishna, Shab. 24, 5) the reader may consult V.H. Hasenmuller, Opera Sabbathum Depellantia (Jen. 1708).\par The Sabbath was especially consecrated to devotion and to the law (Josephus, Ant. 16, 2, 4), and frivolous or unclean conversation was accounted a desecration of the day (Gesen. In Jesa. 2, 230). HeLVAL{nce in the synagogues everywhere on this day took place the great services of worship (Mark 1:21; 6:2; Luke 4:16,31; 6:6; 13:10; Acts 13:44; 16:13; 17:2; 18:4), with prayer and the public reading and expounding of the holy books (Luke 4:16 sq.; Acts 13:27; Josephus, Apion, 1, 22). This, however, cannot be considered as a Mosaic regulation (see Vitringa, Synag. 1, 2, 2); but see LAW. Cheerful meals were held (Luke 14:1; Philo, Opp. 2, 477. The ariston [<START GREEK>\par a&riston<END GREEK>\par ] was taken on the Sabbath about the sixth hour [Josephus, Life, p. 54]. On the three meals of the Sabbath, see Mishna, Shab. 16, 2, and Maimon. ad loc.); feast day clothing was put on (Sharbau, De Luxu Sabbatorio, in his Observ. Sacr. 3, 541 sq.); and it was never a fast day (Judg 8:6. Justin's remark [36:2], which makes it a fast, is untrue. Comp. Sueton. Aug. 76, where Ernesti's explanation does not accord with the usage of speech; Petron. Fragm. 35, 6. See contra, Maimon. Hilkoth Shab. Extr. Comp. P.T. Carpzov, De Jejun. Sabb. ex Antiq. Hebr. [Rostoch. 1741]).\par When the Jews were under foreign supremacy, except during the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes (1 Macc 1:45,48; 2 Macc 6:6), their legal Sabbath was confirmed (comp. 1 Macc 10:34; Josephus, Ant. 14, 10, 20, 21, 23, 25); and even in the composition of the civil law, a conciliatory respect was shown to it (Josephus, Ant. 16, 6, 2 and 4; Philo, Opera, 2, 569). It is still a question how far the Jewish legal administration itself regarded the Sabbath (see, among others, Tholuck, On John, p. 302 sq.; Bleek, Beitr\'e4ge z. Evangelienkritik, p. 140 sq.). The Mishna (Yom Tob, 5, 2) says expressly that no court was held on that day, nor even was a session begun the afternoon preceding, lest it might encroach upon the Sabbath (Mishna, Shab. 1, 2; comp. Gemara, Sanhed. fol. 35, 1; nor can the force of these passages be removed by Gemara, Sanhed. fol. 88, 1, even though it referred to this subject). See COUNCIL. It is remarkable that at one time the Jews themselLVAL|ves made an effort in Syria to do away with the observance of the Sabbath (Josephus, War, 7, 3, 3). This effort was aided, perhaps, by the view which the Romans took of this weekly rest, often mocking the Jews as slothful (Juvenal, 14, 105 sq.; Seneca, in Augustine, Civ. Dei, 6, 11).\par The origin of the Sabbath is usually referred to Moses by the German critics (Ewald, Gesch. Isr. 2, 142 sq.) on the ground that Gen 2:1 cannot be accepted as a testimony to its earlier institution, since this whole account of the creation, whose date and author are unknown, is plainly designed for the very purpose of presenting the Sabbath to us as an immediate divine ordinance (see Gabler, Neuer Vers. uber die mos. Schopfungsgesch. p. 38 sq.; De Wette, Krit. p. 40 sq.), just as it is often set forth in later writings in connection with the exode and with the legislation of Sinai (Ezek 20:10 sq.; Neh 9:13 sq.; comp. Deut 5:14 sq., with which Ex 16:23 agrees). Reggio, by a peculiar. explanation of Gen 2:1 sq., arrives at a distinction between the Sabbath appointed here for all mankind and that given to the Jews in their law (Zeitschrift fur d. Judenth. 1845, p. 102 sq., 121 sq.). The Sabbath is considered as a Mosaic institution also by Eusebius (H.E. 1, 4, 3; Proep. Ev. 7, 6) and most of the rabbins (Selden, Jus. Nat. et Gent. 3, 10). Among the more recent writers, this view is adopted by Spencer (Leg. Rit. 1, 4, 9 sq.); Eichhorn (Urgesch. 1, 249 sq.); Gabler (ibid. p. 58 sq.; Neuer Versuch, p. 38 sq.); Bauer (Gottesdienstl. Verfass. 2, 174 sq., in answer to Hebenstreit, De Sab. ante Leg. Mos. Existente [Lips. 1748]); Iken (Dissert. Theol. p. 26 sq.); Richter (in the Biblioth. Brem. Nova, 3, 310 sq.); Michaelis (Mos. Recht, 4, 110 sq.). See SABBATH, CHRISTIAN.\par The question may be raised whether the Sabbath was not borrowed by Moses from some other ancient people, as the Egyptians. It is not necessary to discuss the unhistoric suppositions of Philo (2, 137) and Josephus (Apion, 2, 39) that this feast was very widLVAL}ely spread among ancient nations. Yet it appears from Seneca (Ep. 95. p. 423, Bip.) and Ovid (Remed. Amor. p. 219) that a reverence for the seventh day had found an entrance among the Romans (comp. Ideler, Chron. 2, 176). Various strange opinions as to the origin of the Sabbath have been suggested which answer themselves (Plutarch, Sympos. 4, 6, 2). (On the pretended Jewish worship of Saturn, see Buttmann, Mythol. 2, 44 sq.) It is certain that the Egyptians knew the reckoning by weeks, and even began each successive week with the day of Chronos (Dion Cass. 37, 18, 19). Baur, following Tacitus (Hist. 5, 5), has connected the Sabbath with the worship of Chronos-Saturn, to whom the Romans also dedicated particularly the seventh day of the week (Tubinger Zeitschr. fur Theol. 1832, 3, 145 sq.; comp. Movers, Phoniz. p. 315); hence the Roman historians compared the Jewish Sabbath with the day of Saturn (Dion Cass. 37, 17, 18; Tibul. 1, 3, 17). His view rests on the well known representation by the Greeks and Romans of the golden age long gone by, the age of rest and equality, under Saturn, and the custom connected with it of giving the slaves a holiday at the Saturnalia (see Syrb, De Sabbatho Gentili in Temp. helvet. 2, 527 sq.; and in Ugolini Thesaur. vol. 17; comp. also Wernsdorf, Diss. de Gentil. Sabbato [Viteb. 1722]). But this theory is so fine spun that it falls to pieces at the first touch, for the passage in Dion Cassius does not do anything towards proving a naming of the days of the week after the planets (see Ideler, Chronol. 1, 180). And the Western representations of Saturn can so much the less be transferred to the East in that, even among the Romans, the day of Saturn was counted an unlucky one. Astrologically, too, the day of Saturn is the first, not the seventh, of the week. But, apart from all this, it was more natural for an agricultural people to keep as a festival the last day of the week, after men and beasts had become wearied with toil, in rest, and with ceremonies in accordance with LVAL~their religious character, particularly with sacrifices. Why should we seek a foreign model for all the Mosaic institutions? Why refer these simple observances to such far fetched and generally unsuitable explanations? (See especially Bahr, Symbol. 1, 584 sq. In answer to Von Bohlen, Genesis, p. 137, Introd. see Tuch, Genesis, p. 14 sq.)\par The Sabbath, as the basis of the Israelitish cycle of feast days, was imitated and repeated, as it were, in several other festivals; e.g. the Sabbath Year, the Seventh New Moon, and the Year of Jubilee. On the subject of the whole article, see Carpzov, Appar. p. 382 sq.; Reland, Ant. Sacr. 4, 8; Bauer, op. cit. 2, 152 sq.; Jahn, 3, 388 sq.; Gisb. Voetii Dis. Sel. 3, 1227 sq.; Bahr, Symbol. 2, 566 sq., 577 sq.\par A figurative use of the word "Sabbath" denotes a solemn festival on which servile work was proscribed; but this occurs only with respect to the great day of annual atonement (Lev 23:33). The word properly representing such an abstract idea of rest is <START HEBREW>/otB*v^<END HEBREW>\par , shabbaton, <START GREEK>\par sabbatismo/$<END GREEK>\par , sabbatism (q.v.). The term "Sabbath," however, is frequently applied to a longer hebdomadal cycle than that of the week, e.g. the sabbatic year (q.v.). The Rabbinic or orthodox Jews likewise claim that in Lev 23:11-16, <START HEBREW>tB*v^<END HEBREW>\par , Sabbath, is synonymous with <START HEBREW>js^P#<END HEBREW>\par , Passover, and accordingly they reckon Pentecost from the 16 th of Nisan, the second day of unleavened bread, instead of the Sabbath following it. See CALENDAR, JEWISH. In this they are upheld by a majority of Christian archaeologists and interpreters. The Karaites, on the contrary, contend that the word "Sabbath" in that ordinance has its regular and usual signification, namely, the seventh day of the week. The arguments advanced for the traditional view and reckoning, formidable as they at first appear, will be found, on a close examination, to be wholly inconclusive.\par (1.) It is a pLVALure assumption that the phrase <START HEBREW>tB*V^h^ tr^j(m*<END HEBREW>\par , morrow of the Sabbath, is equivalent to <START HEBREW>js^P#h^ tr^j(m*<END HEBREW>\par , morrow of the Passover. The passage in Josh 5:11, often appealed to in proof, states that on the latter day the Israelites ate the produce of Canaan (<START HEBREW>Jr#a*h* rWbu&<END HEBREW>\par , A.V. erroneously "old corn of the land"), consisting of unleavened cakes and parched ears. From this it has been inferred that, as the Passover had just been celebrated, the wave sheaf, which was a necessary preliminary to harvest (Lev 23:14), had already been offered. This, as all parties agree, could not be done before the 16 th of Nisan, and hence Keil and others unwarrantably assume that this was the day in question. But we know, from its use elsewhere (Num 23:3), that the phrase "morrow after [Heb. of] the Passover" was the day immediately succeeding the Paschal meal, i.e. the 15 th of Nisan. The wave sheaf had not therefore at that time been offered, and the Israelites could not have stood upon ceremony in eating the new grain, probably because they had not vet become settled in their possession to which the law in question was specially applicable (Lev 23:10; comp. Num 15:18).\par (2.) The definite art. in <START HEBREW>tB*V^h^<END HEBREW>\par the ordinance under consideration merely indicates it as the one Sabbath of the Paschal week, and cannot refer to any other of the Passover days in the context, which are not (either there or elsewhere) designated by this term. Nor is the word <START HEBREW>tB*v^<END HEBREW>\par , Sabbath, ever used in Biblical Hebrew in the sense of a literal week, as the Rabbinical theory assumes. The seven Sabbaths are termed fall (<START HEBREW>tomyj!T=<END HEBREW>\par , "complete") because they are exclusive of the terminus a quo, contrary to the usual Jewish practice, which is to include both extremes.\par (3.) The reckoning of Pentecost from the Sabbath proper would not disagree with the classificatiLVALon of the other Jewish feasts by terms of seven, nor tend to displace either that or the Passover in the calendar; for the other feasts were not dependent upon the Pentecost, and the fifty days would be equally regular and harmonious from whatever point reckoned.\par (4.) The weight of Jewish authority is of little account, and the accession of Christian writers is of still less, since there is known to have been an early difference of opinion and practice on this point. The two instances occurring in the New Test. history are decidedly adverse to the Rabbinical mode of computation, namely. the "second Sabbath after the first," on which Jesus passed through the fields of standing corn (Luke 6:1), See SECOND-FIRST SABBATH, and the first Pentecost of the Christian Church, which by the traditionary calendar would have fallen on the Sabbath (the seventh after that of the crucifixion), and not on Sunday, as generally admitted. See PENTECOST; See SABBATH, MORROW AFTER.\par In Luke 6:1 we have the above-noted phrase, <START GREEK>\par sa/bbaton deutero/prwton<END GREEK>\par , rendered in the A.V. "The second Sabbath after the first." It is over hasty, after a few MSS., to blot out the second word as not genuine, though even Meyer does so. Who could have inserted it? And is not the omission of a word which nobody understood easily accounted for in the few instances in which it takes place? To strike out a word simply as strange is too uncritical to be borne. The various older interpretations are collected in Wolf, Cur. 1, 619 sq.; Rus, Harm. Evang. p. 639 sq.; Paulus, Comm. 2, 32 sq. It is usually regarded as the first Sabbath after the second Easter day (comp. Lev 23:15, and the Sept.), since from this day to the Passover seven Sabbaths were reckoned (Leviticus l.c.), and these may well have been distinguished by their numbers \emdash the first, second, third, etc., after the second Easter day (Scali