Part 63
loc.) and so does Da in Josh 8 30 ff. There is no place for any of these passages in the Wellhausen theory; but again we find one house side by side with many lay altars.
worship had not yet been invented. All old legislations have to be construed in this way to meet changing circumstances, and this example contains nothing exceptional or surprising.
(1) Lay sacrifice.—The alternative view seeks to account for the whole of the facts noted above. In bald outline it is as follows: In pre-
Literature.—J. Wellhausen, Prolegomena to the History of Israel, oh i, for the critical hypothesis: H. M. Wiener, EPC, ch vi, PS passim for the alternative view: POT, 173 fit.
4. The AlMosaic times customary sacrifices temative had been freely offered by laymen at View altars of earth or stone which were not "sanctuaries," but places that could be used for the nonce and then abandoned. Slaugh-
Harold M. Wiener SAND (bin , hoi: a|i(ios, amnios; a variant of the more usual \l/d|ji|ios, psdmmos; cf d|ia6os, dmalhos, \|/a(ia9os, psdmalhos): Sand is principally produced by the grinding action of waves. This is accompanied by chemical solution, with the result that the more soluble constituents of the rock diminish in amount or disappear and the sands tend to become more or less purely silicious. silica or quartz being a common constituent of rocks and very insoluble. The rocks of Pal are so largely composed of limestone that the shore and dune sands are unusually calcareous, containing from 10 to 20 per cent of calcium carbonate. This is subject to solution and redeposition as a cement between the sand grains, binding them together to form the porous sandstone of the seashore, which is easily worked and is much used in building. See Bock, III, (2).
ter, as shoTiTi by the instances cited, was not necessarily sacrificial. Moses did not forbid or discourage the custom he found. On the contrary, he regulated it in Ex 20 24-26; Dt 16 21 f to prevent possible abuses. But he also superimposed two other kinds of sacrifice—certain new offerings to be brought by individuals to the religious capital and the national offerings of Nu 28, 29 and other passages. If P assumes the rehgious capital as axiomatic, the reason is that this portion of the Law consists of teaching intrusted to the priests, embracing the procedure to be followed in these two classes of offerings, and does not refer at all to the procedure at customary lay sacrifices, which was regulated by immemorial custom. Dt thunders not against the lay altars—which are never even mentioned in this connection—but against the Canaanitish high places. Dt 12 contemplates only the new individual offerings. The permission of lay slaughter for food was due to the fact that the infidelity of the Israelites in the wilderness (Lev 17 5-7) had led to the universal prohibition of lay slaughter for the period of the wanderings only, though it appears to be continued by Dt for those who lived near the House of God (see 12 21, limited to the case "if the place .... be too far from thee").
Figurative: (1) Used most often as a symbol of countless multitude; esp. of the children of Israel (Gen 22 17; 32 12; 2 S 17 11; 1 K 4 20; Isa 10 22; 48 19; Jer 33 32; Hos 1 10; Rom 9 27; He 11 12); also of the enemies of Israel (Josh 11 4; Jgs 7 12; 1 S 13 5; cf Rev 20 8). Joseph laid up grain as the sand of the sea (Gen 41 49); God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding and largeness of heart as the sand that is on the seashore (1 K 4 29); Job says "I shall multiply my days as the sand" (Job 29 18); the multitude of quails provided for the Israelites in the desert is compared to the sand (Ps 78 27); the Psalmist says of the thoughts of God, "They are more in number than the sand" (Ps 139 18); Jeremiah, speaking of the desolation of Jerus, says that the number of widows is as the sand (Jer 15 8). (2) Sand is also a symbol of weight (Job 6 3; Prov 27 3), and (3) of instability (Mt 7 26). It is a question what is meant by "the hidden treasures of the sand" in Dt 33 19. Alfred Ely Day SAND FLIES, sand'fllz (DS3 , kinnim [Ex 8 16 m; Wisd 19 10 m]): EV "hce." See Flea; Gnat; Insects; Lice.
(2) Three •pilgrimage festivals in JE.—The JE legislation itself recognizes the three pilgrimage festivals of the House of God (Ex 34 22 f) . One of these festivals is called "the feast of weeks, even of the bikkiiritn [a kind of first-fruits] of wheat harvest," and as 23 19 and 34 26 require these bikkurlm to be brought to the House of God and not to a lay altar, it follows that the pilgrimages are as firmly estaWished here as in Dt. Thus we find a House (with a horned altar) served by priests and lay altars of earth or stone side by side in law and history till the exile swept them all away, and by breaking the continuity of tradition and practice paved the way for a new and artificial interpretation of the Law that was far removed from the intent of the lawgiver.
SAND, GLOWING, glo'ing. See Mirage.
SAND-LIZARD, sand'liz-ard (UpH , hornet; LXX o-aOpa, saura, "hzard"; AV snail):' Hornet is 7th in the list of unclean "creeping things" in Lev 11 29.30, and occurs nowhere else. It is probably a skink or some species of Lacerta. See Lizard; Snail.
The Elephantine temple.—Papyri have recently been found at Elephantine which show us a Jewish
SANDAL, san'dal. See Dress, 6; Shoe; ShoeLatchet.
community in Egypt which in 405 5. The EleBO possessed a local temple. On the phantine Wellhausen hypothesis it is usual to Papyri assume that P and Dt were still unknown and not recognized as authoritative in this community at that date, although the Deuteronomic law of the central sanctuary goes back at least to 621. It is difficult to understand how a law that had been recognized as Divine by Jeremiah and others could still have been unknown or destitute of authority. On the alternative view this phenomenon will have been the result of an interpretation of the Law to suit the needs of an age some 800 years subsequent to the death of Moses in circumstances he never contemplated. The Pent apparently permits sacrifice only in the land of Israel: in the altered circumstances the choice lay between interpreting the Law in this way or abandoning public worship altogether; for the synagogue with its non-sacrificial form of public
SANHEDRIN,san'h5-drin (r^lO?© , janAed/irire, the Talmudic transcription of thie Gr o-uv^Sptov, sunidrion): The Sanhedrin was, at 1. Name and before the time of Christ, the name for the highest Jewish tribunal, of 71 members, m Jerus, and also for the lower tribunals, of 23 members, of which Jerus had two (Toijephta' Haghlghah 11 9; Sanh. 16; 11 2). It is derived from sun, "together," and Udra, "seat." In Gr and Rom literature the senates of Sparta, Carthage, and even Rome, are so called (cf Pausan. iii 11 2' Polyb. ui.22; Dion Cassius xl.49). In Jos we meet with the word for the first time in connection with the governor Gabinius (57-55 BC), who divided the whole of Pal into 5 sunedria (Ant, XIV, v, 4), or sunodoi (BJ, I, viii, 5) ; and with the term sunedrion for the high council in Jerus first in Anl, XIV,
THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Sanctuary Sanhedrin
rias (193-220), though regarded in the Talm (cf Ro'sh ha-shdnah 31a) as having been the direct continuation of the Sanhedrin, had an essentially different character; it was merely an assembly of scribes, whose decisions had only a theoretical importance (cf Sotah 9 11). The Great Sanhedrin in Jerus was formed (Mt 26 3.57.59; Mk 14 53; 15 1; Lk 22 66; Acts 4 5f; 5 21; 22 30) of high priests
ix, 3-5, in connection with Herod, who, when a youth, had to appear before the sunedrion at Jerus to answer for his doings in Galilee. But before that date the word appears in the LXX version of Proverbs (c 130 BC), esp. in 22 10; 31 23, as an equivalent for the Mishnaic 6e(/i-dm = "judgmentchamber."
In the NT the word sometimes, esp. when used in the pi. (Mt 10 17; Mk 13 9; cf Sank. 1 5), means simply "court of justice," i.e. any judicatory (Mt 5 22). But in most cases it is used to designate the supreme Jewish Court of Justice in Jerus, in which the process against Our Lord was carried on, and before which the apostles (esp. Peter and John, Stephen, and Paul) had to justify themselves
3. Consti- (i.e. the acting high priest, those who tution had been high priests, and members of the privileged families from which the high priests were taken), elders (tribal and family heads of the people and prie.sthood}, and scribes
(i.e. legal assessors), Pharisees and Sadducees alike
(Mt 26 59; Mk 14 55; 15 1; Lk 22 66; Jn 11 47; Acts 4 15; 5 21 fif; 6 12 ff; 22 30; 23 Iff; 24 20). Sometimes preshiterion (Lk 22 66; Acts 22 5) and gerousla (Acts 5 21) are substituted for sunedrion. See Senate. In the Jewish tradition-literature the term
(cf Acts 4 Iff; 5 17.34; 23 6). In Mk 15 43; Lk 23 50, Joseph of Arimathaea is called bouleutts, "councillor," i.e. member of the Sanhedrin. According to Jos and the NT, the acting high priest was as such always head and president (Mt 26 3.57; Ac*s 5 17fr; 7 1; 9 1 f ; 22 5; 23 2; 24 1; Ant, IV, viii, 17; XX, x). Caiaphas is president at the trial of Our Lord, and at Paul's trial Ananias
' 'Sanhedrin" alternates with k'nlshta' "meeting-place" {M''ghillalh Ta'&nith 10, compiled in the 1st cent. AD), and beth-din, "court of justice" (Sank. 11 2.4). As, according to Jewish tradition, there were two kinds of sunedria, viz. the supreme sunedrion in Jerus of 71 members, and lesser sunedria of 23 members, which were appointed by the supreme one, we find often the term ^anhedhrin g'dholSh, "the great Sanhedrin," or beth-din ha-gadhol, "the great court of justice" {Middoth 5 4; Sanh. 1 6), or sanhedhrin g'dholah ha-yoshebheth b'-Ush'khath hagazlth, "the great Sanhedrin which sits in the hall of hewn stone."
is president. On the other hand, according to the Talm (esp. H&ghighah 2 2), the Sanhedrin is represented as a juridical tribunal of scribes, in which one scribe acted as nasi', "prince," i.e. president, and another as ' abh-beth-din, father of the judgmentchamber, i.e. vice-president. So far, it has not been found possible to reconcile these conflicting descriptions (see "Literature," below).
Sanh. 4 3 mentions the soph're-ha-daydnim, "notaries," one of whom registered the reasons for acquittal, and the other the reasons for condemnation. In the NT we read of huperetai, "constables" (Mt 5 25) and of the "servants of the high priest" (Mt 26 51; Mk 14 47; Jn 18 10), whom Jos describes as "enlisted from the rudest and most restless characters" {Ant, XX, viii, 8;
There is lack of positive historical information as to the origin of the Sanhedrin. According to Jewish tradition (cf Smih. 1 6) it was
2. Origin constituted by Moses (Nu 11 16-24) and History and was reorganized by Ezra imme-
ix, 2). Jos speaks of the "pubhc whip," Matthew mentions "tormentors" (18 34), Luke speaks of "spies" (20 20).
diately after the return from exile (cf the Tg to Cant 6 1). But there is no historical evidence to show that previous to the Gr period there existed an organized aristocratic governing tribunal among the Jews. Its beginning is to be placed at the period in which Asia was convulsed by Alexander the Great and his successors.
The whole history of post-exilic Judaism circles round the high priests, and the priestly aristocracy always played the leading part in the Sanhedrin
(cf Sank. 4 2). But the more the Pharisees grew in importance, the more were they represented in the Sanhedrin. In the time of Salome they were so powerful that "the queen ruled only in name, but the Pharisees in reaUty" (Ant, XIII, xvi, 2). So in the time of Christ, the Sanhedrin was formally led by the Sadducean high priests, but practically ruled by the Pharisees {Ant, XVIII, i, 4). In the time of Christ the Great Sanhedrin at Jerus enjoyed a very high measure of independence.
The Hellenistic kings conceded a great a,mount of internal freedom to municipal communities, and Pal was then practically under home rule, and was governed by an aristocratic council of Elders (1 Mace 12 6; 2 Mace 1 10; 4 44; 11 27; 3 Mace
1 8; cf Jos, Ani, XII, iii, 4; XIII, v, 8; M'ghUlath Ta'dnith 10), the head of which was the hereditary high priest. The court was called Gerousia, which
in Gr always signifies an aristocratic body (see Westermann in Pauly's RE, III, 49) . Subsequently
It exercised not only civil jurisdiction,
4. Jurisaccording to Jewish law, but also, in diction some degree, criminal. It had administrative authority and could order arrests by its own officers of justice (Mt 26 47; Mk 14 43; Acts 4 3;^ 5 17 f ; 9 2; cf Sanh. 1 5). It was empowered to judge cases which did not involve capital punishment, which latter required the confirmation of the Rom procurator (Jn 18 31
this developed into the Sanhedrin.
During the Rom period (except for about 10
years at the time of Gabinius, who applied to Judaea the Rom system of government; cf Mar-
quardt, Romische Siaatsverwaltung, I, 501), the Sanhedrin's influence was most powerful, the inter-
nal government of the country being practically in
its hands {Ant, XX, x), and it was religiously recognized even among the Diaspora (cf Acts 9 2; 22 5; 26 12). According to Schiirer (ffJP, div II,
ci Jerus Sanh. 1 1; 7 2 [p. 24]; Jos, Ant, XX, ix,l). But, as a rule, the procurator arranged his judgment in accordance with the demands of the Sanhedrin.
vol 1, 171; GJVS 236) the civil authority of the
Sanhedrin, from the time of Archelaus, Herod the
For one offence the Sanhedrin could put to death, on their own authority, even a Rom citizen, namely,
Great's son, was probably restricted to Judaea
proper, and for that reason, he thinks, it had no
judicial authority over Our Lord so long as He remained in Galilee (but see G. A. Smith, Jerus, I,
in the case of a Gentile passing the fence which divided the inner court of the Temple from that of the Gentiles {BJ, VI, ii, 4; Middoth 11 3; cf Acts 21 28). The only case of capital punishment in connection with the Sanhedrin in the NT is that ot Our Lord. The stoning of Stephen (Acts 7 54 ff) was probably the illegal act of an enraged multitude.
416). The Sanhedrin was abolished after the destruction
of Jerus (70 AD). The beth-din (court of judg-
ment) in Jabneh (68-80), in Usah (80-116), m
Shafran (140-63), in Sepphoris (163-93), m Tibe-
Sansannah Saraias THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2690
The Talmudic tradition names "the hall of hewn etonc," which, according to Middolh 5 4, was on the south side of the great court, as
same as Hazar-susim (1 Ch 4 31). It cannot be said to have been identified with any certainty, though Sinmim, "a good-sized village with well and pool, surrounded by gardens and having a grove of olives to the north," has been suggested (PEF, III, 260, Sh XX).
6. Place the seat of the Great Sanhedrin (Pe'ah and Time 2 6; 'Edhmjolh 7 4, et al.). But the of Meeting last sittings of the Sanhedrin were held in the city outside the Temple area (Sank. 41a; Shabbdth 15a; Ro'sh ha-shanah 31o; 'Abhodhdh zdrah 8c). Jos also mentions the place where the houleutai, "the councillors," met as the houle, outside the Temple {BJ, V, iv, 2), and most probably he refers to these last sittings.
SAPH, saf (ap , saph; B, Sdcf), Sdph, A, 24^, Sephe) : A Philistine, one of the four champions of the race of Rapha ("giant") who was slain bv Sibbecai, one of David's heroes (2 S 21 18; 1 Ch 20 4). It is supposed bj' some that he was the son of the giant Goliath, but this is not proved. In
According to the Tosephta' Sank. 7 1, the Sanhedrin held its sittings from the time of the offering of the daily morning sacrifice till that of the evening
1 Ch 20 4, the same person is called "Sippai."
SAPHAT, sa'fat:
sacrifice. There were no sittings on Sabbaths or feast days. The members of the Sanhedrin were arranged in a semicircle, so that they could see each other
(1) A and Fritzsche, Sa^dr, Saphdt; omitted in B(andSwete); B"'"'"! 'Ao-d^, Asaph: The eponym of a family which returned with Zerubbabel (1 Esd 5 9) = "Shephatiah" in Ezr 2 4; Neh 7 9.
(Sare/i. 4 3; Tosephta' 8 1). The two
6. Pronotaries stood before them, whose duty cedure it was to record the votes (see 3, above) The prisoner had to appear in humble attitude and dressed in mourning {Ant, XIV, ix, 4). A sentence of capital punishment could not be passed on the day of the trial. The decision of the judges had to be examined on the following day (Sank. 4 1), except in the case of a person who misled the people, who could be tried and condemned the same day or in the night (Tosephta' Sanh. 10). Because of this, cases which involved capital punishment were not tried on a Friday or on any day before a feast. A herald preceded the condemned one as he was led to the place of execution, and cried out: "N. the son of N. has been found guilty of death, etc. If anyone knows anything to clear him, let him come forward and declare it" (Sank. 6 1). Near the place of execution the condemned man was asked to confess his guilt in order that he might partake in the world to come (ib; cf Lk 23 41-43). Literature.—Our knowledge about the Sanhedrin is based on three sources: the NT, Jos, and the Jewish tradition-literature (esp. Mish i^anhedhrln and Makkoth, best ed, Strack, with Ger. tr, Schriftea des Institutum Judaicum in Berlin, N. 38, Leipzig, 1910). See art. Talmud.
(2) A, ^aipdr, Saphdt; B, Swete, and Fritzsche, Sa0ci7, Saphdg; AV Sabat: One of the families of "the sons of the servants of Solomon" who returned with Zerubbabel (1 Esd 5 34); wanting in the
1| Ezr 2 57; Neh 7 59.
SAPHATIAS, saf-a-tl'as (2a<j>aT£as, Saphatlas, B, So((>oT£as, Sophotias; omitted in A) : Name of a family of returning exiles (1 Esd 8 34) = "Shephatiah" in Ezr 8 8. If Saphatias (1 Esd 8 34) = Saphat (5 9), as would appear, then part of the family went up with Zerubbabel and part with Ezra.
SAPHETH, sa'feth: AV = RV Saphuthi (q.v.).
SAPHIR, sa'fer CT^SliJ , shdphir). See Shaphir.
SAPHUTHI, saf'ft-thl, sa-fu'thi (A and Fritzsche, Sa4>aj9t, Saphuthi, B [and Swete], 2a(j)vc£, Saphuei; AV Sapheth): Name of one of the families of "the sons of the servants of Solomon" (1 Esd 5 33) = "Shephatiah" in Ezr 2 57; Neh 7 59.
SAPPHIRA, sa-fl'ra (S'l'^STB, shappird'; Aram,
for either "beautiful" or "sapphire"; 2air<|)£Cpa, Sappheira): Wife of Ananias (Acts 5 1-10). See An.inias, (1).
Consult the following histories of the Jewish people: Ewald, Herzfeld. Gratz, but esp. Schiirer's excellent HJP, much more fully in GJV^; also G. A. Smith, Jems. Special treatises on Sanhedrin: D. Hoffmann, Der oberste GerichCshof in der Stadt des Helligtums, Berlin. 1878. where the author tries to defend the Jewish traditional view as to the antiquity of the Sanhedrin; J. Reifmann, l^anhedhrln (in Heb), Berditschew, 1888; A. Kuenen, On the Composition of the Sanhedrin, in Dutch, tr<i into Ger. by Budde, Gesammelte Ahhandlungen, etc, 49-81, Freiburg, 1894; Jelski, Die innere Einrichtung des grossen Synedrions zu Jerusalem, Breslau, 1S94, who tries to reconcile the Talmudical statements about the composition of the Sanhedrin with those of Jos and the NT (esp. in connection with the question of president) by showing that in the Mish (GKcept Hdghlohdh 11 2) nasi' always stands for the pohtical president, the high priest, and 'abh-beth-dln for the scribal head of the Sanhedrin, and not for the vicepresident; A. BUchler, Das Synedrium in Jerusalem und das grosse Beth-din in der Quaderkammer des jerusalemischen Tempels, Vienna, 1902. a very interesting but not convincing work, where the author, in order to reconcile the two different sets of sources, tries to prove that the great Sanhedrin of the Talm is not identical with the Sanhedrin of Jos and the NT, Ijut that there were two Sanhedrins in Jerus. the one of the NT and Jos being a political one, the other a religious one. He also thinks that Christ was seized, not by the Sanhedrin. but hy the temple authorities.
SAPPHIRE, saf'ir. See Stones, Precious.
SARABIAS, sar-a-bi'as (SapapCas, Sarabia^) One of the Levites who taught and expounded the Law for Ezra (1 Esd 9 48) = "Sherebiah" in Neh 8 7, probably identical with the "Asebebias" in
1 Esd 8 47 (Ezr 8 18).
SARAH, sa'ra, SARAI, sa'ri:
(1) In Gen 17 15 the woman who up to that time has been known as Sarai CIIB > sdray; l,dpa, Sdra) receives by Divine command the name Sarah
(nntS , sdrdh; Xdppa, Sdrra). (This last form in Gr preserves the ancient doubhng of the r, lost in the Heb and the Eng. forms.)
The former name appears to be derived from the same root as Israel, if, indeed, Gen 32 28 is intended as an etymology of Israel. "She that strives." a contentious person, is a name that might be given to a child at birth
See also W. Bacher's art. in HDB (excellent for sifting the Talmudic sources); Dr. Lauterbaoh's art. in Jew Bnc (accepts fully Biichler's view) ; H. Strack's art. in Sch-Herz (concise and exact).
(cf Hos 12 3.4, of Jacob), or later when the child's character developed; in Gen 16 6 and 21 10 a contentious character appears. Yet comparison with the history of her husband's name (see Abraham) warns us not to operate solely upon the basis of the Heb language. Sarai was the name this woman brought with her from Mesopotamia. On the other hand there can be little doubt that the name Sarah, which she received when her son was promised, means "princess," for it is the fem. form of the extremely common title sar, used by the Semites to designate a ruler of greater or lesser rank.
Paul Levertoff SANSANNAH, san-san'a (n305P, ^an^armah; Savcravva, Sansdnna, or SeBevvaK, Selhenndk) : One of the uttermost cities in the Negeb of Judah (Josh 15 31), identical with Hazar-susah (Josh 19 .5), one of the cities of Simeon, and almost certainly the
2691 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Sansannah Saraias
In the verse following the one where this name is conferred, it is declared of Sarah that "kings of peoples shall be other" (Gen 17 16). We are introduced to Sarai in Gen 11 29. She
her husband, to dishonor and ruin. Abimelech, king of Gerar, desiring to be allied by marriage with a man of Abraham's power, sends for Sarah, whom he knows only as Abraham's sisl-er, and for the second time she takes her place in the harem of a prince. But the Divine promise is not to be thwarted, even by persistent human weakness and
is here mentioned as the wife that Abraham "took," while still in Ur of the Chaldees, that is, while among his kindred. It is immediately added that "Sarai was barren; she had no child." By this simple remark in the overture of his narrative, the writer sounds the molij that is to be developed in
sin. In a dream God reveals to Abimelech the true state of the case, and Sarah is restored to her husband with an indemnity. Thereupon the longdelayed son is born, the jealous mother secures the expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael, and her career comes to a close at the age of 127, at Hebron, long time her home. The grief and devotion of Abraham are broadly displayed in ch 23, in which he seeks and obtains a burying-place for his wife. She is thus the first to be interred in that cave of the
all the sequel. When the migration to Haran occurs, Sarai is named along with Abram and Lot as accompanying Terah. It has been held that the author (or authors) of ch 11 knew nothing of the relationship announced in 20 12. But there can be no proof of such ignorance, even on the assumption of diversity of authorship in the two passages.
field of Machpelah, which was to be the common resting-place of the fathers and mothers of the future
Sarai's career as described in ch 11 was not dependent on her being the daughter of Terah. Terah had other descendants who did not accompany him. Her movements were determined by her being Abram's wife. It appears, however, that she was a daughter of Terah by a different mother from the mother of Abram. The language of 20 12 would indeed admit of her being Abram s niece, but the fact that there was but 10 years' difference between his age and hers (Gen 17 17) renders this hypothesis less probable. Marriage with halfsisters seems to have been not uncommon in antiquity
Israel.
The character of Sarah is of mingled light and shade. On the one hand we have seen that lapse from faith which resulted in the birth of Ishmael, and that lack of self-control and charity which resulted in a quarrel with Abraham, an act of injus-
tice to Hagar, and the disinheriting of Ishmael. Yet on the other hand we see in Sarah, as the NT writers point out (He 11 11; 1 Pet 3 6), one who through a long life of companionship with Abraham shared his hope in God, his faith in the promises, and his power to become God's agent for achieving what was humanly impossible. In fact, to Sarah
(even in the OT cf 2 S 13 13).
This double relationship suggested to Abraham the expedient that he twice used when he lacked
faith in God to protect his life and in cowardice sought his own safety at the price of his wife's honor. The first of these occasions was in the
earlier period of their wanderings (oh 12). From Canaan they went down into Egypt. Sarai, though above 60 years of age according to the chronology
is ascribed a sort of spiritual maternity, correlative with Abraham's position as "father of the faithful"; for all women are declared to be the (spiritual) daughters of Sarah, who like her are adorned in "the hidden man of the heart," and who are "doers of good" and "fearers of no terror" (1 Pet I.e.,
of the sacred historian, made the impression on the Egyptians by her beauty that Abraham had antici-
pated, and the result was her transfer to the royal
palace. But this was in direct contravention of the purpose of God for His own kingdom. The
literally rendered). That in spite of her outbreak about Hagar and Ishmael she was in general "in subjection to her husband" and of "a meek and quiet
earthly majesty of Pharaoh had to bow before the Divine majesty, which plagued him and secured the stranger's exodus, thus foreshadowing those
spirit," appears from her husband's genuine grief at her decease, and still more clearly from her son's prolonged mourning for her (Gen 24 67; cf 17 17 and 23 1 with 25 20). And He who maketh even the wrath of man to praise Him used even Sarah's jealous anger to accomplish His purpose that "the son of the freewoman," Isaac, "born through promise," should alone inherit that promise (Gal 4 22-31). Apart from the three NT passages abeady cited, Sarah is alluded to only in Isa 51 2 ("Sarah that bare you," as the mother of the nation), in Rom 4 19 ("the deadness of Sarah's womb"), and in Rom 9 9, where God's promise in Gen 18 10 is quoted. Yet her existence and her history are of course presupposed wherever allusion is made to the stories of Abraham and of Isaac.
later plagues and that later exodus when Abraham's and Sarah's seed "spoiled the Egyptians."
We meet Sarah next in the narrative of the birth
of Ishmael and of Isaac. Though 14 years separated
the two births, they are closely associated in the
story because of their logical continuity. Sarah's barrenness persisted. She was now far past middle
life, even on a patriarchal scale of longevity, and
there appeared no hope of her ever bearmg that
child who should inherit the promise of God. She
therefore adopts the expedient of being "builded by" her personal slave, Hagar the Egyp (see Gen
16 2 m). That is, according to contemporary law and custom as witnessed by the CH (see Abraham,
IV, 2), a son born of this woman would be the free-
born son and heir of Abraham and Sarah.
To many modem critics Sarah supplies, by her name, a welcome argument in support of the mythical view of Abraham. She has been held to be the local iiumen to whom the cave near Hebron was sacred; or the deity whose consort was worshipped in Arabia under the title
Such was in fact the position of Ishmael later. But the
insolence of the maid aroused the vmdictive jealousy
of the mistress and led to a painful scene of unjustified
exnulsion. Hagar, however, returned at God s behest, humbled herself before Sarah, and bore Ishmael in his own father's house. Here he remained the sole and right-
Dusares. i.e. Husband-of-Sarah ; or. the female associate of Sin the moon-god, worshipped at Haran. On these views the student will do well to consult Baethgen, BeilTdoe, 94, 1.57, and, for the most recent point of view, Gressmann's art., "Sage und Geschichte in den Patriarchenerzahlungen," ZATW, 1910, and Eerdmans, Alltestamenlliche Studien, II, 13.
ful heir until the miracle of Isaac's birth disappointed
all human expectations and resulted in the ultimate expulsion of Hagar and her son.
The change of name from Sarai to Sarah when
(2) The daughter of Raguel, and wife of Tobias (Tob 3 7.17, etc). See Tobit, Book of.
Isaac was promised has abeady been noted. Sarah s
laughter of increduhty when she hears the promise
is of course associated with the origin of the name
J. Oscar Boyd SARAIAS, sa-ra'yas, sa-ri'as (Sapatas, Saraias, Lat Sareus)
of Isaac, but it serves also to emphasize the miracu-
lous character of his birth, coming as it does after
his parents are both so "well stricken m age as to make parenthood seem an absurdity.
(1) = Seraiah, the high priest in the reign of Zedekiah(l Esd 5 5, cf 1 Ch 6 14).
(2) Sareus the father of Ezra (2 Esd 11) = "Seraiah" in Ezr 7 1, sometimes identified with
Before the birth of this child of promise, however,
Sarah is again exposed, through the cowardice of
Saramel Satan THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2692
hill, and among them the temple of Cybele is the most interesting, yet only two of its many stone columns are
Saraias under (1). He is probably identical with the "Azaraias" of 1 Esd 8 1.
still standing. Equally imposing is the necropoUs of the city, which is at a distance of two hours' ride from
(3) AV =RV "Azaraias" (1 Esd 8 1).
Sert S. of the Gygaean lake. The modern name of the necropoUs is Bui Tepe or Thousand Mounds, because
SARAMEL, sar'a-mel ; AV = RV Asaeamel (q. v.)
of the large group of great mounds in which the kings and nobles were buried. Many of the mounds were long ago excavated and plundered.
SARAPH, sa'raf, sii'raf (B'l'l? , saraph, "noble
one".; cf 3"!^, saraph, "burn," "shine"): A descendant of Judah through Shelah (1 Ch 4 22).
SARCHEDONUS, sar-ked'6-nus (B S , Sax^pSovos, Sacherdonds, A, SaxepSav, Sacherddn, but 2ax«p8ovo(r6s, Sacherdonosos in Tob 1 22) : An incorrect spelling, both in AV and RV, for Sacherdonus in Tob 1 21 f, another form of Esar-haddon.
SARDEUS, sar-de'us; AV = RV Zardeus (q.v.)-
Coin of Sardis.
SARDIN(E), sar'din, sar'din, SARDIUS. See Stones, Precious.
We quote the following from the Missionary Herald (Boston, Mass., August, 1911, pp. 361-62):
SARDIS, sar'dis (SdpSeis, Sdrdeis): Sardis is
of special interest to the student of Herodotus and Xenophon, for there Artaphernes, the brother
Dr. C. O. Tracy, of Marsovan, has made a visit to ancient Sardis and observed the work of his countryman. Professor Butler, of Princeton University, who is uncovering the ruins of that famous city of the past. Already rich "finds" have been made; among them portions of a temple of Artemis, indicating a building of the same stupendous character as those at Ephesus and Haalbec, and a necropohs from whose tombs were unearthed three thousand relics, including utensils, ornaments of gold and precious stones, mirrors, etc. What chiefly impressed Dr. Tracy was the significance of those "Seven Churches of Asia," of which Sardis held one. "When I think of the myriads of various nationality and advanced civilization for whose evangelization these churches were responsible, the messages to the Christian communities occupying the splendid strategic centers
of Darius, lived, and from there Xerxes invaded Greece and Cyrus marched against his brother Artaxerxes; it is also of interest to the student of early Christian history as the home of one of the Seven Churches of Rev (1 11; 3 Iff). It was moreover one of the oldest and most important
cities of Asia Minor, and until 549 BC, the capital
of the kingdom of Lydia. It stood on the northern slope of Mt. Tmolus; its acropolis occupied one
of the spurs of the mountain. At the base flowed the river Pactolus which served as a moat, rendering the city practically impregnable. Through the failure to watch, however, the acropolis had beea successfully scaled in 549 BC by a Median
fill me with awe. While established amid the splendors of civilization, they were set as candlesticks in the midst of gross spiritual darkness. Did they fulfil their mission ?"
One of Dr. Butler's recoveries is the marble throne of the Bishop of Sardis: looking upon it the message to Sardis recurs to mind. A fact of current history quickened the visitor's appreciation of the word to "the angel of that church. "Yonder among the moimtains overhanging Sardis there is a robber gang led by the notorious Chakirjali. He rules in the moimtains; no government force can take him. Again and again he swoops down like an eagle out of the sky, in one quarter of the region or another. From time immemorial these mountains have been the haimts of robbers ; very likely it was so when Rev was written,
soldier, and in 218 by a Cretan (cf Rev 3 2.3). Because of its strength during the Pers period, the satraps here made their homes. However, the city was burned by the lonians in 501 BC, but it was quickly rebuilt and regained its importance. In 334 BC it surrendered to Alexander the Great who gave it independence, but its period of independence was brief, for 12 years later in 322 BC it was taken by Antigonus. In 301 BC, it fell into the possession
' I will come upon thee as a thief.' In each case the message was addressed to 'the angel of the church.' Over every church in the world there is a spirit hovering, as it were—a spirit representing that church and by whose name it can be addressed. 'Tlie messages are as vital as they were at the first. 'He that hath ar^.ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churched. ' "
of the Seleucidan kings who made it the residence of their governor. It became free again in 190 BC, when it formed a part of the empire of Pergamos, and later of the Rom province of Asia. In 17 AD, when it was destroyed by an earthquake, the Rom emperor Tiberius remitted the taxes of the people and rebuilt the city, and in his honor the citizens of that and of neighboring towns erected a large monument, but Sardis never recovered its former importance (cf Rev 3 12). Again in 295 AD, after the Rom province of Asia was broken up, Sardis became the capital of Lydia, and during the early Christian age it was the home of a bishop. The city continued to flourish until 1402, when it was so completely destroyed by Tamerlane that it was never rebuilt. Among the ruins there now stands a small village called Sert, a corruption of its ancient name. The rains may be reached by rail from Smyrna, on the way to Philadelphia.
E. J. Banks SARDITE, sar'dlt. See Sered.
SARDIUS, sar'di-us. See Stones, Precious.
SARDONYX, sar'do-niks. See Stones, Precious.
SAREPTA, sa-rep'ta (Hdpeirra, Sdrepta): The name in Lk 4 26 AV, following the Gr, of the Phoen town to which Elijah was sent in the time of the great famine, in order to save the lives of a widow and her son (1 K 17 9.10). RV adopts the form of the name based upon the Heb, and as found intheOT: Zarephath (q.v.).
The ancient city was noted for its fruits and wool, and for its temple of tlie goddess Cybele, whose worship resembled that of Diana of Ephesus. Its wealth was also partly due to the gold which was found in the sand of the river Pactolus, and it was here that gold and silver coins were first struck. During the Rom period its coins formed a beautiful series, and are foimd in abundance by the peasants who till the surrounding fields. The ruins of the buildings which stood at the base of the hill have now been nearly buried by the dirt washed down from above. The hill upon which the acropolis stood measures 950 ft. high: the triple walls still surround it. The more imposing of the ruins are on the lower slope of the
SARID, sa'rid (TIlB , saridh; B, 'EtreStK^uXa,
Esedekgold, SeSSovK, Seddouk, A, 2ap9t8, Sarthid, 2ap(8, Sarid) : A place on the southern border of ZebuluntotheW.ofChisloth-tabor(Josh 19 10.12). It is mentioned but not identified in Onom. Probably we should read "Sadid," and in that case may with Conder locate it at Tell Shaddu, an artificial mound with some modern ruins and good springs,
2693 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Saramel Satan
which stands on the plain, about 5 miles W. of Iksdl.
SAROTHIE, sa-ro'thi-e (A, SapueU, Sarolhie, B and Swel e, SapwBet, Saroihel) : Name of a family of "the sons of the servants of Solomon" who returned with Zerubbabel (1 Esd 5 34); it is wanting in the |1 lists in Ezr 2 57; Neh 7 59.
SARGON, sar'gon (722-705 BC): The name of
this ruler is written lianD
, jargon, in the OT, Shar-ukm in the cuneiform inscriptions, 'Apvd, Arnd, in the LXX, and 'ApKeavos, Arkeanos, in the Ptolemaic Canon. Sargon is mentioned but once by name in the OT (Isa 20 1), when he sent his Tartan (turlannu) against Ashdod, but he is referred to in 2 K 17 6 as "the king of Assyria" who carried Israel into captivity. Shalmaneser V had laid siege to Samaria and besieged it three years. But shortly before or very soon after its capitulation, Sargon, perhaps being responsible for the king's death, overthrew the dynasty, and in his annals credited himself with the capture of the city and the deportation of its inhabitants. Whether he assumed the name of the famous ancient founder of the Accad dynasty is not known.
SARSECHIM, siir'se-kim, sar-se'kim (DID?"!©, sarfkhim) : A prince of Nebuchadnezzar, present at the taking of Jerus by Nebuchadnezzar in the 11th year of Zedekiah (Jer 39 3). The VSS with their various readings—"Nabousachar," "Nabousarach," "Sarsacheim"—point to a corrupt text. The best emendation is the reading "N°bhoshazibhon" ( = Nab&s&zih-anni, "Nebo delivers me"); this is based on the reading in Jer 39 13.
SARUCH, sa'ruk (Sapoix., Sarouch, Sepoix, Serouch): AV; Gr form of Serug (thus Lk 3 35RV).
SATAN, sa'tan Ciplp , sdtan, "adversary," from
the vb. ]I2TC , satan, "to lie in wait" [as adversary]; Sarav, Saldn, Saravds, Satands, "adversary," Sid^oXos, didbolos,"devil," "adversary" or "accuser,"
Sargon at the beginning of his reign was confronted with a serious situation in Babylon. Merodach-baladan of Kaldfl, who paid tribute to previous rulers, on the change of dynasty had himself
KaT-<)Y<op, kategar [altogether unclassical and unGreek] [used once in Rev 12 10], "accuser"):
I. Definition II. ScBiPTURAL Facts concerning Satan
1. Names of Satan 2. Ctiaracter of Satan 3. Works of Satan 4. History of Satan III. General Considerations
1. Scripture Doctrine of Satan Not Systematized 2. Satan and God 3. Satan Essentially Limited 4. ConclusionsLiterature
/. Definition.—A created but superhuman, personal, evil, world-power, represented in Scripture as the adversary both of God and men.
//. Scriptural Facts concerning Satan.—The most important of these are the Heb and Gr equiva-
lents noticed above. These words are
1. Names used in the general sense justified by of Satan their etymological significance. It is applied even to Jeh Himself (Nu 22 22.32; cf 1 S 29 4; 2 S 19 22; Ps 109 6, etc). The word "Satan" is used 24 t in the OT. In Job
Sargon in His War Chariot.
proclaimed king, New Year's Day, 721 BC. At Dur-ilu, Sargon fought with the forces of Merodachbaladan and his ally Khumbanigash of Elam, but although he claimed a victory the result was apparently indecisive. Rebellions followed in other parts
(1 6 f) and Zee (3 1 f) it has the prefixed definite
article. In all cases but one when the art. is omitted
it is used in a general sense. This one exception is
1 Ch 21 1 (cf 2 S 24 1), where the word is generally conceded to be used as a proper name. This meaning is fixed in NT times. We are thus enabled to note in the term "Satan" (and Devil) the growth of a word from a general term to an appellation and later to a proper name. All the other names of Satan save only these two are descriptive
of the kingdom.
In 720 Uu-bi'di (or Yau-bi'di), king of Hamath, formed a coalition against Sargon with Hanno of Gaza, Sib'u of Egypt, and with the cities Arpad,
Simirra, Damascus and Samaria. He claims that
Sib'u fled, and that he captured and flayed Ilu-
bi'di, burned Karkar, and carried Hanno captive
titles. In addition to these two principal names a number of others deserve specific enumeration. Tempter (Mt 4 5; 1 Thess 3 5); Beelzebub (Mt 12 24); Enemy (Mt 13 39); Evil One (Mt 13 19.38; 1 Jn 2 13.14; 3 12, and particularly 5 18); Belial (2 Cor 6 15); Adversary {ivrtdiKoi, anlldikos),
to Assyria. After destroying Rapihu, he carried away 9,033 inhabitants to Assyria.
In the following year Ararat was invaded and the
Hittite Carchemish fell before his armies. The
territory of Rusas, king of Ararat, as well as a part
(1 Pet 6 8); Deceiver (ht. "the one who deceives") (Rev 12 9) ; Dragon (Great) (Rev 12 3) ; Father of Lies (Jn 8 44); Murderer (Jn 8 44); Sinner (1 Jn 3 8)—these are isolated references occurring from 1 to 3 t each. In the vast majority of passages (70 out of 83) either Satan or Devil is used.
of Mehtene became Assyr provinces.
In 710 Sargon directed his attention to Merodach-
baladan, who no longer enjoyed the support of Elam, and whose rule over Babylon had not been popular with his subjects. He was driven out from Babylon and also from his former capital Btt-
Satan is consistently represented in the NT as the enemy both of God and man. The popular notion is that Satan is the enemy of
Yaktn, and Sargon had himself crowned as the shakkanak of Babylon.
In 706 the new city called Dftr-Sharruktn was
2. Characman and active in misleading and ter of Satan cursing humanity because of his intense hatred and opposition to God. Mt 13 39 would seem to point in this direction, but
dedicated as his residence. A year later he was murdered. It was during his reign that the height
of Assyr ascendancy had been reached.
A. T. Clay SARON, sa'ron (Sdpwv, Sdron): AV; Gr form
if one were to venture an opinion in a region where there are not enough facts to warrant a conviction,
of Sharon (Acts 9 35).
Satan THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2694
ing to the Bible man is particeps criminis in the process of his own deception. Lie is deceived only because he ceases to love the truth and comes first to love and then to believe a lie (2 Cor 1 10). This really goes to the very bottom of the problem of temptation. Men are not tempted by evil, per
it would be that the general tenor of Scripture indicates quite the contrary, namely, that Satan's jealousy and hatred of men has led him into antagonism to God and, consequently, to goodness. The fundamental moral description of Satan is given by Our Lord when He describes Satan as the "evil one" (Mt 13 19.38; cf Isa's description of Jeh as the "Holy One," 1 4 and often); that is, the one whose nature and wiU are given to evil. Moral evil is his controUing attribute. It is evident that this description could not be apphed to Satan as originally created. Ethical evil cannot be concreated. It is the creation of each free will for
se, but by a good which can be obtained only at the cost of doing wrong. The whole power of sin, at least in its beginnings, consists in the sway of the fundamental falsehood that any good is really attainable by wrongdoing. Since temptation con-
sists in this attack upon the moral sense, man is constitutionally guarded against deceit, and is morally culpable in allowing himself to be deceived. The temptation of Our Lord Himself throws the clearest possible light upon the methods ascribed to Satan. The temptation was addressed to Christ's consciousness of Divine sonship; it was a deceitful attack emphasizing the good, minimizing or covering up the evil; indeed, twisting evil into good. It was a deliberate, mahgnant attempt to obscure the truth and induce to evil through the acceptance of falsehood. The attack broke against a loyalty to truth which made seK-deceit, and consequently deceit from without, impossible. The lie was punctured by the truth and the temptation lost its power (see Temptation op Christ). This incident reveals one of the methods of Satan — by immediate suggestion as in the case of Judas (Lk 22 3; Jn 13 2.27). Sometimes, however, and, perhaps, most frequently, Satan's devices (2 Cor 2 11) include human agents. Those who are given over to evil and who persuade others to evil are children and servants of Satan (see Mt 16 23; Mk 8 33; Lk 4 8; Jn 6 70; 8 44; Acts 13 10; 1 Jn 3 8). Satan also works through persons and institutions supposed to be on the side of right but really evil. Here the same ever-present and active falseness and deceit are exhibited. When he is called "the god of this world" (2 Cor 4 4) it would seem to be intimated that he has the power to clothe himself in apparently Divine attributes. He also makes himself an angel of hght by presenting advocates of falsehood in the guise of apostles of truth
itself. We are not told in definite terms how Satan became the evil one, but certainly it could be by no other process than a fall, whereby, in the mystery of free personaHty, an evil will takes the place of a good one.
The world-wide and age-long works of Satan are to be traced to one predominant motive. He hates both God and man and does aO that 3. Works in him hes to defeat God's plan of of Satan grace and to estabhsh and maintain a kingdom of evil, in the seduction and ruin of mankind. The balance and sanity of the Bible is nowhere more strikingly exhibited than in
its treatment of the work of Satan. Not only ig the Bible entirely free from the extravagances of popular Satanology, which is full of absurd stories concerning the appearances, tricks, and transformations of Satan among men, but it exhibits a dependable accuracy and consistency of statement which is most reassuring. Almost nothing is said concerning Satanic agency other than wicked men who mislead other men. In the controversy with His opponents concerning exorcism (Mk 3 22 f and ll's) Our Lord rebuts their slanderous assertion that He is in league with Satan by the simple proposition that Satan does not work against himself. But in so saying He does far more than refute this slander. He definitely aUgns the Bible against the popular idea that a man may make a definite and conscious personal alliance with Satan for any purpose whatever. The agent of Satan is always a victim. Also the hint contained in this discussion that Satan has a kingdom, together with a few other not very definite allusions, are aU that we have to go upon in this direction. Nor are we taught anywhere that Satan is able to any extent to introduce disorder into the physical universe or directly operate in the lives of men. It is true that in Lk 13 16 Our Lord speaks of the 'woman who was bowed over as one "whom Satan has bound, lo, these eighteen years," and that in 2 Cor 12 7 Paul speaks of his infirmity as a "messenger of Satan sent to buffet him." Paul also speaks (1 Thess 2 18) of Satan's hindering him from visiting the church at Thessalonica. A careful study of these related passages (together with the prologue of Job) will reveal the fact that Satan's direct agency in the physical world is very limited. Satan may be said to be implicated in all the disasters and woes of human life, in so far as they are more or less directly contingent upon sin (see particularly He 2 14).
(2 Cor 11 13.15; 1 Jn 4 1; 2 Thess 2 9; Rev 12 9; 19 20). In the combination of passages here brought together, it is clearly indicated that Satan
is the instigator and fomenter of that spirit of lawlessness which exhibits itself as hatred both of truth and right, and which has operated so widely and so disastrously in human life.
The history of Satan, including that phase of it which remains to be reahzed, can be set forth only
along the most general lines. He be4. History longs to the angehc order of beings. He of Satan is by nature one of the sons of Elohim
(Job 16). He has fallen, and by virtue of his personal forcefulness has become the leader of the anarchic forces of wickedness. As a free being he has merged his life in evil and has become altogether and hopelessly evU. As a being of high intelligence he has gained great power and has exercised a wide sway over other bemgs. As a created being the utmost range of his power lies within the compass of that which is permitted. It
, On the contrary, it is perfectly evident that Satan's
power consists principally in his ability to deceive. It is interesting and characteristic that according to the Bible Satan is fundamentally a Uar and his kingdom is a kingdom founded upon lies and deceit. The doctrine of Satan therefore corresponds in every important particular to the general Bib. emphasis upon truth. "The truth shall make you free" (Jn 8 32)—this is the way of deliverance from the power of Satan.
is, therefore, hedged in by the providential government of God and essentially limited. The Bib. emphasis upon the element of falsehood in the career of Satan might be taken to imply that his kingdom may be less in extent than appears. At any rate, it is confined to the cosmic sphere and to a limited portion of time. It is also doomed. In the closely related passages 2 Pet 2 4 and Jude ver 6 it is affirmed that God cast the angels, when they sinned, down to Tartarus and committed them to pits of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment. This both refers to the constant Divine control of
Now it would seem that to make Satan preeminently the deceiver would make man an innocent victim and thus relax the moral issue. But accord-
2695 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Satan
the merely speculative temper. The comparative lack of development in this field is due partly to the fact that the Bib. writers are pri-
these insurgent forces and also points to their final and utter destruction. The putting of Satan in bonds is evidently both constant and progressive. The essential hmitation of the empire of evil and its ultimate overthrow are foreshadowed in the Book of Job (chs 38-41), where Jch's power extends even to the symboUzed spirit of evil.
1. Scripture marily interested in God, and only Doctrine of secondarily in the powers of darkness; Satan Not and partly to the fact that in the SystemaBible doctrine waits upon fact. Hence tized the malign and sinister figure of the Adversary is gradually outlined against the light of God's holiness as progressively revealed in the providential world-process which centers in Christ. It is a significant fact that the statements concerning Satan become numerous and definite only in the NT. The dayhght of the Christian revelation was necessary in order to uncover the lurking foe, dimly disclosed but by no means fully known in the earlier revelation. The disclosure of Satan is, in form at least, historical, not dogmatic.
According to synoptic tradition, Our Lord in the crisis ot temptation immediately following the baptism (Mt 4 and ||) met and for the time conquered Satan as His own personal adversary. This preliminary contest did not close the matter, but was the earnest of a complete victory. According to Lk (10 18), wlien the Seventy returned from their mission flushed with victory over the powers of evil, Jesus said: 'I saw Satan fall [not "fallen"; see Plummer, "Lk," ICC, in loc] as lightning from heaven.' In every triumph over the powers of evil Christ beheld in vision the downfall of Satan. In connection with the coming of the Hellenists who wished to see Him, Jesus asserted (Jn 12 31), "Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prmce of this world be cast out." In view of His approaching passion He says again (Jn 14 30), "The prince of the world Cometh: and he hath nothing in me." Once again in connection with the promised advent of the Spirit, Jesus asserted (Jn 16 11) that the Spirit would convict the world ot judgment, "because the prince of this world hath been judged." In Ho (2 14.15) it is said that Christ took upon Himself human nature in order "that through death he might bring to nought him that had the power of death, that is, the devil." In 1 Jn 3 8 it is said, "To this end was the Son of God manifested, that he might destroy the works ot the devil." In Rev 12 9 it is asserted, in connection with Christ's ascen.sion, that Satan was cast down to the earth and his angels with him. According to the passage immediately following (12 10-12), this casting down was not complete or final in the sense of extinguishing his activities altogether, but it involves the potential and certain triumph of God and His saints and the equally certain defeat of Satan. In 1 Jn 2 13 the young men are addressed as those who "have overcome the evil one." In Rev 20 the field of the future is covered in the assertion that Satan is "bound a thousand years"; then loosed "for a little time," and then finally "cast into the lake of fire."
In the second place, the relationship of Satan to God, already emphasized, must be kept constantly
in mind. The doctrine of Satan
2. Satan merges in the general doctrine conand God cerning angels (see Angels). It has often been pointed out that the personal characteristics of angels are very little insisted upon. They are known chiefly by their functions: merged, on the one hand, in their own offices, and, on the other, in the activities of God Himself. In the OT Satan is not represented as a fallen and mahgnant spirit, but as a servant of Jeh, performing a Divine function and having his place in the heavenly train. In the
jl accounts of David's numbering of Israel (1 S 24 1; 1 Ch 21 1) the tempting of David is attributed both to Jeh and Satan. The reason for this is either that 'the temptation of men is also a part of his providence,' or that in the interval between the documents the personality of the tempter has more clearly emerged. In this case the account in Ch would nearly approximate the NT teaching. In the Book of Job
A comparison of these passages will convince the careful student that while we cannot construct a
definite chronological program for the career of Satan, we are clear in the chief points. He is lim-
(1 6), however, Satan is among the Sons of God and his assaults upon Job are Divinely permitted. In Zee (3 1.2) Satan is also a servant of Jeh. In both these passages there is the hint of opposition between Jeh and Satan. In the former instance Satan assails unsuccessfully the character of one whom Jeh honors ; while in tlie latter Jeh explicitly rebukes Satan for his attitude toward Israel (see G. A. Smith, BTP, II, 316 f). The unveihng of Satan as a rebellious world-power is reserved for the NT, and with this fuller teaching the symbolic treatment of temptation in Gen is to be connected. There is a sound pedagogical reason, from the viewpoint of revelation, for this earUer withholding of the whole truth concerning Satan. In the early stages of religious thinking it would seem to be difficult,
ited, judged, condemned, imprisoned, reserved for judgtnent from the beginning. The outcome is
certain though the process may be tedious and slow. The victory of Christ is the defeat of Satan; first,
for Himself as Leader and Saviour of men (Jn 14
30); then, for behevers (Lk 22 31; Acts 26 18; Rom 16 20; Jas 4 7; 1 Jn 2 13; 5 4.18); and,
finaUy, for the whole world (Rev 20 10). The work of Christ has abeady destroyed the empire
of Satan.
///. General Considerations.—There are, no
doubt, serious difficulties in the way of accepting
the doctrine of a personal, superhuman, evil power
as Satan is described to be. It is doubtful, however, whether these difficulties may not be due, at least
if not impossible, to hold the sovereignty of God without attributing to His agency those evils in the world which are more or less directly connected with judgment and punishment (cf Isa 45 7; Am 3 6). The OT sufficiently emphasizes man's responsibility for his own evil deeds, but superhuman evil is brought upon him from above. "When wilful souls have to be misled, the spirit who does so, as in Ahab's case, comes from above"
in part, to a misunderstanding of the doctrine and
certain of its imphcations. In addition, it must
be acknowledged, that whatever difficulties there may be in the teaching, they are exaggerated and,
at the same time, not fairly met by the vague and
irrational skepticism which denies without investi-
gation. There are difficulties involved in any view
of the world. To say the least, some problems are met by the view of a superhuman, evil world-power.
(G. A. Smith, op. cit., 317). The progressive revelation of God's character and purpose, which more and more imperatively demands that the origin of moral evil, and consequently natural evil, must be traced to the created will in opposition to the Divine, leads to the ultimate declaration that Satan is a morally fallen being to whose conquest the Divine Power in history is pledged. There is, also, the distinct possibility that in the significant transition from the Satan of the OT to that of the NT we have the outlines of a biography and an indication of the way by which the angels fell.
In this section certain general considerations are
urged with a view to lessening diffioulties keenly
felt by some minds. Necessarily, certain items
gathered in the foregoing section are here empha-
sized again.
The Scriptural doctrine of Satan is nowhere
systematically developed. For materials m this
field we are shut up to scattered and incidental
references. These passages, which even m the
aggregate are not numerous, tell us what we need
to know concerning the nature, history, kingdom and works of Satan, but offer scant satisfaction to
Satan Saul THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2696
ness the doctrine of Satan. The German theologians of the more evangelical type, such as Weiss, Lange, Martensen (Danish), Dorner, while exhibiting a tendency toward excessive speculation, discern the deeper aspects of the doctrine. Of monographs known to the writer none are to be recommended without qualification. It is a subject on which the Bible is its own best interpreter.
A third general consideration, based upon data given in tlie earlier section, should be urged in the
same connection. In the NT delin-
3. Satan eation of Satan, his limitations are Essentially clearly set forth. He is superhuman, Limited but not in any sense Divine. His activities are cosmic, but not universal or transcendent. He is a created being. His power is definitely circumscribed. He is doomed to final destruction as a world-power. His entire career is that of a secondary and dependent being who is permitted a certain limited scope of power a tim£-lease of activity (Lk 4 6). These three general considerations have been grouped in this way because they dispose of three
Louis Matthews Sweet SATAN, DEPTHS OF (rd PaB^a tov Sarava,
td bathea tou Sataiid) : Found in Rev 2 24, and has reference to false teaching at Thyatira. It is a question (that perhaps may not be decided) whether tou Satana, "of Satan," represents the claim of the
false teachers, or is thrown in by the Lord. Did those false teachers claim to know "the depths" of Satan? Or was it that they claimed to know "the depths" of Deity, and the Lord said it was rather "the depths of Satan"? In either case the an-
objections which are current against
4. Concluthe doctrine of Satan. sions (1) The first is, that it is mythological in origin. That it is not dogmatic is a priori evidence against this hypothesis. Mythology is primitive dogma. There is no evidence of a theodicy or philosophy of evil in the Bib. treatment of Satan. Moreover, while the Scriptural doctrine is unsystematic in form, it is rigidly limited in scope and everywhere essentially consistent. Even in the Apocalypse, where naturally more scope is allowed to the imagination, the same essential ideas appear. The doctrine of Satan corresponds, item for item, to the intellectual saneness and ethical earnestness of the Bib. world-view as a whole. It is, therefore, not mythological. The restraint of chastened imagination, not the extravagance of mythological fancy, is in evidence throughout the entire Bib. treatment of the sub-
tithesis to "depths of Satan" is "depths of God," as referred to in Rom 11 33; 1 Cor 2 10.
SATAN, SYNAGOGUE OF: The expression occurs neither in the Heb nor in the Gr of the OT, nor in Apoc. Three passages in the OT and one in Apoc suggest the idea conveyed in the expression. In Nu 14 27.3.5, Jeh expresses His wrath against "the evil congregation" (LXX .0-11^70177; irov-rjpi, sunagogi ponerd) which He threatens to consume
in the wilderness. In Ps 21 (22) 16, we find, "A company of evil doers [LXX !ri;ra7u77) woinj-
pevoiiivav, sunagogt ponereuomenon] have inclosed me." In Sir 16 6, we read, "In the congregation of sinners [LXX o-vna-yuyT] a.fiapTui\u>v, sunagogt hamartolon] shall a fire be kindled."
Only in the NT occurs the phrase "synagogue of Satan," and here only twice (Rev 2 9; 3 9). Three observations are evident as to who constituted "the synagogue of Satan" in Smyrna and Philadelphia. (1) They claimed to be Jews, i.e. they were descendants of Abraham, and so laid claim to the blessings promised by Jeh to him and his seed. (2) But they are not regarded by John as real Jews, i.e. they are not the genuine Israel of God (the same conclusion as Paul reached in Rom 2 28). (3) They are persecutors of the Christians in Smyrna. The Lord "knows their blasphemy," their sharp denunciations of Christ and Christians. They claim to be the true people of God, but really they are "the synagogue of Satan." The gen. Xarapa, Satand, is probably the possessive gen. These Jewish persecutors, instead of being God's people, are the "assembly of Satan," i.e. Satan's people.
ject. Even the use of terms current in mythology
(as perhaps Gen 3 1.13.14; Rev 12 7-9; cf 1 Pet 5 8) does not imply more than a literary clothing of Satan in attributes commonly ascribed to malignant and disorderly forces.
(2) The second objection is that the doctrine is due to the influence of Pers dualism (see Persian Reugion; Zoroastrianism). The answer to this
is plain, on the basis of facts already adduced. The Bib. doctrine of Satan is not dualistic. Satan's empire had a beginning, it will have a definite and permanent end. Satan is God's great enemy in the cosmic .sphere, but he is God's creation, exists by Divine will, and his power is relatively no more commensurate with God's than that of men. Satan awaits his doom. Weiss says (concerning the NT representation of conflict between God and the powers of evil) : "There lies in this no Manichaean dualism, .... but only the deepest experience of the work of redemption as the definite destruction of the power from which all sin in the world of men proceeds" {Bib. Theol. NT, ET, II, 272; cf G. A. Smith, op. cit., II, 318).
In Polyc, Mar. xvii.2 (c 155 AD) the Jews of Smyrna were still persecutors of Christians and were conspicuous in demanding and planning the martyrdom of Polycarp the bishop of Smyrna, the same city in which the revelator calls persecuting Jews "the assembly of Satan."
(3) The third objection is practically the same as the second, but addressed directly to the doctrine
In the 2d cent., in an inscription {CIJ, 3148) describing the classes of population in Smyrna, we find the expression 01 vori 'louSawi, hoi poti loudaioi, which Mommsen thinks means "Jews who had abandoned their rehgion," but which Ramsay says "probably means those who formerly were the nation of the Jews, but have lost the legal standing of a separate people."
itself, apart from the question of its origin, namely, that it destroys the unity of God. The answer to this also is a simple negative. To some minds the reality of created wills is dualistic and therefore untenable. But a true doctrine of unity malces room for other wills than God's—namely of those beings upon whom God has bestowed freedom. Herein stands the doctrine of sin and Satan. The doctrine of Satan no more militates against the unity of God than the idea, so necessary to morality and religion alike, of other created wills set in opposition to God's. Just as the conception of Satan merges, in one direction, in the general doctrine of angels, so, in the other, it blends with the broad and difficult subject of evil (cf "Satan," HDB, IV, 412a). LiTEH.^TrEE.—All Standard works on Bib. Theology, as well as Diets., etc, treat with more or less thorough-
Literature.—Ramsay, The Seven Churches of Aaia, ch .xii; .Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, 31, 32; Polycarp, Mar. xiiiff.17.2; Mommsen, Historische Zritschrift. XXXVII, 417.
Charles B, Williams SATCHEL, sach'el. See Bag.
SATHRABUZANES, sath-ra-bu'za-nez, sath-rabfi-za'nez (2a9papoT)JdvT|s, Sathrabouzdnes) : In 1 E.sd 6 3.7.27 = "Shethar-bozenai" in Ezr 5 3.6; 6 6.13.
2697 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Satan Saul
SATISFACTION, sat-is-fak'shun : Occurs twice in AV (Nu 35 31.32) as a rendering of the Heb kopher (RV "ransom"). It nfieans a price paid as compensation for a life, and the pa.ssage cited is a prohibition against accepting such, in case of murder, or for the return of the manslayer. Such compensation was permitted in ancient justice among many peoples. Cf iroiv/i, -point, which Liddell and Scott define as "properly quit-money for blood spilt, the fine paid by the slayer to the kinsman of the slain, as a ransom from all consequences." The same custom prevailed among Teutonic peoples, as seen in the Ger. Wergeld and Old Eng. wergild. The Heb laws of the OT permit it only in the case of a man or woman gored to death by an ox (Ex 21 30-32).
14 for llliih; creipTjves, neirines, "sirens," in Isa 13 21 for b'noth ya^dnah, and in 34 13 for tannim. We must bear in mind the uncertainty regarding the identity of giyim, 'lyim, 'ohlm and tannim, as well as of some of the other names, and we must recall the tales that are hung about the name lilUh (AV "screech owl," AVm and RV "night-monster," RVm "Lilith"). While sa^ir is almost alone among these words in having ordinarily a well-understood meaning, i.e. "hc-goat," there is good reason for considering that here it is used in an exceptional sense. The tr "satyr" has certainly much to be said for it. See Goat; Jackal.
Alfred Ely Day SAUL, sol (blSttJ , sha'Ul; SaovX, Saoixl)
(1) The first king of Israel.
Benjamin Reno Downer SATRAPS, sa'traps, sat'raps (D'lISn.lirinS
I. Early Histohy
1. Name and Meaning 2. Genealogy 3. Home and Station
'Ohashdarp'nim, Ezr 8 36; Est 3 12; 8 9; 9 3, AV "lieutenants"; Dnl 3 2.3.27; 6 1 ff, AV "princes"): The viceroys or vassal rulers to whom was intrusted the government of the provinces in the Pers empire. The word answers to the Old Pers khshathrapavan, "protectors of the realm."
4. Sources for Life 5. Election as King
6. Reasons for It
II. Reign and Fall
1. His First Action 2. Army Reorganized 3. Battle of Michmash 4. Defeats the Amalekites
SATYR, safer, sa'ter ("1^3?©, saHr, lit. "he-
5. Deposition Pronounced
6. David Introduced to Saul
goat"; cf lyiri, saHr, "hairy" [Gen 27 11, of Esau],
7. Two Accounts 8. Saul's Envy of David
9. Attempts to Got Rid of Him 10. David Spares Saul 11. Saul's Divided Energies 12. Consults a Necromancer 13. Battle of Gilboa 14. Double Accounts 15. Saul's Posterity III. Character
and Arab. JLci, sha'r, "hair"; pi. DiTy'l?,
s'Hrlm): For s^'irim in Lev 17 7 and 2 Ch 11 15, AV has "devils," RV "he-goats," ERVni "satyrs," LXX Tois /xarafois, tols mataiois, "vain things." For