Part 27
ress of unfolding thought or argument, but in the last word of the foregoing sentence which
is taken up and followed out in the new one" (see
their solemn witness against the awful sins done
1 5.6.7.9.10, etc). This pecuharity, however, does
daily before their eyes.
Peter, First Ep. of Peter, Second Ep. THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2354
nounce sin, to announce judgment on the guilty and to recall them to repentance and reforination. But ever and anon their vision was filled with the
not interfere with tlie unity of the cp,, it rather adds to it, and it gives to it a vividness which it otherwise might not possess.
It is the ep. of hope. How much it makes of this prime grace! Peter seems never to grow weary of describing it and exalting its radiant
future and its blessedness, their voices would swell with rapture as they saw and foretold the great salvation to be brought to the world and the grace that would then so copiously go out unto men; for the Messiah was to appear and to suffer, the just
2. Hope beauty and desirableness. He calls
it a living hope (1 3). It is born by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, and
for the unjust, that He might bring us to God.
(2) Spirit of Christ.—The prophet's messages were the messages of the Spirit of Christ. It was He who testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ
it calmly awaits the glorious inheritance that soon will be enjoyed. It is a hope that will be perfected at the advent of Christ (1 13), and it is set on God, hence cannot fail (1 21). With sickly, dying hope we are quite familiar. The device which a certain state (South Carolina) has inscribed on its Great Seal is, duni spiro spero ("while I live I hope"). Such a hope may serve for a commonwealth whose existence is limited to this world, but a man needs something more enduring, something imperi-shable. "It
^ The prophets always disclaim any part in the origination of their messages. They affirm in the most positive and solemn manner that their predictions are not their own, but God's. Hence they are called the Lord's "spokesmen," the Lord's "mouth" (Ex 4 15.16; 7 1.2; 2 Pet 1 21).
and the glories that should follow.
(3) Prophetic study.—They "sought and searched
is a fearful thing when a man and his hopes die together" (Leigh ton). A Christian can confidently write, "when I am dying I hope," for his is a living hope that fills and thrills the future with a blessed reality.
diligently." These terms are strong and emphatic. They pored over the predictions which the Spirit had revealed through themselves; they scrutinized them with eager and prolonged inquiry. Two points engaged their attention: "What time or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did point unto." The first "what" relates to the time of the Messiah's advent; the second "what" to the events and circumstances which would attend His appearing—a fruitful theme, one that engages the inquiry of nobler students—"which things angels desire to look into."
The Christian's glorious inheritance (1 3-5) is depicted in one of the most comprehensive and sug-
gestive descriptions of the believer's
3. Inheritheritage found in the Bible. It is ance declared to be "incorruptible." The word points to its substance. It is imperishable. In it there is no element of decay. It holds in its heart no germ of death. Like its author, the living God, it is unchangeable and eternal. It is "undefiled." It is not stained by sin nor polluted by crime, either in its acquisition or its possession. Human heritages generally are marred by human wrongs. There is hardly an acre of soil that is not tainted by fraud or violence. The coin that passes from hand to hand is in many instances soiled by guilt. But this of Peter is absolutely pure and holy. It "fadeth not away." It never withers. Ages do not impair its beauty or dim its luster. Its bloom will remain fresh, its fragrance undiminished, forever. Thus our inheritance "is glorious in these respects: it is in its suhslance, incorruptible: in its purity, undefiled: in beauty, unfading" (Alford).
The Christian brotherhood is described in 2 9.10: "But ye are an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy
nation, a people for God's own pos-
5. The session, that ye may show forth the Christian excellencies of him who called you out Brotherhood of darkness into his marvellous light."
The brotherhood is the new Israel. The apostle describes it in terms which were apphed to the old Israel, but which include more than the ancient Israel ever realized. The exalted conception is by one who was a strict Jew, the apostle of the circumcision, and who held somewhat closely to the Mosaic institutions to the end of his life. All the more significant on this account is his testimony. The descriptive titles which he here gathers together and places on the brow of the Christian brotherhood are of the most illustrious sort. A distinguished man, a noble, a general, a statesman, will sometimes appear in public with his breast covered with resplendent decorations which mark his rank or his achievements. But such distinctions sink into insignificance alongside of this dazzling cluster. This is the heavenly nobility, the royal family of the Lord of glory, decorated with badges brighter far than ever glittered on the breast of king or emperor. But even in this instance Peter reminds Christians of the glorious destiny awaiting them that they may be strengthened and stimulated to stedfastness and loyalty in the midst of the trials and afflictions to which they are subjected (2 11.12) A study of 1 Pet 3 18-20—"preached unto the spirits in prison"—should here follow in the present
Now why does the apostle in the very opening of his Ep. give so lofty a place to the saints' inheritance? He does so in order to comfort and encourage his fellow-believers with the consolations of the Lord Himself, that they may bear stedfastly their manifold sufferings and triumph over their weighty
afflictions. Hence he writes: "Wherein ye greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, ye have been put to grief in manifold trials, that the proof of your faith .... may be found unto praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Chri.st" (1 6-9). He hfts their thoughts and their gaze up far above the troubles and distresses around them to Him whose they are, whom they serve, who will by and by crown them with immortal bhss.
The prophets and their study are described in 1 10.11: "Concerning which salvation the prophets
sought and searched diligently, who
cursory review of the characteristic
4. Testiprophesied of the grace that should mony of come unto you," etc. With Peter Prophets and his fellow-apostles the testimony of the prophets was authoritative and
6. Spirits features of the Ep., but anything like in Prison an adequate examination of this difficult passage would require more space than could be given it. Suffice it to quote a sentence from Professor Zahn {NT, II, 289) with which the writer agrees: "That interpretation of 1 Pet 3 19 is in all probability correct, according to which a preaching of Christ at the time of the Flood is referred to, i.e. a preaching through Noah, so that Noah is here represented as a preacher of righteousness, as in 2 Pet 2 5." See Prison, Spirits in.
final. Where they had a clear word from the OT Scriptures, they felt that every question was settled and controversj' was at an end.
(1) Salvation.—The burden of the prophetic communications was salvation. The prophets spoke on many subjects; they had to exhort, rebuke and entreat their wayward contemporaries; to de-
2355 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Peter, First Ep. of Peter, Second Ep.
VI. AncJysis.—A very general analysis of the Ep. is the following:
about it he states to be "difference of style from
I Pet." He accounts for the difference by supposing that the apostle "made use of two different interpreters." As great teachers and scholars as Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome, e.g. Athanasius, Augustine, Epiphanius, Rufinus and Cyril, received
(1) Christian privileges, 1—2 10. (2) Cliristian duties, 2 11—4 11. (3) Persecutions and trials, I 12—5 11. (4) Personal matters and salutations, 5 12-14. The chief doctrines of Christianity are found in 1 Pet. The vicarious suffering and death of the Lord Jesus Christ (2 24; 3 18); the new birth (1 3.23); redemption by the blood of Christ (1 18. 19), faith, hope, patient endurance under unjust suffering, and holiness of life, are all pressed upon Christians with great earnestness and force.
it as genuine. At the Reformation Erasmus rejected 2 Pet; Luther seems to have had no doubt of its genuineness; while Calvin felt some hesitancy because of the "discrepancies between it and the First." In the 4th cent., two church councils (Laodicea, c 372, and Carthage, 397) formally recognized it and placed it in the Canon as equal in authority with the other books of the NT.
Literature.—Bible Diets.. DB, HDB. Davis, DB, EB, Sch-Herz, vol VIII; Intros: Westcott, Salmon, Zahn; Vincent, Word Studies: Comms.: Bible Comm., Cambridge Bible for Sehools: Lillio, Jameson, Pausott and Brown, Altord, Bigg, Mayor (on 2 Pet), Johnstone
The opinion of modern scholars as to references in post-apostolic literature to 2 Pet is not only divided, but in many instances antago2. Modern nistic. Sabnon, Warfield, Zahn and Opinion others strongly hold that such references are to be found in the writings of the 2d cent., perhaps in one or two documents of the 1st. They insist with abundant proof in support of their contention that Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, the Shepherd of Hermas, and the Didache, and Clement of Rome, were all acquainted with the Ep. and made allusions to it in their writings. Weighing as honestly and as thoroughly as one can the citations made from that literature, one is strongly disposed to accept the evidence as legitimate and conclusive.
(homiletical). New York, 1888; Hort, 1 Pet 1 1—2 17, New Yorlc, 1898.
William G. Moorehead PETER, THE SECOND EPISTLE OF: I. External Evidence in Favor of Its Apostolic Authority 1. Ancient Opinion 2. Modern Opinion 3. Dr. Chase's View U. Internal Evidence in Support of Its Apostolic AuTHORITr 1. Style and Diction 2. Reason of Dissimilarities 3. Claim to Petrine Authorship 4. Christian Earnestness 5. Relation to Apostles 6. Autobiographical Allusions 7. Quoted by Jude III. Doctrinal Teachings of the Epistle 1. Saving Knowledge (1) Basis (2) Growth (3) Inerrancy of Sources 2. The Three Worlds (1) The Old World (2) The Present World (3) The New World The Second Ep. of Peter comes to us with less historical support of its genuineness than any other book of the NT. In consequence, its right to a place in the Canon is seriously doubted by some and denied by others. There are those who confidently assign it to the ApostoUc age and to the apostle whose name it bears in the NT, while there are those who as confidently assign it to post-apostolic times, and repudiate its Petrine authorship. It is not the aim of this article to trace the history of the two opinions indicated above, nor to cite largely the arguments employed in the defence of the Ep., or those in opposition to it; nor to attempt to settle a question which for more than a thousand years the wisest and best men of the Christian church have been unable to settle. Such a procedure would in this case be the height of presumption. What is here attempted is to point out as briefly as may be some of the reasons for doubting its canonicity, on the one hand, and those in its support, on the other.
On the other side. Professor Chase (HDB) has subjected all such references and allusions in the primitive writings to a very keen and
3. Dr. searching criticism, and it must be Chase's frankly confessed that he has reduced View the strength of the evidence and argument very greatly. But Professor Chase himself, from the remains of the ancient literature, and from the internal evidence of the Ep.
itself, arrives at the conclusion that 2 Pet is not at
all an apostoHc document, that it certainly was not written by Peter, nor in the 1st cent, of our era, but about the middle of the 2d cent., say 150 AD. If this view is accepted, we must pronounce the Ep. a forgery, pseudonymous and pseudepigraphic, with no more right to be in the NT than has the Apocal3T3se of Peter or the romance of the Shepherd of Hermas.
//. Internal Evidence in Support of Its Apostolic Authority.—At first sight, this seems to be not al-
together reassuring, but looking deeper
1. Style and into the letter itself we arrive at a Diction satisfactory conclusion. Difference of style between the two Epp. attributed to Peter is given as one prominent reason for questioning the vahdity of the Second. It is mainly if not entirely on this ground that Jerome, Calvin and others hesitated to receive it. It is noteworthy that in the earher times objections were not urged because of its relation to Jude—its borrowing from Jude, as is often charged in our days. Its alleged dissimilarity to 1 Pet in diction, structure, and measurably in its contents, explains why it was discredited. Admitting that there is substantial ground for this criticism, nevertheless there are not a few instances in which words rarely found in the other Bib. books are common to the two Epp. Some examples are given in proof: "precious" (1 Pet 1 7.19; 2 Pet 1 1) (a compound), occurring often in Rev, not often in other books; "virtue" (1 Pet 2 9 AVm; 2 Pet 1 3), found elsewhere onlv in Phil 4 8; "supply" (1 Pet 4 11; 2 Pet 1 5), rare in other books; "love of brethren" (1 Pet 1 22; 2 Pet 1 7 m), only in three places besides; "behold" (1 Pet 2 12; 3 2 [verbal form]; 2 Pet 1 16) (eyewitnesses), not found elsewhere in the NT; "without blemish," "without spot" (1 Pet 1 19; 2 Pet 3 14) (order
/. External Evidence in Favor of Its Apostolic Authority.—It must be admitted at the very outset
that the evidence is meager. The
1. Ancient first writer who mentions it by name is Opinion Origen (o 240 AD). In his homily on Josh, he speaks of the two Epp. of
Peter. In another place he quotes 2 Pet 1 4: "partakers of the divine nature," and gives it the name of Scripture. But Origen is careful to say that its authority was questioned: "Peter has left one acknowledged Ep., and perhaps a second, for
this is contested." Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, regarded it with even more suspicion than did Origen, and accordingly he placed it among the disputed books (Antilegomena) . Jerome knew the scruples which many entertained touching the Ep., but notwithstanding, he included it in his Vulg Version. The main reason for Jerome's uncertainty
Peter, Second Ep. THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2356
with Paul's Epp. (3 15.16), and he holds and teaches the same fundamental truth. An apostolic spirit breathes through this document such as is generally r Polatinn absent from spurious writings and such as o. iteiduuu ^ forger does not exhibit. He is anxiously to Apostles concerned for the purity of the faith and for the holiness and fidelity of believers. He exhorts them to give " diligence that ye may be found
of words reversed) ; also positive side (2 Pet 2 13), "spots and blemishes" ; the words do not occur elsewhere; "ungodly" (1 Pet 4 18; 2 Pet 2 5; 3 7) occurs in but three other places, except Jude, which has it three times.
Besides, there are many striking similarities in thought and diction in the two Epp. Two instances are given. In the First the saved are
in peace, without spot and blameless in his sight," and that they
' grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" (3 14.18). All this and much more of like devout teaching is apostolic in tone and betokens genuineness and reality.
2. Reason described as the "elect" (1 1), and as
of Dissimi- "called" (2 21). In the Second, the
larities two great truths are brought together
Still further, the writer appeals to certain facts
in the life of Peter that are almost autobiographical.
(1 10). Likewise, in both stress is
For example, he speaks of "putting
laid upon prophecy (1 Pet 1 10-12; 2 Pet 1 19-21). Now, all this tends to prove that the writer of the Second Ep. was well acquainted with the peculiarity of diction employed in the First, and that he made use purposely of its uncommon terms,
6. Autooff of my tabernacle . . • • even as biographical our Lord Jesus Christ signified unto
Allusions me" (1 13.14). The reference undoubtedly is to Jn 13 36; 21 18.19. He claims to have been a witness of the Transfiguration (1 16-18). He indirectly claims the
or, if the Second was written by another than the
apostle, he succeeded surprisingly well in imitating
his style. The latter alternative does not merit
inspiration without which true prophecy is im-
possible (1 19-21). He asserts that this is his "second epistle" (3 1). This testimony on the part
discussion. The differences arise mainly out of the subjects treated in the two, and the design which the writer seems to have kept constantly in view. In the First, he sought to comfort, strengthen and sustain his persecuted brethren; this is his supreme aim. In the Second he is anxious to warn and to
of the writer is personal, emphatic and direct. It reads much like Peter's plain way of speaking of himself at the Council of Jerus, "Ye know that a good while ago God made choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe" (Acts 15 7). Once more, Jude appears to quote from 2 Pet (see Jude). The question of the priority of the two Epp. is by no means settled. Many recent writers 7 Quoted give the precedence to Jude, others to !' r J Peter. One of the highest authority, by Jude zahn (AT, II, 238 ff), argues with great force in support of the view that Peter's is the older and that Jude cites from it. The arguments In favor of this latter belief are here only summarized; (1) Jude cites from writings other than Scripture, as the apocryphal Book of En and perhaps also from the Assumption of Moses. Peter scarcely quotes from any source. The former would be more hkely to cite 2 Pet 2—3 3 than the latter from Jude vs 4-16. The resemblance between these two sections of the Epp. Is so close that one must have drawn both thoughts and language from the other, or both availed themselves of the same documentary source. Of this latter supposition antiquity furnishes no hint. The differences are as marked as the resemblances, and hence the one who cites from the other is no servile copyist. The real difference between the two is that between prediction and fulfilment. (2) Peter predicts the advent of the "false teachers" (2 1). His principal vbs. are in the future tense (2 1.2.3.12.13). He employs the present tense Indeed in describing the character and the conduct of the hbertines (2 17.18), but their presence and their disastrous teaching he puts in the future (2 13.14). The deadly germs were there when he wrote, the rank growth would speedily follow. Jude, on the contrary, throughout his short letter, speaks of the same corrupters as already come; his objects are present, they are in the midst of the people of God and actively doing their deadly work. (3) Jude twice refers to certain sources of information touching these enemies, with which his readers were acquainted and which were designed to warn them of the danger and keep them from betrayal. The two sources were (a) a writing that spoke of
shield those whom he addresses as to impending dangers more disastrous and more to be feared than the sufferings inflicted by a hostile world. In the
First, judgment had begun at the house of God
(4 17.18), and behevers were to arm, not to resist
their persecutors, but for martyrdom (4 1). But
in the Second, a very different condition of things
is brought to view. Ungodly men holding degrading principles and practising shocking imnioral-
ities were threatening to invade the Christian brotherhood. Evil of a most vicious sort was detected by the watchful eye of the writer, and he knew full well that if suffered to continue and grow,
as assuredly it would, utter ruin for the cause he loved would ensue. Therefore he forewarns and denounces the tendency with the spirit and energy
of a prophet of God.
2 Pet opens with the positive statement of Peter's authorship; "Simon ["Symeon," Nestle, Weymouth] Peter, a servant .... of Jesus Christ."
3 Claim to The insertion of "Symeon," the old Heb
Tj" , . name, in the forefront of the document is fetrme
_ significant. If a forger had been writing Authorship in Peter's name he would have begun his letter almost certainly by copying the First Ep. and simply written, "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ." Note also that "servant" is introduced Into the Second Ep.. but is absent from the First. He designates himself as a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ. "Although several pseudonymous writings appear in early Christian literature, there is no Christian document of value written by a forger who uses the name of an apostle" (Dods, SBD). If this important statement is accepted at its full worth, it goes far to settle the question of authorship. Both "servant" and "apostle" appear in the opening sentence, and the writer claims both for himself.
' ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ," ver 4; (b) the prediction of Peter that "in the last days mockers shall come with mockery, walking after their own lusts" (2 Pet 3 3). Jude urges his readers to remember the words which the apostles of Christ had before spoken, and then he cites this prediction of Peter in almost the exact terms; "In the last time there shall be mockers, walking after their ungodly lusts." He applies the prediction to the libertines then and there practising their unholy deeds ;
Furthermore, the writer is distinctively a Christian; he addresses those who "have obtained a like precious
faith with us in the righteousness of our A rViriotian God and the Saviour Jesus Christ" (1 1). *• <-""=""" His is the same precious faith which all the Earnestness saints enjoy; his also the exceeding great and precious promises of God, and he expects with all other believers to be made a partalier of the Divine nature (1 3.4). Is it at all probable that one with such a faith and such expectations would deliberately forge the name of Simon Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ ? The writer is unsparing in his denunciations of false teachers, corrupters of others, and perverters of the truth. He instances the fall of the angels, the destruction of Sodom, the rebuke of Balaam, as examples of the doom of those who know the truth and yet live in shameful sin and crime. Would a Christian and servant of Jesus Christ be at all likely to commit in the most flagrant manner the things he so vehemently condemns ? If the writer was not the apostle Peter, he was a false teacher, a corrupter of others, and a hypocrite, which seems incredible to us.
' These are they who make separations, sensual, having not the Spirit." The conclusion is inevitable. Jude quotes from Peter. (4) Chronology gives the priority to Peter. The apostle died between 63-67 AD, probably in 64 AD. The vast majority of recent interpreters date the Ep. of Jude at 75-80 AD. There is no doubt but that it was written after the destruction of Jems, 70 AD. Accordingly, it is later than Peter's death by from 6 to 10 years. Jude quoted from 2 Pet. This being so. it follows that his Ep. endorses that of Peter as being apostolic and likewise canonical, for he recognizes Peter as an apostle and gifted with the prophetic spirit. See Jude; Peter (Simon).
///. Doctrinal Teachings of the Epistle.—Only some of the more important features of the Ep. are
Moreover, he associates himself with the other apostles
(3 2), is in full sympathy with Paul and is acquainted
2357 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Peter, Second Ep.
Jie^e noticed. If all were treated as they deserve to be, this article would expand into the proportions of a commentary.
Moreover, the apostle appeals to the inspiration of the prophets in conflrmation of his teaching: "No prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation, p'or no prophecy ever came by the will of man : but men spake from God, being moved by the Holy Spirit " He recognizes this as primary truth, that prophecy is not of one s own origination, nor is it to be tied up to the times of the prophet. The prophecy was brought to him, as It IS brought to us. Peter and his fellow-believers did not follow "cunningly devised fables"; they were borne along in their prophetic utterances by the Spirit.
The key-word of 1 Pet is Hope; of 2 Pet Knoivledge. The apostle gives to this gift of grace a promment place (1 2.3.5.6.8; 2 20.21; 1. Saving 3 18). The term he uses is largely in Knowledge the intensified form, viz. "full knowledge"; that is, knowledge that rests on fact, knowledge that comes to the believer as something supernatural, as being communicated by the bpint of God, and therefore is true and complete. The grace and peace Peter asks for the saints should issue m the knowledge of God and of Jesus Our Lord, who has granted unto us all things that pertain unto hfe and godliness through the knowledge of Him (1 2.3).
Of course in 3 5-13, where the three worlds are spoken of, three globes are not meant, but three vast epochs, three enormous periods in 2. The earth's history. The apostle divides Three its history into three clearly defined Worlds sections, and mentions some of the characteristic features of each.
(1) The old ivorld.—"The world that then was" (3 6) : this is his first world. It is the antediluvian world that is meant, the world which the Flood overwhelmed. Scoffers in Peter's time asked, no doubt with a sneer, "Where is the promise of his coming? for, from the day that the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation" (3 4). This is a surprisingly modern inquiry. Mockers then as now appealed to the continuity of natural processes, and to the inviolabihty of Nature's laws. Nature keeps her track with unwavering precision. There is no sign of any change; no catastrophe is likely, is possible. The promise of His coming fails. Peter reminds the skeptics that a mighty cataclysm did once overwhelm the world. The Flood drowned every living thing, save those sheltered within the ark. As this is a historical fact, the query of the mockers is foolish.
^_ (1) The basis of saving knowledge rests on the exceeding great and precious promises" which He has made us, and which become ours by faith in Him. It leads us into acquaintance with the righteousness of God, into the reahzation of our calhng as samts, and of the glorious destiny that awaits them who know and trust God (1 2-4 AV).
(2) The growth in true knowledge (1 5-11): "In your faith supply virtue," etc. He does not ask that faith be supphed, that these believers akeady had. But starting with faith as the foundation of all, let the other excellencies and virtues be richly and abundantly furnished. The original word for "supply" is derived from the Gr "chorus," in behalf of the members of which the manager supplied all the equipments needed. And Peter appropriating that fact urges Christians to give all diligence to furnish themselves with the gifts and grace he mentions, which are far more needful to the Christian than were the equipments for the ancient chorus. See Supply. What a magnificent cluster Peter here gives I Each springs out of the other; each is strengthened by the other. "In your faith supply virtue," or fortitude, manliness; and let virtue supply "liuowledge." Knowledge by itself tends to puff up. But tempered by the others, by self-control, by patience, by godliness, by love, it becomes one of the most essential and powerful forces in the Christian character. Paul begins his list of the "fruits of the Spirit" with love (Gal 5 22); Peter ends his with love. It is lilie a chain, each linlj holds fast to its fellow and is a part of the whole. It matters little at which end of the chain we begin to count, for the links form a unity, and to touch one is to touch all. God freely gives what we need and all we need ; we are to " add all diUgence
(2) The present world.—Peter's second world is "the heavens that now are, and the earth" (3 7). It is the present order of things in sky and earth that is meant. He asserts that this world is "stored up for fire, being reserved against the day of judgrnent and destruction of ungodly men." The margin reads, "stored with fire," i.e., it contains within itself the agency by which it may be consumed. The world that now is, is held in strict custody, reserved, not for a second deluge, but for fire. The advent of Christ and the judgment are associated in Scripture with fire: "Our God shall come, and shall not keep silence: a fire shall devour before him, and it shall be very tempestuous round about him" (Ps 50 3 AV; cflsa 66 15.16; Dnl 7 10.11). Nor is the NT silent on this point: "the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with the angels of his power in flaming fire" (2 Thess 1 7). Ample materials are stored up in the earth for its consumption by fire. The oils and the gases so inflammable and destructive in their energy can. when it may please God to release these forces, speedily reduce the present order of things to ashes. Peter's language does not signify earth's annihilation, nor its dissolution as an organic body, nor the end of time. He speaks of cosmical convulsions and physical revolutions of both sky and earth, such as shall transform the planet into something glorious and beautiful.
' to supply the need richly.
(3) Inerrancy of the sources of saving knowledge
(1 16-21). The apostle rests his teaching on two trustworthy facts: (a) the fact and meaning of the Saviour's Transfiguration; (6) the fact of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Taken together these two facts invest his teaching with infallible certainty. "For we did not follow cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty." Pagan mythology, so widely prevaiUng at the time in Asia Minor, indeed over the whole heathen world, was composed of "myths" (Peter's word) skilfully framed and poetically embellished. Jewish cabalism, and the wild vagaries springing up in the Christian brotherhood itself had no place in the gospel message nor in apostolic teaching. What Peter and his fellowdisciples taught was the very truth of God, for at the 'Transfiguration they saw the outshining glory of the Son of God, they heard the Divine Voice, they beheld the two visitants from the unseen world, Moses and Elijah. Of the majestic scene they were eyewitnesses. Peter adds, "And we have the word of prophecy made more sure." The Transfiguration has confirmed what the prophets say touching the future and God's purpose to fill the earth with His glory; every word He has spoken is to be made good.
(3) The new world.—The third world is this: "But, according to his promise, we look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness" (3 13). This is Paradise restored. We have sure ground for the expectancy; the last two chapters of Rev contain the prophetic fulfilment: "And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth are passed away; and the sea is no more." The accomplishment of these sublime predictions will involve a fundamental change in the constitution of the globe. Life would be impossible if the sea was no more. But He who made the world can surely recreate it, clearing it of every vestige of sin and misery and imperfection, fitting it for the dwelling of perfect beings and of
Pethahiah Pharaoh Hophra THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2358
PETRA, pe'tra. See Sela.
His supreme glory. Immanuel will dwell with the holy inhabitants of the new earth and in the new Jerus which is to descend into the glorified planet. John is bidden, "Write, for the predictions are faith-
PEULTHAI, ]ie-ul'thl, PEULLETHAI, pe-ul'e-
thi CrbS'S, p<='ull'lhay, "Jeh's seed"): One of the
"porters," 8th son of Obed-edom (1 Ch 26 5).
ful and true; they shall not fail to come to pass."
"Earth, thou grain of sand on the shore ol the Universe
PHAATH MOAB, fa'ath mo'ab (A, *ade Mudp, Phadth Modh, B followed by Swete, *ea\€i[ia)dp, Phthaleimodb [1 Esd 5 11]; 1 Esd 8 31 [AV "Pahath Moab"], B followed by Swete reads MaaBiiudp, Maathmodh; Fritzsche in both places reads 'i'adO MwdP) : One of the families, part of which, consisting
of God, On thee has the Lord a great work to complete."
LiTEB.iTURE.—See at end of Peter, First Epistle of; Peter (Simon).
William G. Moorehead PETHAHIAH, peth-a-hi'a (n^jrinp, p'thahyah, "Jeh opens up"):
"of the sons of Jesus and Joab 2,812," went up out
(1) Chief of the 19th course of priests (1 Ch 24
of captivity with Zerubbabel and Joshua (1 Esd
5 11), and part of which, viz. "Eliaonias the son of
16). . , (2) One of the Levites having "foreign wives
Zaraias and with him 200 men," went up with Ezra
(Ezr 10 23; Neh 9 5; "Patheua" in 1 Esd 9 23).
(1 Esd 8 31 = "Pahath-moab" of Ezr 2 6; 8 4;
[10 30]; and Neh 7 11 [3 11; 10 14]). As the name of a Jewish clan or family the name Phaath
(3) Son of Meshezabeel, descendant of Judah, who was "at the king's hand in all matters concerning the people" (Neh 11 24).
or Pahath Moab presents difficulties of which explanations are offered, though none is convincing.
It is generally taken as "ruler of Moab," which may
PETHOR, pe'thor ("liriS, -p'thor; *aeo«pa, Pha-
refer to the Israelite conquest of Moab in which this family may have distinguished itself, or it rnay have arisen from the settlement and incorporation of a Moabite family in Heb territory, or from the settlement of an Israelite family in Moabite territory (cf 1 Ch 4 22); or it may be the corruption of some unknown word or name. Instances of such corruption are quite common in these apocryphal Heb proper names. See Pahath-Moab.
thoura, Baeovpa, Bathoura): The dwelling-place of Balaam, situated on "the river" (the
1. Possibly Euphrates) (Nu 22 5). In Dt 23 4, it the Assyris further described as being in Meso-
ian Pitru potamia (Aram-naharaim). Pethor is
identified with the Pedru(i) of the geographical lists of Thothmes III (c 1500 BC) and the Pitru (Pithru) of the Assyr king Shalman-
eser II, who states that in his 3d year (857 BC) he took the city Ana-Assur-utlr-asbat (meaning:
S. Angus PHACARETH, fak'a-reth (^aKapeB, Phakareth, but B followed by Swete correctly reads 4>. SaPeiri, Sabeit, together, A followed by AV reading "sons of Sabie," as a distinct family, 1 Esd 5 34) : The same as "Pochereth-hazzebaim" of Ezr 2 57.
"I founded [it] anew for Assur"), which the Hattaa
(Hittites) called Pitru. He says that it lay on the
farther (western) bank of the Euphrates, by the Sagurru or Sagura River, the modern Sajilr. The importance of Pitru is indicated by the fact that he received there the tribute of the kings of Carchemish, Comagene, JVIelitene and other districts. As Pitru is about 400 miles from Moab, this meant for Balaam a three or four weeks' journey,
PHAISUR, fa'sur, fa-I'sur (B, ^aio-ovip, Phaisour, A, "l>oio-ov, Phaisou) : Head of one of the families of priests some of whom had taken "strange wives"
(1 Esd 9 22) = "Pashhur" of Ezr 10 22; styled "Phassurus" in 1 Esd 5 25.
but the messengers sent to fetch him,
2. Difficulthough they had to travel that dis-
ties of tance twice, could naturally, by press-
PHALDEUS, fal-de'us (A [Fritzsche], *a\8atos, Phaldaios, B [Swete], #aX.a8aios, Phaladaios; AV Phaldaius) : One of those who stood on Ezra's left hand when he expounded the Law (1 Esd 9 44) = "Pedaiah" of Neh 8 4.
Identifiing their mounts, have performed it cation in much less time. Doubt may likewise be entertained as to the identity
of Pethor with Pitru by the absence in the latter
of the 0, which would lead one to expect rather the Assyr form Pit(h)Uru. Shalmaneser, however, says that Pitru was the Hittite name, and that may account for it. With regard to the derivation, nothing can at present be said, except that, as a Hittite name, Tomkins (Records of the Past, V [London, 1891], 38) has compared the name Pitru with the Pteria of Herodotus i.76 (identified wdth Boghaz-keui, the great Hittite capital in Cappadocia, anciently called Hattu). T. G. Pinches
PHALEAS, fa-le'as (*aXaCas, Phalaias) : A family of "temple-servants" who went up with Zerubbabel from Babylon (1 Esd 5 29) = "Padon" of Ezr 2 44.
PHALEC, fa'lek ('i'aX^K, PhaUk, WH, *dXcK, Phdlek): AV; Gr form of "Peleg" (thus RV) (Lk 3 35).
PHALIAS, fa-h'as (*aXCas, Phalias, A, "l-iAeas, Phidthas; AV Biatas, following Aldine Btaras, Bidtas) : One of the Levites who read and explained the Law to the multitude (1 Esd 9 48) = "Pelaiah" of Neh 8 7.
PETHTJEL, pg-thu'el (bxiPlS, p'thu'el, "God's opening"): Father of Joel the prophet (Joel 1 1).
PETITION, pe-tish'un: Used in EV only as a
noun, usually as representing the Heb nbXlB,
PHALLU, fal'oo (N^^B, pallu'). See Pallc.
sh''elah (Ps 20 5, nbSTlJia, mish'alah), from the common vb. bKlB, shd'al, "to ask." The noun, consequently, has no technical meaning, and may be used indifferently in the active (Est 7 2) or passive (1 S 1 27) sense, or for a petition addressed to either God (1 S 1 17) or man (1 K 2 16), while
PHALTI, fal'ti CTjbs
, palti). See Palti.
PHALTIEL, fal'ti-el (bS^pbB
, paltVel; Syr "Psaltiel"; Vulg and AV Salathiel) : "The captain of the people" who came to Esdras between his first and second vision (2 Esd 5 16). Fritzsche (Libri Apoc vet. test.) reads "Phalthiel." See Paltiel.
in Jgs 8 24; Job 6 8; Ps 106 15, it is rendered simply "request." Otherwise "petition" represents the Aram. irS, ba'u (Dnl 6 7.13), the Gr
PHANTJEL, fan-u'el, fan'a-el (bX^D?
atr-qfia., miema (1 Jn 6 15), and Sir)cns, deesis
, p'nu'el, "vision of God"; *avou^X., Phanoutl): Parent of Anna (Lk 2 36). See Peniel.
(1 Mace 7 37, RV "supphcation"), and the Lat
oratio (2 Esd 8 24). Burton Scott Easton
2359 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Pethahiah Pharaoh Hophra
PHARAKIM, far'a-kim (4>apaK£C|j., PJiarakeim, B, *apaK^|i, Pharakem.; AV Pharacim) ; One of the families of tomplc-scrvants wiio returned with Zerubbabol (1 Esd 5 31; not found in Ezr or Neh).
been able to make such historical use of this name, while, to a writer at the time of the exodus, it would have been perfectly natural to use Pharaoh for the king without any further name; and historical writers in the time of the prophets in Pal would likewise have used Pharaoh-necoh and Pharaoh Hophra. This evidence is not absolutely conclusive for an early authorship of the Pent and historical books, but is very difficult to set aside tor a late authorship (ef Gen 12 14-20; 41 14; Ex 1 11; 3 11; 1 K 3 1; 14 25; 2 K 23 29; Jer 44 30; also 1 K 11 19; 2 K 18 21; 1 Ch 4 18). M. G. Kyle PHARAOH HOPHRA, hof'ra (^l^n nyiS, par'oh hophra^ Oua(j)p-^, Houaphre) : He is so called in Scripture (Jer 44 30); He-
PHARAOH, fa'ro, fa'rS-o (WIE, par'oh;
4>apau>, PharaG; Egyp per aa, "great house"): Many and strange differences of opinion have been expressed concerning the use of this name in Egypt and elsewhere, because of its importance in
1. Use of Name in Egypt
critical discussions (see below). Eli says "a name given to all Egyp kings in the Bible";
it also claims that the name could not have been received by the Hebrews before 1000 BC. HDB (III, 819) says that a letter was addressed to Amenhotep as "Pharaoh, lord ni of," etc. According to Winck- /rv--4i ler's theory of a North ^^^Jk.
1. Sole rodotus calls him Apries (ii.l09). He King, 689is known on the monuments as Uah 'ab 570 BC 'ra. He was the son of Psammetichus
II, whose Gr mercenaries have left inscriptions upon the rocks of Abu-Sim-bel, and the grandson of Pharaoh-necoh. He reigned alone from 589 BC to 570 BC, and jointly, by compulsion of his people, with his son-in-law Aahmes (Gr Amasis) for some years longer. No sooner had he mounted the throne than he yielded to the overtures of Zedekiah of Judah, who thought Hophra's accession a good opportunity for throwing off the yoke of Babylon. So, as Ezekiel says (17 15), "he rebelled against him [Nebuchadrezzar] in sending his ambassadors into Egypt, that they might give him horses and much people." Zedekiah had entered into the intrigue against the advice of Jeremiah, and
^"'^"" -' - . ^ Arabian Musri, it was the k«3> ^^^^^iii?*^ '-% Hebrews alone in ancient *s>'*''i^ "'^^ iv\.i,^ times who adopted the term Pharaoh from the Egyptians, the name not being found even in the Am Tab or anywhere else in cuneiform literature for the king of Egypt. Such a result is obtained according to Winckler's theory by referring every reference in cuneiform to "Pir'u, king of Musri" to the North Arabian country.
2. Alliance it proved fatal to Zedekiah and the with kingdom. Nebuchadrezzar was not Zedekiah. slow to punish the disloyalty of his vassal, and in a brief space his armies were beleaguering Jerus. The Egyptians did indeed march to the relief of their allies, and the Chaldaeans drew off their forces from Jerus to meet them. But the Egyptians returned without attempting to meet the Chaldaeans in a pitched battle, and Jerus was taken, the walls broken down and the temple burnt up with fire.
In Egyp inscriptions the term "Pharaoh" occurs from the Pyramid inscriptions onward. At first it ia used with distinct reference to its etymology and not clearly as an independent title. Pharaoh, "great house," like Subhme Porte, was applied first as a metaphor to mean the government. But as in such an absolute monarchy as Egypt the king was the government, Pharaoh was, by a figure of speech, put for the king. Its use in Egypt clearly as a title denoting the ruler, whoever he might be, as Caesar among the Romans, Shah amonj Persians, and Czar among Russians, belongs to a few dynasties probably beginning with the XVIIIth, and certainly ending not later than the XXIst, when we read of Pharaoh Sheshonk, but the Bible does not speak so, but calls him "Shishak king of Egypt" (1 K 14 25). This new custom in the use
When Jerus had fallen and Nebuchadrezzar's governor, Gedaliah, had been assassinated, the dis-
pirited remnant of Judah, against the
3. Recepadvice of Jeremiah, fled into Egypt, tion of carrying the prophet with them . They Jeremiah settled at Tahpanhes, then Daphnae and Jewish (modern Tell Defe?ineh), now identified Captives with a mound bearing the significant name of Ka^r Bint el Yahudi, "the palace of the Jew's daughter." Here Pharaoh had a palace, for Jeremiah took great stones and hid them in mortar in the brickwork "which is at the entry of Pharaoh's house at Tahpanhes," and prophesied that Nebuchadrezzar would spread his royal pavilion over them (Jer 43 8-13). The Pharaoh of that day was Hophra, and when the fortress of Tahpanhes was discovered and cleared in 1886, the open-air platform before the entrance was found. "Here the ceremony described by Jeremiah took place before the chiefs of the fugitives assembled on the platform, and here Nebuchadrezzar spread his royal pavilion. The very nature of the
Pharaoh.
of the title Pharaoh does not appear in the Bible
until we have "Pharaoh-necoh." Pharaoh is cer-
tainly used in the time of Rameses II, in the "Tale
of Two Brothers" {Records of the Past, 1st series, II,
137; Becueil de Travaux, XXI, 13, 1. 1). It appears from the preceding that Bib. writers use this word with historical accuracy for the various
site is precisely applicable to all the events" (Flinders Petrie, Nebesheh and Defenneh, 51). It was in 568 BC that the prophecy was fulfilled when Nebuchadrezzar marched into the Delta.
periods to which it refers, not only for the time of Necoh and Hophra, but for the time of Rameses II, and use the
More recently, in 1909, in the course of excava-
2. Significance of Use in the Bible
tions carried on by the British School of Archae-
ology in Egypt, the palace of King
style of the time of Rameses II for the time of Abraham and Joseph, concerning which we have not certain knowledge of its use in Egypt. It is strongly urged that writers of the 7th or 5th cent. BC would not have
4. Palace Apries, Pharaoh Hophra, has been
at Memphis discovered on the site of Memphis, the ancient capital of Egypt. Under
the grey mud hill, close to the squalid Arab village
Pharaoh-necoh Pharisees THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2360
of Mitrahenny, which every tourist passes on the way to Sakkhara, had lain for centuries Hophra's magnificent palace, 400 ft. long by 200 ft., with a splendid pylon, an immense court, and stonelined halls, of which seven have been found intact. With many other objects of value there was found a fitting of a palanquin of solid silver, decorated with a bust of Hathor with a gold face. It is said to be of the finest workmanship of the time of Apries, a relic of the fire, which, Jeremiah predicted at Tahpanhes, the Lord of Hosts was to kindle "in the houses of the gods of Egypt" (Jer 43 12). Pharaoh Hophra, as Jeremiah prophesied (44 29 f), became the victim of a revolt and was finally strangled.
Egypt unto the river Euphrates, all that pertained to the king of Egypt" (2 K 24 7). While Pharaoh-necoh II was ambitious to extend his empire, he was bent also upon the commercial
development of Egypt. For this he 4. Comset himself to collect a navy. He had mercial Detwo fleets built, composed of triremes, velopment one of them to navigate the Mediterof Egypt ranean, the other to navigate the Red Sea. In order to secure a combination of his fleets, he conceived the idea of reopening the canal between the Nile and the Red Sea which had been originally constructed by Seti I and Rameses II, two Pharaohs of the days of the Israel-
ite oppression, but had become silted up by desert sands. He excavated this old canal, following the line of the former cutting, and widening it so that two triremes might meet and pass each other in it. According to Herodotus he was obliged to desist from the undertaking in consequence of the mortality among the laborers, and it was left to Darius to complete. He also resolved to try whether it was possible to circumnavigate Africa, and, manning his ships with Phoenician sailors, he sent them forth with instructions to keep the coast of Africa on their right and to return to Egypt by way of the Mediterranean. They succeeded, and, rounding the Cape of Good Hope from the East, anticipated by two millenniums the feat which Vasco da Gama accomplished from the West. The enterprise took more than two years, and the result of it was of no practical value. Herodotus, when he visited Egypt in 450 BC, saw still remaining the docks which Necoh had built for the accommodation of his
LlTERATUBB.—Fliuders Petrie, History of Egypt. Ill, 344 t; Wiedemann, Geschichte von Alt-Aegypten. 190 fl; Flinders Petrie and J. H. Walker. Memphis, I, II ("The Palace of Apries"); Herodotus ii. 161-69.
.T. NlCOL PHARAOH-NECOH, ne'ko (HSJ TOIS, par'oh n'khoh, also ^33 , n'kho; Ntxaci, Nechao [2 K 23 29. 33.34; 2 Ch 35 22; 36 4, AV Necho,
1. PharaohRV NECO; Jer 46 2; 2 Ch 35 20, Necoh, 610AV Necho, RV NECO]) : Nekau II of 694 BC the monuments—Gr Nekos—was the 2d king of the XXVIth Dynasty, being the son of Psammetichus I, famous in Gr contemporary history, whose long reign has left so many memorials both in Upper and Lower Egypt (Herod. ii.l53, 158, 169). The great event of his reign (610594 BC) was his expedition across Syria to secure for himself a share in the decaying empire of Assyria. In the days of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal, Egypt had been tributary to Assyria, and, when it began to break up, Egypt and other subject kingdoms saw their opportunity to throw off
fleet.
Literature.—Flinders Petrie, History of Egypt, III, 335 ff; Wiedemann, Geschichte von Alt-Aegypten, 17990; Rawlinson. Egypt ("Story of the Nations"), 354 ff; Herodotus ii. 158, 1S9.
its yoke. Psammetichus had turned back the Scythian hordes which had reached his border on their western march, and now his son Necoh was to make a bold stroke for empire.
T. NiCOL PHARAOH'S DAUGHTER (nyiSTia, halh-
par'-oh) : The princess who rescued Moses (Ex 2 5-
10; He 11 24). This is probably a title as well as an appellation, indicating not only one of the daughters of a Pharaoh, but also some very distinguished rank, thought to be most probably that of the heir to the throne by birth; though she was debarred from reigning by reason of sex, she still possessed the right to entail the scepter and crown to her oldest son. Positive identification of the "Pharaoh's daughter" mentioned in the Bible is not possible yet. All attempts toward identification are, of course, guided by the particular theory of the oppressor accepted. If the Pharaoh of the Oppression was Rameses II, as is most likely, then Pharaoh's daughter was probably the daughter of Seti I, an older sister of Rameses II. If, as many think, the Pharaoh of the Oppression was Thothmes III, then Pharaoh's daughter was some unknown princess. Some have thought she was Hatshepsut, the "Queen Elizabeth of Egypt." M. G. Kyle
On his expedition toward the East, he had to pass through the territory of Judah, and he desirecl to have Josiah its king as an ally. 2. Battle of Whatever may have been his reasons, Megiddo, Josiah remained loyal to his Assyr 608 BC suzerain, declined the Egyp alliance, and threw himself across the path of the invader. The opposing armies met on the battlefield of Megiddo, 608 BC, where Josiah was mortally wounded and soon after^ died amid the lamentations of his people. Necoh marched northward, captured Kadesh, and pressed on to the Euphrates. Not having met an enemy there, he seems to have turned back and established himself for a time at Riblah in Syria. To Riblah he summoned Jehoahaz whom the people had anointed king in room of his father Josiah, deposed him after a brief reign of 3 months, and set his brother Jehoiakim on the throne as the vassal of Egypt. Jehoiakin") paid up the tribute of a hundred talents of silver and a talent of gold which Necoh had imposed upon the land, but he recovered it by exactions which he made from the people (2 K 23 35). The Egyp monarch still kept some hold upon Syria, and his presence there had attracted the attention of the newly established 3. Battle of power at Babylon. The Chaldaeans Carchemish, under Nebuchadrezzar set out for the 604 BC Euphrates, and, meeting the army of Pharaoh-necoh at Carchemish, inflicted upon him a signal defeat. The Chaldaeans were now undisputed masters of Western Asia, and the sacred historian relates that "the king of Egypt came not again any more out of his land; for the king of Babylon had taken, from the brook of
PHARATHON, far'a-thon (*apa9<5v, Pharathdn): One of the strong cities of Judaea fortified by Bacchides during the Maccabean war (1 Mace 9 50). LXX reads "Thamnatha-pharathon" as the name of one city. Jos, however {Ant, XIII, i, 3), and Syr supply the "and"_between them. The name represents a Heb pir'athon. If it is to be taken strictly as in Judaean territory, it cannot be identified with PiRATHON (q.v.) of Jgs 12 15. In that case we should probably seek for it with Dr. G. A. Smith in some fortress covering the top of Wddy Far'ah. w. Ewing
PHARES, fa'rez (-l-ap^s, Pharos): AV; Gr form of "Perez" (thus RV) (Mt 1 3; Lk 3 33).
ANCIENT PAINTING OF AN EGYPTIAN PRINCESS
2361 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Pharaoh-necob Pharisees
PHAREZ, fa'rez (AV 1 Esd 5 9; 8 30): The same as RV Phoros (q.v.).
descendants of the Pharisees, the fact that the Gemara, from which most of our information is derived, is so late renders the evidence deduced from Talmudic statements of little value. Even the Mish, which came into being only a century after the fall of the Jewish state, shows traces of exaggeration and modification of facts. Still, taking these deficiencies into consideration, we may make a fairly consistent picture of the sect. The name means "separatists," from IDHS
PHARIDA, fa-ri'da (^opeiSa, Phareidd, A, *apiSa, Pharidd; AV Pharira) : The clan name of one of the families of "the servants of Solomon" who came up from Babylon with Zerubbabel (1 Esd 5 33) = "Peruda" of Ezr 2 55 = "Perida" of Neh 7 57.
, parash, "to separate"—those who carefully kept themselves from any legal contamination, distinguishing themselves by their care in such matters from the common people, the 'am hd-'areQ, who had fewer scruples. Like the Puritans in England during the 17th cent., and the Presbyterians in Scotland during the same period, the Pharisees, although primarily a religious party, became ere long energetically political. They were a closely organized society, all the members of which called each other hdbherim, "neighbors"; this added to the power they had through their influence with the people.
PHARIRA, fa-rl'ra: AV = RV Pharida (q.v.).
PHARISEES, far'i-sez (DilB^nB, p'ras/um; I'api-
cratoi, Pharisaioi) :
1. Name and General Character 2. Authorities—Josephus—NT—Talmud I. History of the Sect 1. Associated at First with Hasnaoneans, but Later Abandon Them 2. Change of Name 3. Later Fortunes ot the Sect 4. In NT Times
.5. In Post-apostolic Times II. Doctrines of the Pharisees 1. Statements of Josephus Colored by Greek Ideas 2. Conditional Reincarnation 3. NT Presentation of Pharisaic Doctrines—Angels and Spirits—Resurrection 4. Traditions Added to the Law 5. Traditional Interpretations (Sabbath, etc) 6. Students of Scripture (1) Messianic Hopes (2) Almsgiving III. Organization of the Pharisaic Party The hdbherim—Pharisaic Brotherhoods IV. Character of the Pharisees 1. Pharisees and People of the Land 2. Arrogance toward Other Jews 3. Regulations for the hdbher 4. The NT Account '
/. History of the Sect.—The Assidaeans (hd^vdhirn) were at first the most active supporters of Judas Macoabaeus in his struggle for religious freedom. A portion of them rather than fight retired to the desert to escape the tyranny of Epiphanes (1 Maco 2 2'7 f). The followers of these in later days became the Essenes. When Judas Maccabaeus cleansed the temple and rededicated it with many sacrifices, it
is not expressly said, either in the Books of Mace or by Jos, that he acted as high priest, but the probability is that he did so. This would be a shock to the Assidaean purists, as Judas, though a priest, was not a Zadokite; but his actions would be tolerated at that time on account of the imminent necessity for the work of reconsecration and the eminent services of Judas himself and his family.
(1) Their Scrupulosity (2) Their Hypocrisy 5. Talmudic Classification of the Pharisees V. Our Lord's Relation to the Pharisees 1. Pharisaic Attempts to Gain Christ Over 2. Reasons for Pharisaic Hatred of Christ 3. Our Lord's Denimciation of the Pharisees Literature
When Bacchides appeared against Jerus with Alcimus in his camp, this feeling against Judas took
A prominent sect of the Jews. The earliest notice of them in Jos occurs in connection with Jonathan,
shape in receiving the treacherous 1. AssoAlcimus into Jerus and acknowledging ciated at him as high priest, a line of action which First with, soon showed that it was fraught with Hasdisaster, as Alcimus murdered many moneans, of the people. They had to betake but Later themselves anew to Judas, but this Abandon desertion was the beginning of a sepaThem rating gulf which deepened when he made a treaty with the idolatrous Romans. As is not infrequently the case with religious zealots, their valor was associated with a mystic fanaticism. The very idea of alliance with heathen powers was hateful to them, so when Judas began to treat with Rome they deserted him, and he sustained the crushing defeat of Eleasa. Believing themselves the saints of God and therefore His peculiar treasure, they regarded any association with the heathen as faithlessness to Jeh. Their attitude was much that of the Fifth Monarchy men in the time of Cromwell, still more that of the Cameronians in Scotland at the Revolution of 16S8 who, because William of Orange was not a "covenanted" king, would have none of him. As the later Hasmoneans became more involved in worldlj'
the high priest. Immediately after
1. Name and the account of the embassy to the General Lacedaemonians, there is subjoined Character (Jos, Ant, XIII, v, 9) an account of the Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes, therefore implying that then and in this connection they had been prominent, although no notice of any of these parties is to be found that confirms that view. Later (XIII, x, 5), the Pharisees are represented as envious of the success of John Hyrcanus; Eleazar, one of them, insults him at his own
table. From the fact that earlier in the history the Assidaeans occupy a similar place to that occupied
later by the Pharisees, it may be deduced that the two parties are in a measure one. See Hasidaeans
; AsMONEANS. It would seem that not only the Pharisees, but also the Essenes, were derived from the Assidaeans or haijldhim.
In considering the characteristics and doctrines
of the Pharisees we are in some difficulty from the
nature of our authorities. The writers
2. Authorities of the NT assume generally that the character and tenets of the Pharisees are well known to their readers, and only lay stress on the points in which they were in antagonism to Our Lord and His followers. The evidence of Jos, a contemporary and himself a Pharisee, is lessened in value by the fact that he modified his accounts of his people to suit the taste of his Rom masters. The Pharisees, with him, are a philosophic sect, and not an active political party. Their Messianic hopes are not so much as mentioned. Although the Talm was written, both Mish and Gemara, by the
politics, they became more and more alienated from the strict Assidaeans, yet the successors of Judas Maccabaeus retained their connection with the party in a lukewarm fashion, while the Sadducean sect was gaining in influence.
About this time the change of name seems to have been effected. They began to be called Pharisees, p'rushvm, instead of hd^idhim— "sepa-
ratists" instead of saints. A parallel instance is to be found in the religious history of England.
Pharisees THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2362
Senate of the United States, the other the Senate of a university, let us say, of Jerus. Although followed hy Rabbi Lauterbach in the Jew Enc, this attempt cannot be regarded as successful. There is no evidence for this dual Sanhedrin either in the NT or Jos, on the one hand, or in the Talm on the other.
The Puritans of the 17th cent, became in the 19th "Non-conformists." The earhest instance of the Pharisees' intervening in history is that
2. Change referred to in Jos {Ant, XIII, x, 5), of Name where Eleazar, a Pharisee, demanded that John Hyrcanus should lay down the high-priesthood because his mother had been a captive, thus insinuating that he—Hyrcanus was no true son of Aaron, but the bastard of some nameless heathen to whom his mother had surrendered herself. This unforgivable insult to himself and to the memory of his mother led Hyrcanus to break with the Pharisaic party definitely. He seems to have left them severely alone.
Outside the Sanhedrin the Pharisees are ubiquitous, in Jerus, in Galilee, in Peraea and in the Decapolis, always coming in contact with Jesus. The attempts made by certain recent Jewish writers
to exonerate them from the guilt of the condemnation of Our Lord has no foundation; it is contradicted by the NT records, and the-aftitude of the Talm to Jesus.
The Pharisees appear in the Book of Acts to be
in a latent way favorers of the apostles as against the high-priestly party. The personal influence of Gamaliel, which seems commanding, was exercised in their favor. The anti-Christian zeal of Saul the Tarsian, though a Pharisee, may have been to some extent the result of the personal feelings which led him to perpetuate the relations of the earlier period when the two sects were united
The sons of Hyrcanus, esp. Alexander Jannaeus, expressed their hostility in a more active way. Alexander crucified as many as 800 of
3. Later the Pharisaic party, a proceeding that Fortunes of seems to intimate overt acts of hosthe Sect tility on their part which prompted
this action. His whole policy was the aggrandizement of the Jewish state, but his ambition was greater than his military abilities. His repeated failures and defeats confirmed the Pharisees in their opposition to him on religious grounds. He scandalized them by calling himself king, although not of the Davidic line, and further still by adopting the heathen name "Alexander," and having it stamped in Gr characters on his coins. Although a high priest was forbidden to marry a widow, he married the widow of his brother. Still further, he incurred their opposition by abandoning the Pharisaic tradition as to the way in which the libation water was poured out. They retaliated by rousing his people against him and conspiring with the Syrian king. On his deathbed he advised his wife, Alexandra Salome, who succeeded him on the throne, to make peace with the Pharisees. This she did by throwing herself entirely into their hands. On her death a struggle for the possession of the throne and the high-priesthood began between her two sons, John Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II. The latter, the more able and energetic, had the support of the Sadducces; the former, the elder of the two brothers, had that of the Pharisees. In the first phase of the
in common antagonism to the teaching of Christ. He, a Pharisee, offered himself to be employed by the Sadducean high priest (Acts 9 1.2) to carry on the work of persecution in Damascus. In this action Saul appears to have been in opposition to a large section of the Pharisaic party. The bitter disputes which he and the other younger Pharisees had carried on with Stephen had possibly influenced him.
When Paul, the Christian apostle, was brought before the Sanhedrin at Jerus, the Pharisaic party
were numerous in the Council, if they
5. In Postdid not even form the majority, and apostolic they readily became his defenders Times against the Sadducees.
From Jos we learn that with the outbreak of the war with the Romans the Pharisees were thrust into the background by the more fanatical Zealots, Simon ben Gioras and John of Gischala (BJ, V, i). The truth behind the Talmudic statements that Gamaliel removed the Sanhedrin to Jabneh and that Johanan ben Zakkai successfully entreated Vespasian to spare the scholars of that city
is that the Pharisees in considerable numbers made peace with the Romans. In the Mish we have the evidence of their later labors when the Sanhedrin was removed from Jabneh, ultimately to Tiberias in Galilee. There under the guidance of Jehuda ha-Kadhosh ("the Holy") the Mish was reduced to m-iting. It may thus be said that Judaism became Pharisaism, and the history of the Jews became that of the Pharisees. In this later period the opposition to Christianity sprang up anew and became embittered, as may be seen in the Talmudic tables concerning Jesus.
conflict, Hyrcanus w^as defeated and compelled to make a disadvantageous peace with his brother, but, urged by Antipater, the Idumaean, he called in Aretas, who inclined the balance at once to the side of Hyrcanus. The Romans were appealed to and they also, moved partly by the astuteness of Antipater, favored Hyrcanus. All this resulted ultimately in the supremacy of the Herodians, who through their subservience to Rome became inimical to the Pharisees and rivals of the Sadducees.
When the NT records open, the Pharisees, who have supreme influence among the people, are also
//. Doctrines of the Pharisees.—The account given of the doctrines of the Pharisees by Jos is clearly influenced by his desire to
strong, though not predominant, in the
4. In Sanhedrin. The Herodians and SadNT Times ducees, the one by their alliance with the Rom authorities, and the other by their inherited skill in political intrigue, held the reins of government. If we might believe the Talmudic representation, the Pharisees were in the immense majority in the Sanhedrin; the 7ia!>l\ or president, and the 'abh-heth-dln, or vice-president, both were Pharisees. This, however, is to be put to the credit of Talmudic imagination, the relation of which to facts is of the most distant kind.
1. Joparallel the Jewish sects with the sephus' Gr philosophical schools. He directs Statements especial attention to the Pharisaic . Colored by opinion as to fate and free will, since Greek on this point the Stoic and Epicurean Ideas sects differed very emphatically. He regards the Pharisaic position as mtcT^ way between that of the Sadducees, who denied fate altogether and made human freedom absolute, and that of the Essenes that "all things are left in the hand of God." He says "The Pharisees ascribe all thirigs to fate and God, yet allow that to do what is right or the contrary is principally in man's own po\yer, although fate cooperates in every action." It is to be noted that Jos, in giving this statement of views, identifies "fate" with "God," a process that is more plausible in connection with the Lat
Recently Buchler (Das grosse Synedrion in Jeru^) has attempted to harmonize these Talmudic tables with the aspect of things appearing in the NT and Jos. He assumes that there were two Sanhcdi-ins, one civil, having to do with matters of government, in which the Sadducees were overwhelmingly predominant, and the other scholastic, in which the Pharisees were equally predominant—the one the Senate of the nation, like the
2363 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Pharisees
fatum, "something decreed," than in relation to the
with its consequent eternal rewards and punishments formed a portion and a valuable portion of
impersonal moira, or keimarmSne, of the Greeks. As Jos wrote in Gr and used only the second of these terrns, he had no philological inducement to make the identification; the reason must have been the matter of fact. In other words, he shows that the Pharisees believed in a personal God whose will was providence.
this tradition.
I T_(.„_ Less valuable, at times burdensome and uonai interhurtful, were the minute refinements they pretation of introduced into the Law. Sometimes the the Law bv >isenuity of the Pharisaic doctors was
Tj. • ' directed to Ughten the burden of the preir-narisees cept as in regard to the Sabbath. Thus a person was permitted to go much farther than a Sabbath day's journey if at some tune previous he had deposited, within the legal Sabbath day's journey of the place he wished to reach, bread and water; this point was now to be regarded as the limit of his house, and consequently from this all distances were to be ceremonially reckoned (Jew Enc, s.v. "Erub"). The great defect of Pharisaism was that it made sin so purely external. An act was rigbt or wrong according as some external condition was present or absent; thus there was a difference in bestowing alms on the Sabbath whether the beggar put his hand within the door of the donor or the donor stretched his hand beyond his own threshold, as may be seen in the first Mish in the Tractate Shabhdth. . A man did not breali the Sabbath rest of his ass, though he rode on it, and hence did not break the Sabbath law, but if he carried a switch with which to expedite the pace of the beast he was guilty, because he had laid a burden upon it.
In connection with this was their doctrine of a future life of rewards and punishments. The phrase which Jos uses is a peculiar one: 2. Condi- "They think that every soul is immortional Retal; only the souls of good men will incarnation pass into another body, but the souls of the evil shall suffer everlasting punishment" (a'idia timoria kohlzesthai) . From this it has been deduced that the Pharisees held the transmigration of souls. In our opinion this is a mistake. We believe that really it is an attempt of Jos to state the doctrine of the resurrection of the body in a way that would not shock Hellenic ideas. The Gr contempt for the body made the idea of the resurrection abhorrent, and in this, as in most philosophical matters, the Romans followed the Greeks. It would seem that Jos regarded the Pharisees as maintaining that this resurrection applied only to the righteous. Still even this restriction, though certainly the natural interpretation, is not absolutely necessary. This is confirmed by the corresponding section in the Antiquities (XVIII, i, 3): "They also believe .... that under the earth there will be rewards or punishments, according as they have lived virtuously or viciously in this life, and the latter are to be detained in an everlasting prison, but that the former shall have power to revive and live again." Jos also declares the Pharisees to be very attentive students of the law of God: "they interpret the law with careful exactitude."