Part 42
^ (3) Pss of Solomon (72, 127).—Even conservative critics are in doubt as to the Solomonic authorship of the two pss ascribed to him by the titles. Perhaps assurance is not attainable in the present state of inquiry. Delitzsch well says: "Under Solomon psalmody already began to decline; all the productions of the mind of that period bear the stamp of thoughtful contemplation rather than of direct feeling, for restless yearning for higher things had given place to sensuous enjoyment, national concentration to cosmopolitan expansion."
Within the Psalter there lie certain groups of pss which have in a measure retained the form in which
(4) The era of Jehoshaphat.—Delitzsch and others regard the period of Jehoshaphat as one of literary productivity. Possibly Pss 75 and 76 celebrate the deliverance from the great eastern invasion toward the close of Jehoshaphat's reign.
they probably once circulated sepa-
2. Smaller rately. Among these groups may be Groups of named the Psalms of Ascents (Pss Psalms 120-34), the Asaph group (Pss 73-
83), the sons of Korah groups (Pss 42-49, 84-87, except 86), a Mikhtam group (Pss 66-60), a group praising Jeh for His character and deeds (Pss 93-100), to which Pss 90-92 form a
(.5) The era of Hezekiah.~The latter half of the 8th cent. BC was one of literary vigor and expansion, esp. in Judah. Perhaps the great deliverance from Sennacherib's invasion is celebrated in Pss 46 and 48.
fitting introduction. Pss 103-7 constitute another group of praise pss, and Pss 145-50 make a closing Hallelujah group.
(6) The period of Jeremiah.—Ehrt and some other scholars are inclined to attribute to Jeremiah a considerable number of pss. Among those which have been assigned to this prophet may be named Pss 31, 35, 38, 40, 55, 69, 71. Those who deny the Davidic authorship of Ps 22 also assign this great poem to Jeremiah. Whether we are able to name definitely any pss of Jeremiah, it seems thoroughly reasonable that he should have been the author of certain of the plaintive poems in the Psalter.
The Psalter has had a long and varied history. No doubt the precentor of the temple choir had his own collection of hymns for public worship. Small groups of pss may have been issued also for private use in the home. As time went on, collections were made on different organizing principles. Sometimes hymns attributed to a given author were perhaps brought into a single group. Possibly pss of a certain type, such as Maskll and Mikhtam pss, were gathered together in small collections. How these small groups were partly preserved and partly broken up, in the history of the formation of our present Psalter, will, perhaps, never be known.
(7) During the exile.—Ps 102 seems to have been composed during the exile. The poet pours out his complaint over the present distress, and reminds Jeh that it is time to have pity upon Zion. Ps 137 pictures the distress of the captives by the rivers of Babylon. The fire and fervor of the poem bespeak an author personally involved in the distress. No doubt other pss in our collection were composed during the captivity in Babylon.
IV. The Poetry of the Psalter.—For general discussion of the form of Heb poetry, see Poetry. In the Pss ahnost all known varieties of poetic parallelism are exemplified. Among modems, C. A. Briggs has made extensive research into the poetical structure of the Pss. In summing up the result of
(8) Post-exilic pss.—As specimens of the joyous hymns composed after the return from exile, we may name Pss 85 and 126. Many of the liturgical hymns in the Psalter were no doubt prepared for use in the worship of the second temple. Certain recent critics have extended this class of hymns so as
his study of the various measures employed in the Pss, he classes 89 pss or parts of pss as trimeters, that is, the lines have three main accents; 22 pss or parts he regards as tetrameters, each of the lines having four accented syllables; 25 pss or portions are classed as pentameters, and an equal number as hexameters. He recognizes some variety of measure in certain pss. There is coming to be agreement among Heb scholars that the rhythm of Heb poetry
to include the greater part of the Psalter, but that is surely an extreme view. No doubt, the stirring times of Ezra and Nehemiah stimulated poets in Jerus to pour forth thanksgiving and praise to
Israel's God. Ewald taught that the latest pss
is largely determined by the number of accented syllables to the line. Some critics insist rigorously on perfect regularity, and therefore are compelled to resort to conjectural emendation. See Poetry, Hebrew.
in our collection were composed at this time.
(9) Are there Maccabean p.^s f—Calvin assigned Pss
44, 74 and 79 to the Maccabean period. If there are Maccabean pss, Calvin has perhaps hit upon three of them. Hitzig assigns to the Maccabean period all the pss from 73 to 150, together with a few pss in the earlier half of the Psalter. Among moderns, Duhm puts practically the whole Psalter in the period from 170 to 70 BC. Gesenius, Ewald. Hupfeld and Dilhnann, four of the greatest names in OT criticism, oppose the view that the Psalter contains Maccabean pss. Most recent students admit the possibility of Maccabean pss. The question may well be left open for further investigation.
Nine pss are known as alphabetical poems, viz. Pss 9, 10, 25, 34, 37, 111, 112, 119, 145. The mo,st elaborate of these is Ps 119, which is divided into 22 sections of 8 vs each. Each letter of the Heb alphabet occurs 8 t in succession as the initial letter
of the verses in its section. As to strophical structure or stanza formation,
///. The Growth of the Psalter.—In the Heb text
there is evidence in certain pss of such organization
of the poems. The refrains with which strophes
as well as in RV, the Pss are grouped into five books,
Psalms, Book of THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2492
(3) Praising God.—More than 20 pss have for
often close form an easy guide to the strophical divisions in certain pss, such as Pss 42, 43, 46, 107. Among Eng. commentators, Briggs pays most attention to strophical structure. There is some evidence of antiphonal singing in connection with the Psalter. It is thought by some that Pss 20 and 21 were sung by responsive choirs. Pss 24 and 118 may each be antiphonal.
their keynote praise to God. See esp. Ps 8 1.9; 57 7-11; 71 22-24; 95 1-7. The first three vs of Pss 33, 34, 40, 92 and 105 reveal a rich vocabulary
of praise for stammering human Hps.
(4) Joy in God's house.—Pss 84 and 122 are
classic hymns expressive of joy in pubhc worship
in the sanctuary. Religious patriotism has never received a more striking expression than is found in Ps 137 5 f
V. The Speaker in the Pss.—Smend, in ZA TW, 1888, undertook to establish the thesis that the speaker in the Pss is not an individual, but a personification of the Jewish nation or church. At first he was inclined to recognize an individual speaker in Pss 3, 4, 62 and 73, but one year later he interpreted these also as collective. Thus at one stroke individual religious experience is wiped out of the Psalter. A tew scholars have accepted Smend's
(.5) Practising the presence of God.—In Pss 91 and 23 the worshipping saint delights his soul with the sense of God's protecting presence. The Shepherd, tender and true, is ever present to shield and to comfort. The shadow of the Almighty is over the saint who dwells in the secret place of the Most High.
(6) God in Nature.—The Psalmist did not go "through Nature up to Nature's God" ; for he found God immanent in all things. He heard God's voice
thesis; but the great majority of critics of every school have withheld their assent, and some of the best commentators have shown that the theory is whoUy untenable.
in the thunder; felt His breath in the twilight breeze; saw the gleam of His sword in the hghtning's flash, and recognized His hand in every provision for the wants of man and the lower animals. See Ps 104, "Hymn of Creation"; Ps 29, "Jeh, the God of the storm"; and the first half of Ps 19, "the heavens are telling."
Perhaps the best monograph on the subject, for the Ger. student, is one by Emil Balla, Das Ich der Psalmen. Balla's thesis is that the "I" pss, both in the Psalter and in tlie other boolcs of the OT. are always to be understood as indi\'idual, with the exception of those in which from plain data in the text another interpretation of the "I" is necessary. Of 100 pss in which "I" occurs, Balla classes 80 as easy to interpret; in the remaining 20 there might be reasonable room for difference of opinion whether the ps was individual or collective.
(7) Love for God's word.—Ps 119 is the classic description of the beauty and power and helpfulness of the Word of God. The second half of Ps 19 is also a gem. Ps 119 was happily named by one of the older commentators "a holy alphabet for Zion's scholars." The Psalmist sings the glories of God's Word as a lamp to guide, as a spring of comfort, and as a fountain of hope.
Personification is largely used in aU parts of the OT. There is no room for doubt that Ps 129, though using "I," "my" and "me," is the language of Israel as a people. The same is true of Ps 124. The author of Ps 126 hkewise associates himself with his brethren. The author of Ps 122, however,
(8) God's care of all things.—Faith in Divine Providence—both general and special—was a cardinal doctrine with the psalmists; yea more, the very heart of their religion. Ps 65 sings of God's goodness in sunshine and shower, which clothes the meadows with waving grain. The river of God is always fuU of water. Ps 121, "Jeh thy Keeper," was read by David Livingstone at family worship on the morning when he left home to go out to Africa as a missionary.
is evidently speaking for himself individually, when he says in ver 8, "For my brethren and companions' sakes, I will now say, Peace be within thee." The intelligent reader usually has no difficulty in deciding, after a careful reading of a ps, whether the "I" refers to an individual Israelite or to the congregation of Israel. Sane views on this subject are important, inasmuch as Smend's theory does violence to the strength and power of the individual religious experience of OT believers. In many portions of the OT, national duties are urged, and Israel
(9) God OUT refuge.—The psalmists were fond of the figure of "taking refuge in God." Jeh was to them a rock of refuge, a stronghold, a high tower, an impregnable fortress. Pss 46, 61 and 62 exalt God as the refuge of His saints. His help is always easy to find. The might and wisdom of God do not overwhelm the inspired singers, but become a theme of devout and joyous contemplation.
is addressed as a whole. At the same time, it would be easy to exaggerate the relatively small place that individual reUgion occupies in the prophetic writings and in the Law. The Psalter absolutely refuses to be shut up in the molds of a rigid nationaUsm.
VI. The Gospel in the Pss.—Christians love the Psalter as much as the ancient Jew could possibly have done. On every page they discover elements of religious life and experience that are thoroughly Christian. In this respect the earlier dispensation came nearer to the perfection of Christian standards than in political and social organization. Along with the NT, the aged Christian saint desires a copy of the Pss. He passes easily from the Gospels to the Psalter and back again without the sense of shifting from one spiritual level to another. Religious experience was enjoyed and was portrayed by the ancient psalmists so well that no Christian book in the apostohc period was composed to displace the Psalter.
Our Lord Jesus found in the Pss prophecies concerning Himself (Lk 24 44-47).
(1) The suffering Saviour.—While 2. The hanging on the cross, the mind of Our Messiah Lord turned to the Psalter. He voiced the terrible anguish of His soul in the opening words of Ps 22, and breathed out His spirit at the end with the trustful words of Ps 31 5. He also invited the fulfilment of a Messianic prediction in Ps 69 21 by saying, "I thirst." Isa and the Pss did not fail Him in the hour of His shame, when reproach broke His heart, and there was none to comfort Him. Only Isa 52 13—53 12 surpasses Ps 22 as a picture of Calvary and an interpretation of the significance of the cross. Whether Ps 22 is a direct prophecy of Christ, or only a typically Messianic ps, is in dispute. Every sentence can be applied to Jesus without straining its meaning. If David or some other sufferer took up his harp to sing of his own sorrows, the Spirit of God guided him to describe those of a greater.
(1) The psalmists are alwaijs reverent in their approach to Deity.—Jeh is infinitely holy (Ps 99 3.5.9). Pss 95-100 are models of adora-
1. The tion and worship. Soul's (2) Thirsting for God.—Fss 42 and Converse 43, which were originally one ps, voice with God the longing of the individual soul for God as no other human composition has been able to express it. Ps 63 is a worthy companion ps of yearning after God.
Rationalistic critics Insist that to apply part of a pa to David and part to Christ introduces confusion. They ridicule the theory of a "double sense," and contend
2493 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Psalms, Book of
that the language refers to the Psalmist and to him alone, and that the application of certain vs to Our Lord Jesus is only by way of accommodation. This theory ignores the presence and activity of the Holy Spirit altogether; and when men tails of "psychological impossibilities," they may be talking nonsense ; for who of us can understand fuiiy the psychological experience of men while receiving revelations from God 7 The real author of inspired prophecies is tlie Hoiy Spirit. His meaning is that which the reverent interpreter most delights to find; and we have evidence that the OT writers did not fully comprehend their own predictions concerning Christ (1 Pet 1 10-12). We ought not to be surprised that we should be unable to explain fully the method of the Holy Spirit's activity in guiding 'the thought of prophets and psalmists in their predictions of tiie sufferings of Christ and the glories that should follow them.
out of the depths and ends with a note of joy over redemption from sin. The plenteous redemption of which the poet speaks includes triumph over sin in one's heart and life. The cries of the OT saints for victory over sin were not unheeded (139 23 f; 19 13; 119 133). The author of Ps 84 truthfuUy depicts the hfe of Jeh's worshippers, "They go from strength to strength." Victory over sin is sure in the end.
The ancient Hebrew seems to have had no temptation to atheism or pantheism. The author of Eccl felt 1;he puU of agnosticism and 4. Wresmaterialism (Eccl 3 19-21; 9 2-10), tling with but in the end he rejected both (12 Doubts 7.13 f). The ancient Hebrew found in the world about him one difficulty which seemed almost insuperable. He believed in the wisdom and power and justice of God. How then could it be possible, in a world over which a wise and just God presides, that the wicked should prosper and the righteous suffer? This is the question which is hotly debated by Job and his three friends. A partial solution of the difficulty may be seen in Ps 37, the theme of which is 'the brevity of godless prosperity, and the certainty that well-doing wiU lead to well-being.' A better solution is attained in Ps 73, which depicts God's attitude toward the wicked and toward the righteous. The wicked will be suddenly overthrown, while the righteous will live forever in the enjoyment of communion with God. Not even death can sever him from God. The fleeting pleasures of proud scoffers pale into insignificance before the glories of everlasting fellowship with God.
(2) The conquering King.—Pss 2 and 110 (with which Ps 72 may be compared) describe the Messiah as Jeh's Son, a mighty Conqueror, who shall overwhelm all foes and reign supported by Jeh. Some will oppose the Messiah, and so perish; others will enter His army as volunteers, and in the end will enjoy the fruits of victory. "It is better to sit on His throne than to be His footstool."
(3) The growing kingdom.—There is room in the earth for no god other than Jeh, the Creator and Redeemer of manltind. Pss 47, 67, 96-100 and 117 are proofs of the glorious missionary outlook of the Psalter. AU nations are exhorted to forsake idols and worship Jeh. Ps 47 closes with a picture of the whole world united in the worship of the God of Israel. Ps 67 is a bugle call to all nations to unite in the worship of the true God. Pss 96-100 paint the character of Jeh as a basis of appeal to all nations to turn from idols and worship the God of Abraham. Pss 96 and 98 exalt His righteousness; Ps 97 His power and dominion ; Ps 99 His holiness and His fidelity to Israel, while Ps 100 tells of His goodness. Idols will finally go down before a God worthy of men's reverence and love.
(1) Out of the depths of persecution and slander the author of Ps 31 cUmbed into his refuge, as he exclaimed, "In the covert of thy
5. Out of presence wilt thou hide them from the the Depths plottings of man : Thou wilt keep them secretly in a pavihon from the strife of tongues." (2) Ps 77 is a stairway out of the depths of suspense and anxiety. The experience of the author well illustrates Maclaren's epigram, "If out of the depths we cry, we shall cry ourselves out of the depths." (3) The author of Ps 116 looked into the jaws of death. Perhaps no other ps has so much to say of physical death. The singer
The Psalter deals with man as a sinner. Seven of the best known poems in the collection are so charged with a sense of sin and of its
3. The deadly fruits that they have been Problem known for centuries as the Penitential
of Sin Pss (6, 32, 38, 51, 102, 130, 143). Besides these poems of penitence and confession, there are many passages elsewhere in the Psalter which depict the sinfulness of men. And yet there are assertions of personal innocence and righteousness in the Psalter that sound hke the claims of self-righteous persons (7 3-9; 17 1-5; 18 20-24; 35 11-17; 44 17-22). The psahnists do not mean to affirm that they are sinless before God, but rather that they are righteous in comparison with their foes who are seeking to destroy them. Sometimes they plead for mercy in the same con-
is filled with gratitude as he reviews the deadly peril from which Jeh has saved him. (4) Ps 88 is unique, because it is sad and plaintive from beginning to end. The singer has long cried for deUverance from bodily weakness and from loneliness. (5) Out of the depths of disaster and defeat the authors of Pss 60, 74, 79 and 89 cry to God. The Bab exile was a sore trial to patriotic Jews. They mourned over the destruction of their beautiful temple and the holy city in which their fathers had worshipped. The author of Ps 60 closes with hope and confidence (60 12). "Unquestionably in the Pss we reach the highwater mark of OT practical piety, the best that the OT can exhibit of heart-reUgion."
text. The honest exegete does not find the Phari-
saic temper in these noble hymns, though he is quite
willing to admit that the Christian cannot well employ some of the expressions concerning his own
experiences. Jesus requires a humility deeper than that which was attained in OT times.
(1) Confessing sin.— (a) Individual confession: Pss 32 and 51 are notable examples of individual
6. Ethical (1) What sort of man, then, would Ideals the Pss acclaim as goodf—Ps 1 opens with a vivid contrast between the righteous and the wicked. Ps 15 is the most complete description of a good man to be found in the Psalter. The picture is drawn in answer to the question, What sort of man will Jeh receive as an acceptable worshipper? The morahty of the Bible
confession. The cries of the penitent in Ps 51 have been repeated by thousands on bended knee as the
best expression of their own sense of sin and yearn-
ing for forgiveness, {b) National confession (see
esp. 78, 95 and 106). Ps 105 celebrates the praises
of Jeh for His unfailing kindness to Israel; 106 tells
the tale of Israel's repeated rebeUion.
is rooted in religion, and the rehgion of the Bible blossoms and bears fruit in the highest ethics known to man. Ps 131 makes humility a prime quality in real goodness. Ps 133 magnifies the spirit of brotherly love. The social virtues had a large place in the psalmists' ideals of goodness. HumUity and brotherly love are a guaranty of peace in the
(2) Seeking forgiveness.—Fa 51 is the penitent's
cry for mercy. Never did the soul of man plead more powerfully for forgiveness. God cannot
despise a heart broken and crushed with the sense
of sin and pleading hke a lost child for home and mother.
(3) Conquering sin.—7a 130 begins with a cry
Psalms, Book of Psychology THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2494
home, the church and the nation. Ps 24 4 is a compend of ethics in a single sentence.
death. Let this fact, however, be borne in mind, that not one of the poets or prophets of Israel settled down to a final denial of immortahty. Some of them had moments of joyous assurance of a blessed
(2) The ethics of speech.—Even a casual reading of the Pss must impress one with the fact that the psalmists felt very keenly the Ues and slanders and boastings of the wicked. Stirred with righteous indignation, they call upon God to awake and confront the blatant foes of truth and righteousness (see esp. Pss 12, 52 and 120).
life of fellowship with God in the world to come. Life everlasting in the presence of Jeh is the prospect with which the author of Ps 16 refreshes him-
self (16 S-11). The vision of God's face after the sleep of death is better than worldly prosperity (17 13-15). The author of Ps 73 wins rest for his distressed mind in the assurance of a fellowship with God that cannot be broken (73 23-26). God will finally take the singer to Himself. It has been weU said that Ps 49 registers the high-water mark of OT faith in a future Ufe. Death becomes the shepherd of the wicked who trusted in riches, while God redeems the righteous from the power of Sheol and takes the believing soul to Himself.
(3) Ministering to the needy.—Bible readers are familiar with the ideal of the good man in Job 29 12-16; 31 13-22. Ps 82 is a plea for justice. Venal judges are one day to confront the great Judge. Men need fair play first. Perhaps there will then be no occasion for the exercise of almsgiving. Ps 41 is a plea for kindness. The Christian reader is reminded of the words of Jesus, "Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy." The Ideal Ruler is both just and beneficent (Ps 72 2.12-14). To be a good lover one must know how to hate. The excitement of battle throbs in many of the Pss.
LiTER.^TUEE.—One of the most elaborate and informing articles on the history of the exposition of the Pss is found in the Intro to Dehtzsch's C'omm. (pp. 64-87, ET). Among the Fathers, Jerome, Chrysostom and Augustine are most helpful. Among the Keformers, Calvin, the prince of expositors, is most valuable. Among modern commentators, Ewald and Dehtzsch are scholarly and sane. Their comms. are accessible in Eng. tr. Hupfeld is strong in grammatical exegesis. Baethgen (1904) is very thorough. Among recent Eng. and American commentators, the most helpful are Perowne (6th ed. 1866), Maclaren in Expositor's Bible (1890-92), and Kirkpatrick in Cambridge Bible (189395). Briggs in ICC (1906) is learned; Davison, Neia Century Bible, is bright and attractive. Spurgeon, Treasury of David, is a valuable compilation, chiefly from the Puritan divines. Cheyne, The Book of Pss (1888) and The Origin and Religious Contents of the Psalter (1891), is quite radical in his critical views. Binnie. The Pss: Their Origin, Teachings and Use (1886), is a fine introduction to the Psalter. Robertson, The Poetry and Religion of the Pss (1898), constructs an able argument against recent radical views.
The enemies of righteousness are vic-
7. Praying torious and defiant. Their taunts against the drive the psaknists to importunate Wicked prayer. Jeh's honor is at stake and His cause in peril. More than 20 pss contain prayer for the defeat and overthrow of the wicked. Warlike imagery of the boldest kind is found in many of the imprecatory pss. To the Christian reader some of the curses pronounced against the wicked are startling and painful. Many are led to wonder how such imprecations ever found a place in the Bible. The most severe curses are found in Pss 35, 69 and 109. Maclaren's words are well worth reading as an introduction to Ps 109: "For no private injuries, or for those only in so far as the suffering singer is a member of the community which represents God's cause, does he ask the descent of God's vengeance, but for the insults and hurts inflicted on righteousness. The form of these maledictions belongs to a lower stage of revelation; the substance of them, considered as passionate desires for the destruction of evil, burning zeal for the triumph of truth, which is God's cause, and unquenchable faith that He is just, is a part of Christian perfection." Two remarks may be made, as suggestions to the student of the Psalter:
John Richard Sampet PSALMS, IMPRECATORY, im'pr5-ka-t5-ri, impre-ka'ter-i. See Psalms, VI, 7.
PSALTER, sorter (PSALMS), OF SOLOMON. See Apocalyptic Literature, III, 1; Between THE Testaments, IV, 1, (1), (6).
PSALTERY, s61'ter-i. See Music.
PSALTIEL, s61'ti-el: Syr and RVm= "Phaltiel" of 2 Esd 5 16.
(1) We ought to study the pss of imprecation in the light of their origin. They are poetry and not prose; and De Witt reminds us that the language of oriental poetry is that of exaggerated passion. Some of these imprecations pulse with the throb of actual battle. Swords are drawn, and blood is flowing. The champion of Jeh's people prays for the overthrow of His foes. The enemies cursed are men who break every moral law and defy God. The Psalmist identifies himself with Jeh's cause. "Do not I hate them, O Jeh, that hate thee? And am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee? I hate them with perfect hatred: They are become mine enemies" (Ps 139 21 f). Thus the psaknists pray with God's glory in view. (2) We ought to use the imprecatory pss in the Hght of Our Lord's teaching. We cannot pronounce curses on our personal enemies. This heavenly artillery may be turned upon the saloon, the brothel and the gambling hell, though we must not forget to pray for the conversion of the persons who are engaged in these hues of business.
PSEUDO-MATTHEW, su'ds-math'u, GOSPEL OF. See Apocryphal Gospels, III, 1, (6).
PSYCHOLOGY, sl-kol'5-ji:
1. Introduction: Scope of Biblical Psychology 2. Nature and Origm of the Soul 3. False Theories 4. Creationism and Traducianism
.5. Trichotomy 6. Scriptural Terms 7. Pauline E.xpressions 8. Monism and Other Theories 9. The Pall of Man 10. Effects of the Fall 11. Death as a Problem 12. Immortality of the Soul Literature
The extravagant claims made by some wi-itera for a fully developed system of Bib. psychology has
brought the whole subject into dis1. Introrepute. So much so, that Hofmann duction: {Schriftbeweis) has boldly asserted that Scope of "a system of Bib. psychology has Biblical been got together without any justiPsychology fication for it in Scripture." At the outset, therefore, it must be borne in mind that the Bible does not present us with a systematized philosophy of man, but gives in popular form an account of human nature in all its various relationships. A reverent study of Scripture will undoubtedly lead to the recognition of a
"If a man die, shall he live again?" What answer do the Pss give to Job's cry for light? There are expressions in the Psalter which 8. The seem to forbid hope of a blessed imFutureLife mortahty (Ps 6 .5; 30 9; 39 13; 115 17). The p.sahnists are tempted to fear that fellowship with God would cease at
2495 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Psalms, Book of Psychology
well-defined system of psychology, on which the whole scheme of redemption is based. Great truths regarding human nature are presupposed in and accepted by the OT and the NT; stress is there laid on other aspects of truth, unknown to writers outside of revelation, and presented to us, not in the language of the schools, but in that of practical life.
According to the Kabbalah, souls are supposed to have an ideal as well as a real pree.xistence : "ideal as emanations from the s-phiroth, whicli are themselves emanations from the infinite real, as having been 'created' at a definite time" (cf Eric Bischoff, De Kabbala).
The doctrine with some modifications passed into the Christian church, was accepted by Justin Martyr, Theodoretus, Origen and others of the church Fathers, but became obsolete by the latter part of the 4th cent, (cf Shedd, Hist of Christian Doctrine, II, 9). It was formally condemned by a synod held at Constantinople in the 6th cent. In later times it was accepted in modified form by Kant, Schelling and others, and was specially defended by Julius Mtiller, who held that the soul had a timeless preexistence and underwent a fall before the final act, whereby it was united in time to the body as its temporary home {Ein ausser-
_ Man is there described as fallen and degraded, but intended by God to be raised, redeemed, renewed. From this point of view Bib. psychology must be studied, and our aim should be "to bring out the views of Scripture regarding the nature, the life and life-destinies of the soul, as they are determined in the history of salvation" (Delitzsch, Bibl. Psych., 1.5). As to the origin of the soul. Scripture is silent. It states very clearly that life was inbreathed into man by God (nS'lT, wayyippah; 2. Nature LXX ivecpva-rja-fi', e7iephiisesen; Vulg and Origin inspiravit). The human being thus of the Soul inspired by God was thereby constituted a ncphesh hayyah ("living soul"), because the nishmath hayyim ("breath of lives") had been imparted to him (Gen 2 7). Beyond this the first book of the Bible does not go. In later books the doctrine is taught with equal clearness. Thus in the Book of Job: "The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty giveth me life" (Job 33 4). The difference in expression should be carefully noted. The "living soul" (LXX psuche zosa) is made to depend upon, as it ha,s its origin in, the "breath of lives" (LXX pnotzots). The n'shamah ("breath") is characteristic of man—though it is very rarely, if ever, attributed to animals; man is described as a being 'in whose nostrils is but a breath' (n'shdmah) (Isa 2 22). That "breath" is 'God's breath in man' (Job 32 8; 34 14), or, as it is represented in Prov 20 27, "The spirit of man [nishmath] is the lamp of Jeh." In the NT Paul evidently refers to this view of man's origin in the statement that "the first man Adam became a living soul. The last Adam . . . . a life-giving [quickening] spirit" (1 Cor 15 4.5). This too agrees with what Christ has said: "It is the spirit that giveth life [quickenethj" (Jn 6 63), and with what Paul himself has stated elsewhere in the Ep. to the Rom (8 2) : "The Spirit of life in Christ Jesus made me free from the law of sin and of death."
zeitlicher tjrzustand und Urfall). Reference is sometimes made to Jer 1 .5, where Jeh addresses His servant: "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee; I have appointed thee a prophet unto the nations." But this text gives no warrant to the doctrine as taught by the writers mentioned. All that may be conceded is, what Delitzsch has termed "an ideal preexistence," i.e. "a pree.xistence, not only of man as such, but also of the individual and of all: a preexistence in the Divine knowledge, which precedes the existence in the individual consciousness" (Bihl. Psych., 46). A new question arises at this point, viz. Is the soul a special creation ? Is it derived from the parents ? Opinions are and have been divided on
4. Preatinn *'^'^ point. Many have supported the
. '^^"^'*""'^" theory of Creationism, by wlilch is meant Ism and that in every instance where a new indiTraducianvidual comes into being a soul is specially
ic,yf, created by God, de nihilo, to inhabit tiie '""' new-formed body. This view of the soul's birth found great favor in the early church. It was dominant in the East and was advocated in the West. "Jerome asserts that God quotidie fabricatur aiiimas, and cites Scripture in proof" (Shedd, op. cit., II, 11). Scholastic theologians in the JNIiddle Ages. Roman Catholic divines, Reformed orthodoxy upheld the theory. Though finding little support in Scripture, they appealed to such texts as the following: "He fashioneth their hearts alike" (Ps 33 15 AV)
Jeh " formeth the spirit of man within him " (Zee 12 1): "The spirit returneth unto God who gave it" (Eccl 12 7: cf Nu 16 22; He 12 9); "God, the God of the spirits of all flesh" (.Nu 27 16)—of which Delitzsch declared :
' • There can hardly be a more classical prooftext for creationism " (Bibl. Psyeh., 137).
Traducianism again has found equal support in the Christian church. It declared that the parents were responsible, not merely for the bodies, but also for the sotLls of their offspring per Iraducem vrl per propaginem (i.e. by direct derivation, in the ordinary way of propagation). Tertullian was a strong supporter of this view: "The soul of man, like the shoot of a tree, is dra^vn out (deducla) into a physical progeny from Adam, the parent stock" (Shedd, Hi-'it of Doctrine, II, 14). Jerome remarked that in his day it was adopted by maxima pars occideiUalium ("the large majority of western tiieologians"). Leo the Great (d. 461) asserted that "the Catholic faith teaches tliat every man with reference to the substance of his soul as well as of his body is formed in the womb" (Shedd). Augustine, however, though doctrinally inclined to support the claims of Traducianists, kept an open mind on the subject: "You may blame, if you will, my hesitation," lie wrote, "l)ecause I do not venture to affirm or deny tliat of which I am ignorant." And, perhaps, this is the safest attitude to assume; for there is little Scriptural warrant for either theory. Birth is a mystery which liafRcs investigation, and Scripture throws no light upon that mystery. Yet some who have discussed this subject have tried actually to calculate the very day on which the soul is created or infused into the body, as it is being formed in the mother's womb—in ijoys on tlie 40th day after pregnancy and in girls on the 80th. This indeed is the reduetio ad absurdum of Creationism.
Scripture therefore repudiates all doctrines of emanation, by which is meant a natural, forth-flowing
life from God into the human sphere;
3. False it teaches a doctrine of creation, whereTheories by it declares that the Almighty acts with deliberation and design, in free choice, and not of necessity. "Let us make man"
is the sublime utterance of Divine wisdom and power. Nor does Scripture teach the preexistence of the soul—a doctrine found in the extra-canonical, platonically inspired Book of Wisd (8 19.20), "For
I was a child of parts, and a good soul fell to my
lot; nay rather, being good, I came into a bofly undefiled." This doctrine was well known to Jewish writers, and was taught in Talm and Kabbalah.
"All souls were, according to the Talm. created and kept in secret from the first moment of creation. As creatures of the highest sphere they are omniscient; but at the moment of birtli in a human body an angel touches the lips of the child, so that he forgets whatever has been "
(Emanuel Deutsch, The Talmud). The doctrine, however, must be a later importation into Jewish theology through Plato and Philo. It reminds us of Vergil {Mneid vi.713), who makes the souls—destined by the Pates to inhabit new bodies on earth—drink of the waters of Lethe (forgetfulness) , so as to remove all remembrance of the joys of Elysium
Whichever theory we accept, the difficulties are great either way. For if God creates a soul, tliat soul must be pure and sinless and stainless at l^irth. How then can it be said tliat man is "conceived" as well as "born in sin " ? If the impure, sin-stained body contaminates the pure, unstained soul by contact, why cannot the stainless soul disinfect the contaminated body'? And again, if every individual soul is a special creation by direct
"The souls that throng the flood,
Are those to whom by Fate are other bodies owed
In Lethe's lake they long oblivion taste Of future life secure, forgetful of the past."
Psychology THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2496
interposition of the Almighty, what becomes of the unity and solidarity of the race ? Is its connection with Adam then purely one of physical or corporeal generation ? Creationism cannot account for the birth of the soul. Nor can Traducianism. For it can accoimt neither for the origin, nor for the hereditary taint of the soul. It lands us in a hopeless dilemma. In the one case we fall back upon Creationism with its dilHculties; in the other, we plunge into a materialism which is equally fatal to the theory (cf Bavinck, Gereformeerde Dogmaliek, II, 626). Perhaps the words of Petrus Lombardus, though frequently misunderstood and misapplied, throw most light on the subject-—a light, however, which is little more than "darkness visible" creando infundit eas Deus, et iiifundendo creat ("in creating God infused [the soul]; and in infusing He creates"). The problem is and remains insoluble.
of the Holy Spirit. It has been pointed out (A. Kuyper, Het werk v. d. Heiligen Oeest, III, 101)— and this must be carefully borne in mind—that "the apostle does not use the word holomerels, 'in
all your parts,' and then summarize these parts in body, soul and spirit, but holoteleis, a word that has no reference to the parts, but to the telos, the end or aim. Calvin interprets 'soul' and 'spirit' here as referring to our rational and moral existence, as thinking, willing beings, both modes of operation of the one, undivided soul."
The next text to which an appeal is made is He 4 12: "The word of God is living, and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing even to the dividing of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and quick to discern tlie thoughts and intents of the heart." Here spirit, soul and heart are brought into close correspondence, with heart evidently as the center of personality, manifesting itself in soul and spirit. The only question
Passing allusion may be made to another very curious theory, to which reference is made by Martensen (,Christliche Ethik, I, 107). It bears upon human individuality, as impressed not only upon the soul, but also upon the body. The soul and the body are represented as arising at the same moment, but the latter (not in regard to its physico-chemical composition, but in other respects) is the resultant of soul-influences, whatever these may be. The soul therefore e.xercises a formative influence upon the body, with which it is united. This theory is attributed by Martensen to G. E. Stahl, who died in Berlin in 1734, as physician to the royal family. We are here in a region where the way is barred—"a palpable obscure " without the light of day.
is, whether the dividing which takes place by the piercing word of God is one within the soul and
spirit, causing a complete exposure of the inner man, a cutting asunder of all that composes his nature, or one between the soul and spirit, causing a division between them as separate parts of human nature. The probability lies with the first of these two contradictory views. The writer evidently meant that, as a sharp two-edged sword pierces to the very marrow in its sundering process, so the sword of the spirit cuts through all obstacles, pierces the very heart, lays bare what hitherto was hidden to all observers, even to the man himself, and "discerns" the "thoughts and intents," which in the unity of soul and spirit have hitherto been kept in the background. "The meaning is rather, that the word of God pierces and dissects both the soul and spirit, separates each into its parts, subtle though they may be, and analyzes their thoughts and intents" (Davidson, op. cit., 187). At any rate, to found a doctrine of Trichotomy on an isolated, variously interpreted text is dangerous in the extreme. The language of metaphor is not the language of literal speech; and here evidently we are in the region of metaphor.
The next important question which has occupied many minds is equally difficult of solution—the theory of Tripartition. Is man com-
5. Triposed of "body" and "soul" [dichotchotomy omy) only, or is a third to be added to the two, so that "spirit" is another element in the constitution of human nature (trichotomy)? Either theory ia supposed to be supported by Scripture, and both have had their defenders in all ages of the church. Where the tripartite division has found favor, soul and spirit have been distinguished from each other, as man's lower is distinguished from his higher nature; where dichotomy prevailed, soul and spirit were represented as manifestations of the same spiritual essence. Under the influence of Platonic philosophy, trichotomy found favor in the early church, but was discredited on account of the ApoUinarian heresy. The threefold division of human nature into soma ("body"), psuchi ("soul"), pjieuma ("spirit") had been accepted by many when ApoUinaris, bishop of Laodicea (d. 382), attempted to explain the mystery of Christ's person by teaching that the Logos (or second person of the Trinity) had taken the place of the rational soul in Christ, so that the person of Christ on earth consisted of the Divine Logos, a human body, and a soul (psuche) as the link between the two.
The ground is now cleared for a fuller investigation of the meaning of these terms:
(1) The terms are used inter-
6. Scripchangeably, though they are not tural Terms synonymous. Lebhabh ("heart"), nephesh ("soul"), ril'h ("spirit") are very closely connected in the CT. The heart is there represented as "the organ, the spirit as the principle, the soul as the subject of hfe" (Cremer, Lexicon). Hence we read that "out of it [the heart] are the issues of life" (Prov 4 23). Dying is represented as the surrender of soul (Gen 35 18; Job 11 20), but also of spirit (Ps 31 5; 146 4). The dead are called souls (Rev 6 9; 20 4), and also spirits (He 12 23; 1 Pet 3 19). In the last mentioned text the "spirits in prison" are also called "souls." The living are described as "disturbed" or "grieved" in soul (.Jgs 10 16), "vexed" (Jgs 16 16), "discouraged" (Nu 21.4), "weary" (Zee 11 8); but also as in "anguish of spirit" (Ex 6 9), "impatient in spirit" (Job 21 4, in the Heb), 'straitened in spirit' (Mic 2 7). At death the "spirit" departs (Ps 146 4, in the Heb), but also the "soul" (Gen 35 18). As in the OT so in the NT, Our Lord "sighed," or "was troubled in the spirit" (Jn 13 21); but we also read that His soul was "exceeding sorrowful," or troubled (Mt 26 38; Jn 12 27). See Spirit; Soul; Heart.
For the tripartite division of human nature two texts are specially brought into the discussion:
viz. 1 Thess 5 23, "May your spirit and soul and body be preserved entire, without blame"—a text which is popularly interpreted as conveying that "soul" stands for "our powers natural—those we have by nature," and that by "spirit" is meant "that life in man which in his natural state can scarcely be said to exist at all, but which is to be called out into power and vitality by regeneration" (F. W. Robertson, Seniions). There is very
little warrant in Scripture for such interpretation. "The language does not require a distinction of organs or substances, but may be accounted for by a vivid conception of one substance in different relations and under different aspects. The two terms are used to give exhaustive expression to the whole being and nature of man" (Davidson, OT Theology, 13.5). There is evidently no distinction of essence here—viz. of a soul distinct from the
spirit, and a body distinct from either. In his "fervid desire for the comjilete and perfect sanctification of his disciples, the apostle accumulates these terms" in order to emphasize the doctrine of an entire renewal of the whole man by the working
(2) And yet there is a distinction, whatever the real nature of it may be. In Mary's Magnificat,
e.g., we find the two combined in an interesting manner: "My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my
2497 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Psychology
f^''A^^ u^ rejoiced in God my Saviour" (Lk 1 4b.47;, the one clause "referring to the personal emotions of Mary, to her feelings as a woman and a mother, all of which find an outlet in adoration," the second clause "appearing to indicate the moment when m the profoundest depths of her being, by the touch of the Divine spirit, the promise of the angel was accomplished in her*' (Godet, in loc ). A like contrast meets us in the story of Gethsemane. Xhe Master was 'exceeding sorrowful in soul' (i e the emotional, sensitive center of His being was in deep sorrow), the disciples were 'willing in spiriL' but 'weak in the flesh' (Mt 26 38.41). In the ot we tmd that when a man dies his "soul" departs, ffV^T o<J\''
one soul [psuche] striving for the faith" (Phil 1 27). He exhorts them to be "of the same mind"
[sumpsuchoi, Phil 2 2); he hopes to 7. Pauline be "of good comfort" {eupsucho, Phil 2 Expressions 19); he knows of 'no man likeminded, [isopsuchon], who [would] care truly for [then-] state' (Phil 2 20). Everywhere therefore we have "soul" in various combinations to indicate the mental attitude, which in the "fellowship of the Spirit" he would assume toward his readers, and his readers would adopt toward himself.
_ There cannot be therefore that subtle distinction which men have found in the terms "spirit" and "soul," as though two separate essences were housed in one body. The text in Job (33 4), "The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty giyeth me life," is the key to the whole problem. The spiritus spirans becomes the spiritus spiratus—the inspiring spirit becomes in man the life which is expired, outbreathed by man, in both soul and spirit. "Soul," therefore, may well stand for the personal, living, animated being—the suffering, acting, thinking, reasoning, dying creature, "whose breath is in his nostrils." Christ gave His 'soul' {psuche) for His sheep (Jn 10 11). On the cross He Himself exclaimed: "Into thy hands I commend my spirit" {pneuma) (Lk 23 46). Spirit may_ therefore indicate the all-embracing power, guiding the inward and the outward life principium illud internum ex quofluunt acliones, is Bengel's comment on Eph 2 2 (cf Lk 9 55 AV; 4 36). Hence by an easy gradation it may stand for the abysmal depths of personality; while "soul" would express man's individuality in general. See Soul; Spirit.
IS restored to life his "soul" returns U yy 17 II); but when consciousnessor lifepower returns to one not dead, "spirit" is used (Gen 45 27; Jgs 15 19; 1 S 30 12; IK 10 5) liven m popular language the distinction is recognized: we speak of so many "souls," not "spirits " as having perished.
(3) Frorn all this it would appear that philosophic distinction or scientific accuracy of expression IS not met with in Scripture. Man is there represented as a unity, and the various terms employed to mdicate that unity in its diversity of activities or passivities do not necessarily imply the existence of 9™^^6nt essences, or of separate organs, through which these are realized. Psychical action is sometimes ascribed to the body, as well as to the soul, for soul and body are inseparably united to each other. It is the possession of a soul which makes the body what it is; and on the other hand, a soul without a body is unthinkable. The resurrection of the body therefore is no mere figment of the creeds. The body is God's work (Job 10 8), inseparable from the life of the soul. In the NT it is spoken of as "the house on earth" {epigeios oikia)
Pauline phraseology has somewhat confused the issue; at any rate, new meanings, not obvious to the reader, have been assigned to various terms. Paul contrasts the psychical and the pneumatic, the man under the influence of the Divine p?iexima,and the man as influenced by his own psuche. The psychicalm&Ti is man in his natural, unregenerate state, psychical in this connection being almost equivalent to carnal; while the pneumatic man would be the man guided and directed by the Spirit from on high. Nature and grace are contrasted in the two terms as the first and second Adam are contrasted in 1 Cor 15 45—the first Adam being described as a living psuche ("soul"), the second as a life-giving pneuma ("spirit"). Even so the psychical body is the body intended, fitted to bear the psuche, while the pneumatic body is evidently the body capable of bearing the pneuma. Hence the one is corruptible and weak, the other incorruptible and full of power. The soul confined to the carnal body uses it as an organ, till it falls into decay and no longer lends itself to such use. The sjn'rit, in constant fellowship with the Divine Spirit, communicates its energy to a body fitted to be the bearer of this renewed life, spiritualizes that organ, makes that body its docile instrument, enables the body to fulfil its wishes and thoughts, wjth inexhaustible power of action, "as we even now see the artist using his voice or his hand with marvelous freedom and thus foreshadowing the perfect spiritualizing of the body."
the "tabernacle" or tent prepared for the occupant (sktnos) (1 Cor 12 18; 2 Cor 4 7; 5 1). In the OT "we have such metaphorical expressions as 'houses of clay'; or, as in post-Bib. writings, 'earthly tabernacle.' In the latest, we have words which suggest a hollow, a framework, or a sheath, favoring the Gr idea of the body as the husk or clothing of the soul" (Laidlaw). Hence in Scripture, spirit and soul are interchangeably used with body for human nature in general, not as though indicating three separate entities, but as denoting a parallelism which brings out the full personality of man. Soul and body are threatened with destruction (Mt 10 28); body without spu-it is a corpse (Jas 2 26); soul and spirit are interchangeably united: "Stand fast in one spirit, with one soul striving," etc (Phil 1 27).
(4) Gathering all together, the Scriptural position seems to be as follows: The Divine Spirit is the source of all life, and its power is communicated in the physical, intellectual and moral sphere. That Spirit, as the spiritus spirans, the inspiring spirit, by its very breath makes man a living soul: "The spirit [or breath] of God is in my nostrils" (Job 27 3); "Thou takest away their breath [rWh, "spirit"], they die, and return to their dust" (Ps'l04 29). Hence God is called "God of the spirits of all flesh" (Nu 16 22; 27 16). Soul, though identical with spirit, has shades of meaning which spirit has not; it stands for the individual. "Man is spirit, because he is dependent upon God. Man is soul^ because, unlike the angels, he has a body, which links him to earth. He is animal as possessing anima, but he is a reasoning animal, which distinguishes him from the brute"
Other questions call for discussion here: they may be briefly touched upon. Scripture acknowledges a dualism, which recognizes the sepa8. Monism rate existence of soul and body. It reand Other jects a monism, which makes man but Theories "a doublefaced unity" (Bain); or considers mind and body as equally un-
real, and as "aspects," "appearances," "sides" of one and the same reality (scientific monism). It knows nothing of mere idealism, which makes mind the only reality, of which matter is but a manifestation.
(Bavinck, Ger. Dogm., Il, 628).
(5) In this connection stress may be laid upon some of Paul's expressions. He exhorts the Philippians to "stand fast in one spirit [pneuma], with
Psychology Ptolemy THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2498
the evolutionary theory as so presented. For primitive man's transgression would under such circumstances be but the natural expression of brute passion, to which the name of sin in the Christian sense can hardly be applied. But if for "minute" and "insensible" gradations in the evolutionary process be substituted the "mutations," "leaps" or "lifts," to which an increasing number of evolutionists are appealing ; if primitive man be not pictured as a semi-animal, subject to brutish impulse and passion ; if with man a new start was made, a "lift" occurred in the process of development under the guiding and directing influence of Almighty power, the problem assumes a different shape. A sinless creature, transgressing the moral law, is then not an un-
nor of malerialism, which considers matter as that which alone is substantial, while mind is a mere product of the brain (Haeckel). It does not support the theory of harmonia praestabilita—preestablished harmony, whereby
"Oiir birth is but a sleep and a forgetting,"
because soul and body were united in harmonious action before the individual was called into active being, body and soul acting in harmony after creation like two clocks accurately regulated, pointing to the same hour on the dial plate, though driven by different springs (Leibnitz). Scripture has no theory. It deals with facts and facts only in so far as they bear upon the history of man's sin and man's redemption. It throws no light on many problems raised by science or philosophy. It does not discuss origins—the origin of evil, of matter, of mind. "All is of God" is the Scriptural answer to many questions. Thus the relation of mind to body is and remains a mystery—as great as the relation between the forces in Nature, to which the names of light and electricity have been given. Science has attempted to explain that mystery and has
scientific assumption; conscience asserting itself as the voice Divine within the human soul is then not only possible, but actual and real, in the history of man's earliest progenitors. The Bib. narrative will after all remain as the most reasonable explanation of man's original couclition and his terrible fall. In that narrative will be found enshrined the "shadowing tradition" of a real, historic event, which has influenced the human race through all the ages. Professor Driver, writing under the strong influence of the evolutionary theory, and accepting as "the law stamped upon the entire range of organic nature, progress, gradual advance from lower to higher, from the less perfect to the more perfect," has wisely remarked that "man failed in the trial to which he was exposed, that sin has entered into the world .... and that through the whole course of the race it has been attended by an element of moral disorder, and thus it has been marred, perverted, impeded or drawn back" (Driver, Genesis, 57). See Fall, The. An equally serious question arises as to the
failed. The words of Shenstone {Cornhill Maga-
zine, 1907) may be applied to all psychical problems, outside of Holy Writ, which by him were applied to those scientific questions which remain unanswered in spite of all our efforts at solution: ''We are still very far from knowing definitely that atoms are composed entirely of electrons or that electrons are nothing else than electric charges; and though electrons have been shown to exhibit electric
effects of the fall of man. Shame, corruption, death is the answer given by the OT and NT.
10. Effects "In the day that thou eatest thereof of the thou shaft surely die" (Gen 2 17) Fall was the judgment pronounced upon man. By this was evidently meant "death" as a physical and as a spiritual fact. Man was doomed. The posse non mori, which according to older theologians was man's privilege, was
inertia, it has not been proved that the inertia of atoms also is electrical." The mystery of matter is great; that of soul is greater still. The next question which falls to be discussed is the influence of the fall of man upon his soul. Scripture is clear upon the point. Man's fall from a 9 The Fall prinaeval state of innocence is there told
lost and was succeeded by a punishment of which the non posse non mori was the doom, i.e. the possi-
bility of immortal life was followed by the impossi-
bility of not suffering death. Not as though immortality was absolutel}' lost; for with sin came decay, degeneration, death, not of the inbreathed
f -j^jf in unambiguous terms, though the word or Man itself is not found in the narrative, except perhaps in Rom 11 11.12, where allusion
is made to the fall (pardptoma) of Israel. Witli tho oriijiii of evil Scripture apparently does not concern itself, though it clearly states that man's sinful condition stands in direct connection with the transgression of Adam, as in Rom 5 12, where the introduction of sin (hamartia) into the world (kdsmos) is spoken of as the act of one man (s.c. Adam), hamartia being evidently taken as a power of evil working in the world of men. The OT allusion in Hos 6 7 can hardly be referred to Adam's transgression; at any rate the reference is doubtful. AV renders the passage: "They like men have transgressed the covenant," though the revisers have trJ; "But they like Adam have transgressed the covenant." The German and Dutch VSS give the same interpretation to the verso: "like Adam." The LXX takes the term as an appellative (/io,s dnthropos, "as man"), but the Vulg refers the transgression to Adam \sicui Adam transgressi sunt). Tile other allusions in the OT to this event are slight, as in Job 31 3.3; Ezk 28 13.15. In the NT, however, the references are much more frequent, esp. in the writings of .John and of St. Paul (cf .Tn 8 44: 1 Jn 3 8; 2 Cor 11 3; 1 Tim 2 14). The strong parallelism between Adam and Christ in Rom 5 12-21, the obedience of the one bringing freedom, while that of tho other brought woe, and the contrast in 1 Cor 15 22 between Adam and Christ throw sufBcient light on the question at issue.
spirit, but of the body into which the soul was breathed by God. But even the body is imperishable. It undergoes change, but not extinction. The resurrection-body has become a possibility through the atonement and resurrection of Christ. The tabernacle is removed, but renewed. The body is not a prison house, but a temple; not an adjunct but an integral part of the human being. The Bible teaches not only a resurrection-body, but a transformed body (Rom 12 1). It speaks not only of a soul to be saved, but of a body to be redeemed. Scripture alone accounts for death and explains it. With modern evolutionists death is an unsolved problem. Weissmann {Essays on Heredity) maintains on the one hand that "death is 11. Death not an essential attitude of matter" as a (p. 159), and on the other, "it is only Problem from the point of view of utility that we can understand the necessity of death" (p. 23), and again "death is to be looked upon as an occurrence which is advantageous to the species as a concession to the outer conditions of life, and not as an absolute necessity, essentially inherent in life." He even speaks of "the immortality of the protozoa," because "an immense number of the lower organisms" are not subject to death (ib, 26). Death therefore according to him has been "acquired secondarily as an adaptation," and must in a certain sense be unnatural. It is indeed "one of the most difficult problems in the whole range of physiology." If this be so, we may safely turn to Scripture for an explanation of the problem, which has a value peculiarly its own. "By man came death" is the authoritative declara-
Modern science, under tho influence of the evolutionary hypothesis, has eliminated or at least has attempted to eliminate the factor of the Fall. That "fall" has been interpreted as a "rise," the "descent" is supposed to have been a real "ascent." Far down the ages, millenniums ago, "a miserable, half-starved, naked wretch, just emerged from the bestial condition, torn with fierce passions, and fighting his way among his compeers with low-browed cunning" (Orr, Chrislian View of God, 180) must have emerged somehow out of darkness into light. " We are no longer," says Professor J. A. Thomson, "as those who look back to a paradise in which man fell; we are as those 'who, rowing hard against the stream, see distant gates of Eden gleam, and do not dream it is a dream' " (Bible of Nature, 226). If science definitely teaches that man has arisen by slow, insensible gradations from the brute, and no further word may be said on the subject, then indeed the problem of human sin is utterly inexplicable. There can then be no agreement between the Bib. conception and
2499 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Psychology Ptolemy
tion, because by man came sin. "In Adam all die," because through Adam came sin. Here we may safely leave the problem, because "by man" will come "resurrection from the dead." See Death. But if the body is mortal, is the soul immortal? On this point the NT gives no uncertain sound, and
PTOLEMY, tol'G-mi (nxoXtixatos, Plolemalos, but usually called Ptolemy— "the Warlike"): The name Ptolemy is rather common from the days of Alexander the Great, but is best known as the dynastic name of the 13 (14) Macedonian kings of Egypt (323-43 BC) (as Pharaoh in the OT) . Those of interest to the Bib. student are:
though the doctrine be not as clearly 12. Immorexpressed in the OT, yet even there tality of kinship with God is man's guaranty the Soul for everlasting communion with Him
(1) Ptolemy I, surnamed Soter (Swrijp, Soltr, "Savior"), called also Ptolemy Lagi, was born c 366 BC, the son of Lagus and Arsinoe, a concubine of Philip of Macedon. He was prominent among the officers of Alexander the Great, whom he accompanied in his eastern campaigns. On the death of Alexander, Ptolemy seized the satrapy of Egypt as his share (1 Mace 1 6ff). Now commenced the long hostilities between Egypt and Syria, Ptolemy on more than one occasion invading Syria. In 316 he joined in a war against Antigonus during which Coele-Syria and Phoenicia were lost, but in 312 regained from Demetrius the son of Antigonus. It was most probably in this year (312) that Ptolemy captured Jerus on a Sabbath day (Jos, Anl, XII, i, 1), and by force or persuasion induced many Jews to accompany him to Egjrpt as colonists or mercenaries. His kind treatment of them induced others to leave Sj'ria for Egypt. In 306 Ptolemy was defeated in the great naval fight off Salamis in Cyprus by which Cyprus was lost to Egypt. About this date Ptolemy assumed the title of "king," following the' example of the Syrian ruler. In 305-304 he defended the Rhodians against Demetrius Poliorcetes, forcing the latter to raise the siege —hence the title "Savior." In 285 BC Ptolemy abdicated in favor of his youngest son Philadelphus—the son of his favorite wife Berenice—and died in 283 BC. According to the usual interpretation this Philadelphus is "the king of the south" in Dnl 11 5. This Ptolemy shares with his son and successor the honor of founding the famous Alexandrian Museum and Library.
(cfPs 73). Job longed for such fellowship, which to him and to the OT saints before and after him was life. In memorable words he gave utterance to the hope which was in him: 'I know that my Redeemer liveth .... and after my skin [read "body"] .... has been destroyed, yet from my flesh shall I see God ; whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold and not another'
(Job 19 25). Hosea, the mourner, is responsible for that sublime utterance, which in its NT form is recited at the graveside of those who die in the Lord : "I will ransom them from the power of Sheol
I will redeem them from death: O death, where are thy plagues? O Sheol, where is thy destruction?" (13 14). Reference may also be made to the words of Isaiah (26 19): "Thy dead shall live; my dead bodies shall arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in the dust." Still clearer is the note sounded by Daniel (12 2.3): "Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. And they that are wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever." In one word, the OT saint based all his hope and fellowship on God. That hope strengthened his soul when he shuddered at the darkness of Sheol. "It overleaps Sheol in the vigor of his faith." In the Pss we find the same hope expressed on almost every page: "As for me, I shall behold thy face in righteousness; I shall be
(2) Ptolemy II, surnamed Philadelphus {^t.\6,- 5eX0os, Philddelphos, "Brother[sister?]-loving"), the youngest son of Ptolemy
satisfied, when I awake, with beholding thy form"
(AV "with thy likeness," Ps 17 15); and again: "Thou wilt not leave my soul to Sheol; neither wilt thou suffer thy holy one to see corruption. .... In thy presence is fulness of joy; in thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore" (16 10.11). Whatever the ultimate verdict of science may be regarding the "utility" of death in regard to the human race. Scripture considers it abnormal, unnatural, a punishment, an infliction, the result of man's wrongdoing and his transgression of the law of God. But death in Holy Writ is not a hope-
1; b. 309 BC in Cos; succeeded his father in 285 BC and d. 247. Like his father, he was actively engaged in two Syrian wars until peace was made about 250 BC, Berenice, the daughter of Philadelphus, being given in marriage to Antiochus II. This Ptolemy planted numerous colonies in Egypt, Syria and Pal, among which were several of the name of Arsinoe (his sister-wife), Philadelphia on the ruins of old Rabbah, Philotera south of the Sea of Galilee, and Ptolemais on the site of Acco. He devoted great attention to the internal administration of his kingdom, endowed the Museum and Alexandrian Library in which his father had taken much interest; in general he followed his father's example as a liberal patron of
Octodrachm (Egyptian Talent) of Ptolemy II.
less separation of body and soul. The NT sounds a note even clearer than the OT; for Christ has brought "life and immortality to light." "We know," says Paul, "that we have a building from God," after the dissolution of our tabernacle (2 Cor 6 1); and that is but the necessary corollary to Christ's great utterance: "I am the resurrection, AND THE life" (Jn 11 25).
Literature.—Beck, Umriss der hihlischen Seelen-
art^ science and literature. According to one tradition it was Philadelphus who was instrumental in beginning the LXX tr (see Septuagint). At any
lehre, ET; Hofmarm, Schriftbeweis; Delitzsch, Sustem of Bib. Psycholoov: Oehler, OT Theology: Wendt, Die Begriffe Fleisch u. Geist, etc; Dickson, St. Paul's Use of the Flesh and Spirit; Cremer. Bibl.-iheol. Wiirterbuch, etc; Herzog. RE, arts, "Geist" and "Seele"; Laidlaw, Bible Doctrine of Man; Orr. God's Image in Man; Davidson, OT Theology.
rate, he was favorably disposed toward his Jewish subjects, and in his reign Jewish wisdom and Gr philosophy began to blend. Philadelphus is supposed to be "the king of the south" of Dnl 11 6, whose daughter "shall come to the king of the north to make an agreement."
J. I. Marais PTOLEMAIS, tol-g-ma'is (IlToXtiiats, Ptolemals) : Same as "Acco" in Jgs 1 31. Ptolemais was the most prominent town on the Phoen seacoast in Maccabean times (1 Mace 5 15.55; 10 1.58.60; 12 48), and is once mentioned in the NT in Acts 21 7 as a seaport at which Paul landed for one
(3) Ptolemy III, surnamed Euergetes (Euep-
•yirris, Euergetes, "Benefactor"), son of Philadelphus, whom he succeeded in 247 BC. In 246 he was provoked to a Syrian war to avenge the murder
of his sister Berenice at Antioch; in the course of
day, visiting the "brethren" in the place. See Acco; Phoenicia.
this campaign he met with remarkable success.
Ptolemy Punishment THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2500
brother, conceding him a share in the government
overran Syria, plundered Susa and Babylonia, penetrated to the shores of India and captured the important stronghold of Seleucia (1 Mace 11 8). Euergetes was, however, prevented from reaping the fruits of his victories by being recalled by internal troubles in Egypt. He brought back with him frorn the East the Egyp gods that Cambyses had carried away 300 years before, thus earning from the Egyptians the title of "Benefactor." Two traditions obtain as to his death: the more probable is that of Polybius (ii.71), according to which he died a natural death (222 BC), or, according to another (Justin xxix.l), he was murdered by his son. Some regard this king as the Euergetes mentioned in the Prologue to Sir, but the reference must rather be to Euergetes II (Ptolemy VII). The "shoot" who "shall enter into the fortress of the king of the north" and prevail is Euergetes I (Dnl 11 7-9), ver 8 referring to the act by which he won his title.