Part 74
article.
(9) Simon, the tanner, with whom Peter lodged at Joppa. His house was by the seaside outside the city wall, because of its ceremonial uncleanness to a Jew, and also for reasons of sanitation (Acts 9 43). S. F. Hunter
SIMON MAGUS, ma'gus (2C|jiwv, Simon, Gr form of Heb IVOti , shim'on; Gesenius gives the meaning of the Heb word as "hearing with accept-
ance"; it is formed from V ^"QXO , sha,ma\ "to
hear"):
1. Simon, a Magician 2. Simon and the Apostles (1) Simon and Phihp (2) Simon and Peter and John
3. The Magicians and the Gospel 4. Testimony of Early Christian Writers 5. Sources of Legendary History
(3) Simon II, high priest, son of Onias II and grandson of Simon I and father of Onias III, flourished about the end of the 3d cent. BC, and was
6. Traditions of His Death
7. The Simoniani 8. Was Simon the Originator of Gnosticism 7 The name or term "Magus" is not given to him
succeeded by his son Onias III c 198 BC. Jos says that this Simon in the conflict of the sons of Joseph sided with the elder sons against Hyrcanus the younger. Schiirer (probably incorrectly) thinks he is the Simon praised in Sir 50 1 ff. See (2) above (3 Mace 2 1; Jos, Ant, XII, iv, 10).
in the NT, but is justly used to designate or particularize him on account of the inci-
1. Simon, dent recorded in Acts 8 9-24, for a Magician though the word "Magus" does not occur, yet in ver 9 the present participle mageuon is used, and is tr'', both in AV and in RV, "used sorcery." Simon accordingly was a sorcerer, he "bewitched the people of Samaria" (,AV). In ver 11 it is also said that "of long time he had amazed" them "with his sorceries" {magiais). The claim, given out by himself, was that he "was some great one"; and this claim was acknowledged by the Samaritans, for previous to the introduction of the gospel into Samaria, "they all gave heed [to him], from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is that power of God which is called Great" (ver 10).
(4) Simon, a Benjamite, guardian of the temple, who, having quarreled with the high priest Onias III, informed ApoUonius of the untold sums of money
in the temple treasury. ApoUonius laid the matter
before the king Seleucus IV, who sent Heliodorus
to remove the money. An apparition prevented Heliodorus from accomplishing his task (2 Maco
3 4ff). It is further recorded, that Simon con-
tinued his opposition to Onias. He is spoken of as brother of the renegade Menelaus (4 23). Of his end we know nothing.
(5) Simon Chosameus (B [and Swete], Xoo-aMoos, Chosdmaos,A, Xoa-o/xatos, Chosomaios), one of the sons
of Annas who had married "strange wives" (1 Esd
9 32). Simon apparently = "Shimeon" {shim-on)
(1) It so happened, however, that Philip the deacon and evangelist went down from Jerus to Samaria, and "proclaimed unto them
of the sons of Harim (Ezr 10 31); Chosameus is probably a corruption standing in the place of, but
2. Simon the Christ" (ver 5); and as the result and the of the proclamation of the gospel, Apostles many were gathered into the Christian church. Many miracles also were performed by Philip, sick persons cured, and demons cast out; and Simon fell under the influence of all these things, both of the preaching and of "the signs." So great was the impression now made upon Simon that he "believed" (ver 13). This means, at least, that he saw that Philip was able in the name of Jesus Christ to display powers greater than anything he himself was acquainted with: Philip's power was greater by far than Simon's. He therefore came forward as one of the new converts, and was baptized. After his baptism he continued with Philip. The signs which accompanied the introduction of the gospel into this city did not cease, and Simon seeing them "was amazed." The word denoting Simon's amazement at the "signs" wrought by Philip is the same as that used to express how the people of Samaria had been
not resembling, any of the three names: Benjamm,
Malluch, Shemaraiah, which Esd omits from the Ezr
list. S. Angus
SIMON, sl'mon (2i(io)v, Simon):
(1) Simon Peter. See Peter (Simon).
(2) Another of the Twelve, Simon "the Cana-
naean" (Mt 10 4; Mk 3 18), "the Zealot" (Lk 6
15; Acts 1 13). See Cananaean.
(3) One of the brethren of Jesus (Mt 13 55; Mk 6 3). See Brethebn of the Lord.
(4) "The leper" in Bethany, in whose house
a woman poured a cruse of precious ointment over
the head of Jesus (Mt 26 6; Mk 14 3). He had
perhaps been healed by Jesus; in that case his
ungracious behavior was not consistent with due
gratitude. However he was healed, the title
referred to his condition in the past, as lepers were
ostracized by law. ,, (5) A Pharisee in whose house a woman, a
sinner," wet the feet of Jesus with her tears, and
Simon Magus SimoS the^lellot '^^^ INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2796
been erected to him, on the island in the river Tiber, with the inscription Simoni Deo Sancto. that is. "To Simon the sacred god." Curiously enough, in the year 1574, a stone which appears to have served as a pedestal of a statue, was dug up in the Tiber at the spot described by Justin ; and on it were inscribed the words Semoni Sanco Deo Fidio Sacrum, that is, the stone then discovered was dedicated to the god Semo Sancus, the Sabine Hercules. This antiquarian find makes it probable that Justin was mistaken in what he said about a statue having been erected in honor of Simon Magus. "It is incredible that the folly should ever be carried to such an e.xtent as that a statue should be erected, and the senate should pass a decree enrolling Simon Magus among the deos Romanos^ (Neander, Church History, II, 123). The inscription found in 1574 shows the source of the error into which Justin had fallen.
amazed at Simon's sorceries. It is an indication of the nature of the faith which he possessed in the gospel—wondering amazement at a new phenomenon «ot yet understood, not repentance or trust in Christ.
(2) News having reached Jerus of the events which had occurred in Samaria, the apostles sent Peter and John to establish the worlc there. These two apostles prayed for the converts that they might receive the Holy Ghost, which they had not yet received. And when they had laid their hands upon the converts, the Spirit was given to them. At this early period in the history of the church the Holy Ghost was bestowed in a visible manner which showed itself in such miraculous gifts as are described in Acts 2. Simon saw what had taken place, and then, instead of joining the company of those who had truly repented and trusted Christ, he came forward with the same amazement as he had previously shown, and offered money to Peter and John, if they would impart to him the power of giving the Holy Ghost to others. Peter instantly rebuked this bold and ungodly request, and did so with such sternness as to cause Simon to ask that the judgment threatened by the apostle might not
There are many stories told by some of the early Christian writers regarding Simon Magus, but they are full of legend and fable: some of them are improbable in the extreme and border on the impossible.
(2) Jerome, who professes to quote from writings of Simon, represents him as employing these words in reference to himself, " I am the Word of God, I am the Comforter, I am Almighty. I am all there is of God" (Mansel.
The Gnostic Heresies. 82). Irenaeus (Mansel, ib, 82) writes regarding him: "Simon, having purchased a certain woman named Helena, who had been a prostitute in the city of Tyre, carried her about with him, and said that she was the first conception of his mind, the mother of aU things, by whom, in the beginning, he conceived the thought of making the angels and archangels ; for that this conception proceeded forth from him, and knowing her father's wishes, she descended to the lower world, and produced the angels and powers; by whom also he said that this world was made. But after she had produced them, she was detained by them through envy, since they were unwilling to be considered the offspring of any other being ; for he himself was entirely unknown by them ; but his conception was detained by those powers and angels which were put forth from her, and suffered every insult from them that she might not return upward to her father; and this went so far that she was even confined wittiin a human body, and for ages passed into other female bodies, as if from one vessel into another. He said also that she was that Helen, on whose account the Trojan war was fought .... and that after passing from one body to another, and constantly meeting with insult, at last she became a public prostitute, and that this was the lost sheep. On this account he himself came, that he might first of all reclaim her and free her from her chains, and then give salvation to men through the knowledge of himself. For since the angels ruled the world badly, because one of them desired the chief place, he had come down for the restoration of all things, and had descended, being changed in figure, and made like to principalities and powers and angels, so that he appeared among men as a man, and was thought to have suffered in Judaea, though he did not suffer Furthermore he said that the prophets uttered their prophecies under the inspiration of those angels who framed the world; for which reason they who rest their hope on him and his Helena no longer cared for them, but as free men could act as they pleased, for that men are saved by his [i.e. Simon's] grace, and not according to their own just works, for that no acts were just by nature, but by accident, according to tlie rules established by the angels, who made the world, and who attempt by these precepts to bring men into bondage. For this reason he promised that the world should be released, and those who are his set at liberty from the government of those who made the world."
fall upon him.
Such is the unenviable history of Simon Magus, as it is recorded in the NT. Later centuries have shown their estimation of the heinousness of Simon's sin by employing his name to indicate the crime of buying or selling a spiritual office for a price in money—"simony."
It is not strange to find the gospel brought into direct conflict with magicians, for in the 1st and 2d cents, there were a multitude of 3. The such persons who pretended to possess Magicians supernatural powers by which they and the endeavored to deceive men. They Gospel flattered the sinful inclinations of the human heart, and fell in with men's current ways of thinking, and required no selfrenunciation at all. For these reasons the magicians found a ready belief on the part of many. The emperor Tiberius, in his later years, had a host of magicians in constant attendance upon him. Elymas, with whom Paul came in contact in Cyprus "was with the deputy of the country, Sergius Paulus, a prudent man" (Acts 13 7 AV). Elymas was one of those magicians, and he endeavored to turn away the deputy from the faith. Luke expressly calls this man "magus," Elymas the magus (Acts 13 6.8 m).
The influence of such persons presented an obstacle to the progress of the Christian faith, which had to force its way through the delusions with which these sorcerers had surrounded the hearts of those whom they deceived. When the gospel came in contact with these magicians and with thenworks, it was necessary that there should be striking facts, works of supernatural power strongly appealing to men's outward senses, in order to bring them out of the bewilderment and deception in which they were involved, and to make them able to receive the impression of spiritual truth. Such miracles were wrought both in Cyprus and in Samaria, the spheres of influence of the magicians Elymas and Simon.
The chief sources of the legendary history of Simon Magus are the collection of writings known
as The Clementines (see Literature,
5. Sources Sub-apostolic; Peter, First Epistle of Legendof; Peter, Second Epistle of). ary HisWhat is there said of him is, that he tory studied at Alexandria, and that he had been, along with the heresiarch Dositheus, a disciple of John the Baptist. He became also a disciple of Dositheus, and afterward his successor. The Clementines comprise (1) The Homilies, (2) The Recognitions, and (3) The Epitome. These three are cognate works, and in part are identical. The date of The Homilies may be placed about 160 AD. The contents comprise a supposed letter from the apostle Peter to the apostle James, along with other matter. Then follow the homilies, of which there are twenty. These record the supposed travels of Clement, a Rom citizen. Clement meets with Barnabas and with Peter. Then there is narrated a discussion between Peter and Simon Magus. This disputation
^ These Divine works first arrested men's attention, and then dispelled the delusive influence of the sorcerers.
(1) The history of Simon Magus does not close with what is narrated in the Acts, for the early Christian writers have much to say in 4. Testiregard to him.
r-„i^ Justin Martyr, himself a Samaritan, 5, .-^ states tliat Simon Magus wasa " SamariWriters tanlromtlie village caliedGitton." Justin also relates that, in the time of Claudius Caesar. Simon was worshipped as a god at Rome on account of his magical powers, and that a statue had
2797 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Simon Magus Simon the Zealot
lasts for three days, Simon maintaining that there are two gods, and that the God of the OT is an imperfect being. Simon Magus withdraws to Tyre and then to Sidon. Peter follows Simon from place to place, counteracting his sorceries, and instructing the people. At Laodicea a second disputation takes place between the apostle and Simon on the same subjects.
system. The early Christian writers took this view, and regarded Simon Magus as the founder of Gnosticism. Perhaps they were right, "but from the very little authentic information we possess, it is impossible to ascertain how far he was identified with
their tenets" (Alford, A^ 7', II, 86). In the midst of the various legends regarding Simon, it may be that there is a substratum of fact, of such a nature that future investigation and discovery will justify these early Christian writers in their judgment, and will show that Simon Magus is not to be overlooked as one of the sources from which Gnosticism sprang. The exact origin of Gnosticism is certainly
The Homilies are not a Christian protest against Gnosticism, but merely that of one gnostic school or sect against another, the Ebionite against the Marcionite. The Deity of Christ is denied, and He is regarded as one of the Jewish prophets.
In the legends Simon is represented as constantly opposing Peter, who ultimately discredits and vanquishes him. These legends occur in more forms than one, the earlier form selecting Antioch as the place where Simon was discomfited by the apostle and where he also died, while the later tradition chooses Rome for these events.
difficult to trace, but there is little or no indication that it arose from the incidents narrated in Acts 8. It cannot be denied that a connection is possible, and may have existed between the two, that is between Simon Magus and some of the gnostic here-
sies; but the facts of history show widespread tendencies at work, during and even before the Apostolic age, which amply account for the rise of Gnosticism. These are found e.g. in the Alexandrian philosophy, and in the tenets of the false teachers at Colossae and in other places. These philosophical and theosophical ideas commingled with the influences of Zoroastrianism from Persia, and of Buddhism from India, and these tendencies and influences, taken in conjunction, were the sources of the various heresies known by the name of Gnosticism. See Gnosticism.
One tradition tells how the magician ordered his followers to bury him in a grave, promising that
if this were done, he would rise again 6. Tradion the third day. They did as he tions of His wished and buried him; but this Death was the end of him, for he did not rise again.
Simon is said to have met his death at Rome, after an encounter with the apostle Peter. During tliis his final controversy with the apostle, Simon had raised himself in the air by the help of evil spirits, and in answer to the prayer of Peter and Paul he was (lashed to the ground and killed. According to another form of this tradition, Simon proposed to give the Rom emperor a proof of his power by flying off to God. He succeeded, it is said, in flying for a certain distance over Rome, but in answer to the prayer of Peter he fell and broke one of his legs. This tradition accounts for his end by saying that the people stoned him to death.
John Rdthehfurd SIMON PETER. See Peter, Simon.
SIMON THE CANAANITE, OR CANANAEAN, OR ZEALOT (2£|io)v Kavavalos, Simon Kananaios; 'S3|5, kannd'l, "the Jealous [or Zealous] One"): One of the Twelve Apostles. This Simon was also named "the Canaanite" (Mt 10 4; Mk 3 18 AV) or "the Cananaean" (Mt 10 4; Mk 3 18 RV) or "Zelotes" (Lk 6 1.5; Acts 1 13 AV) or "the Zealot" (Lk 6 15; Acts 1 13 RV).
The Simoniani, the Simonians or followers of Simon, were an eclectic sect, who seem, at one time,
to have adopted tenets and opinions
7. The derived from paganism, at another, Simoniani from Judaism and the beliefs of the Samaritans, and at another still, from Christianity. Sometimes they seem to have been
According to the " Gospel of the Ebionites " or " Gospel of the Twelve Apostles" (of the 2d cent, and mentioned by Origen) Simon received his call to the apostleship along with Andrew and Peter, the sons of Zebedee. Thaddaeus and Judas Iscariot at the Sea of Tiberias (cf Mt 4 1822; see also Hennecke, Neutestamenlliche Apokryphen, 24-27).
ascetics; at others they are wild scoffers at moral
law. They regarded Simon Magus as their Christ,
or at least as a form of manifestation of the redeern-
ing Christ, who had manifested Himself also in
Although Simon, like the majority of the apostles, was probably a Galilean, the designation "Cananaean" is regarded as of political rather than of geographical significance (of St. Luke's rendering). The Zealots were a faction, headed by Judas of Galilee, who "in the days of the enrolment" (cf Acts 5 37; Lk 2 1.2) bitterly opposed the threatened increase of taxation at the census of Quirinius, and would have hastened by the sword the fulfilment of Messianic prophecy.
Jesus. The Simonians were one of the minor
gnostic sects and were carried far away both from the doctrine and from the ethical spirit of the Christian faith.
Origen denies that the followers of Simon were
Christians in any sense. The words of Origen are,
"It escapes the notice of Celsus that the Simonians do not m any way acknowledge Jesus as the Son
of God, but they call Simon the Power of God."
In the time of Origen the followers of Simon had dwindled in number to such a degree that he writes,
Simon has been identified with Simon the brother of Jesus (Mk 6 3; Mt 13 55), but there also are reasons in favor of identifying him with Nathanael.
"I do not think it possible to find that all the fol-
lowers of Simon in the whole world are more than
Thus (1) all the arguments adduced in favor of the Bartholomew-Nathanael identification (see Nathanael) can equally be applied to that of Simon-Nathanael, except the second. But the second is of no account, since the Philip-Bartholomew connection in the Synoptists occurs merely in the apostolic lists, while in St. John it is narrative. Further, in the Synopti.sts, Philip is connected in the narrative, not with Bartholomew but with Andrew.
thirty: and perhaps I have said more than there
really are" {Conlr. Cels., i.57, quoted by Alford, GrNT, Acts 8 9). ,. ^. Irenaeus also has much to say regardmg bimon
and his followers. He makes the legendary Simon
identical with the magician of Acts 8,
8. Was makes him also the first ki the list Simon the which he gives of heretics, and also
(2) The identity is definitely stated in the Genealogies of the Twelve Apostles (see Nathanael). Further, the "Preaching of Simon, son of Cleopas" (cf Budge, II, 70 fl) has the heading "The preaching of the blessed St. Simon, the son of Cleopas, who was surnamed Judas, which is interpreted Nathanael, who became bishop of Jems after James the brother of Our Lord." Eusebius (//i?, Ill, xi, 32; IV,xxii) also refers to a Simon who succeeded James as bishop of Jerus and suffered martyrdom under Trajan; and Hegesippus, whom Eusebius professes to quote, calls this Simon a son of Cleopas,
Originator says that it was from him that Gnosti-
of Gnosticism sprang. The account which he
cism? gives of the Simonians shows that by
the time when Irenaeus lived, their
system had developed into Gnosticism; but this
fact does not justify Irenaeus in the assertion that Simon of Acts 8 is the originator of the gnostic
Simple Sin THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2798
SIN (nXEin, hatta'th, "a missing," 117, 'awon,
(3) The invitation of Philip to Nathanael (cf Jn 1 45) was one which would naturally be addressed to a follower of the Zealots, who based their cause on the fnlfllm ent of Messianic prophecy.
"perversity," J'lpS
, pesha', "transgression," 37^,
ra'', "evil," etc; a(iapTdva), hamartdno, "miss the mark," iropdpao-is, pardbasis, "transgression" with a suggestion of violence, dSiKCo, adikia, "injustice," "unrighteousness")
(4) As Alphaeiis, the father of James, is generally regarded as the same as Clopas or Cleopas (see J.\mes. Son of Alphaeus), this identification of the above Simon Nathanael. son of Cleopas. with Simon Zelotes would shed light on the reason of the juxtaposition of James son of Alphaeus and Simon Zelotes in the apostolic lists of St. Ltike and Acts. i.e. they were brothers.
1. Sin as Disobedience 2. Affects the Inner Life 3. Involves All Men 4. The Story of the Fall 5. The Freedom of Man 6. A Transgression against Light 7. Inwardness of the Moral Law (1) Prophets (2) Paul (3) Jesus 8. Sin a Positive Force 9. Heredity 10. Environment 11. Redemption 12. Life in Christ 13. Repentance 14. Forgiveness LiTER.VTURE
C. M. Kerr SIMPLE, sim'p'l: In the OT the uniform tr of the Heb word Tpethi (root pathdh, "be open"). Like the Eng. word "simple" (etymologically "of onefold"), the Heb pelhi is used sometimes in a good sense,
i.e. "open-minded" (Ps 19 7; 116 6; 119 130, possibly in all three cases the sense is neutral rather than yositivdy good), and sometimes in a bad sense (Prov 7 7, || to "destitute of understand-
ing"; 8 5, l| to "fools" [blockheads]; 14 15, opposed
to prudent). The fundamental idea of pelhi seems
to be open to influence, i,e. easily influenced. That one open to influence should as a rule be classed with the irreligious is one of many instances in which language is an unwilling witness to the miasmatic moral atmosphere in which we live. The line between moral weakness and moral turpitude, between negative goodness (if indeed such a thing be conceivable) and positive badness, is soon passed. In the NT the word "simple" is found only in Rom 16 18.19 AV. In the iirst of these passages
A fairly exact definition of sin based on Bib. data would be that sin is the transgression of the law of God (1 Jn 3 4). Ordinarily, sin
1. Sin as is defined simply as "the transgression Disobediof the law," but the idea of God is so ence completely the essential conception of the entire Bib. revelation that we can best define sin as disobedience to the law of God.
It will be seen that primarily sin is an act, but from the very beginning it has been known that acts have effects, not only in the outward world of things and persons, but also upon
it is used to translate dkakos (RV "innocent"). In He 7 26 AV the same word is rendered "harm-
less," the rendering of RV in this instance being
"guileless." This would suit Rom 16 18 better than "innocent." Guilelessness is not a synonym for
2. Affects him who commits the act. Hence we the Inner find throughout the Scriptures a Life growing emphasis on the idea of the sinful act as not only a fact in itself, but also as a revelation of an evil disposition on the part of him who commits the act (Gen 6 5). Then also there is the further idea that
gullibility; but the guileless are frequently the prey
of designing men. In Rom 16 19 the word tr*" "simple" is akeraios, lit. "unmixed," "sincere" (Trench and Godet; Young, erroneously "hornless" and so "harmless"). "Uncontaminated" seemstobe the idea of the apostle. He would have those to whom he wrote "wise as regards good" and not ignorant as regards evil—for that would be impos-
3. Involves deeds which so profoundly affect the All Men inner life of an individual in some way have an effect in transmitting evil tendencies to the descendants of a sinful individual
sible, even if desirable—but without that kind of knowledge of evil that comes from engaging in it, as we say, mixing themselves up with it, unalloyed with evil. W. M. McPheeters
(Ps 51 5.6; Eph 2 3). See Heredity; Tradition. Hence, we reach shortly the conception, not only that sin is profoundly inner in its consequences, but that its effects reach outward also to an extent which practically involves the race. Around these various items of doctrine differing systems of theology have sprung up.
SIMPLICITY, sim-plis'i-ti (n^TlE, pHhayyulh;
airXoTiis, haplMes) : The words in the OT commonly tr"^ "simpUcity" are pelhl, "simple" (Prov 1
Students of all schools are agreed that we have
22), p'lhayyuth, "simplicity" (9 13 m), torn, "completeness," "integrity" (2 S 15 11), "They went
in the OT story of the fall of Adam an eternally true
account of the way sin comes into the
in their simphcity." In the NT, haplotes, 'single-
' simplicity," occurs in Rom 12 8, "He that giveth let him do it with simplicity," RV "Uberahty," m "Gr 'singleness'"; 2 Cor 1 12, "in simplicity and godly sincerity," RV (with corrected
4. Story of world (Gen 3 1-6). The question is the Fall not so much as to the literal historic matter-of-factness of the narrative, as to its essentially psychological truthfulness. The essential thought of the narrative is that both Adam and Eve disobeyed an express command of God. The seductiveness of temptation is nowhere more forcefully stated than in this narrative. The fruit of the tree is pleasant to look upon; it is good to eat; it is to be desired to make one wise; moreover, the tempter moves upon the woman by the method of the half truth (see Adam in the OT). God had said that disobedience to the command would bring death; the tempter urged that disobedience would not bring death, implying that the command of God had meant that death would immediately follow the eating of the forbidden fruit. In the story the various avenues of approach of sin to the human heart are graphically suggested, but after the seductiveness of evil has thus been set forth, the fact remains that both transgressors knew they were transgressing (Gen 3 2f). Of course, the story is told in simple, naive fashion, but its per-
ness of mind,"
text) "in holiness and sincerity of God"; 11 3, "the simphcity that is in Christ," RV (with corrected text) "the simplicity and the purity that is toward Christ"; cf Eph 6 5; Col 3 22, where the
tr is "singleness." In Wisd 1 1 we have, "Think ye
of the Lord with a good mind [AV "heart"], and in singleness [AV "simplicity"] of heart seek ye him"
(haplotes). Our Lord also speaks (Mt 6 22; Lk 11 34) of the "single eye" (haploiis), and James
(1 5) applies haplos, "simply," "directly," without after-thought (AV and RV "liberally"] to God, who had been described by Plato {Rep. ii.382 E)
as tjeing perfectly simple (haplous) and true, both
in word and deed. In such "simplicity"—openness,
sincerity, freedom from double-mindedncss—man most resembles God and is most open to His visitation and blessing. W. L. Walker
SIMRI, sim'ri. See Shimri.
2799 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Simple Sin
but the customs were, in many cases, made sacred by the claim of Divine sanction. Hence we find Bib. characters giving themselves readily to polygamy and warfare. The Scriptures themselves, however, throw fight upon this problem. They refer to early times as times of ignorance, an ignorance which God Himself was willing to overlook (Acts 17 30). Even so ripe a moral consciousness as that of Paul felt that there was ground for forgiveness toward a course which he himself later considered
ennial spiritual truth is at once apparent. There has been much progress in religious thinking concerning sin during the Christian ages, but the progress has not been away from this central conception of wilful disobedience to the law of God.
In this early Bib. account there is implicit the thought of the freedom of man. The idea of transgression has sometimes been inter6. Freedom preted in such wise as to do away with of Man this freedom. An unbiased reading of the Scriptures would, with the possible exception of some passages which designedly lay stress on the power of God (Rom 8 29.30), produce on the mind the impression that freedom is essential to sin. Certainly there is nothing in the account of the OT or NT narratives to warrant the conception that men are bom into sin by forces over which they have no control. The argument of the tempter with the woman is an argument aimed at her will. By easy steps, indeed, she moves toward the transgression, but the transgression is a transgression and nothing else. Of course, the evil deed is at once followed by attempts on the part of the transgressors to explain themselves, but the futility of the explanations is part of the point of the narrative. In all discussion of the problem of freedom as relating to sin, we must remember that the Bib. revelation is from first to last busy with the thought of the righteousness and justice and love of God (Gen 6 9 tells us that because of justice or righteousness, Noah walked with God). Unless we accept the doctrine that God is Himself not free, a doctrine which is nowhere implied in the Scripture, we must insist that the condemnation of men as sinful, when they have not had freedom to be otherwise than sinful, is out of harmony with the Bib. revelation of the character of God. Of course
evil, because in that earfier course he had acted ignorantly (Acts 26 9; 1 Tim 1 13). The Bib. narratives, too, show us the passage over from sin conceived of as the violation of external commands to sin conceived 7. Inwardof as an unwiUingness to keep the ness of the commandments in the depths of the Moral Law inner life. The course of Bib. history
is one long protest against conceiving of sin in an external fashion.
(1) Prophets.—In the sources of light which are to help men discern good from evil, increasing stress
is laid upon inner moral insight (cf Isa 58 5t; Hos 6 1-7). The power of the prophets was in their direct moral insight and the fervor with which they made these insights real to the mass of the people. Of course it was necessary that the spirit of the prophets be given body and form in carefully articulated law. The progress of the Hebrews from the insight of the seer to the statute of the lawmaker was not different from such progress in any other nations. It is easy to see, however, how the hardening of moral precepts into formal codes, absolutely necessary as that task was, led to an externalizing of the thought of sin. The man who did not keep the formal law was a sinner. On such basis there grew up the artificial systems which came to their culmination in the NT times in Pharisaism. On the other hand, a fresh insight by a new prophet might be in violation of the Law, considered in its literal aspects. It might be necessary for a prophet to attack outright some additions to the Law. We regard as a high-water mark of OT moral utterances the word of Micah that the Lord requires men to do justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with Him (6 8). At the time this word was uttered, the people were giving themselves up to multitudes of sacrifices. Many of these sacrifices called for the heaviest sufferings on the part of the worshippers. It would seem that an obligation to sacrifice the firstborn was beginning to be taught in order that the Hebrews might not be behind the neighboring heathen nations in observances of religious codes. The simple direct word of Micah must have seemed heresy to many of its first hearers. The outcome, however, of this conflict between the inner and the outer in the thought of transgression was finally to deepen the springs of the inner Ufe. The extremes of externalism led to a break with moral realities which tended to become apparent to the most ordinary observer. The invective of Jesus against NT Pharisaism took its force largely from the fact that Jesus gave clear utterance to what everyone knew. Those who thought of religion as external gave themselves to formal keeping of the commandments and allowed the inner life to run riot as it would (Mt 23 23, et al.).
this does not mean that a man is free in aU things. Freedom is limited in various ways, but we must retain enough of freedom in our thought of the constitution of men to make possible our holding
fast to the Bib. idea of sin as transgression. Some who take the Bib. narrative as literal historical fact maintain that all men sinned in Adam (see Imputation, III, 1). Adam may have been tree to sin or not to sin, but, "in his faU we sinned all." We
shall mention the hereditary influences of sin in a
later paragraph; here it is sufficient to say that even
if the first man had not sinned, there is nothing in our thought of the nature of man to make it im-
possible to believe that the sinful course of human
history could have been initiated by some descendant of the first man far down the line.
The progress of the Bib. teaching concerning sin
also would seem to imply that the transgression of
the law must be a transgression com-
6. Transmitted against the light (Acts 17 30;
gression 1 Tim 1 13). To be sinful in any
against full sense of the word, a man must
Light know that the course which he is adopt-
ing is an evil course. This does not
necessarily mean a full realization of the evil of the
course. It is a fact, both of Bib. revelation and of
revelation of all times, that men who commit sin do not reaUze the full evil of their deeds until after
the sin has been committed (2 S 12 1-13). This
is partly because the consequences' of sin do not
declare themselves until after the deed has been committed ; partly also because of the remorse of the
(2) Paul.—With the more serious-minded the keeping of the Law became more and more a matter of the inner spirit. There were some who, like Paul, found it impossible to keep the Law and find peace of conscience (Rom 7). It was this very unpossibUity which forced some, like Paul, to understand that, after aU, sin or righteousness must be judged by the inner disposition. It was this which led to the search for a conception of a
conscience; and partly from the humihation at
being discovered; but in some sense there must be
a reaUzation of the evil of a course to make the
adoption of the course sinful. E.g. m estimatmg
the moral worth of Bib. characters, esp. those ot
earlier times, we must keep in mind the standards
of the times in which they lived. These standards
were partly set by the customs of the social group,
Sin THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2800
God who looks chiefly at the heart and judges men by the inner motive.
touch men does in one sense a merely negative work; in another sense, however, his work makes possible the positive development of the forces which make for health.
(3) Jesus.—In the teaching of Jesus the emphasis upon the inner spirit as the essential factor in the moral life came to its climax. Jesus honored the Law, but He pushed the keeping of the Law back from the mere performance of externals to the inner stirrings of motives. It is not merely the actual commission of adultery, for example, that is sin:
It is from this thought of the positiveness of
sin that we are to approach the problem of the hereditary transmission of evil. The
9. Heredity Bib. teaching has often been misinterpreted at this point. Apart from certain passages, esp. those of St. Paul, which set forth the practically universal contamination of sin (e.g. Rom 5 18, etc), there is nothing in the Scriptures to suggest the idea that men are born into the world under a weight of guilt. We hold fast to the idea of God as a God of justice and love. There
it is the lustful desire which leads to the evil glance;
i* is not merely the actual killing of the man that is murder; it is the spirit of hatred which makes the thought of murder welcome (Mt 5 21.27). Paul caught the spirit of Jesus and carried the thought
of Jesus out into more elaborate and formal statements. There is a law of the inner life with which man should bind himself, and this law is the law of Christ's life itself (Rom 8 1-4). While both Jesus and Paul recognized the place of the formal codes in the moral life of individuals and societies, they wrought a great service for righteousness
is no way of reconciling these attributes with the condemnation of human souls before these souls have themselves transgressed. Of course much theological teaching moves on the assumption that the tendencies to evil are so great that the souls will necessarily trangress, but we must keep clearly in mind the difference between a tendency to evil and the actual commission of evil. Modern scientific research reinforces the conception that the children of sinful parents, whose sins have been such as to impress their lives throughout, will very soon mani-
io setting on high the obHgations upon the inner
spirit. The follower of Christ is to guard the inmost thoughts of his heart. The commandments are not always precepts which can be given articulated statement; they are rather instincts and intuitions and glimpses which must be followed, even when we cannot give them full statement.
fest symptoms of evil tendency. Even in this case, however, we must distinguish between the psychological and moral. The child may be given a wrong tendency from birth, not only by hereditary transmission, but by the imitation of sinful parents; yet the question of the child's own personal responsibility is altogether another matter. Modern society has come to recognize something of the force of this distinction. In dealing with extreme cases of this kind, the question of the personal guilt of the child is not raised. The attempt is to throw round about the child an environment that will correct the abnormal tendency. But there can be
From this standpoint we are able to discern something of the force of the Bib. teaching as to whether
sin is to be looked upon as negative
8. Sin a or positive. Very often sin is defined Positive as the mere absence of goodness. Force The man who sins is one who does not keep the Law. This, however, is hardly the full Bib. conception. Of course, the man who does not keep the Law is regarded as a sinner, but the idea of transgression is very often that of a positive refusal to keep the commandment and a breaking of the commandment. Two courses are set before men, one good, the other
little gainsaying the fact that the presence of sin in the life of the parent may go as far as to mark the
evil. The evil course is, in a sense, something positive in itself. The evil man does not stand still; he moves as truly as the good man moves; he becomes a positive force for evil. In all our discussions we must keep clearly in mind the truth that evil is not something existing in and by itself. The Scriptures deal with evil men, and the evil men are as positive as their natures permit them to be. In this sense of the word sin does run a course of positive destruction. In the thought, e.g., of the writer who describes the conditions which, in his belief, made necessary the Flood, we have a positive state
life of the child with the sinful tendency.
The positive force of sinful life also appears in the effect of sin upon the environment of men. It is not necessary for us to believe that all 10. Enthe physical universe was cursed viromnent by the Almighty because of man's
sin, in order to hold that there is a curse upon the world because of the presence of sinful men. Men have sinfully despoiled the world for their own selfish purposes. They have wasted
its resources. They have turned forces which ought to have made for good into the channels of
of evil contaminating almost the whole world (Gen 6 11). It would be absurd to characterize the world in the midst of which Noah lived as merely a negative world. The world was positively set toward evil. And so, in later writings, Paul's thought of Rom society is of a world of sinful men moving with increasing velocity toward the destruction of themselves and of all around them through doing evil. It is impo.ssible to believe that Rom 1 conceives of sin merely in negative terms. We repeat, we do not do full justice to the Bib. conception when we speak of sin merely in negative terms. If we may be permitted to use a presentday illustration, we may say that in the Bib. thought sinful men are like the destructive forces in the world of Nature which must be removed before there can be peace and health for human life. For example, science today has much to say concerning germs of diseases which prove destructive to human life. A large part of modern scientific
evil. In their contacts with one another also, evil men furnish an evil environment. If the employer of 100 men be himself evil, he is to a great extent the evil environment of those 100 men. The curse of his evil is upon them. So with the relations of men in larger social groups : the forces of state-life which are intended to work for good can be made to work for evil. So far has this gone that some earnest minds have thought of the material and social realms as necessarily and inherently evil. In other days this led to retreats from the world in monasteries and in solitary cells. In our present time the same thought is back of much of the pessimist idea that the world itself is like a sinking ship, absolutely doomed. The most we can hope for is to save individuals here and there from imminent destruction. Yet a more Bib. conception keeps clear of all this. The material forces of the world—apart from certain massive physical necessities (e.g. earthquakes, storms, floods, whirlwinds, fires, etc), whose presence floes more to furnish the conditions of moral growth than to discourage that growth are what men cause them to be. Social forces are nothing apart from the men who are themselves the
effort has been to rid the world of these germs, or at
least to cleanse human surroundings from their contaminating touch. The man who sterilizes the human environment so that these forces cannot
2801 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Sin
forces. No one oan deny that evil men can use physical forces for evil purposes, and that evil men can make bad social forces, but both these forces, can be used for good as well as for evil. "The whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain" waiting for the redemption at the hands of the sons of God (Rom 8 19-23). In the thought of Jesus, righteousness is life. Jesus came that men might have life (Jn 10 10). It must follow therefore that in His 11. Rethought sin is death, or rather it is demption the positive course of transgression which makes toward death (Jn 5 24). But man is to cease to do evil and to learn to do well. He is to face about and walk in a different direction; he is to be born from above (Jn 3 3), and surrender himself to the forces which beat upon him from above rather than to those which surge upon him from below (Rom 12 2). From the reahzation of the positiveness both of sin and of righteousness, we see the need of a positive force which is to bring men from sin to righteousness (Jn 3 3-8). Of course, in what we have said of the positive nature of sin we would not deny that there are multitudes of men whose evil consists in their passive acquiescence in a low moral state. Multitudes of men may not be lost, in the sense that they are breaking the more obvious of the commandments. They are lost, in the sense that they are drifting about, or that they are existing in a condition of inertness with no great interest in high spiritual ideals. But the problem even here is to find a force strong enough and positive enough to bring such persons to themselves and to God. In any case the Scriptures lay stress upon the seriousness of the problem constituted by sin. The Bible is centered on redemption. Redemption from sin is thought
which, if accepted by sinful men, will heal and re-
store them.
It is with thLs seriousness of sin before us that we must think ef forgiveness from sin. We can understand very readily that sin can be for-
13. Repentgiven only on condition that men seek ance forgiveness in the name of the highest manifestation of holiness which they have known. For those who have heard the preaching of the cross and have seen something of the real meaning of that preaching, the way to forgiveness is in the name of the cross. In the name of a holiness which men would make their own, if they could; in the name of an ideal of holy love which men of themselves cannot reach, but which they forever strive after, they seek forgiveness. But the forgiveness is to be taken seriously. In both the OT and NT repentance is not merely a changed attitude of mind. It is an attitude which shows its sincerity by willingness to do everything possible to undo the evil which the sinner has wrought (Lk 19 8). If there is any consequence of the sinner's own sin which the sinner can himself make right, the sinner must in himself genuinely repent and make that consequence right. In one sense repentance is not altogether something done once for all. The seductiveness of sin is so great that there is need of humble and continuous watching. While anything like a morbid introspection is unscriptural, constant alertness to keep to the straight and narrow path is everywhere enjoined as an obUgation (Gal 6 1). There is nothing in the Scriptures which will warrant the idea that forgiveness is to be conceived
of in such fashion as would teach that 14. Forthe consequences of sin can be easily giveness and quickly eliminated. Change in the attitude of a sinner necessarily means change in the attitude of God. The sinner and God, however, are persons, and the Scriptures always speak of the problem of sin after a completely personal fashion. The changed attitude affects the personal standing of the sinner in the sight of God. But God is the person who creates and carries on a moral universe. In carrying on that universe He must keep moral considerations in their proper place as the constitutional principles of the universe. While the father welcomes back the prodigal to the restored personal relations with himself, he cannot, in the full sense, blot out the fact that the prodigal has been a prodigal. The personal forgiveness may be complete, but the elimination of the consequences of the evil life is possible only through the long lines of healing set at work. The man who has sinned against his body can find restoration from the consequences of the sin only in the forces which make for bodily healing. So also with the mind and will. The mind which has thought evil must be cured of its tendency to think evil. To be sure the curative processes may come almost instantly through the upheaval of a great experience, but on the other hand, the curative processes may have to work through long years
of as carrying with it redemption from all other calamities. If the kingdom of God and of His righteousness can be seized, all other things will follow with the seizure (Mt 6 33). The work of Christ is set before us as chiefly a work of redemp-
tion from sin. A keen student once observed that almost aU failures to take an adequate view of the person of Christ can be traced to a failure to realize adequately the seriousness of sin. The problem
of changing the course of something so positive as a
life set toward sin is a problem which may well tax the resources of the Almighty. Lives cannot be transformed merely by precept. The only effective
force is the force of a Divine life which will reach and save human lives (see Redemption).
_ We are thus in a position to see something of the
positiveness of the life that must be in Christ if He is to be a Saviour from sin. That
12. Life in positiveness must be powerful enough
Christ to make men feel that in some real
sense God Himself has come to their
rescue (Rom 8 32-39). For the problem of sal-
vation from sin is manifold. Sm long persisted m
begets evil habits, and the habits must be broken.
Sin lays the conscience under a load of distress, for
which the only rehef is a sense of forgiveness. Sm
(see Sanctification). The will which has been given to sin may feel the stirrings of sin after the
blights and paralyzes the faculties to such a degree
that only the mightiest of tonic forces can bring
life of forgiveness has begun. All this is a manifestation, not only of the power of sin, but of the constitutional morality of the universe. Forgiveness must not be interpreted in such terms as to make the transgression of the Law of God in any sense a light or trivial offence. But, on the other hand, we must not set limits to the curative powers
back health and strength. And the problem is
often more serious than this. The presence of evi
in the world is so serious in the sight of a Holy God
that He Himself, because of His very hohness, must
be under stupendous obligation to aid us to the
utmost for the redemption of men. Out of the
thought of the disturbance which sin makes even
of the cross of God. With the removal of the power which makes for evil the possibility of development
in the heart of God, we see something of the
reason for the doctrine that in the -cross of Christ God was discharging a debt to Himself and to
in real human experience is before the life (see Forgiveness). The word of the Master is that He "came that they may have life, and may have it
the whole world; for the insistence also that m
the cross there is opened up a fountain of life,
Sin Sinai THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2802
In Acts 7 38 AV, RV "Sinai"
SINA, si'na:
abundantly" (Jn 10 10). Sin is serious, because
it thwarts life. Sin is given so large a place in the thought of the Bib. writers simply because it blocks the channel of that movement toward the fullest
(q.v.).
SINAI, si'ni, si'nft-i C'T'O , sinay; A, 2i.vd, Sirid,
life which the Scriptures teach is the aim of God in
B, 2ei.va, Seind) : The name comes probably from a root meaning "to shine," which occurs
placing men in the world. God is conceived of as the Father in Heaven. Sin has a deeply disturbing
1. The in Syr, and which in Bab is found in Name the name sinu for "the moon." The old explanation, "clayey," is inappro-
effect in restraining the relations between the Father and the sons and of preventing the proper development of the life of the sons. See further, Ethics, I, 3, (2); Ethics of Jesus, I, 2; Guilt; JoHANNiNE Theology, V, 1; Paul the Apostle; Pauline Theology; Redemption, etc.
priate to any place in the Sinaitic desert, though
it might apply to Sin (Ezk 30 15.16) or Pelusium; even there, however, the apphcability is doubtful. The desert of Sin (Ex 16 1; 17 1; Nu 33 11 f) lay between Sinai and the GuLf of Suez, and may have been named from the "glare" of its white chalk. But at Sinai "the glory of Jeh was
LiTERATTTRE.—Tennant, Origin and Propagation of Sin; Hyde, .Sin and Its Forgiveness; chapter On "Incarnation and Atonement" in Bowne's Studies in Christianity; Stevens Christian Doctrine of Salvation; Clarke, Chris-
tian Doctrine of God; various treatises on Systematic Theology. , , , ^ Francis J. McConnell SIN, sin (T'P, sin, "day or mud";
^vl]v<], Sutne, A, Tdvis, Tdnis): A city
of Egypt mentioned only in Ezk 30 15.16. This seems to be a pure Sem name. The
ancient Egyp name, if the place ever had one such, is unknown. Pelusium (Gr
IlcXoi/ffioi', Pelousion) also meant "the
clayey or muddy town." The Pelusiac mouth of the Nile was "the muddy mouth," and the modern Arab, name of
this mouth has the same significance. These facts make it practically certain
that the Vulg is correct in identifying S. with Pelusium. But although Pelusium appears very frequently in ancient history,
its exact location is still not entirely
certain. The Ust of cities mentioned in Ezk in connection with S. furnishes no
clue to its location. From other histori-
cal notices it seems to have been a frontier
city. Rameses II built a wall from S. to Hehopolis, probably by the aid of Heb
slaves (Diodorus Siculus; cf Budge, Hist
oj Egypt, V, 90), to protect the eastern
frontier. S. was a meeting-place of Egypt with her enemies who came to attack her, many great battles being fought at or near this place. Sennacherib and Cambyses both fought Egypt near Pelusium
(Herod, ii. 141; iii. 10-13). Antiochus IV defeated the Egyptians here (Budge, VIII,
THE ADJACENT VALLEYS
25), and the Romans under Gabinius defeated the Egyptians in the same neighborhood. Pelusium was also accessible from the sea, or was very near a seaport, for Pompey after the disaster at PharsaUa fled into Egypt, sailing for Pelusium. These historical
bke devouring fire on the top of the mount in the eyes of the children of Israel" (Ex 24 17); and, indeed, the glory of the Lord still dyes the crags of JebelMusa (the "mountain of Moses") with fiery red, reflected from its red granite and pink gneiss rocks, long after the shadows have fallen on the plain beneath. Sinai is mentioned, as a desert and a mountain, in 35 passages of the OT. In 17 passages the same desert and mountain are called "Horeb," or "the waste." This term is chiefly used in Dt, though Sinai also occurs (Dt 33 2). In the other books of the Pent, Sinai is the usual name, though Horeb also occurs (Ex 3 1; 17 6; 33 6), applying both to the "Mount of God" and to the desert of Rephidim, some 20 miles to the N.W.
notices of Pelusium make its usual identification with the ruins near el-Kantara, a station on the Suez Canal 29 miles S. of Port Said, most prob-
able. "S., the stronghold of Egypt," in the words of Ezk (30 15), would thus refer to its inaccessibiUty because of swamps which served as impassable moats. The wall on the S. and the sea on the N.
also protected it on either flank. M. G. Kyle
SIN AGAINST THE HOLY GHOST (SPIRIT). See Blasphemy.
SIN, MAN OF. See Man op Sin.
The indications of position, in various passages of the Pent, favor the identification with the tradi-
SIN MONEY. See Sacrifice in the OT.
tional site, which has become generally
2. Tradiaccepted by all those explorers who tional Site have carefully considered the subject, though two other theories may need notice. Moses fled to the land of Midian (or "empty land"), which lay E. of the Sinaitic peninsula
SIN OFFERING. See Sacrifice.
SIN, WILDERNESS OF. See Wanderings op Israel.
2803 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Sin Sinai
(Nu 22 4.7; 25, 31), and when he wandered with his flocks to Horeb (Ex 3 1) he is said to have reached the west side of the desert. In another note (Dt 1 2) we read that the distance was eleven days' journey from Horeb by the way of Mount Seir unto Kadesh-barnea" or Petra (see Wanderings of Israel), the distance being about 145 miles, or 14 miles of daily march, though Israel— with its flocks, women and children—made 16 marches between these points. Sinai again is described as being distant from Egypt "three days' journey into the wilderness" (Ex 5 3), the actual route being 117 miles, which Israel accomplished m 10 journeys. But, for Arabs not encumbered with families and herds, this distance could still
Jehcl Kdtarin (so named from a legend of St. Catherine of Egypt), rising 8,550 ft. above the sea. N.E. of this is Jebel Mum (7,370 ft.), which, though less high, is more conspicuous because of the open plain called er Rdhah ("the wide") to its N.W. This plain is about 4 miles long and has a width of over a mile, so that it forms, as Dr. E. Robinson {Bib. Res., 1838, 1, 89) seemstohavebeen thefir.st tonote, a natural camp at the foot of the mountain, large enough for the probable numbers (see Exodds, 3) of Israel.
Jebel MiXsa has two main tops, that to the S.E. being crowned by a chapel. The other, divided by gorges into three precipitous crags, has the Convent to its N., and is called Rds-es-Saj^dfeh, or "the
R^ s-es-f^afadfeh.
be covered by an average march of 39 miles daily, on riding camels, or even, if necessary, on foot. These distances will not, however, allow of our placing Sinai farther E. than Jebel M-dsa. Lofty mountains, in all parts of the world,
willow top." N. of the Convent is the lower top of Jebel ed Deir ("mountain of the monastery"). These heights were accurately deter4. Descripmined by Royal Engineer surveyors in tion of ^ 1868 (Sir C. Wilson, Ordnance Survey Jebel Musa of Sinai) ; and, though it is impossible to say which of the peaks Moses ascended, yet they are all much higher than any mountains in the Sinaitic desert, or in Midian. The highest tops in the Tih desert to the N. are not much over 4,000 ft. Tho.se in Midian, E. of Elath, rise only to 4,200 ft. Even Jebel Serbdl, 20 miles W. of Sinai—a ridge with many crags, running 3 miles in length—is at its highest only 6,730 ft. above the sea. Horeb is not recorded to have been visited by any of the Hebrews after Moses, excepting by Elijah (1 K 19 8) in a time of storm. In favor of the traditional site it may also be observed that clouds suddenly formed, or lasting for days (Ex 24 15 f), are apt to cap very lofty mountains. The Hebrews reached Sinai about the end of May (Ex 19 1)
3. Identifihave always been sacred and recation with garded as the mysterious abode of Jebel Musa God; and Jos says that Sinai is "the highest of all the mountains thereabout," and again is "the highest of all the moun-
tains that are m that country, and is not only very
difficult to be ascended by men, on account of its vast altitude, but because of the sharpness of its
precipices: nay, indeed, it cannot be looked at without pain of the eyes, and besides this it was
terrible and inaccessible, on account of the rumor that passed about, that God dwelt there" {Ant, II,
xii, 1; III, V, 1). Evidently in his time Sinai was supposed to be one of the peaks of the great granitic block called et TAr—a term applying to any lofi;y mountain. This block has its highest peak in
Sinai Sinlessness THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA 2804
neighborhood of Jebel Misa would. I think, bear comparison with many mountain districts in Scotland with regard to its supply of water. There is also no other district in the Peninsula which affords such excellent pastinage,"
and, on the 3d day, "there were thunders and hghtnings, and a thick cloud upon the mount" (ver
16). Such storrns occur as a rule in the Sinaitic desert only in December and January, but thunderstorms are not unknown in Pal even in May.
This is important, as Israel encamped near Sinai from the end of May till April of the next year. There is also a well on the lower slope of Jebel MiXsa
A constant tradition fixing the site is traceable back to the 4th cent. AD. Eusebius and Jerome {Onom, s.v. "Choreb") place Horeb
itself, where the ascent begins.
5. Patristic near Paran, which in their time was Evidence placed {Onom, s.v. "Raphidim") in Wady Feirdn. Anchorites Uved at Paran, and at Sinai at least as early as 365 AD, and
Another theory, put forward by Mr. Balier Greene (The Heb Migration from Egypt), though accepted by Dr. Sayce {Higlier Cricitism. 1894. 268), 7 OrppTip'Q appears like^vise to be entirely untenable. I. vjiccuc s j^^ Greene supposed Elim (Ex 15 27) to llieory be Elath (Dt 2 8), now ' Ailah at the head of the Gulf of
' AkAbah; and that Sinai therefore was some tinknown mountain in Midian. But in this case Israel would in 4 days (see Ex 15 22.23.27) have traveled a distance of 200 miles to reach E lim
, which cannot but be regarded as quite impossil3le for the Hebrews when accompanied by women, children, floclis and herds.
C, R. CONDEB SINCERE, sin-ser', SINCERITY, sin-ser'i-ti
(D"'T2ri , tdmitn; d<t>9ap<rta, aphtharsia, elXiKpCvtia,
eilikrlneia) : "Sincerity" occurs once in the OT as the tr of (Smim, "complete," "entire," "sincere, " etc (Josh 24 14); the same word is tr'* "sincerity" (Jgs 9 16.19, RV "iiprightly"). Four different words are rendered "sincere," "sincerely," "sincerity," in the NT: ddolos, "without guile," "unadulterated," "desire the sincere milk of the word" (1 Pet 2 2AV, RV "the spiritual," ARVm "Gr, 'belonging to the reason'; cf Rom 12 1," ERVm "reasonable"), "milk which is without guile," with no other purpose but to nourish and benefit the soul (Alford); hagnos, "without blame, " "pure, " "preach Christ .... not sincerely" (Phil 117); aphtharsia, "without corruption" (Eph 6 24, AV "that love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity," ARV "with a love incorruptible," m " 'in incorruption.' See Rom 2 7," ERV " uncorruptness" ; Tit 2 7, AV "shewing uncorruptness .... sincerity," RV "uncorruptness"); ^re^stos, "not spurious" (2 Cor 8 8); eilikrines, lit,, judged of in the sunhght, hence, "clear," "manifest" (Phil 1 10) ; eilikrineia, with same meaning, is tr*' "sincerity"
Convent Garden, Sinai.
are noticed in 373 AD, and often later (Robinson, Bib. Res., 1838, I, 122-28); the monastery was
first built for them by Justinian in 527 AD and his chapel still exists. Cosmas (Topogr. Christ.), in the same reign, says that Rephidim was then called Pharan, and (distinguishing Horeb from Sinai, as Eusebius also does) he places it "about 6 miles from Pharan," and "near Sinai." These various considerations may suffice to show that the tradition as to Horeb is at least as old as the time of Jos, and that it agrees with all the indications given in the OT.
(1 Cor 5 8; 2 Cor 1 12: 2 17), RV has "sincere" for ''pure" (2 Pet 3 1), "sincerely" for "clearly" (Job 33 3), In Wisd 7 25 we have eilikrines in the description of Wisdom as a "pure influence," RV "clear effluence." W. L. Walker
SINEW, sin'u (T'H, gidh [Job 10 11, etc]): The tendons and sinews of the body are uniformly
(7 t) thus called. "Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sinew of the hip which is upon the hollow of the thigh, unto this day: because he touched the hollow of Jacob's thigh in the sinew of the hip" (Gen 32 32). In the poetical description of Behemoth (hippopotamus) it is said: "He moveth his tail hke a cedar: the sinews of his thighs are knit together" (Job 40 17). The prophet Ezekiel saw in his vision (37 6.8) that the dry bones were gathered together, that they were covered with sinews, flesh and skin, and that they were revived by the spirit of the Lord, In figurative language the neck of the obstinate is compared to an "iron sinew"
Lepsius, it is true (Letters from Egypt, 1842-44), denying the existence of any unbroken tradition, and relying on his understanding of
6. Lepsius' Cosmas, supposed Sinai to be the Jebel Theory Serbdl above mentioned, which lies immediately S. of Wddy Feirdn. His main argument was that, visiting Sinai in March, he considered that the vicinity did not present sufficient water for Israel (Appendix B, 303-18). But, on this point, it is sufficient to give the opinion of the late Rev. F. W. Holland, based on the experience of four visits, in 1861, 1865, 1867-68.
He says (Recovery of Jerus, 524)
(Isa 48 4). AV "my sinews take no rest" (w'^or'kay
"With regard to water-supply there is no other spot In the whole Peninsula which is nearly so well supplied as the neighborhood of Jebel M-Hsa. Four streams of running water are found there: one in IFddi/ Leja: a second in Wdd^ et Tl'ah which waters a succession of gardens extending more than .3 miles in length, and forms pools in whicii I have often had a swim; a third stream rises to the N. of the watershed of the plain of er Rdhah and runs W. into Wddy et Tl'ah; and a fourth is formed by the drainage from the mountains of Urmn ' Alawy. to the E. of W&dfj Sebaitjefi and finds itsway into that valley by a narrow ravine opposite Jebel ed Deir. In addition to tliese streams there are numerous wells and springs, alfording excellent water throughout the whole of the granitic district, I have seldom found it necessary to carry water when maldng a mountain excursion, and the intermediate
lo' yishkabhun, Job 30 17) has been corrected by RV into "the pains that gnaw me take no rest," but the earlier version has been retained in the margin. H, L. E. Luerinq
SINGERS, sing'erz, SINGING, sing'ing: Singing seems to have become a regular profession at a quite early date among the Hebrews. David had his troupe of "singing men and singing women" at Jerus (2 S 19 35), and no doubt Solomon added to their numbers. Isa 23 16 suggests that it was not uncommon for foreign female minstrels of question-
2805 THE INTERNATIONAL STANDARD BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA Sinai Sinlessness
SINIM, si'nim, sin'im, LAND OF (n^rP fl^? ,
able character to be heard making "sweet melody," singing songs along the streets and highways of Judaea. Nor was the worship of the temple left to the usually incompetent and inconstant leadership of amateur choristers. The elaborate regulations drawn up for the constitution of the temple orchestra and chorus are referred to under Music
'ereg ijlnlm; -yf) Ilepo-oiv, gi Person) : The name occurs in Isaiah's prophecy of the return of the people from distant lands: "Lo, these shall come from
far; and, lo, these from the north and from the west; and these from the land of Sinim" (49 12). The land is clearly far off, and it must be sought either
in the S. or in the E. LXX points to an eastern country. Many scholars have favored identifica-
(q.v.). It has been inferred from Ezr 2 65 that women were included among the temple singers, but this is erroneous, as the musicians there mentioned were of the class employed at banquets, festivals, etc. The temple choir consisted exclusively of Levites, one essential qualification of an active member of that order being a good voice.
tion with China, the classical Sinae. It seems improbable that Jews had already found their way to China; but from very early times trade
relations were established with the Far East by way of Arabia and the Pers Gulf; and the name may have been used by the prophet simply as suggesting extreme remoteness. Against this view are Dillmann (Comm. on Isa), Duhm, Cheyne and
Of the vocal method of the Hebrews we know nothing. WeUhausen imagines that he can detect one of the singers, in the portrayal of an Assyr band, compressing his throat in order to produce a vibrato; and it is quite possible that in other respects as well as thi.s ancient and modem oriental vocahzation resembled each other. But that is about all that can be said.
others. Some have suggested places in the S.:
e.g. Sin (Pelusium, Ezk 30 15) and Syene (Cheyne, Intro to Isa, 275). But these seem to be too near. In harmony with his reconstruction of Bib. history, Cheyne finally concludes that the reference here is to the return from a captivity in North Arabia {EB,