mi'-a-min.
mib'-har (mibhchar, "choice"(?)): According to 1 Ch 11:38, the name of one of David's heroes. No such name, however, occurs in the parallel passage (2 Sam 23:36). A comparison of the two records makes it probable that mibhchar is a corruption of mitstsbhah = "from Zobah," which completes the designation of the former name, Nathan of Zobah. The concluding words of the verse, Ben-Hagri = "the son of Hagri," will then appear as a misreading of Bani ha-gadhi = "Bani, the Gadite," thus bringing the two records into accord.
mib'-sam (mibhsam, "perfume"(?)):
(1) A son of Ishmael (Gen 25:13; 1 Ch 1:29).
(2) A Simeonite (1 Ch 4:25).
mib'-zar (mibhtsar, "a fortress"): An Edomite chief, the King James Version "duke" (Gen 36:42; 1 Ch 1:53). According to Eusebius, Mibzar is connected with Mibsara, a considerable village subject to Petra and still existing in his time. Compare Holzinger and Skinner in respective commentaries on Genesis.
mi'-ka (mikha'): A variant of the name Micah, and probably like it a contracted form of MICAIAH (which see). In the King James Version it is sometimes spelled "Micha."
(1) A son of Merib-baal or Mephibosheth (2 Sam 9:12, the King James Version "Micha"). In 1 Ch 8:34, he is called "Micah."
(2) The son of Zichri (1 Ch 9:15). In Neh 11:17 (the King James Version "Micha"), he is designated "the son of Zabdi," and in Neh 12:35, his name appears as "Micaiah (the King James Version "Michaiah"), the son of Zaccur."
(3) One of the signatories of the Covenant (Neh 10:11, the King James Version "Micha").
John A. Less
mi'-ka (mikhah, contracted from mikhayahu, "who is like Yah?"; Codex Vaticanus, Meichaias; Codex Alexandrinus, Micha; sometimes in the King James Version spelled Michah):
(1) The chief character of an episode given as an appendix to the Book of Judges (Jdg 17; 18). Micah, a dweller in Mt. Ephraim, was the founder and owner of a small private sanctuary with accessories for worship (17:1-5), for which he hired as priest a Judean Levite (17:7-13). Five men sent in quest of new territory by the Danites, who had failed to secure a settlement upon their own tribal allotment, visited Micah's shrine, and obtained from his priest an oracle favoring their quest (Jdg 18:1-6). They then went on until they reached the town of Laish in the extreme North, and deeming it suitable for the purpose, they returned to report to their fellow-tribesmen. These at once dispatched thither 600 armed men, accompanied by their families (Jdg 18:7-12). Passing Micah's abode, they appropriated his idols and his priest, and when their owner pursued, he was insulted and threatened (Jdg 18:13-26). They took Laish, destroyed it with its inhabitants and rebuilt it under the name of Dan. There they established the stolen images, and appointed Micah's Levite, Jonathan, a grandson of Moses (the King James Version "Manasseh"), priest of the new sanctuary, which was long famous in Israel (Jdg 18:27-31).
The purpose of the narrative is evidently to set forth the origin of the Danite shrine and priesthood. A few peculiarities in the story have led some critics--e.g., Moore, "Judges," in ICC and "Judges" in SBOT; Budde, Richter--to regard it as composite. Wellhausen, however, considers that the peculiarities are editorial and have been introduced for the purpose of smoothing or explaining the ancient record. Most authorities are agreed that the story is nearly contemporary with the events which it narrates, and that it is of the highest value for the study of the history of Israelite worship.
See also JUDGES ;DAN ;PRIESTHOOD .
(2) A Reubenite, whose descendant Beerah was carried into exile by Tiglath-pileser (1 Ch 5:5).
(3) A son of Merib-baal (1 Ch 8:34 f; 9:40 f).
See MICA , (1).
(4) A Kohathite Levite (1 Ch 23:20; 24:24 f).
(5) The father of Abdon, one of Josiah's messengers to the prophetess Huldah (2 Ch 34:20). In the parallel passage (2 Ki 22:12), the reading is "Achbor the son of Micaiah," the King James Version "Michaiah."
(6) A Simeonite mentioned in the Book of Judith (Judith 6:15).
(7) The prophet, called, in Jer 26:18 (Hebrew), "Micaiah the Morashtite." See special article.
(8) The son of Imlah.
See MICAIAH , (7).
John A. Less
(mikhah; Meichaias; an abbreviation for Micaiah (Jer 26:18), and this again of the longer form of the word in 2 Ch 17:7; compare 1 Ki 22:8):
The name signifies "who is like Yah?"; compare Michael, equal to "who is like El?" (i.e. God). As this name occurs not infrequently, he is called the "Morashtite," i.e. born in Moresheth. He calls his native city, in Mic 1:14, Moresheth-gath, because it was situated near the Philistine city of Gath. According to Jerome and Eusebius, this place was situated not far eastward from Eleutheropolis. The prophet is not to be confounded with Micah ben Imla, in 1 Ki 22:8, an older prophet of the Northern Kingdom.
According to Jer 26:18, Micah lived and prophesied in the reign of Hezekiah; according to Mic 1:1, he labored also under Jotham and Ahaz. This superscription has, it must be said, great similarity to Isa 1:1 and is probably of a later date. Yet the contents of his first discourse confirm the fact that he prophesied, not only before the destruction of Samaria, but also before the reformation of Hezekiah (compare Mic 1:5). Accordingly, Micah 1 is probably a discourse spoken already under Ahaz, and Micah 2 through 5 under Hezekiah. No mention is any longer made of Samaria in chapters 2 to 5. This city has already been destroyed; at any rate, is being besieged. Accordingly, these discourses were pronounced after the year 722 BC, but earlier than 701 BC, as the reformation of Hezekiah had not yet been entirely completed. It is impossible to date exactly these discourses, for this reason, that all the separate sentences and addresses were afterward united into one well-edited collection, probably by Micah himself. The attacks that have been made by different critics on the authenticity of Micah 4 and 5 have but a poor foundation. It is a more difficult task to explain the dismal picture of the conditions of affairs as described in Micah 6 and 7 as originating in the reign of Hezekiah. For this reason, scholars have thought of ascribing them to the reigns of Jotham and Ahaz. But better reasons speak for placing them in the degenerate reign of Manasseh. There is no reason for claiming that Micah no longer prophesied in the times of this king. It is true that a number of critics declare that Micah did not write these chapters, especially the so-called psalm in 7:7-20, which, it is claimed, clearly presupposes the destruction of Jerusalem (7:11)! But it is a fact that Micah did really and distinctly predict this destruction and the exile that followed this event in 3:12; and accordingly he could in this concluding hymn very easily have looked even beyond this period.
Micah is, then, a younger contemporary of Isaiah, and, like the latter, he prophesied in Judah, perhaps also in Jerusalem. To the writings of this great prophet his book bears a close resemblance both in form and in contents, although he did not, as was the case with Isaiah, come into personal contact with the kings and make his influence felt in political affairs.
The statement in Mic 4:1 ff is found almost literally in Isa 2:2 ff. Opinions differ as to who is to be credited with the original, Isaiah or Micah. In the latter, the passage seems to suit better into the connection, while in Isa 2 it begins the discourse abruptly, as though the prophet had taken it from some other source. However, Mic 4:4 f is certainly a sentence added by Micah, who, accordingly, was not the first to formulate the prophecy itself. It is possible that both prophets took it from some older prophet. But it is also conceivable that Isaiah is the author. In this case, he placed this sentence at the head of his briefer utterances when he composed his larger group of addresses in Micah 2--4, for the purpose of expressing the high purposes which God has in mind in His judgments.
4. Contents of the Prophecies:
Micah combats in his discourses, as does Isaiah, the heathenish abuses which had found their way into the cult, not only in Samaria, but also in Judah and Jerusalem, and which the reformation of Hezekiah could counteract only in part and not at all permanently (compare Mic 1:5-7; 5:11-13; 6:7,16). Further, he rebukes them for the social injustice, of which particularly the powerful and the great in the land were guilty (Mic 2:1 ff; 3:2 f.10 f); and the dishonesty and unfaithfulness in business and in conduct in general (compare Mic 6:10 ff; 7:2 ff). At all times Micah, in doing this, was compelled to defend himself against false prophets, who slighted these charges as of little importance, and threatened and antagonized the prophet in his announcements of impending evil (compare 2:5 ff,11 ff). In pronounced opposition to these babblers and their predictions of good things, Micah announces the judgment through the enemies that are approaching, and he even goes beyond Isaiah in the open declaration that Jerusalem and the temple are to be destroyed (Mic 3:12; 4:10; 5:1). The first-mentioned passage is also confirmed by the event reported in Jer 26:17 ff. The passage Mic 4:10, where in a surprising way Babylon is mentioned as the place of the exile, is for this reason regarded as unauthentic by the critics, but not justly. Micah predicts also the deliverance from Babylon and the reestablishment of Israel in Jerusalem, and declares that this is to take place through a King who shall come forth from the deepest humiliation of the house of David and shall be born in Bethlehem, and who, like David, originally a simple shepherd boy, shall later become the shepherd of the people, and shall make his people happy in peace and prosperity. Against this King the last great onslaught of the Gentiles will avail nothing (4:11-13; 5:4 ff). As a matter of course, he will purify the country of all heathen abuses (5:9 ff). In the description of this ruler, Micah again agrees with Isaiah, but without taking the details from that prophet.
The form of the prophecies of Micah, notwithstanding their close connection with those of his great contemporary, has nevertheless its unique features. There is a pronounced formal similarity between Mic 1:10 ff and Isa 10:28 ff. Still more than is the case in Isaiah, Micah makes use of the names of certain places. Witty references, which we can understand only in part, are not lacking in this connection; e.g. Lachish, the "city of horses," is made the object of a play on words. (Recently in the ruins of this city a large wall has been unearthed.) The style of Micah is vigorous and vivid. He loved antitheses. It is a peculiarity of his style that he indulges in dramatic interruptions and answers; e.g. 2:5,12; 3:1; 6:6-8; 7:14 f. He also loves historical references; as e.g. 1:13,15; 5:5; 6:4 f,6,16; 7:20. He makes frequent use of the image of the shepherd, 2:12; 3:2 f; 4:6; 5:3 ff; 7:14. The fact that these peculiarities appear in all parts of his little book is an argument in favor of its being from one author. He is superior to Isaiah in his tendency to idyllic details, and especially in a deeper personal sympathy, which generally finds expression in an elegiac strain. His lyrical style readily takes the form of a prayer or of a psalm (compare Mic 7).
LITERATURE.
C. P. Caspari; Ueber Micha den Morasthiten, 1851; T.K. Cheyne, Micah with Notes and Introduction, 1882; V. Ryssel, Untersuchungen uber Textoeatalt und Echtheit des Buches Micha, 1887. See the commentaries on the 12 minor prophets by Hitzig, Ewald, C. F. Keil, P. Kleinert, W. Nowack, C. v. Orelli, K. Marti; Paul Haupt, The Book of Micah, 1910; Pusey, The Minor Prophets, 1860.
C. von Orelli
mi-ka'-ya, mi-ki'-a (mikhayahu, "who is like Yah?"; Meichaias): A frequently occurring Old Testament name occasionally contracted to MICA or MICAH (which see). In the King James Version it is usually spelled "Michaiah."
(1) The mother of Abijah (2 Ch 13:2, the King James Version "Michaiah"). The parallel passage (1 Ki 15:2; compare 2 Ch 11:20) indicates that Michaiah here is a corruption of MAACAH (which see) (so the Septuagint).
(2) The father of Achbor (2 Ki 22:12, the King James Version "Michaiah").
See MICAH , (5).
(3) A prince of Judah sent by Jehoshaphat to teach in the cities of Judah (2 Ch 17:7, the King James Version "Michaiah").
(4) The son of Zaccur, a priestly processionist at the derivation of the wall (Neh 12:35, the King James Version, "Michaiah").
(5) A priestly processionist at the dedication of the wall (Neh 12:41; wanting in the Septuagint (Septuagint)).
(6) The canonical prophet.
See MICAH , (7), and special article.
(7) The son of Imlah, the chief character of an important episode near the end of the reign of Ahab (1 Ki 22:4-28 parallel 2 Ch 18:3-27). In the Hebrew, his name appears once in the contracted form "Micah" (2 Ch 18:14). Ahab had suggested to his victor, Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, that they should undertake a joint campaign against Ramoth-gilead. Jehoshaphat politely acquiesced, but asked that the mind of Yahweh should first be ascertained. Ahab forthwith summoned the official prophets to the number of 400, into the royal presence. Obsequious to their master, they, both by oracular utterance and by the symbolic action of their leader, Zedekiah, the son of Chenaanah, gave the king a favorable answer. Their ready chorus of assent seems to have made Jehoshaphat suspicious, for he pleaded that further guidance be sought. Micaiah, for whom Ahab, then, with evident reluctance, sent, at first simply repeated the favorable response of the 400; but adjured by the king to speak the whole truth, he dropped his ironical tone, and in sad earnest described a vision of disaster. Ahab endeavored to lessen the effect of this oracle by pettishly complaining that Micaiah was always to him a prophet of evil. The latter thereupon related an impressive vision of the heavenly court, whence he had seen a lying spirit dispatched by Yahweh to the prophets in order to bring about Ahab's delusion and downfall. In answer to a rude challenge from Zedekiah, who acted as spokesman for the 400, Micaiah confidently appealed to the issue for proof of the truth of his prediction, and was promptly commuted to prison by the king.
The narrative is exceedingly vivid and of the utmost interest to students of Issraelite prophecy. Several of its details have given rise to discussion, and the questions: How far were the prophet's visions objective? How far did he admit the inspiration of his opponents? Is the Divine action described consistent with the holy character of Yahweh? have occasioned difficulty to many. But their difficulty arises largely either because of their Christian viewpoint, or because of their hard and mechanical theory of prophetic inspiration. Micaiah's position was a delicate one. Foreboding or foreseeing disaster, he did his best to avert it. This he could do only by weaning the king from the influence of the 400 time-serving prophets. He sought to gain his end; first, by an ironical acquiescence in their favorable answer; then, by a short oracle forecasting disaster especially to Ahab; and, these means having failed, by discrediting in the most solemn manner the courtly prophets opposed to him. Thus regarded, his vision contains no admission of their equal inspiration; rather is it an emphatic declaration that these men were uttering falsehood in Yahweh's name, thereby endangering their country's safety and their king's life. Their obsequious time-service made them fit forerunners of the false prophets denounced by Jeremiah (Jer 23:9-40) and by Ezekiel (Ezek 13:1-15). The frank anthropomorphism of the vision need be no stumbling-block if allowed to drop into its proper place as the literary device of a prophet intensely conscious of his own inspiration and as whole-heartedly patriotic as those opposed to him.
The record ends very abruptly, giving no account of Micaiah's vindication when at length the course of events brought about the fulfillment of his prediction. The closing words, "Hear, ye peoples, all of you" (1 Ki 22:28 parallel 2 Ch 18:27), a quotation of Mic 1:2, are an evident interpolation by some late scribe who confused the son of Imlah with the contemporary of Isaiah.
For fuller treatment see EB ,HDB , and commentaries on Kings and Chronicles.
John A. Lees
mis.
See MOUSE .
mi'-ka, mi'-ka.
mi'-ka-el, mi'-kel (mikha'el, "who is like God?" Michael):
(1) The father of Sethur the Asherite spy (Nu 13:13).
(2) (3) Two Gadites (1 Ch 5:13,14).
(4) A name in the genealogy of Asaph (1 Ch 6:40 (Hebrew 25)).
(5) A son of Izrahiah of Issachar (1 Ch 7:3).
(6) A Benjamite (1 Ch 8:16).
(7) A Manassite who ceded to David at Ziklag (1 Ch 12:20).
(8) The father of Omri of Issachar (1 Ch 27:18).
(9) A son of King Jehoshaphat (2 Ch 21:2).
(10) The father of Zebediah, an exile who returned with Ezra (Ezr 8:8 parallel 1 Esdras 8:34).
(11) "The archangel" (Jude 1:9). Probably also the unnamed archangel of 1 Thess 4:16 is Michael. In the Old Testament he is mentioned by name only in Daniel. He is "one of the chief princes" (Dan 10:13), the "prince" of Israel (Dan 10:21), "the great prince" (Dan 12:1); perhaps also "the prince of the host" (Dan 8:11). In all these passages Michael appears as the heavenly patron and champion of Israel; as the watchful guardian of the people of God against all foes earthly or devilish. In the uncanonical apocalyptic writings, however, Jewish angelology is further developed. In them Michael frequently appears and excretes functions similar to those which are ascribed to him in Daniel. He is the first of the "four presences that stand before God"--Michael, Gabriel, Raphael and Uriel or Phanuel (En 9:1; 40:9). In other apocryphal books and even elsewhere in En, the number of archangels is given as 7 (En 20:1-7; Tobit 12:15; compare also Rev 8:2). Among the many characterizations of Michael the following may be noted: He is "the merciful and long-suffering" (En 40:9; 68:2,3), "the mediator and intercessor" (Ascension of Isaiah, Latin version 9:23; Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, Levi 5; Dan 6). It is he who opposed the Devil in a dispute concerning Moses' body (Jude 1:9). This passage, according to most modern authorities, is derived from the apocryphal Assumption of Moses (see Charles' edition, 105-10). It is Michael also who leads the angelic armies in the war in heaven against "the old serpent, he that is called the Devil and Satan" (Rev 12:7 ff). According to Charles, the supplanting of the "child" by the archangel is an indication of the Jewish origin of this part of the book.
The earlier Protestant scholars usually identified Michael with the preincarnate Christ, finding support for their view, not only in the juxtaposition of the "child" and the archangel in Rev 12, but also in the attributes ascribed to him in Daniel (for a full discussion see Hengstenberg, Offenbarung, I, 611-22, and an interesting survey in English by Dr. Douglas in Fairbairn's BD).
John A. Lees
mi'-ka.
See MICAH .
mi-ka'-ya, mi-ki'-a.
See MICAIAH .
mi'-kal (mikhal, contracted from mikha'el, "Michael" (which see); Melchol): Saul's younger daughter (1 Sam 14:49), who, falling in love with David after his victory over Goliath (1 Sam 18:20), was at last, on the payment of double the dowry asked, married to him (1 Sam 18:27). Her love was soon put to the test. When Saul in his jealousy sent for David, she was quick to discern her husband's danger, connived at his escape, and not only outwitted and delayed the messengers, but afterward also soothed her father's jealous wrath (1 Sam 19:11-17). When David was outlawed and exiled, she was married to Palti or Paltiel, the son of Laish of Gallim (1 Sam 25:44), but was, despite Palti's sorrowful protest, forcibly restored to David on his return as king (2 Sam 3:14-16). The next scene in which she figures indicates that her love had cooled and had even turned to disdain, for after David's enthusiastic joy and ecstatic dancing before the newly restored Ark of the Covenant, she received him with bitter and scornful mockery (2 Sam 6:20), and the record closes with the fact that she remained all her life childless (2 Sam 6:23; compare 2 Sam 21:8 where Michal is an obvious mistake for Merab). Michal was evidently a woman of unusual strength of mind and decision of character. She manifested her love in an age when it was almost an unheard-of thing for a woman to take the initiative in such a matter. For the sake of the man whom she loved too she braved her father's wrath and risked her own life. Even her later mockery of David affords proof of her courage, and almost suggests the inference that she had resented being treated as a chattel and thrown from one husband to another. The modern reader can scarce withhold from her, if not admiration, at least a slight tribute of sympathy.
John A. Lees
mi-ke'-as: In 2 Esdras 1:39 = the prophet Micah.
mik'-mas (mikhmac; Codex Vaticanus Machmas; Codex Alexandrinus Chammas): The form of the name "Michmash" found in Ezr 2:27; Neh 7:31. In 1 Esdras 5:21 it appears as MACALON (which see).
mik'-mash (mikhmash; Machmas): A town in the territory of Benjamin, apparently not of sufficient importance to secure mention in the list of cities given in Josh 18:21 ff. It first appears as occupied by Saul with 2,000 men, when Jonathan, advancing from Gibeah, smote the Philistine garrison in Geba (1 Sam 13:2). To avenge this injury, the Philistines came up in force and pitched in Michmash (1 Sam 13:5). Saul and Jonathan with 600 men held Geba, which had been taken from the Philistine garrison (1 Sam 13:16). It will assist in making clear the narrative if, at this point, the natural features of the place are described.
Michmash is represented by the modern Mukhmas, about 7 miles North of Jerusalem. From the main road which runs close to the watershed, a valley sloping eastward sinks swiftly into the great gorge of Wady es-Suweinit. The village of Mukhmas stands to the North of the gorge, about 4 miles East of the carriage road. The ancient path from Ai southward passes to the West of the village, goes down into the valley by a steep and difficult track, and crosses the gorge by the pass, a narrow defile, with lofty, precipitous crags on either side--the only place where a crossing is practicable. To the South of the gorge is Geba, which had been occupied by the Philistines, doubtless to command the pass. Their camp was probably pitched in a position East of Mukhmas, where the ground slopes gradually northward from the edge of the gorge. The place is described by Josephus as "upon a precipice with three peaks, ending in a small, but sharp and long extremity, while there was a rock that surrounded them like bulwarks to prevent the attack of the enemy" (Ant., VI, vi, 2). Conder confirms this description, speaking of it as "a high hill bounded by the precipices of Wady es-Suweinit on the South, rising in three flat but narrow mounds, and communicating with the hill of Mukhmas, which is much lower, by a long and narrow ridge." The Philistines purposed to guard the pass against approach from the South. On the other hand they were not eager to risk an encounter with the badly armed Israelites in a position where superior numbers would be of little advantage. It was while the armies lay thus facing each other across the gorge that Jonathan and his armor-bearer performed their intrepid feat (1 Sam 14:1 ff).
It will be noted that the Philistines brought their chariots to Michmash (1 Sam 13:5). In his ideal picture of the Assyrian advance on Jerusalem, Isaiah makes the invader lay up his baggage at Michmash so that he might go lightly through the pass (1 Sam 10:28). A company of the men of Michmash (see MICHMAS ) returned with Zerubbabel from exile (Ezr 2:27; Neh 7:31). Michmash produced excellent barley. According to the Mishna, "to bring barley to Michmash" was equivalent to our English "to carry coal to Newcastle." Michmash was the seat of government under Jonathan Maccabeus (1 Macc 9:73).
The modern village is stone-built. There are rock-cut tombs to the North. Cisterns supply the water. There are foundations of old buildings, large stones, and a vaulted cistern.
W. Ewing
mik'-me-tha (ha-mikhmethah; Codex Vaticanus Hikasmon; Codex Alexandrinus Machthoth): A place named in defining the territory of Ephraim and Manasseh (Josh 16:6; 17:7). It is said to lie "before," i.e. to the East of Shechem. In the name itself, the meaning of which is obscure, there is nothing to guide us. The presence of the article, however ("the Michmethah"), suggests that it may not be a proper name, but an appellative, applying to some feature of the landscape. Condor suggests the plain of Makhneh, which lies to the East of Nablus (Shechem), in which there may possibly be an echo of the ancient name.
mik'-ri (mikhri): A Benjamite dweller in Jerusalem (1 Ch 9:8).
mik'-tam.
See PSALMS .
mig'-ron (mighron; Magon):
(1) A place in the uttermost part of Geba--which read here instead of Gibeah--marked by a pomegranate tree, where Saul and his 600 men encamped over against the Philistines, who were in Michmash (1 Sam 14:2). Josephus describes the distress of Saul and his company as they sat on a high hill (bounos hupselos) viewing the widespread desolation wrought by the enemy. There is, however, nothing to guide us as to the exact spot. Many suppose that the text is corrupt; but no emendation suggested yields any satisfactory result. The place was certainly South of Michmash.
(2) (Codex Vaticanus Magedo; Codex Alexandrinus Mageddo): The Migron of Isa 10:28 is mentioned between Aiath (Ai) and Michmash. If the places are there named in consecutive order, this Migron must be sought to the North of Michmash. It may with some confidence be located at Makrun, a ruined site to the North of the road leading from Michmash to Ai.
There is nothing extraordinary in two places having the same name pretty close to each other. The two Beth-horons, although distinguished as upper and lower, are a case in point. So also are the two Bethsaidas. There is therefore no need to try to identify the two with one another, as some (e.g. Robertson Smith in Journal of Philology, XIII, 62 ff) have attempted to do with no success.
W. Ewing
mid'-da (machatsith ha-yom, tsohorayim; hemera mese): The Hebrew machatsith ha-yom (Neh 8:3) and the Greek hemeras meses (Acts 26:13) are strictly the middle of the day, but the Hebrew tshorayim is a dual form from tsohar, meaning "light," hence, light or brightness, i.e. the brightest part of the day (1 Ki 18:29).
See NOON .
mid'-in (middin; in GB, Ainon, "springs"): One of the six cities in the wilderness of Judah (Josh 15:61). There are not many possible sites. The Hebrew name may possibly survive in Khirbet Mird, a very conspicuous site with many ancient cisterns overlooking the plateau el Bukea`, above which it towers to a height of 1,000 ft.; it is the Mons Mardes of early Christian pilgrims; the existing remains are Byzantine. It is a site of great natural strength and was clearly once a place of some importance. The Greek reading Ainon, "place of springs," suggests the neighborhood of the extensive oasis of `Ain Feshkhah at the northwest corner of the Dead Sea where there are at Kh. Kumram remains of buildings and a rock-cut aqueduct. See PEF ,III , 210, 212, ShXVIII .
E. W. G. Masterman
See PARTITION .
mid'-i-an, mid'-i-an-its (midhyan, midhyanim; Madiam, Madienaioi):
1. The Seed of Abraham to the Time of the Judges:
Midian was a son of Abraham by his concubine Keturah. To him were born 5 sons, Ephah, Epher, Hanoch, Abida and Eldaah (Gen 25:2,4; 1 Ch 1:32 f). Bearing gifts from Abraham, he and his brothers, each with his own household, moved off from Isaac into "the east country" (Gen 25:6). The first recorded incident in the history of the tribe is a defeat suffered "in the field of Moab" at the hands of Hadad, king of Edom. Of this nothing beyond the fact is known (Gen 36:35; 1 Ch 1:46). The Midianites next appear as merchantmen traveling from Gilead to Egypt, with "spicery and balm and myrrh," with no prejudice against a turn of slave-dealing (Gen 37:25 ff). Moses, on fleeing from Egypt, found refuge in the land of Midian, and became son-in-law of Jethro, the priest of Midian (Ex 2:15,21). In Midian Moses received his commission to Israel in Egypt (Ex 4:19). A Midianite, familiar with the desert, acted as guide ("instead of eyes") to the children of Israel in their wilderness wanderings (Nu 10:29 ff). The friendly relations between Israel and Midian, which seem to have prevailed at first, had been ruptured, and we find the elders of Midian acting with those of Moab in calling Balaam to curse Israel (Nu 22:4-7). Because of the grievous sin into which they had seduced Israel on the shrewd advice of Balaam, a war of vengeance was made against the Midianites in which five of their chiefs perished; the males were ruthlessly slain, and Balaam also was put to death (Nu 25:15,17; 31:2 ff). We next hear of Midian as oppressing Israel for 7 years. Along with the Amalekites and the children of the East they swarmed across the Jordan, and their multitudinous beasts swept up the produce of the earth. Overwhelming disaster befell this horde at the onset of Gideon's chosen men. In the battle and pursuit "there fell a hundred and twenty thousand men that drew sword"; their kings, Zebah and Zalmunna, and their princes, Oreb and Zeeb, sharing the common fate (Jdg 6--8). Echoes of this glorious victory--"the day of Midian"--are heard in later literature (Ps 83:9; Isa 9:4; 10:26; Hab 3:7).
The Kenites appear to have been a branch of the Midianites. Jethro could hardly have attained the dignity of the priesthood in Midian had he been of alien blood (Jdg 1:16). See KENITES . Again, the tribesmen are named indifferently Ishmaelites and Midianites (Gen 37:25,28,36; Jdg 8:22,24). They must therefore have stood in close relations with the descendants of Hagar's son.
The representations of Midian in Scripture are consistent with what we know of the immemorial ways of Arabian tribes, now engaged in pastoral pursuits, again as carriers of merchandise, and yet again as freebooters. Such tribes often roam through wide circles. They appear not to have practiced circumcision (Ex 4:25), which is now practically universal among the Arabs. The men wore golden ornaments, as do the modern nomads (Jdg 8:24 ff).
The name of "Midian" is not found in Egyptian or Assyrian documents. Delitzsch (Wo lag das Paradies? 304) suggests that Ephah (Gen 25:4) may be identical with Chayapa of the cuneiform inscriptions. If this is correct the references point to the existence of this Midianite tribe in the North of el-Chijaz in the times of Tiglath-pileser and Sargon (745-705 BC). Isaiah speaks of Midian and Ephah apparently as separate tribes, whose dromedaries bear gold and frankincense to Zion (60:6); but he gives no hint of the districts they occupied. The tribe of Ghifar, found in the neighborhood of Medina in Mohammed's day, Knobel would identify with Epher, another of Midian's sons.
No boundaries can now be assigned to "the land of Midian." It included territory on the West as well as on the East of the Gulf of `Aqaba (Ex 4:19). It lay between Edom and Paran (1 Ki 11:18). In the time of the Judges their district seems to have extended northward to the East of Gilead (8:10).
A trace of the ancient name is found in that of Madyah, a place mentioned by the Arabic geographers, with a plentiful supply of water, now called Maghair Sho`aib. It lies East of the Gulf of `Aqaba, some miles from the coast, almost opposite the point of the Sinaitic peninsula. The name Sho`aib, given by Mohammed to Jethro, may here be due to ancient Midianite tradition.
W. Ewing
mid'-i-an-it-ish, (ha-midhyanith, "the Midianitess"): The designation given to the daughter of Zur, Cozbi, whom Zimri the son of Salu brought into the camp of Israel (Nu 25:6-18). Both were of noble parentage (Nu 25:14,15). The majority of the people strongly resented this act of profanation (Nu 25:6). A pestilence was raging in the camp, and Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, in an outburst of zeal pursued the two delinquents and slew them by a spear-thrust through their bodies (Nu 25:8). He obtained as a reward the immediate staying of the plague and the promise of perpetual priesthood to his family (Nu 25:8,13).
John A. Lees
mid'-nit (chatsoth laylah, "middle of the night" (Ex 11:4; Job 34:20; Ps 119:62), chatsi ha-laylah, "the half of the night" (Ex 12:29; Jdg 16:3; Ruth 3:8), tokh ha-laylah, "the division of the night" and hence, the middle point (1 Ki 3:20); meses nuktos (Mt 25:6), or meson tes nuktos, "the middle of the night" (Acts 27:27), mesonuktios, "midnight"; Westcott and Hort, The New Testament in Greek, mesonuktion (Acts 16:25, etc.)): In the period before the exile midnight does not seem to have been very accurately determined. The division of the night was into three watches, the middle one of which included midnight. In New Testament times the four-watch division was used where midnight must have been more or less accurately determined.
H. Porter
mid'-rash (midhrash): The Hebrew word corresponding to the King James Version "story" and the Revised Version (British and American) "commentary" in 2 Ch 13:22; 24:27. A midrash is properly a story developed for purposes of edification.
See COMMENTARY .
mid'-wif (meyalledheth): Those who in patriarchal times attended mothers at childbirth are so named in Gen 35:17; 38:28; Ex 1:15-22. Such attendants were probably then (1 Sam 4:20), as they usually are now, the older female relatives and friends of the mother. The duties which they had to perform are enumerated in Ezek 16:4: division of the cord, washing the infant in water, salting with salt and swathing in swaddling clothes. During the Egyptian bondage there were two midwives who attended the Hebrew women; from their names, they were probably Hebrews, certainly they were not Egyptians. From this passage it appears that they used a certain double-round form of birthstool called 'obhnayim, concerning which there are several rabbinical comments. It probably was like the kuru elwiladeh, or "birth-seat," still used by the Egyptian fellahin. I have not found any record of its use among the Palestinian fellahin. There is a curious passage in the Talmud (Cotah 2 b) in which it is said that the two midwives had different duties, Shiphrah being the one who dressed the infant, Puah, the one who whispered to it. One Jewish commentator on this supposes that Puah used artificial respiration by blowing into the child's mouth. The midwives must have had considerable skill, as a case like that of Tamar required some amount of operative manipulation.
The English word means originally the woman who is "with the mother" (compare "the women that stood by," in 1 Sam 4:20), but very early became applied to those who gave skilled assistance, as in Raynold's Birth of Mankind, 1565.
Alexander Macalister
mig-dal-e-der.
See EDER .
mig'-dal-el (mighdal-'el; Codex Vaticanus Megalaareim; Codex Alexandrinus Magdalieoram): The name, which means "tower of God," occurs between Iron and Horem in the list of the fenced cities of Naphtali (Josh 19:38). Eusebius, Onomasticon places it 9 miles from Dora (Tanturah), on the way to Ptolemais, which points to Athlit. But this is far from the territory of Naphtali. It is probably to be identified with either Khirbet Mejdel, 3 miles North of Qedes, or Mejdel Islim, 5 miles farther to the Northwest.
mig'-dal-gad (mighdalgadh, "tower of Gad"): One of a group of 16 cities of Judah situated in the "lowland" (Josh 15:37). Of these, only Lachish, Eglon, Beth-dagon and Naamah have been identified with any certainty. This would indicate a site in the Philistine plain, and the modern flourishing town of Mejdel, 2 1/2 miles Northeast of Ashkelon, appears to be a possible identification. It is the most important town in the district which is named after it Nahiet el-Mejdel. It must, however, be admitted that it is difficult to see how Judah could have held a site so close to the great Philistine strongholds. It is very probable that Mejdel ("tower") is the tower mentioned in Josephus, BJ, III, ii, 3, as close to Ashkelon, and it or Migdalgad (or both if they are the same sites) may be identical with the Magtal of the Tell el-Amarna Letters (Petrie, Hist. Egypt, II, 329). For Mejdel see Palestine Exploration Fund,II , 410, ShXVI .
E. W. G. Masterman
mig'-dol, mig'-dol (mighdol; Magdolon): This name ("the tower") is applied to two places on the east frontier of Egypt.
In Ex 14:2; Nu 33:7, the Hebrew camp, on the march from Etham after they had "turned" (apparently to the South), is defined as `facing Pi-hahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, over against Baal-zephon.' It is thus to be sought (see EXODUS ) West of the Bitter Lakes, and may have been a watchtower on the spur of Jebel 'Ataqah. Israel was supposed to be "entangled in the land," and shut in in the "wilderness," between this range and the Bitter Lakes, then forming the head of the Red Sea. The exact site is unknown. In about 385 AD, Silvia, traveling from Clysma (Suez), was shown the sites above mentioned on her way to Heroopolis, but none of these names now survive.
In Jer 44:1; 46:14, a Migdol is noticed with Memphis, and with Tahpanhes Septuagint "Taphnas"), this latter being supposed to be the Daphnai of Greek writers, now Tell Defeneh, West of Qantarah. The same place is probably intended in Ezek 29:10; 30:6 (compare 30:15-18), the borders of Egypt being defined as reaching "from Migdol to Syene" (see the Revised Version margin), as understood by the Septuagint translators. The Antonine Itinerary places Migdol 12 miles South of Pelusium, and the site appears to have been at or near Tell es Samut, the Egyptian name, according to Brugsch (Hist, II, 351), being Samut. This Migdol was thus apparently a "watchtower" on the main road along the coast from Palestine, which is called (Ex 13:17) "the way of the land of the Philistines," entering Egypt near Daphnai.
These Sites Not Identical.
We are specially told that this was not the route taken at the exodus, and this Migdol cannot therefore be the same as (1), though Brugsch, in consequence of a theory as to the exodus which has not been accepted by other scholars, has confused the two sites, as apparently does the Antonine Itinerary when placing Pithom on the same route leading to Zoan. Brugsch (Geography, III, 19) supposes the Egyptian town name Pa-Ma'kal (with the determinative for "wall" added) to stand for Migdol, but the prefix "Pa-" ("city") seems to show that this word is purely native, and not Semitic, to say nothing of philological objections. This town may, however, have lain in the required direction, according to a scribe's report of the time of Seti II (or about 1230 BC).
As much confusion has been created by quoting this report as illustrative of the exodus, the actual words according to Brugsch's translation may be given (History, II, 132): "I set out from the hall of the royal palace on the 9th day of Epiphi, in the evening, after the two servants. I arrived at the fortress Thuku (T-k-u) on the 10th of Epiphi. I was informed that the men had resolved to take their way toward the South. On the 12th I reached Khetam. There I was informed that grooms who had come from the neighborhood (of the "sedge city") reported that the fugitives had already passed the rampart (Anbu or "wall"), to the North of the Ma'ktal of King Seti Minepthah." As to the position of this "wall," see SHUR .
C. R. Conder
mij'-a-min (miyamin; the King James Version Miamin):
(1) One of those who had married foreign wives (Ezr 10:25). He is also called Maelus (1 Esdras 9:26).
(2) The one to whom fell the lot for the 6th priestly course (1 Ch 24:9). His family returned with Zerubbabel and Joshua (Neh 12:5).
(3) A signatory of the Covenant (Neh 10:7).
mik'-loth, mik'-loth (miqloth):
(1) A Benjamite, son of Jeiel (1 Ch 8:32; 9:37,38). A comparison of the two passages shows that the name Mikloth has been dropped at the end of 1 Ch 8:31.
(2) An officer designated "the ruler," appointed in the priestly course for the 2nd month (1 Ch 27:4).
mik-ne'-ya, mik-ni'-a (miqneydhu): A Levite doorkeeper (1 Ch 15:18).
mil-a-la'-i, mil'-a-li (milalay): A Levite musician (Neh 12:36).
mil'-ka (milkah; Melcha):
(1) Daughter of Haran, wife of Nahor, and grandmother of Rebekah (Gen 11:29; 22:20-23; 24:15,24,47).
(2) Daughter of Zelophehad (Nu 26:33; 27:1; 36:11; Josh 17:3). Many recent authorities are of opinion that Milcah is an abbreviation of Bethmilcah, and is a geographical rather than a personal name.
mil'-kom, mil'-kom.
See MOLECH .
mil'-du (yeraqon; Septuagint usually ikteros, literally, "jaundice"): In the 5 passages where it occurs it is associated with shiddaphon, "blasting" (Dt 28:22; 1 Ki 8:37; 2 Ch 6:28; Am 4:9; Hag 2:17). In Jer 30:6, the same word is translated "paleness," the yellow color of one with abdominal disease. The root-meaning is "greenish yellow"; compare the Arabic yarqan, meaning both "jaundice" and "blight." Mildrew or "rust" in grain is due to a special fungus, Puccinia graminis, whose life is divided between the barberry and cereals. Many other varieties of fungi which flourish upon other plants are also designated "mildew."
See BLASTING .
E. W. G. Masterman
mil (milion, Latin mille passus, milia passuum): A thousand paces, equal to 1,618 English yards. (Mt 5:41).
See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES .
mi-le'-tus (Miletos): A famous early Ionian Greek city on the coast of Caria, near the mouth of the Meander River, which, according to Acts 20:15--21:1, and 2 Tim 4:20 (the King James Version "Miletum"), Paul twice visited. In the earliest times it was a prominent trading post, and it is said that 75 colonies were founded by its merchants. Among them were Abydos, Cyzicus and Sinope. In 494 BC, the city was taken by the Persians; it was recovered by Alexander the Great, but after his time it rapidly declined, yet it continued to exist until long after the Christian era. In the history of early Christianity it plays but a little part. The Meander brings down a considerable amount of sediment which it has deposited at its mouth, naturally altering the coast line. The gulf into which the river flows has thus been nearly filled with the deposit. In the ancient gulf stood a little island called Lade; the island now appears as a mound in the marshy malarial plain, and Palatia, the modern village which stands on the site of Miletus, is 6 miles from the coast. Without taking into account the great changes in the coast line it would be difficult to understand Acts 20:15-21, for in the days of Paul, Ephesus could be reached from Miletus by land only by making a long detour about the head of the gulf. To go directly from one of these cities to the other, one would have been obliged to cross the gulf by boat and then continue by land. This is what Paul's messenger probably did. The direct journey may now be made by land. Miletus has been so ruined that its plan can no longer be made out. Practically the only remaining object of unusual interest is theater, the largest in Asia Minor, which was not built in a hollow of the hillside, as most ancient theaters were, but in the open field.
E. J. Banks
milk (chalabh; gala; Latin lac (2 Esdras 2:19; 8:10)): The fluid secreted by the mammary glands of female mammals for the nourishment of their young. The word is used in the Bible of that of human beings (Isa 28:9) as well as of that of the lower animals (Ex 23:19). As a food it ranked next in importance to bread (Ecclesiasticus 39:26). Palestine is frequently described as a land "flowing with milk and honey" (Ex 3:8,17; Nu 13:27; Dt 6:3; Josh 5:6; Jer 11:5; Ezek 20:6,15). Milk was among the first things set before the weary traveler (Gen 18:8). In fact, it was considered a luxury (Jdg 5:25; Song 5:1). The people used the milk of kine and also that of sheep (Dt 32:14), and especially that of goats (Prov 27:27). It was received in pails ('atinim, Job 21:24), and kept in leather bottles (no'dh, Jdg 4:19), where it turned sour quickly in the warm climate of Palestine before being poured out thickly like a melting substance (nathakh; compare Job 10:10). Cheese of various kinds was made from it (gebhinah and charitse he-chalabh, literally, "cuts of milk"); or the curds (chem'ah) were eaten with bread, and possibly also made into butter by churning (Prov 30:33). See FOOD ,II . It is possible that milk was used for seething other substances; at least the Israelites were strictly forbidden to seethe a kid in its mother's milk (Ex 23:19; 34:26; Dt 14:21), and by a very general interpretation of these passages Jews have come to abstain from the use of mixtures of meat and milk of all kinds.
Figuratively the word is used (1) of abundance (Gen 49:12); (2) of a loved one's charms (Song 4:11); (3) of blessings (Isa 55:1; Joel 3:18); (4) of the (spiritual) food of immature people (1 Cor 3:2; Heb 5:12,13); (5) of purity (1 Pet 2:2).
Nathan Isaacs
mil, mil'-ston (recheh; mulos, mulon): The two most primitive methods of grinding grain were (1) by pounding it in a mortar, and (2) by rubbing it between two stones. In Nu 11:8 both methods are mentioned as used for rendering the manna more fit for cooking. Numerous examples of both mill and mortar have been found in ancient excavations. Bliss and Macalister in their excavations at Gezer and other places have found specimens of what is called the saddle-quern or mill, which consists of two stones. The "nether" stone, always made of hard lava or basalt from the district of the Hauran, was a large heavy slab varying in length from 1 1/2 ft. to 2 3/4 ft., and in width from 10 inches to 1 1/3 ft. Its upper surface was hollowed out slightly, which made it look a little like a saddle and may have suggested the name of "riding millstone" applied by the Hebrews to the upper stone which rested on it (Jdg 9:53). The "upper stone" or "rider" was much smaller, 4 inches to 8 in. long and 2 3/4 inches to 6 inches wide, and of varying shapes. This could be seized with the two hands and rubbed back and forth over the nether stone much the same as clothes are scrubbed on a wash-board. Such a stone could be used as a weapon (Jdg 9:53; 2 Sam 11:21), or given as a pledge (Dt 24:6).
Macalister goes so far as to say that "the rotary handquern in the form used in modern Palestine and in remote European regions, such as the Hebrides, is quite unknown throughout the whole history, even down to the time of Christ" (Excavations at Gezer). The same writer, however, describes some mills belonging to the 3rd and 4th Sere periods which are much like the present rotary quern, except smaller (4 inches to 6 inches in diameter), and with no provision for a turning handle. Schumacher describes these as paint grinders. The only perforated upper millstones found in the excavations at Gezer belong to the early Arabic period.
If the above assertions are substantiated then we must alter somewhat the familiar picture of the two women at the mill (Mt 24:41), commonly illustrated by photographs of the mills still used in modern Palestine These latter consist of two stone discs each 18 inches to 20 inches in diameter, usually made of Hauran basalt. The upper one is perforated in the center to allow it to rotate on a wooden peg fixed in the nether stone, and near the circumference of the upper stone is fixed a wooden handle for turning it. The grain to be ground is fed into the central hole on the upper stone and gradually works down between the stones. As the grain is reduced to flour, it flies out from between the stones on to a cloth or skin placed underneath the mill. To make the flour fine it is reground and sifted. Larger stones 4 ft. to 5 ft. in diameter, working on the principle of the handmill, are still used for grinding sesame seed. These are turned by asses or mules. Another form of mill, which is possibly referred to in Mt 18:6; Mk 9:42; Rev 18:21,22, consisted of a conical nether stone on which "rode" a second stone like a hollowed-out capstan. The upper stone was probably turned with handspikes in much the same way as an old-fashioned ship's capstan was turned. The material to be ground was fed into the upper cone which formed the hopper and from which it was delivered to the grinding surfaces between the "rider" and the nether stone. This form of mill must have been known in late Biblical times, because many examples of the upper stone dating from the Greek-Roman period have been found. One may be seen in the museum of the Syrian Protestant College at Beirut. Another large one lies among the ruins at Petra, etc. In Mt 18:6; Mk 9:42, the mill is described as a mulos onikos, literally, a mill turned by an ass, hence, a great millstone. It is not at all unlikely that the writers have confused the meaning of onos (chamor), a term commonly applied to the upper millstone of a handmill, thinking it referred instead to the animal which turned the mill. This explanation would make Christ's words of condemnation more applicable. The upper millstone of a handmill would be more than sufficient to sink the condemned, and the punishment would be more easily carried out. A few years from now handmills will have disappeared from the Syrian households, for the more modern gristmills turned by water or other motor power are rapidly replacing them.
See CRAFTS ,II , 8.
Figuratively: (1) Of firmness and undaunted courage (Job 41:24). "The heart of hot-blooded animals is liable to sudden contractions and expansions, producing rapid alternations of sensations; not so the heart of the great saurians" (Canon Cook, at the place). (2) To "grind the face of the poor" (Isa 3:15) is cruelly to oppress and afflict them. (3) The ceasing of the sound of the millstone was a sign of desolation (Jer 25:10; Rev 18:22).
James A. Patch
MILLENNIUM, POSTMILLENNIAL VIEW
See ESCHATOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT .
MILLENNIUM, PREMILLENNIAL VIEW
mi-len'-i-um
Divergent Views--Scope of Article
The Millennium Not before the Advent
(1) Parable of the Wheat and Tares
(2) Parable of the Pounds
2. Possibility of Survival--Its Implications
5. Harmony of Christ and Apostles
LITERATURE
Divergent Views--Scope of Article:
The great majority of evangelical Christians believe that the kingdom of God shall have universal sway over the earth, and that righteousness and peace and the knowledge of the Lord shall everywhere prevail. This happy time is commonly called the Millennium, or the thousand years' reign. Divergent views are entertained as to how it is to be brought about. Many honest and faithful men hold that it will be introduced by the agencies now at work, mainly by the preaching of the gospel of Christ and the extension of the church over the world. An increasing number of men equally honest teach that the Millennium will be established by the visible advent of the Lord Jesus Christ. The aim of this brief article is to set forth some of the Scriptural grounds on which this latter view rests. No reference will be made to objections, to counter-objections and interpretations; the single point, namely, that the Millennium succeeds the second coming of Jesus Christ, that it does not precede it, will be rigidly adhered to. Those who hold this view believe that neither Christ nor His apostles taught, on fair principles of interpretation, that the Millennium must come before His advent.
The Lord Jesus said nothing about world-wide conversion in His instructions to His disciples touching their mission (Mt 28:19,20; Mk 16:15; Lk 24:46-48; Acts 1:8).
The Millennium Not before the Advent:
They were to be His witnesses and carry His message to the race, but He does not promise the race will receive their testimony, or that men will generally accept His salvation. On the contrary, He explicitly forewarns them that they shall be hated of all men, that sufferings and persecutions shall be their lot, but if they are faithful to the end their reward will be glorious. But world-wide evangelism does not mean world-wide conversion. The universal offer of salvation does not pledge its universal acceptance. In His instructions and predictions the Lord does not let fall a hint that their world-wide mission will result in world-wide conversion, or that thereby the longed-for Millennium will be ushered in. But there is a time to come when the knowledge of the Lord shall cover the earth as the waters the sea, when teaching shall no longer be needed, for all shall know Him from the least to the greatest. Our dispensation, accordingly, cannot be the last, for the effects stated in that are not contemplated in the instructions and the results of this. To the direct revelation of Christ on the subject we now turn. In two parables He explicitly announces the general character and the consummation of the gospel age, and these we are briefly to examine.
(1) Parable of the Wheat and Tares (Matthew 13:24-30,36-43).
Happily we are not left to discover the meaning and scope of this parable. We enjoy the immense advantage of having our Lord's own interpretation of it. Out of His Divine explanation certain most important facts emerge: (a) The parable covers the whole period between the first and second advents of the Saviour. The Sower is Christ Himself. He began the good work; He opened the new era. (b) The field is the world. Christ's work is no longer confined to a single nation or people as once; it contemplates the entire race. (c) His people, the redeemed, begotten by His word and Spirit, are the good seed. Through them the gospel of His grace is to be propagated throughout the whole world. (d) The devil is also a sower. He is the foul counterfeiter of God 's work. He sowed the tares, the sons of the evil one. (e) The tares are not wicked men in general, but a particular class of wicked brought into close and contaminating association with the children of God. "Within the territory of the visible church the tares are deposited" (Dr. David Brown). It is the corruption of Christendom that is meant, a gigantic fact to which we cannot shut our eyes. (f) The mischief, once done, cannot be corrected. "Let both grow together until the harvest." Christendom once corrupted remains so to the end. (g) The harvest is the consummation of the age. This is the culmination of our age; it terminates with the advent and judgment of the Son of God. He will send forth His angels who will "gather out of his kingdom all things that cause stumbling, and them that do iniquity, and shall cast them into the furnace of fire ..... Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father."
Here, then, we have the beginning, progress and consummation of our age. Christ Himself introduced it, and it was distinguished for its purity and its excellence. But the glorious system of truth was soon marred by the cunning craftiness of Satan. No after-vigilance or earnestness on the part of the servants could repair the fatal damage. They were forbidden to attempt the removal of the tares, for by so doing they would endanger the good grain, so intermixed had the two become! The expulsion of the tares is left for angels' hands in the day of the harvest. This is our Lord's picture of our age: a Zizanian field wherein good and bad, children of God and children of the evil one, live side by side down to the harvest which is the end. In spite of all efforts to correct and reform, the corruption of Christendom remains, nay, grows apace. To expel the vast crop of false doctrine, false professors, false teachers, is now as it has been for centuries an impossibility. Christ's solemn words hold down to the final consummation, "Let both grow together until the harvest." In such conditions a millennium of universal righteousness and knowledge of the Lord seems impossible until the separation takes place at the harvest.
(2) Parable of the Pounds (Luke 19:11-27).
Jesus was on His last journey to Jerusalem, and near the city. The multitude was eager, expectant. They supposed the Kingdom of God was immediately to appear. The parable was spoken to correct this mistake and to reveal certain vital features of it. "A certain nobleman went into a far country, to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return." There is little difficulty in grasping the main teaching of this suggestive narrative. The nobleman is the Lord Jesus Christ Himself; the far country is heaven; the kingdom He goes to receive is the Messianic kingdom, for the victorious establishment of which all God's people long and pray. The servants are those who sustain responsible relation to the Lord because of the trust committed to them. The rebellious citizens are those who refuse subjection to His will and defy His authority. His return is His second coming. The parable spans the whole period between His ascension and His advent. It measures across our entire age. It tells of Christ's going away, it describes the conduct of His servants and of the citizens during His absence; it foretells His return and the reckoning that is to follow. Mark the words, "And it came to pass, when he was come back again, having received the kingdom." It is in heaven He receives the investiture of the kingdom (Rev 5:6). It is on earth that He administers it. The phrase, "having received the kingdom," cannot by any dexterity of exegesis be made to denote the end of time or the end of the Millennium, or of His receiving it at the end of the world; it is then He delivers it up to God, even the Father (1 Cor 24-28).
The order and sequence of events as traced by the Lord disclose the same fact made prominent in the parable of the Wheat and Tares, namely, that during the whole period between His ascension and His return there is no place for a Millennium of world-wide righteousness and prosperity. But Scripture warrants the belief that such blessedness is surely to fill the earth, and if so, it must be realized after Christ's second coming.
There is no unmistakable evidence that the apostles expected a thousand years of prosperity and peace during Christ's absence in heaven. In Acts 1:11 we read that the heavenly visitants said to the apostles, "Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye looking into heaven?" This attitude of the men of Galilee became the permanent attitude of the primitive church. It was that of the uplifted gaze. Paul's exultant words respecting the Thessalonians might well be applied to all believers of that ancient time, that they "turned unto God from idols, to serve a living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven" (1 Thess 1:9,10). It is the prominent theme of the New Testament epistles. In the New Testament it is mentioned 318 t. One verse in every thirty, we are told, is occupied with it. It is found shining with a glad hope in the first letters Paul wrote, those to the Thessalonians. It is found in the last he wrote, the second to Timothy, gleaming with the bright anticipation of the crown he was to receive at the Redeemer's appearing. James quickens the flagging courage, and reanimates the drooping spirits of believers with this trumpet peal: "Be ye also patient; establish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord is at hand" (5:8). Peter exhorts to all holy conversation and godliness by the like motive: "Looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God" (2 Pet 3:12 margin). Amid the deepening gloom and the gathering storms of the last days, Jude 1:14 cheers us with the words of Enoch, the seventh from Adam, `Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousand of his saints, to execute judgment upon .... the ungodly.' John closes the Canon with the majestic words, "Behold, he cometh with the clouds," "Behold, I come quickly." These men, speaking by the Spirit of the living God, know there can be no reign of universal righteousness, no deliverance of groaning creation, no redemption of the body, no binding of Satan, and no Millennium while the tares grow side by side with the wheat; while the ungodly world flings its defiant shout after the retiring nobleman, "We will not have this man to reign over us"; and while Satan, that strong, fierce spirit, loose in this age, deceives, leads captive, devours and ruins as he lists. Therefore the passionate longing and the assurance of nearing deliverance at the coming of Christ fill so large a place in the faith and the life of the primitive disciples.
2. Possibility of Survival--Its Implications:
In 1 Thess 4:17 Paul speaks of himself and others who may survive till the Lord's coming: "Then we that are alive, that are left, shall together with them be caught up in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air" (compare 1 Cor 15:51,52).
This implies fairly that the apostle did not know that long ages would elapse between his own day and Christ's advent. There was to his mind the possibility of His coming in his lifetime; in fact, he seems to have an expectation that he would not pass through the gates of death at all, that he would live to see the Lord in His glorious return, for the day and the hour of the advent is absolutely concealed even from inspired men. The inference is perfectly legitimate that Paul and his fellow-disciples did not anticipate that a thousand years should intervene between them and the coming.
3. Prophecy of the "Man of Sin":
Furthermore, the Thessalonians had fallen into a serious mistake (2 Thess 9:1-12). By a false spirit, or by a forged epistle as from Paul, they were led to believe that "the day of the Lord is now present" (English Revised Version), 2 Thess 9:2. The apostle sets them right about this solemn matter. He assures them that some things must precede that day, namely, "the falling away," or apostasy, and the appearing of a powerful adversary, whom he calls "the Man of Sin," and describes as "the Son of Perdition." Neither the one nor the other of these two, the apostasy and the Man of Sin, was then present. But the road was fast getting ready for them. There was the "mystery of lawlessness" already at work at the time, and although a certain restraint held it in check, nevertheless when the check was removed it would at once precipitate the apostasy, and it would issue in the advent of the Man of Sin, and he should be brought to nought by the personal coming of Jesus Christ. This appears to be the import of the passage.
Here was the appropriate place to settle forever for these saints and for all others the question of a long period to intervene before the Saviour's advent. How easy and natural it would have been for Paul to write, "Brethren, there is to be first a time of universal blessedness for the world, the Millennium, and after that there will be an apostasy and the revelation of the Man of Sin whom Christ will destroy by the brightness of His coming." But Paul intimated nothing of the sort. Instead, he distinctly says that the mystery of lawlessness is already working, that it will issue in "the falling away," and then shall appear the great adversary, the Lawless One, who shall meet his doom by the advent of Christ. The mystery of lawlessness, however, is held in restraint, we are told. May it not be possible that the check shall be taken off, then the Millennium succeed, and after that the apostasy and the Son of Perdition? No, for its removal is immediately followed by the coming of the great foe, the Antichrist. For this foe has both an apocalypse and a parousia like Christ Himself. Hence, the lifting of the restraint is sudden, by no means a prolonged process.
The apostle speaks of the commencement, progress, and close of a certain period. It had commenced when he wrote. Its close is at the coming of Christ. What intervenes? The continuance of the evil secretly at work in the body of professing Christians, and its progress from the incipient state to the maturity of daring wickedness which will be exhibited in the Man of Sin. This condition of things fills up the whole period, if we accept Paul's teaching as that of inspired truth. There appears to be no place for a Millennium within the limits which the apostle here sets. The only escape from this conclusion, as it seems to us, is, to deny that the coming of Christ is His actual, personal second coming. But the two words, epiphaneia and parousia, which elsewhere are used separately to denote His advent, are here employed to give "graphic vividness" and certainty to the event, and hence, they peremptorily forbid a figurative interpretation. The conclusion seems unavoidable that there can be no Millennium on this side of the advent of Christ.
5. Harmony of Christ and Apostles:
Our Lord's Olivet prophecy (Mt 24; 25; Mk 13; Lk 21) accords fully with the teaching of the apostles on the subject. In that discourse He foretells wars, commotions among the nations, Jerusalem's capture and the destruction of the temple, Israel's exile, Christians persecuted while bearing their testimony throughout the world, cosmic convulsions, unparalleled tribulation and sufferings which terminate only with His advent. From the day this great prophecy was spoken down to the hour of His actual coming He offers no hope of a Millennium. He opens no place for a thousand years of blessedness for the earth.
These are some of the grounds on which Biblical students known as Premillennialists rest their belief touching the coming of the Lord and the Millennial reign.
LITERATURE.
Premillenarian: H. Bonar, The Coming of the Kingdom of the Lord Jesus; Wood, The Last Things; Guinness, The Approaching End of the Age; Seiss, The Last Times; Gordon, Ecce Venit; Premillennial Essays; Peters, The Theocratic Kingdom; West, The Thousand Years in Both Testaments; Trotter, Plain Papers on Prophetic Subjects; Brookes, Maranatha; Andrews, Christianity and Antichristianity; Kellogg, Predition and Fulfillment.
William G. Moorehead
mil'-et, mil'-it (dochan; kegchros): One of the ingredients of the prophet's bread (Ezek 4:9). The Arabic equivalent is dukhn, the common millet, Panicum miliaceum, an annual grass 3 or 4 ft. high with a much-branched nodding panicle. Its seeds arc as small as mustard seeds and are used largely for feeding small birds, but are sometimes ground to flour and mixed with other cereals for making bread. The Italian millet, setaria Italica, known as Bengal grass, is also called in Arabic dukhn, and has a similar seed. A somewhat similar grain, much more widely cultivated as a summer crop, is the Indian millet--also called "Egyptian maize"--the Sorghum annuum. This is known as dhurah in Arabic, and the seed as dhurah beida, "white dourra." It is a very important crop, as it, like the common millet, grows and matures without any rain. It is an important breadstuff among the poor.
Both the common millet and the dourra were cultivated in Egypt in very ancient times; the Hebrew dochan was certainly the first, but may include all three varieties.
E. W. G. Masterman
mil'-o. (millo generally interpreted to mean a "filling," e.g. a solid tower or an earth embankment; in Jdg 9:6,20; 2 Ki 12:20, we get beth millo', translated in English Versions of the Bible "House of Millo," which Winckler thinks may have been the original Jebusite temple-shrine of Jerusalem (see BETH-MILLO ); Septuagint reads Bethmaalon, also Maalon and oikos Maallon):
1. Old Testament References
It is generally supposed that "The Millo" was some kind of fortress or other defense, but many speculations have been made regarding its position. In 2 Sam 5:9, we read that David built round about from the Millo and inward, or (in the Septuagint, Septuagint) "he fortified it, the city, round about from the Millo and his house" (compare 1 Ch 11:8). In connection with Solomon's strengthening of the fortifications, there are several references to Millo. In 1 Ki 9:15, Solomon raised a levy "to build the house of Yahweh, and his own house, and Millo, and the wall of Jerusalem," etc.; in 9:24, "Pharaoh's daughter came up out of the city of David unto her house which Solomon had built for her: then did he build Millo"; in 1 Ki 11:27, Solomon "built Millo, and repaired the breach of the city of David his father." At a later time Hezekiah "took courage, and built up all the wall that was broken down, and raised it up to the towers, and the other wall without, and strengthened Millo in the city of David" (2 Ch 32:5; 2 Ki 12:20); Joash was slain by his servants "at the house of Millo, on the way that goeth down to Silla," but possibly this may have been in Shechem (compare Jdg 9:6).
2. Identical with the Akra Site:
The mention of the site in the days of David and the reference to it in connection with the city of David (1 Ki 11:27) point to some part of the southeastern hill South of the temple. It is suggestive that Millo is in Septuagint always translated by "Akra." It seems to the present writer very probable that it was a fortress crowning the hill on which at a later time stood the Syrian Akra, which hill, if we are to believe Josephus (BJ, V, iv, 1, etc.), was cut down because its commanding situation dominated the temple. This hill cannot have been the site of Zion afterward known as "David's Burg" (City of David), because the tombs of the Judean kings were within its walls, and that alone would have made the complete leveling of the site impossible, but whereas the Jebusite fortress was probably not far from Gihon, this fortified summit may have been, as Watson suggests for the Akra, as far north as where the present Al Aqsa mosque is situated. In David's time it may have been an isolated and detached fort guarding the north approach, but if it was originally a Jebusite high place (Winckler) partly of sun-dried brick like similar constructions in Babylonia, the account of its being leveled would be much more credible. The importance of this site in the days of Solomon is fully explicable if this was the citadel guarding the newly built temple and royal palaces.
Dr. G.A. Smith is inclined to think that Millo may have been a fortress "off the south end of Ophel, to retain and protect the old pool," and Vincent suggests that the site of Millo is that now occupied by the great causeway connecting the Western and Eastern hills along which runs the Tariq bab es silsileh.
E. W. G. Masterman
mil'-ston.
See MILL .
mi'-na.
See MANEH .
min'-sing (Taphaph): "Taking short steps," "walking trippingly." Only in Isa 3:16, "walking and mincing as they go, and making a tinkling (a jingling of the metal anklets) with their feet." Compare OHL .
mind (nous, dianoia, sunesis):
1. No Precision in the Terms Used:
We look in vain in the Old Testament and New Testament for anything like scientific precision in the employment of terms which are meant to indicate mental operations.
In the Old Testament lebh is made to stand for the various manifestations of our intellectual and emotional nature. We are often misled by the different renderings in the different versions, both early and late.
Sometimes nephesh or "soul" is rendered by "mind" (Dt 18:6 the King James Version, "desire of his soul" or "mind"); sometimes ruah or "spirit" (Gen 26:35, "grief of mind," ruah). Here Luther renders the term Herzeleid ("grief of heart"), and the Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) animum. Sometimes lebh is used, as in Isa 46:8, "bring it to mind" (literally, "heart"), or in Ps 31:12, "I am forgotten as a dead man out of mind" (literally, "heart"), as in Septuagint, kardia, and in Vulgate, a corde, Luther, im Herzen, new Dutch translated, uit de gedachtenis (i.e. "memory").
In the Apocrypha this precision is equally lacking. Thus we read in The Wisdom of Solomon 9:15, "For the corruptible body (soma) presseth down the soul (psuche) and the earthly tabernacle weigheth down the mind (nous) that museth upon many things." But these distinctions are alien to the letter and spirit of revelation, a product of the Greek and not of the Hebrew mind.
In the New Testament the words nous and dianoia are used, but not with any precision of meaning.
Here too several terms are rendered by the same word. Thus the Hebrew ruach is rendered by nous in 1 Cor 2:16 ("mind of the Lord," with reference to Isa 40:13, where "ruach YHWH (spirit of Yahweh)" occurs). Nous evidently means here the organ of spiritual perception--a word borrowed from the Septuagint, where it is sometimes made to stand for lebh (Job 7:17; Isa 41:22); sometimes for ruah (Isa 40:13). In Lk 24:45--the solitary text, where nous occurs in the Gospels--it is rendered "understanding" in the King James Version, "mind" in the Revised Version (British and American).
For a true solution we must turn to the Epistles of Paul, where the word frequently occurs in an ethical sense--sometimes in connection with (sinful) flesh as in Col 2:18, "puffed up by his fleshly mind," sometimes in direct contrast to it, as in Rom 7:25, `with my mind I serve the law of God; with the flesh the law of sin.' In Tit 1:15 it is brought into parallelism with conscience ("Their mind and their conscience are defiled"). Phrases like "a reprobate mind," "corrupted in mind" occur elsewhere (Rom 1:28; 1 Tim 6:5). From this state of "reprobation" and "corruption" man must be saved. Hence, the necessity of complete transformation and renewal of the inner man (Rom 12:2), "transformed by the renewing of your mind (nous)."
Another word, with possibly a deeper meaning, is sometimes employed, namely, dianoia, which literally means "meditation," "reflection." It is found as synonymous with nous in a good sense, as e.g. in 1 Jn 5:20 (He "hath given us an understanding, that we know him that is true"). Evidently the sense here is the same as in Rom 12:2, a renovated mind capable of knowing Christ. It may also bear a bad sense, as in Eph 4:18, where the Gentiles are represented as having "a darkened understanding," or in parallelism with sarx: "the desires of the flesh and of the mind" (Eph 2:3), and with nous: `walking in vanity of mind (nous) and a darkened understanding (dianoia)' in Eph 4:18. At times also "heart" and "mind" are joined to indicate human depravity (Lk 1:51: "He hath scattered the proud in the imagination (dianoia) of their heart"). It is interesting also to know that the Great Commandment is rendered in Mt 22:37--"Thou shall love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul (psuche), and with all thy understanding (dianoia) (English Versions of the Bible, "mind")"--though Mark has two renderings in one of which dianoia occurs, and in the other sunesis (Mark 12:30,33), though possibly without any psychological refinement of meaning, for the term sunesis occurs elsewhere in conjunction with pneumatikos ("spiritual understanding," Col 1:9). It also stands alone in the sense of an "understanding enlightened from above" (2 Tim 2:7 King James Version: "The Lord give thee understanding (sunesis) in all things"). The history of these terms is interesting, but not of great theological significance.
It seems to us that Godet's interpretation of the Great Commandment in Lk 10:27 is somewhat far-fetched. He considers the heart as "the central focus from which all rays of the moral life go forth, and that in their three principal directions: the powers of feeling, or the affections, nephesh (`soul') in the sense of feeling; the active powers, the impulsive aspirations, the might (`with all thy might'), the will; and in the intellectual powers, analytical or contemplative, dianoia (`with all thy mind'). The difference between the heart, which resembles the trunk and the three branches, feeling, will, understanding, is emphatically marked in the Alexandrian variation, by the substitution of the preposition en (`in') for ek (`with,' `from') in the three last members. Moral life proceeds from the heart and manifests itself without, in the three forms of activity. The impulse God-ward proceeds from the heart, and is realized in the life through the will, which consecrates itself actively to the accomplishment of His will; and through the mind, which pursues the track of His thought in all His works" (Godet, Commentary on the Gospel of Luke, II, 38, 39).
J. I. Marais
min, min'-ing: In Job 28:1-11 we have the only Biblical reference to mines. The writer very likely derived his information either from personal observation or from a description by an eyewitness, of the mining operations of Sinai (see METALS ). No traces of ancient mines have yet been found in Palestine and Syria. What metals were taken out came from the superficial strata. The mines of Upper Egypt have already been mentioned. Burton and other travelers in Northern Arabia and the Red Sea country have found there evidences of ancient mining operations.
The usual Egyptian method of mining was to follow the vein from the surface as far as it was practicable with tools corresponding to our pick and hoe, hammer and chisel. The shafts frequently extended into the ground a distance of 180 to 200 ft. The rock when too hard to be dug out was first cracked by having fires built on it. The metal-bearing stone was carried in baskets to the surface, where the crushing and separating took place. The mining operations were performed by an army of slaves who were kept at their work day and night, driven with the lash until they died, when their places were taken by others.
James A. Patch
min'-er-alz.
See METALS ;STONES ,PRECIOUS .
MINGLED PEOPLE; (MIXED MULTITUDE)
min'-g'-ld pe'-pl:
(1) "Mixed multitude" occurs in Nu 11:4 as a translation of asaphcuph, "collection," "rabble." The same phrase in Ex 12:38; Neh 13:3 is the rendition of erebh. "Mingled people" is used also to translate `erebh, and is found in Jer 15:20,24; 50:37; Ezek 30:5, and in 1 Ki 10:15 the Revised Version (British and American) (the King James Version "Arabia"; compare the American Revised Version margin). In the last case both revised versions have followed the pointing of the Massoretic Text, and this pointing alone distinguishes "mingled people" (`erebh) from "Arabia" (`arabh); in the unvocalized text both words are equally `-r-b. Now "the traffic of the merchants, and of all the kings of the mingled people, and of the governors of the country" is very awkward, and the correction into "Arabia," as in the Massoretic Text (and English Versions of the Bible) of the parallel 2 Ch 9:14, is indicated. Probably the same change should be made in Ezek 30:5, reading "Ethiopia, and Put, and Lud, and Arabia, and Cub." A similar textual confusion seems to be responsible for either "and all the kings of Arabia" or "and all the kings of the mingled people" in Jer 25:24. On all these verses see the commentaries.
(2) In Jer 25:20; 50:37, "mingled people" is a term of contempt for the hybrid blood of certain of Israel's enemies. Something of this same contempt may be contained in Ex 12:38, where a multitude of non-Israelite camp-followers are mentioned as accompanying the children of Israel in the exodus, and in Nu 11:4 it is this motley body that seduced Israel to sin. But who they were, why they wished or were permitted to join in the exodus, and what eventually became of them or of their descendants is a very perplexing puzzle. In Neh 13:3, the "mixed multitude" consists of the inhabitants of Palestine whom the Jews found there after the return from the exile (see SAMARIA ). In accord with the command of Dt 23:3-5, the Jews withdrew from all religious intercourse whatever had been established with these.
NOTE.--The Hebrew noun for "mingled people" may or may not be connected with the verb translated "mingle" in Ezr 9:2; Ps 106:35; Dan 2:43. On this see the lexicons.
Burton Scott Easton
min'-ya-min, mi-ni'-a-min (minydmin):
(1) A Levite who assisted Kore, the son of Imnah, in the distribution of the freewill offerings (2 Ch 31:15).
(2) A priestly family of the time of the high priest Joiakim (Neh 12:17), probably = MIJAMIN (2).
(3) A priestly participant in the ceremony of the dedication of the wall (Neh 12:41).
min'-ash (the King James Version and the English Revised Version Ex 15:19; Ps 107:39; the English Revised Version Isa 19:6; Hos 8:10): The verb "mannish," "make small," is now obsolete, being replaced by its derivative "diminish" (compare the American Standard Revised Version in all verses above).
min'-is-tri:
Use of the Word in This Article
Origin
III. THREEFOLD CONGREGATIONAL MINISTRY
(1) Aid Given in Selecting a Bishop
2. Multiplication of Orders: Growth of a Hierarchy
LITERATURE
The common New Testament term for the ministry is diakonia, and along with it we find diakonos, "minister," ho diakonon), "he who ministers," and diakonein, "to minister." All these words have a very extensive application within the New Testament and are by no means restricted to denote service within the Christian church; even when so restricted the words are used in a great variety of meanings: e.g. (1) discipleship in general (Jn 12:26); (2) service rendered to the church because of the "gifts" bestowed (Rom 12:7; 1 Cor 12:5), and hence, all kinds of service (Acts 6:2; Mt 20:26); (3) specifically the "ministry of the Word" (Eph 4:12), and most frequently the "apostleship" (Acts 1:17; 20:24; 21:19; Rom 11:13, etc.); (4) such services as feeding the poor (Acts 6:1; 11:29; 12:25), or organizing and providing the great collection for the poor saints at Jerusalem (Rom 15:25; 2 Cor 8:4,19, etc.); (5) such services as those rendered by Stephanas (1 Cor 16:15), by Archippus (Col 4:17), by Tychicus (Eph 6:21; Col 4:7), etc.
Use of the Word in This Article:
In this article the word has to do with the guidance and government of a united community, fellowship, or brotherhood of men and women whose inward bond of union was the sense of fellowship with Jesus their Risen Lord. In all ages of Christianity the call to become the follower of Jesus, while it is the deepest of all personal things and comes to each one singly, never comes solitarily. The devout soul must share his experiences with those like-minded, and the fellowship thus formed must be able to take outward shape, which cannot fail to render necessary some sort of rule and guidance. The very thought of the church with articulate expression of a common faith, administration of the sacraments, meetings and their right conduct, aid given to the spiritual and bodily needs of their fellow-members, implies a ministry or executive of some kind. To endeavor to explain what was the character of the ministry of the Christian church in the earliest centuries of its existence and how it came into being is the aim of this article.
The earliest fact we have about the organization of the Christian church is given in Acts 6, where we are told that "seven" men were appointed to what is called a "ministry of tables" (diakonein trapezais), which is distinguished from the "ministry of the word" (diakonia tou logou). This distinction between two different kinds of "ministry" which appears at the very beginning is seen to exist all through the apostolic church and beyond it into the sub-apostolic. It can be traced in the Epistles of Paul and in other parts of the New Testament. It is seen in the Didache, in the Pastor of Hermas, in the Epistles of Barnabas, in the Apology of Justin Martyr, in the writings of Irenaeus and elsewhere. (For a full list of authorities, compare Harnack, Texte u. Untersuchungen, II, ii, 111 ff.) The one ministry differs from the other in function, and the distinction depends on a conception to be afterward examined--that of "gifts." The common name, in apostolic and sub-apostolic literature, for the members of the one kind of ministry is "those who speak the Word of God" (lalountes ton logon tou Theou). Modern writers have called it the charismatic, but perhaps the better term is the prophetic ministry; while to the other class belong all the names which are given to denote office-bearers in the local churches. The two existed side by side. The great practical distinction between them was that the members of the former were in no sense office-bearers in any one Christian community; they were not elected or appointed to any office; they were not set apart for duties by any ecclesiastical ceremony. The "Word" came to them and they were compelled by inward impulsion to speak the message given them to deliver. Some were wanderers; others confined themselves to their own community. They were responsible to no ecclesiastical authority. Churches were encouraged to test them and their message; for the "gift" of discerning whether a so-called prophet spoke a truly Divine message was always presupposed to be within the local church. But once accepted they took a higher place than the office-bearers, they presided at the Lord's Supper, and their judgment in cases of discipline could overbear ordinary ecclesiastical rules. The contest of Cyprian with the "confessors" at Carthage was the last stage of the long struggle which arose in the 2nd century between the two ministries. Out of the other kind of ministry came, by ordinary development, all the various kinds of ecclesiastical organization which now exist. Its members were office-bearers in the strictest sense of the word; they were selected to do ecclesiastical work in a given community, they were set apart for it in a special way, and they were responsible to the church for its due performance.
But it is important to remember that while the two kinds of ministries are thoroughly distinct from each other, the same individuals might belong to both kinds. The "prophetic gift" might fall on anyone, private member or office-bearer alike. Office-holding did not prevent the "gift." Polycarp, office-bearer at Smyrna, was a prophet; so was Ignatius of Antioch, and many others. The "gift" of speaking the Word of God was a personal and not an official source of enlightenment.
In the prophetic ministry we find a threefold division--apostles, prophets and teachers. Some would add a fourth, evangelists, i.e. men like the apostles in all respects save in having seen the. Lord in the flesh. The distinction may hold good for the apostolic period, though that appears to be very doubtful; it disappears utterly in the sub-apostolic; evangelist and apostle seem to be one class. This triple division may be traced through early Christian literature from 1 Corinthians down to the Clementine Homilies, which can scarcely be earlier than 200 AD. It is hardly possible to define each class in any mechanical fashion; speaking generally, the first were the missionary pioneers whose message was chiefly to the unconverted, while to the second and third classes belonged exhortation and instruction within the Christian communities.
In the New Testament and in the other literature of the early church the word "apostle" is used in a narrower and in a wider sense, and it is the more extensive use of the word which denotes the first division of the prophetic ministry. The Lord selected the Twelve, "whom also he named apostles" (Mk 3:14, the Revised Version margin), to be trained by personal fellowship with Him and by apprentice mission work among the villages of Galilee for that proclamation of His gospel which was to be their future life-work. Two things strictly personal and excluding every thought of successors separated the "Eleven" from all other men: long personal fellowship with Jesus in the inner circle of His followers, and their selection by Himself while still in the flesh. They were the "Apostles" in the narrow sense of the word. But the name was given to many others. Matthias, who had enjoyed personal intercourse with Jesus both before and after the resurrection, was called by the disciple company, confirmed by decision of the lot, to the same `service and sending forth' (diakonia kai apostole) (Acts 1:25). Paul was called by the Lord Himself, but in vision and inward experience, and took rank with those before mentioned (Rom 1:1 ff; Gal 2:7-9). Others, called apostles, are mentioned by name in the New Testament. Barnabas is not only an apostle but is recognized to have rank equal to the "Eleven" (Acts 14:14; Gal 2:7-9). The correct rendering of the text (Rom 16:7) declares that Andronicus and Junias were apostles who had known Christ before Paul became a believer. Chrysostom, who thinks that Junias or Junia was a woman, does not believe that her sex hindered her from being an apostle. Silas or Silvanus and Timothy, on the most natural interpretation of the passage, are called apostles by Paul in 1 Thess 1:1,6. The title can hardly be denied to Apollos (1 Cor 4:6,9). Paul praises men, whom he calls "the apostles of the churches," and declares them to be "the glory of Christ" (2 Cor 8:23 margin). One of them, Epaphroditus, is mentioned by name--"your apostle," says Paul writing to the Christians of Philippi (Phil 2:25 margin); and there must have been many others. "Apostles" are distinguished from the "Twelve" by Paul in the rapid summary he gives of the appearances of Jesus after the resurrection (1 Cor 15:5,7). Besides those true apostles the New Testament mentions others who are called "false apostles" (2 Cor 11:13), and the church of Ephesus is praised for using its "gift" of discrimination to reject men who "call themselves apostles, and they are not" (Rev 2:2). This wider use of the word has descended to the present day; "apostles" or "holy apostles" is still the name for missionaries and missioners in some parts of the Greek church. The double use of the word to denote the "Twelve" or the "Eleven" is seen in the sub-apostolic age in the Didache, which recognizes the narrower use of the word in its title ("The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles"), and in the text portrays the itinerant missionaries to whom the name in its widest use belonged.
Those "apostles," to whatever class they belonged, had one distinguishing characteristic: they had chosen as their life-work to be the missionary pioneers of the gospel of the Kingdom of Christ. They were all engaged in aggressive work, and were distinguished from others not so much by what they were as by what they did. They were wanderers with no fixed place of residence. The requirements of their work might make them abide for long periods in some center (as did Paul at Corinth and at Ephesus, or some of the "Eleven" at Jerusalem), but they had no permanent home life. As the earlier decades passed, their numbers increased rather than diminished. They are brought vividly before us in such writings as the Didache. They were to be highly honored, but as severely tested. They were not expected to remain longer than three days within a Christian community, nor to fare softly when there (Didache ii.4-6). The vindication of their call was what they were able to accomplish, and to this Paul, the greatest of them, appeals over and over again.
Prophets had been the religious guides of Israel of old, and the spirit of prophecy had never entirely died out. John the Baptist (Mt 11:9), Simeon (Lk 2:25,26), and Anna (Lk 2:36) had the gift in the days of Christ. It was natural for the Samaritan woman to believe that the stranger who spoke to her by the well was a prophet (Jn 4:19). The reappearance of prophecy in its old strength was looked on as a sign of the nearness of the coming of the Messiah. Jesus Himself had promised to send prophets among His followers (Mt 10:41; 23:34; Lk 11:49). The promise was fulfilled. Christian prophets appeared within the church from its beginning. Nor were they confined to communities of Jewish Christians; prophecy appeared spontaneously wherever Christianity spread. We are told of prophets in the churches of Jerusalem and Caesarea where the membership was almost purely Jewish; at Antioch where Jews and Gentiles united to make one congregation; and everywhere throughout the Gentile churches--in Rome, Corinth, Thessalonica and in the Galatian churches (Acts 11:27; 15:32; 21:9,10; Rom 12:6,7; 1 Cor 14:32,36,37; 1 Thess 5:20; Gal 3:3-5). Prophets are mentioned by name--Agabus (Acts 11:28; 21:10), Symeon and others at Antioch (Acts 13:1), Judas and Silas in Jerusalem (Acts 15:32). Nor was the "gift" confined to men; women prophesied--the four daughters of Philip among others (Acts 21:9). From the earliest times down to the close of the 2nd century and later, an uninterrupted stream of prophets and prophetesses appeared in the Christian churches. The statements of New Testament writers, and especially of Paul, imply that prophets abounded in the earliest churches. Paul, for example, expected the prophetic gift to appear in every Christian community. He recognized that they had a regular place in the meeting for public worship (1 Cor 14); he desired that every member in the Corinthian church should possess the "gift" and cultivate it (1 Cor 14:1,5,39); he exhorted the brethren at Thessalonica to `cherish prophesyings' (1 Thess 5:20), and those in Rome to make full use of prophecy (Rom 12:6). If he criticized somewhat severely the conduct of the "prophets" in the Corinthian church, it was to teach them how to make full use of their "gift" for the right edifying of the brethren.
Prophecy was founded on revelation; the prophets were men especially "gifted" with spiritual intuition and magnetic speech. Sometimes their "gift" took the form of ecstasy, but by no means always; Paul implies that prophets have a real command of and can control their utterances. Sometimes their message came to them in visions, such as we find in the Apocalypse and in Hermas; but this was not a necessary means. The prophets spoke as they were moved, and the Spirit worked on them in various ways.
The influence of those prophets seems to have increased rather than diminished during the earlier decades of the 2nd century. While the duty of the apostle was to the unbelievers, Jewish or heathen, the sphere of the activity of the prophet was within the Christian congregation. It was his business to edify the brethren. Prophets had a recognized place in the meeting for the public worship of the congregation; if one happened to be present at the dispensation of the Lord's Supper, he presided to the exclusion of the office-bearers, and his prayers were expected to be extempore (Didache x.7); he had special powers when matters of discipline were discussed, as is plain from a great variety of evidence from Hermas down to Tertullian. From Paul's statements it seems that the largest number of the prophets he speaks of were members of the communities within which they used their "gift" of prophecy; but many of the more eminent prophets traveled from community to community edifying each. When such wandering prophets, with their wives and families, dwelt for a time in any Christian society, preaching and exhorting, it was deemed to be the duty of that society to support them, and regulations were made for such support. According to the Didache (chapter xiii): "Every true prophet who shall settle among you is worthy of his support ..... Every first-fruit then of the products of the winepress and threshing-floor, of oxen and of sheep, thou shalt take and give to the prophets ..... In like manner also when thou openest a jar of wine or oil, take the first of it and give it to the prophets; and of money and clothing and every possession take the first as may seem right to thee, and give according to the commandment." Only, the receivers were to be true prophets. Each congregation had to exercise the "gift" of discrimination and sift the true from the false; for "false" prophets confronted the true in early Christianity as well as in the old Judaism.
While the third class of the prophetic ministry, the teachers, is found joined to the other two both in the New Testament and in sub-apostolic literature, and while Paul assigns a definite place for their services in the meeting for edification (1 Cor 14:26), we hear less about them and their work. They seem, however, to have lingered much longer in active service in the early church than did the apostles and the prophets.
As has been said, the first notice we have of organization within a local church is in Acts 6, where at the suggestion of the apostles seven men were selected to administer the charity of the congregation.
The conception that "the Seven" were a special order of office-bearers, deacons, is a comparatively late suggestion. These men are nowhere called deacons; the official designation is "The Seven." It may be that the appointment of those men was only a temporary expedient, but it is more probable that "the Seven" of Acts 6 are the elders of Acts 11; for we find those "elders" performing the duties which "the Seven" were appointed to fulfil. If so, we have in Acts 6 the narrative of the beginnings of local organization as a whole. When we turn to the expansion of Christian communities outside Jerusalem, we have no such distinct picture of beginnings; but as all the churches in Palestine evidently regarded the society in Jerusalem as the mother church, it is likely that their organization was the same. Acts tells us that Paul and Barnabas left behind them at Derbe, Lystra and Iconium societies of brethren with "elders" at their head. The word used suggests an election by popular vote and was probably the same as had been used in the selection of the "Seven" men.
When we examine the records of the distinctively Pauline churches, there is not much direct evidence for the origins of the ministry there, but a great deal about the existence of some kind of rule and rulers. For one thing, we can see that these churches had and were encouraged to have feelings of independence and of self-government; a great deal is said about the possession of "gifts" which imply the presence and power of the Spirit of Jesus within the community itself. We find names applied to men who, if not actually office-bearers, are at least leaders and perform the functions of office-bearers--proistamenoi, poimenes, episkopoi, diakonoi--and where special designations are lacking a distinction is always drawn between those who obey and those who are to be obeyed. In all cases those leaders or ministers are mentioned in the plural.
It may be said generally that about the close of the 1st century every Christian community was ruled by a body of men who are sometimes called presbyters (elders), sometimes but more rarely bishops (overseers), and whom modern church historians are inclined to call presbyter-bishops. Associated with them, but whether members of the same court or forming a court of their own it is impossible to say, were a number of assistant rulers called deacons. See BISHOP ;CHURCH GOVERNMENT ;DEACON ;ELDER . The court of elders had no president or permanent chairman. There was a two-fold not a threefold ministry. During the 3rd century, rising into notice by way of geographical distribution rather than in definite chronological order, this twofold congregational ministry became threefold in the sense that one man was placed at the head of each community with the title of pastor or bishop (the titles are interchangeable as late as the 4th century at least). In the early centuries those local churches, thus organized, while they never lacked the sense that they all belonged to one body, were independent self-governing communities preserving relations to each other, not by any political organization embracing them all, but by fraternal fellowship through visits of deputies, interchange of letters, and in some indefinite way giving and receiving assistance in the selection and setting apart of pastors.
Origin.
The question arises, How did this organization come into being? We may dismiss, to begin with, the idea once generally accepted among the Reformed churches, that the Christian society simply took over and made use of the synagogue system of organization (Vitringa, De synagoga vetere). The points common to both reveal a superficial resemblance, but no more. The distinctive differences are great. When we add to them the decisive statement of Epiphanius (Haeresis, xxx. 18), that the Jewish Christians (Judaizing) organized their communities with archons and an archisynagogos like the Jewish synagogues of the Dispersion and unlike the Christian churches, all the evidence makes it impossible to believe that the earliest Christian organization was simply taken over from the Jewish. On the other hand, there is little evidence that the apostles (the Twelve and Paul) received a special commission from our Lord, to appoint and ordain the office-bearers of the earliest Christian communities, so exclusive that there could be no legitimate organization without this apostolic authority and background. We find, on the contrary, the church in Rome exercising all the disciplinary functions of a congregation without this apostolic ecclesiastical rule supposed to be essential. Even in the mother-church in Jerusalem, the congregational meeting exercised rule over the apostles themselves, for we find apostles summoned before it and examined on their conduct (Acts 11:1-4). The whole question demands the recognition of several facts:
(1) Evidence abounds to show that the local churches during the apostolic and sub-apostolic age were self-governing communities and that the real background of the ministry was not apostolic authority but the congregational meeting. Its representative character and its authority are seen in the apostolic and sub-apostolic literature from Paul to Cyprian.
(2) The uniquely Christian correlation of the three conceptions of leadership, service and "gifts"; leadership depended on service, and service was possible by the possession and recognition of special "gifts" which were the evidence of the presence and power of the Spirit of Jesus within the community. These "gifts" gave the church a Divine authority to exercise rule and oversight apart from any special apostolic direction.
(3) The general evidence existing to show that there was a gradual growth of the principle of association from looser to more compact forms of organization (Gayford, article "Church" in HDB; also Harnack, The Expositor, 1887, January to June, 322-24), must not be forgotten; only one must remember that in young communities the growth is rapid.
(4) We must also bear in mind that the first Christians were well acquainted with various kinds of social organization which entered into their daily life and which could not fail to suggest how they might organize their new societies.
Examples occur readily: (a) Every Jewish village community was ruled by its "seven wise men," and it is probable that the appointment of the "Seven" in the primitive Jewish church was suggested by familiarity with this example of social polity. (b) It was and is an almost universal oriental usage that the "next of kin" to the founder was recognized, after the founder's death, to be the head of the new religious community founded, and this usage accounts for the selection of James, the eldest male surviving relative of our Lord, to be the recognized and honored head of the church in Jerusalem. James has been called the first bishop; but when we read in Eusebius (Historia Ecclesiastica, III, 11, 1,2; 32,4; IV, 22, 4; III, 20, 1-8) how his successors were chosen, the term seems inappropriate. A succession in the male line of the kindred of Jesus, where the selection to office is mainly in the hands of a family council, and where two (James and Zoker) can rule together, has small analogy to episcopal rule. (c) The relation of "patron" to "client," which in one form or other had spread throughout the civilized world, is suggested by a series of kindred words used to denote rulers in local churches. We find proistamenoi, prostatis, prostates, proestos, in various writers, and the last was used as late as the middle of the 2nd century to denote ministry in the Roman church (Rom 12:8; 16:2; 1 Thess 5:12; Hermas, Pastor. Vis. 2, 4; Justin, Apol, i.65). (d) The Rom empire was honeycombed with "gilds," some recognized by law, most of them without legal recognition and liable to suppression. These confraternities were of very varied character--trades unions, burial clubs, etc., but a large proportion were for the purpose of practicing special religious rites. The Jewish synagogues of the Dispersion seemed to have been enrolled among those confraternities, and certainly appeared to their heathen neighbors to be one kind of such private associations for the practice of a religion which had been legalized. Many scholars have insisted that the Gentile Christian churches simply copied the organization of such confraternities (Renan, Les Apotres; Heinrici, Zeitschrift f. wissensch. Theol., 1876-77); Hatch, Organization of the Early Christian Churches). There must have been some external resemblances. Pliny believed that the Christian churches of Bithynia were illicit confraternities (Ep. 96; compare Lucian, Peregrinus Proteus). They had, in common with the churches, a democratic constitution; they shared a "common meal" at stated times; they made a monthly collection; they were ruled by a committee of office-bearers; and they exercised a certain amount of discipline over their members. Multitudes of Christians must have been members of such confraternites, and many continued to be so after accepting Christianity (Cyprian, Ep., lxvii. 6).
But while the Christian churches may have learned much about the general principles of associated life from all those varied forms of social organization, it cannot be said that they copied any one of them. The primitive Christian societies organized themselves independently in virtue of the new moral and social life implanted within them; and though they may have come to it by various paths, they all in the end arrived at one common form--a society ruled by a body of office-bearers who possessed the "gifts" of government and of subordinate service embodied in the offices of presbyter and deacon.
III. Threefold Congregational Ministry.
During the 2nd century the ministry was subject to a change. The ruling body of office-bearers in every congregation received a permanent president, who was called the pastor or bishop, the latter term being the commoner. The change came gradually. It provoked no strong opposition. By the beginning of the 3rd century it was everywhere accepted.
When we seek to trace the causes why the college of elders received a president, who became the center of all the ecclesiastical life in the local church and the one potent office-bearer, we are reduced to conjecture. This only can be said with confidence, that the change began in the East and gradually spread to the West, and that there are hints of a gradual evolution (Lindsay, The Church and the Ministry in the Early Centuries, 180, 183-85). Scholars have brought forward many reasons for the change; the need for an undivided leadership in times of danger from external persecution or from the introduction of Gnostic speculations which disturbed the faith of the members; the convenience of being represented to other local churches by one man who could charge himself with the administration of the external affairs of the congregation; the need of one man to preside at the solemn and crowning act of worship, the administration of the Lord's Supper; the sense of congregational unity implied in the possession of one leader--each or all are probable ways in which the churches were influenced in making this change in their ministry.
This threefold congregational ministry is best seen in the Epistles of Ignatius of Antioch. They portray a Christian community having at its head a bishop, a presbyterium or session of elders, and a body of deacons. These form the ministry or office-bearers of the congregation to whom obedience is due. Nothing is to be done without the consent of the bishop, neither love-feast, nor sacrament, nor anything congregational. The ruling body is a court where the bishop sits as chairman surrounded by his council or session of elders; and the one is helpless without the other, for if the bishop be the lyre, the elders are the chords, and both are needed to produce melody. Ignatius compares the bishop to Jesus, and the elders to the apostles who surrounded Him. There is no trace of sacerdotalism, apostolic succession, one-man government, diocesan rule in those letters of Ignatius; and what they portray is unlike any form of diocesan episcopacy.
1. Insistence on Organization:
It is interesting to remark how all throughout the 3rd century and later every body of Christians, even if consisting of fewer than twelve families, is instructed to organize itself into a church under a ministry of office-bearers, consisting of a bishop or pastor, at least two elders and at least three deacons. Should the bishop be illiterate--for character more than erudition determined his choice--the congregation was told to elect a reader, and provision was made for a ministry of women. It was possible to obey such instructions, because the ministry of the early church received no stipends. The ministry were office-bearers, to whom ecclesiastical obedience was due in virtue of their call and election and their being set apart by prayer, and perhaps by laying on of hands, for sacred office; but they were at the same time merchants, artisans, or engaged in other secular callings, and supported themselves. Buildings, set apart for public worship, did not exist until the very close of the 2nd century, and then only in a few populous centers in towns which had felt persecution but slightly. The only property which a church possessed, besides its copies of the Scriptures, its congregational records and perhaps a place of burial, were the offerings which were presented by members of the congregation, mostly in kind, after the Eucharist; and these offerings were distributed to the poor of the congregation. If office-bearers received a share, it was only on account of their poverty and because they were on the roll of widows, orphans and helpless poor.
This threefold congregational ministry has been called by some scholars "monarchical episcopacy," a title as high-sounding as it is misleading. The kingdom over which those so-called monarchs presided might and often did consist of less than twelve families, and their rule was fenced in with many restrictions. We can collect from the Epistles of Ignatius what were the powers and what the limitations (Epistle to Polycarp) of the bishop. He administered the finances of the church; he was president of the court of Elders; he had the right to call and presumably to preside over the court of discipline; and he had the regulation of the sacraments in his hands. On the other hand, it is very doubtful whether he, or even he in conjunction with the elders, could excommunicate; that appears to have remained in the hands of the congregational meeting. The bishop might convoke the congregational meeting for the purpose, but it belonged to the meeting and not to the bishop to appoint delegates and messengers to other churches; and the meeting had the power to order the bishop to go on such a mission.
(1) Aid Given in Selecting a Bishop.
From what has been said it is plain that the selection of a bishop became one of the most important acts a congregation was called upon to perform. Accordingly, provision was made for its assistance. It is declared in the Apostolic Canons that if a congregation contains fewer than twelve men competent to vote at the election of a bishop, neighboring, "well-established" churches are to be written to in order that three men may be sent to assist the congregation in selecting their pastor (Sources of the Apostolic Canons, 7, 8). This is evidently the origin of what afterward became the custom and later a law, that the consecration of a bishop required the presence of three neighboring bishops--a rule which has given occasion to the saying that "all Christendom becomes Presbyterian on a consecration day." This custom and rule, which in its beginnings was simply practical assistance given to a weak by stronger congregations, came to bear the meaning that the bishop thus consecrated was an office-bearer in the church universal as well as the pastor of a particular congregation. It is also more than probable that this practice of seeking assistance in an emergency is the germ out of which grew the Synod--the earliest recorded synods being congregational meetings assisted in times of difficulty by advice of experienced persons from other churches.
When a small group of villagers had been won to Christianity through the efforts of the Christian congregation in a neighboring town, they commonly were disinclined to separate from it, and came from their villages into town to join in the public worship. "On the day called Sunday," says Justin Martyr, "all who live in the city and in the country gather together into one place" (Ap., i.67). The earliest collections of canons show that the bishop was able in time of absence or sickness to delegate his duties to elders or even to deacons; and this enabled him, when occasion for it arose, to be, through his office-bearers, the pastor of several congregations. We can see the same process at work more clearly in large towns where the number of Christians had become very large. The bishop was always held to be the head of the Christian community, however large, in one place. He was the pastor; he baptized; he presided at the Holy Supper; he admitted catechumens to the full communion of the brotherhood. By the middle of the 3rd century the work in most large towns was more than one man could do. No record exists of the number of members belonging to the Roman church at this time, but some idea of its size may be obtained from the fact that it had more than 1,500 persons on its poor-roll; and before the close of the century the Roman Christians worshipped in over 40 separate places of meeting. It is obvious that one man could not perform the whole pastoral duties for such a multitude, and that most of the pastoral work must have been delegated to the elders or presbyters. The unity of the pastorate was for long strictly preserved by the custom that the bishop consecrated the communion elements in one church, and these were carried round to the other congregations. The bishop was thus the pastor in every congregation; the elders and deacons belonged to the whole Christian community; they served all the congregations and were not attached to one distinctively. In Alexandria, on the other hand, something like a parochial system gathered round the bishop, for individual presbyters were set over the separate congregations within the city. But always and without exception the original pastoral status of the bishop was preserved by the fact that one portion of the pastoral duties was invariably left in his hands--the rite of confirmation whereby catechumens were admitted to full communion.
II. Multiplication of Orders: Growth of a Hierarchy:
The middle of the 3rd century witnessed two changes in the ministry of the church. One was a multiplication of orders and the other the growth of a hierarchy; and while many causes went to produce these changes it can hardly be doubted that they were at least partly due to the imitation of pagan religious organization. Although we find the distinction between those who are to be obeyed and those who are to obey clearly laid down in the Epistles of Paul, we do not find a common term in general use to denote the former class until the beginning of the 3rd century. In the west the word was ordo, and in the east clerus, from which come our "orders" and "clergy." Ordo was the designation for the municipality in towns or for the committee which presided over a confraternity; and clerus denoted rank or class. The introduction of ministerial stipends and the implication that a paid ministry was expected to give its whole time to the service of the church made the distinction between clergy and laity more emphatic. When we investigate the matter, it is evident that the fact that the clergy are paid complicates the question; for the earliest lists are evidently those who are entitled to share in the funds of the church, and widows and orphans figure as members of the ordo or clerus. Setting this disturbing element aside we find that the earliest division of the ministry in the 3rd century is into bishops, presbyters and deacons (all congregational); but bishops and presbyters are sometimes said to form the special ordo ecclesiasticus. The earliest addition to those three orders is the reader, and there follows soon the sub-deacon. Then come such persons as exorcists, acolyths, singers, door-keepers and even grave-diggers; and to such the name "minor orders" is given. All are included within the clergy, all receive a proportionate share of the revenues of the congregational funds. The presence of bishops, presbyters and deacons needs no explanation. Readers, as we have seen, were needed at first to assist illiterate bishops or pastors; their retention and the insertion of exorcists have been plausibly accounted for by the idea that they represented the absorption of the old prophetic ministry. But in instituting the other minor orders the Christian church evidently copied the pagan temple usages where persons who performed corresponding services were included among the temple ministry and had due share of the temple revenues. In the institution of a graded hierarchy including metropolitans and patriarchs, the churches probably followed the example of the great pagan organization called forth by the imperial cult of the Divi and Divae (Lindsay, The Church and the Ministry, 335 ff). As Mommsen remarks, "The conquering Christian church took its hierarchic weapons from the arsenal of the enemy."
Synods to begin with were essentially democratic assemblies. They were, in their primitive form, congregational meetings assisted in times of emergency by delegates (not necessarily bishops) from "well-established churches," and they grew to be the instrument by which churches grouped round one center became united into one compact organization. The times were not democratic, and gradually the presence of the laity and even of presbyters and deacons and their combined assent to the decisions of the assembly became more and more a matter of form and gradually ceased altogether. The synods consisted exclusively of bishops and became councils for registering their decisions; and this implied that each local church was fully and completely represented by its pastor or bishop, who had become very much of an autocrat, responsible, not to his congregation nor even to a synod, but to God alone. Before the end of the 3rd century and onward, synods or councils had become a regular part of the organization of the whole church, and the membership was confined to the bishops of the several churches included within the group. It was natural that such assemblies should meet in the provincial capitals, for the roads converged to the cities which were the seats of the Roman provincial administration. A synod required a chairman, and various usages obtained about the natural chairman. At first the oldest bishop present was placed in the chair, and this continued long to be the practice in several parts of the empire. Gradually it became the habit to put into the chair the bishop of the town in which the council met, and this grew to a prescriptive right. It was then that the bishops of the towns which were the meeting-places of synods came to be called metropolitans. The title was for long one of courtesy only and did not carry with it any ecclesiastical rank and authority. But by the middle of the 4th century the metropolitans had acquired the right to summon the synods and even to exercise some authority over the bishops of the bounds, especially in the matter of election and consecration. When Christianity was thoroughly established as the religion of the empire, the more important bishops secured for themselves the civil precedence and privileges which had belonged to the higher priests of the abandoned Imperial Cult, and the higher ranks of the Christian ministry came into the possession of a lordship strangely at variance with their earlier position of service.
LITERATURE.
C. Vitringa, De synagoge vetere libra tres, Leucopetrae (Weissenfels), 1726; Bingham, Antiquities of the Christian Church, 1708-32; Bannermann, The Scripture Doctrine of the Church; Hort, The Christian Ecclesia; Lightfoot, Commentary on the Epistle to the Philippians (dissertation on the ministry); Hatch, The Organization of the Early Christian Church, and articles on "Orders" in Smith's Dictionary of Christian Antiquities; Harnack, The Expositor for January to June, 1887, and Entstehung u. Entwicklung der Kirchenverfassung .... in d. zwei ersten Jahrhunderten (1910) (English translation, The Constitution and Law of the Church); Lindsay, The Church and the Ministry in the Early Centuries; Schmiedel, article "Ministry" in EB; Gayford, article "Church" in HDB.
T. M. Lindsay
min'-i (minni): A kingdom mentioned in Jer 51:27, along with Ararat and Ashkenaz, as assailants of Babylon. It is identified with the Minnai of the Assyrian inscriptions, in close relation with, or part of, Armenia.
min'-ith (minnith; Codex Vaticanus achris Arnon; Codex Alexandrinus eis Semoeith): After Jephthah defeated the Ammonites, he is said to have smitten them from Aroer "until thou come to Minnith" (Jdg 11:33). Eusebius, Onomasticon mentions a place called Maanith, 4 Roman miles from Heshbon, on the road to Philadelphia (`Amman), and locates Abelcheramim, which is mentioned with Minnith, 7 miles from Philadelphia, without indicating the direction. Some travelers have spoken of a Menjah, 7 miles East of Heshbon, but of this place Tristram (Land of Moab, 140) could find no trace. The same place appears to be mentioned in Ezek 27:17 as supplying wheat, which figures in the trade between Judah and Tyre. There are really no reliable data on which to suggest an identification, while there are grave reasons to suspect the integrity of the text.
W. Ewing
min'-strel.
See MUSIC .
mint (heduosmon): Mentioned (Mt 23:23; Lk 11:42) as one of the small things which were tithed. The cultivated variety (Mentha piperita), "peppermint," was doubtless primarily intended, but the wild Mentha silvestris or horsemint, which flourishes all over the mountains of Palestine, is probably included.
mif'-kad, (sha`ar ha-miphqadh; the Revised Version (British and American) "Hammiphkad" (Neh 3:31)): A gate in, or near, the north end of the east wall of Jerusalem, rebuilt under Nehemiah. Its exact position is uncertain.
See JERUSALEM .
mar'-a-k'-l:
II. MIRACLE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
3. Trustworthiness of Evidence in Gospels and Acts
III. MIRACLE AND LAWS OF NATURE
1. Projudgment of Negative Criticism
3. Effects on Nature of New Agencies
4. Agreement with Biblical Idea and Terms
6. Miracle as Connected with Command
IV. EVIDENTIAL VALUE OF MIRACLE
1. Miracles as Proofs of Revelation
2. Miracles of Christ in This Relation
3. Miracles Part of Revelation
V. MIRACLES IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
1. Analogy with New Testament Miracles
1. Probability of Such Miracles
VII. MIRACLE IN WORKS OR GRACE
LITERATURE.
"Miracle" is the general term for the wonderful phenomena which accompanied the Jewish and Christian revelation, especially at critical moments, and which are alleged to have been continued, under certain conditions, in the history of the Christian church. The miracle proper is a work of God (Ex 7:3 ff; Dt 4:34,35, etc.; Jn 3:2; 9:32,33; 10:38; Acts 10:38, etc.); but as supernatural acts miracles are recognized as possible to evil agencies (Mt 24:24; 2 Thess 2:9; Rev 13:14; 16:14, etc.).
The Biblical idea of miracle as an extraordinary work of God, generally though not invariably ("providential" miracles--see below,II , 6), transcending the ordinary powers of Nature, wrought in connection with the ends of revelation, is illustrated by the terms used to describe miracles in the Old Testament and New Testament. One class of terms brings out the unusual, exceptional, and striking character of the works, as pele', niphla'oth (Ex 3:20; 15:11, etc.), teras, literally, "a portent" (in plural Mt 24:24; Acts 2:22,43, etc.); another lays stress on the power displayed in them, as gebhurah, dunamis (in plural "mighty works," the Revised Version margin "powers," Mt 11:20,21,23; 13:54; 14:2; 2 Cor 12:12, etc.); a third gives prominence to their teleological significance--their character as "signs," as 'oth (plural the Revised Version (British and American) "signs," Nu 14:22; Dt 11:3, etc.), semeion (plural the Revised Version (British and American) "signs," Jn 2:11,23, and frequently; Acts 4:16,22; 6:8; Rev 13:14, etc.). Another Old Testament word for "wonder" or "miracle" is mopheth (Ex 7:9; Dt 29:3). See, further, below, III, 4.
II. Miracle in the New Testament.
1. Miracles in Gospel History:
The subject of miracles has given rise to much abstract discussion; but it is best approached by considering the actual facts involved, and it is best to begin with the facts nearest to us: those which are recorded in the New Testament. Our Lord's ministry was attended from first to last by events entirely beyond the ordinary course of Nature. He was born of a Virgin, and His birth was announced by angels, both to His mother, and to the man to whom she was betrothed (Matthew and Luke). He suffered death on the cross as an ordinary man, but on the third day after His crucifixion He rose from the tomb in which He was buried, and lived with His disciples for 40 days (Acts 1:3), eating and drinking with them, but with a body superior to ordinary physical conditions. At length He ascended to the heavens, and a cloud received Him out of their sight. But besides these two great miracles of His birth and His resurrection, Jesus was continually performing miracles during His ministry. His own words furnish the best description of the facts. In reply to the question of John the Baptist, His predecessor, He said, "Go and tell John the things which ye hear and see: the blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have good tidings preached to them" (Mt 11:4,5). Specimens of these miracles are given in detail in the Gospel narratives; but it is a mistake to consider the matter, as is too often done, as though these particular miracles were the only ones in question. Even if they could be explained away, as has often been attempted, there would remain reiterated statements of the evangelists, such as Matthew's that He "went about in all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of disease and all manner of sickness among the people" (Mt 4:23), or Luke's "And a great number of the people from all Judea and Jerusalem, and the seacoast of Tyre and Sidon, who came to hear him, and to be healed of their diseases; and they that were troubled with unclean spirits were healed. And all the multitude sought to touch him; for power came forth from him, and healed them all" (Lk 6:17-19).
It must be borne in mind that if there is any assured result of modern criticism, it is that these accounts proceed from contemporaries and eyewitnesses, and with respect to the third evangelist there is one unique consideration of great import. The researches of Dr. Hobart have proved to the satisfaction of a scholar like Harnack, that Luke was a trained physician. His testimony to the miracles is therefore the nearest thing possible to the evidence which has often been desired--that of a man of science. When Luke, e.g., tells us of the healing of a fever (4:38,39), he uses the technical term for a violent fever recognized in his time (compare Meyer, in the place cited); his testimony is therefore that of One who knew what fevers and the healing of them meant. This consideration is especially valuable in reference to the miracles recorded of Paul in the latter part of Acts. it should always be borne in mind that they are recorded by a physician, who was an eyewitness of them.
3. Trustworthiness of Evidence in Gospels and Acts:
It seems to follow from these considerations that the working of miracles by our Lord, and by Paul in innumerable cases, cannot be questioned without attributing to the evangelists a wholesale untrustworthiness, due either to willful, or to superstitious misrepresentation, and this is a supposition which will certainly never commend itself to a fair and competent judgment. It would involve, in fact, such a sweeping condemnation of the evangelists, that it could never be entertained at all except under one presupposition, namely, that such miraculous occurrences, as being incompatible with the established laws of Nature, could not possibly have happened, and that consequently any allegations of them must of necessity be attributed to illusion or fraud.
III. Miracle and Laws of Nature.
1. Pre-judgment of Negative Criticism:
This, in fact, is the prejudgment or prejudice which has prompted, either avowedly or tacitly, the great mass of negative criticism on this subject, and if it could be substantiated, we should be confronted, in the Gospels, with a problem of portentous difficulty. On this question of the abstract possibility of miracles, it seems sufficient to quote the following passage from the Gifford Lectures for 1891 of the late eminent man of science, Professor Sir George Stokes.
On page 23 Professor Stokes says: "We know very well that a man may in general act uniformly according to a certain rule, and yet for a special reason may on a particular occasion act quite differently. We cannot refuse to admit the possibility of something analogous taking place as regards the action of the Supreme Being. If we think of the laws of Nature as self-existent and uncaused, then we cannot admit any deviation from them. But if we think of them as designed by a Supreme Will, then we must allow the possibility of their being on some particular occasion suspended. Nor is it even necessary, in order that some result out of the ordinary course of Nature should be brought about, that they should even be suspended; it may be that some different law is brought into action, whereby the result in question is brought about, without any suspension whatever of the laws by which the ordinary course of Nature is regulated. .... It may be that the event which we call a miracle was brought about, not by any suspension of the laws in ordinary operation, but by the superaddition of something not ordinarily in operation, or, if in operation, of such a nature that its operation is not perceived."
3. Effects on Nature of New Agencies:
Only one consideration need be added to this decisive scientific statement, namely, that if there be agencies and forces in existence outside the ordinary world of Nature, and if they can under certain circumstances interpose in it, they must necessarily produce effects inconsistent with the processes of that world when left to itself. Life under the surface of the water has a certain course of its own when undisturbed; but if a man standing on the bank of a river throws a stone into it, effects are produced which must be as unexpected and as unaccountable as a miracle to the creatures who live in the stream. The nearness of two worlds which are absolutely distinct from one another receives, indeed, a striking illustration from the juxtaposition of the world above the water and the world below its surface. There is no barrier between them; they are actually in contact; yet the life in them is perfectly distinct. The spiritual world may be as close to us as the air is to the water, and the angels, or other ministers of God's will, may as easily, at His word, interpose in it as a man can throw a stone into the water. When a stone is thus thrown, there is no suspension or modification of any law; it is simply that, as Sir George Stokes supposes in the case of a miracle, a new agency has interposed.
4. Agreement with Biblical Idea and Terms:
This, indeed, is the main fact of which miracles are irresistible evidence. They show that some power outside Nature, some supernatural power, has intervened. They are exactly described by the three words in the New Testament already mentioned. They are terata, "prodigies" or "wonders"; they are also dunameis, virtutes, "powers," or "manifestation of powers"; and finally they are semeia, "signs." The three conceptions are combined, and the source of such manifestations stated with them, in a pregnant verse of Hebrews: "God also bearing witness with them, both by signs and wonders, and by manifold powers, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to his own will" (2:4).
The words of J. S. Mill on the question of the possibility of miracles may also be quoted. Dealing with the objection of Hume in his Essay on Miracles, Mill observes: "In order that any alleged fact should be contradictory to a law of causation, the allegation must be, not simply that the cause existed without being followed by the effect, for that would be no uncommon occurrence; but that this happened in the absence of any adequate counteracting cause. Now in the case of an alleged miracle, the assertion is the exact opposite of this. It is that the effect was defeated, not in the absence, but in consequence, of a counteracting cause, namely, a direct interposition of an act of the will of some being who has power over Nature; and in particular of a Being, whose will being assumed to have endowed all the causes with the powers by which they produce their effects, may well be supposed able to counteract them. A miracle (as was justly remarked by Brown) is no contradiction to the law of cause and effect; it is a new effect, supposed to be produced by the introduction of a new cause. Of the adequacy of that cause, if present; there can be no doubt; and the only antecedent improbability which can be ascribed to the miracle is the improbability that any such cause existed" (System of Logic, II, 161-62).
6. Miracle as Connected with Command:
There is, however, one other important characteristic of miracles--of those at least with which we are concerned--namely, that they occur at the command, or at the prayer, of the person to whom they are attributed. This is really their most significant feature, and the one upon which their whole evidential value depends. One critic has compared the fall of the fortifications of Jellalabad, on a critical occasion, with the fall of the walls of Jericho, as though the one was no more a miracle than the other. But the fall of the walls of Jericho, though it may well have been produced by some natural force such as an earthquake, bears the character of a miracle because it was predicted, and was thus commanded by God to occur in pursuance of the acts prescribed to Joshua. Similarly the whole significance of our Lord's miracles is that they occur at His word and in obedience to Him. "What manner of man is this," exclaimed the disciples, "that even the winds and the sea obey him?" (Mt 8:27).
IV. Evidential Value of Miracle.
1. Miracles as Proofs of Revelation:
This leads us to the true view of the value of miracles as proofs of a revelation. This is one of the points which has been discussed in far too abstract a manner. Arguments have been, and still are, constructed to show that there can be no real revelation without miracles, that miracles are the proper proof of a revelation, and so on. It is always a perilous method of argument, perhaps a presumptuous one, to attempt to determine whether God could produce a given result in any other way than the one which He has actually adopted. The only safe, and the sufficient, method of proceeding is to consider whether as a matter of fact, and in what way, the miracles which are actually recorded do guarantee the particular revelation in question.
2. Miracles of Christ in This Relation:
Consider our Lord's miracles in this light. Assuming, on the grounds already indicated, that they actually occurred, they prove beyond doubt that He had supreme command over Nature; that not only the winds and the sea, but the human soul and body obeyed him, and in the striking words of the English service for the Visitation of the Sick, that He was "Lord of life and death, and of all things thereto pertaining, as youth, strength, health, age, weakness and sickness." This is the grand fact which the miracles establish. They are not like external evidence, performed in attestation of a doctrine. They are direct and eloquent evidence of the cardinal truth of our faith, that our Lord possessed powers which belong to God Himself. But they are not less direct evidence of the special office He claimed toward the human race--that of a Saviour. He did not merely work wonders in order that men might believe His assertions about Himself, but His wonderful works, His powers--virtues--were direct evidence of their truth. He proved that He was a Saviour by doing the works of a Saviour, by healing men and women from their diseases of both body and soul. It is well known that salvation in the true sense, namely, saving men out of evils and corruptions into which they have fallen, is an idea which was actually introduced into the world by the gospel. There was no word for it in the Roman language. The ancients know of a servator, but not of a salvator. The essential message of the miracles is that they exhibit our Lord in this character--that of one who has alike the will and the power to save. Such is our Lord's own application of them in His answer, already quoted, to the disciples of John the Baptist (Mt 11:4,5).
3. Miracles Part of Revelation:
It is therefore an extraordinary mistake to suppose that the evidence for our faith would not be damaged if the miracles were set aside. We should lose the positive evidence we now possess of our Lord's saving power. In this view, the miracles are not the mere proofs of a revelation; they are themselves the revelation. They reveal a Saviour from all human ills, and there has been no other revelation in the world of such a power. The miracles recorded of the apostles have a like effect. They are wrought, like Peter's of the impotent man, as evidence of the living power of the Saviour (Acts 3; 4). "Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even in him doth this man stand here before you whole. .... And in none other is there salvation: for neither is there any other name under heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved" (Acts 4:10,12). In a word, the miracles of the New Testament, whether wrought by our Lord or by His apostles, reveal a new source of power, in the person of our Lord, for the salvation of men. Whatever interference they involve with the usual order of Nature is due, not to any modification of that order, but to the intervention of a new force in it. The nature of that force is revealed by them, and can only be ascertained by observation of them. A man is known by his words and by his deeds, and to these two sources of revelation, respecting His person and character, our Lord expressly appealed. "If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do them, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father" (Jn 10:37,38).
It is therefore a mistake to try to put the evidence of the miracles into a logically demonstrative argument. Paley stated the case too much in this almost anathematized form.
"It is idle," he said, "to say that a future state had been discovered already. It had been discovered as the Copernican system was; it was one guess among many. He alone discovers who proves; and no man can prove this point but the teacher who testifies by miracles that his doctrine comes from God" (Moral and Polit. Philosophy, book V, chapter ix, close).
Coleridge, in the Aids to Reflection, criticizes the above and puts the argument in a more just and more human form.
"Most fervently do I contend, that the miracles worked by Christ, both as miracles and as fulfillments of prophecy, both as signs and as wonders, made plain discovery, and gave unquestionable proof, of His Divine character and authority; that they were to the whole Jewish nation true and appropriate evidences, that He was indeed come who had promised and declared to their forefathers, Behold your God will come with vengeance, even God, with a recompense! He will come and save you. I receive them as proofs, therefore, of the truth of every word which He taught who was Himself the Word: and as sure evidences of the final victory over death and of the life to come, in that they were manifestations of Him who said: I am the resurrection and the life!" (note prefatory to Aphorism CXXIII).
This seems the fittest manner in which to contemplate the evidence afforded by miracles.
V. Miracles in the Old Testament.
1. Analogy with New Testament Miracles:
If the miracles ascribed to our Lord and His apostles are established on the grounds now stated, and are of the value just explained, there can be little difficulty in principle in accepting as credible and applying the miracles of the Old Testament. They also are obviously wrought as manifestations of a Divine Being, and as evidences of His character and will.
This, e.g., was the great purpose of the miracles wrought for the deliverance of the people of Israel out of Egypt. The critical theories which treat the narrative of those events as "unhistorical" are, I am convinced, unsound. If they could be established, they would deprive us of some of the most precious evidences we possess of the character of God. But, in any case, the purpose to which the alleged miracles are ascribed is of the same character as in the case of the New Testament miracles. "For ask now," says Moses, "of the days that are past .... whether there hath been any such thing as this great thing is, or hath been heard like it? Did ever a people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as thou hast heard, and live? Or hath God assayed to go and take him a nation from the midst of another nation, by trials, by signs, and by wonders, and by war, and by a mighty hand, and by an outstretched arm, and by great terrors, according to all that Yahweh your God did for you in Egypt before your eyes? Unto thee it was showed, that thou mightest know that Yahweh he is God; there is none else besides him" (Dt 4:32-35). The God of the Jews was, and is, the God manifested in those miraculous acts of deliverance. Accordingly, the Ten Commandments are introduced with the declaration: "I am Yahweh thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage," and on this follows: "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Ex 20:2,3). Without these miracles, the God of the Jews would be an abstraction. As manifested in them, He is the living God, with a known character, "a just God and a Saviour" (Isa 45:21), who can be loved with all the heart, and soul, and mind, and strength.
The subsequent miracles of Jewish history, like those wrought by Elijah, serve the same great end, and reveal more and more both of the will and the power of God. They are not mere portents, wrought as an external testimony to a doctrine. They are the acts of a living Being wrought through His ministers, or with their cooperation, and He is revealed by them. If the miracles of the New Testament were possible, those of the Old Testament were possible, and as those of the New Testament reveal the nature and will of Christ, by word and deed, so those of the Old Testament reveal the existence, the nature, and the will of God. Nature, indeed, reveals God, but the miracles reveal new and momentous acts of God; and the whole religious life of the Jews, as the Psalms show, is indissolubly bound up with them. The evidence for them is, in fact, the historic consciousness of a great and tenacious nation.
It should be added that the Jewish Scriptures embody one of the greatest of miracles--that of prophecy. It is obvious that the destiny of the Jewish people is predicted from the commencement, in the narrative of the life of Abraham and onward. There can, moreover, be no question that the office of the Christ had been so distinctly foreshadowed in the Scriptures of the Old Testament that the people, as a whole, expected a Messiah before He appeared. our Lord did not, like Buddha or Mohammed, create a new office; He came to fill an office which had been described by the prophets, and of which they had predicted the functions and powers. We are told of the Saviour, "And beginning from Moses and from all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself" (Lk 24:27). That, again, is a revelation of God's nature, for it reveals Him as "knowing the end from the beginning," and as the Ruler of human life and history.
1. Probability of Such Miracles:
Some notice, finally, must be taken of the question of what are called ecclesiastical miracles. There seems no sufficient reason for assuming that miracles ceased with the apostles, and there is much evidence that in the early church miraculous cures, both of body and soul, were sometimes vouchsafed. There were occasions and circumstances when the manifestation of such miraculous power was as appropriate as testimony of the living power of Christ, as in the scenes in the Acts. But they were not recorded under inspired guidance, like the miracles of the Apostolic Age, and they have in many cases been overlaid by legend.
The observation in Pascal's Thoughts eminently applies to this class of miracles: "It has appeared to me that the real cause (that there are so many false miracles, false revelations, etc.) is that there are true ones, for it would not be possible that there should be so many false miracles unless there were true, nor so many false religions unless there were one that is true. For if all this had never been, it is impossible that so many others should have believed it. .... Thus instead of concluding that there are no true miracles since there are so many false, we must on the contrary say that there are true miracles since there are so many false, and that false miracles exist only for the reason that there are true; so also that there are false religions only because there is one that is true" (On Miracles).
VII. Miracle in Works of Grace.
It has lately been argued with much earnestness and force in Germany, particularly by J. Wendland, in his Miracles and Christianity, that belief in miracles is indispensable to our apprehension of a real living God, and to our trust in His saving work in our own souls. The work of grace and salvation, indeed, is all so far miraculous that it requires the influence upon our nature of a living power above that nature. It is not strictly correct to call it miraculous, as these operations of God's Spirit are now an established part of His kingdom of grace. But they none the less involve the exercise of a like supernatural power to that exhibited in our Lord's miracles of healing and casting out of demons; and in proportion to the depths of man's Christian life will he be compelled to believe in the gracious operation on his soul of this Divine interposition.
On the whole, it is perhaps increasingly realized that miracles, so far from being an excrescence on Christian faith, are indissolubly bound up with it, and that there is a complete unity in the manifestation of the Divine nature, which is recorded in the Scriptures.
LITERATURE.
Trench, Notes on the Miracles; Mozley, Bampton Lectures (Mozley's argument is perhaps somewhat marred by its too positive and controversial tone, but, if the notes be read as well as the Lectures, the reader will obtain a comprehensive view of the main controversies on the subject); A.B. Bruce, The Miraculous Element in the Gospels. For modern German views see J. Wendland, Miracles and Christianity; Christlieb, Modern Doubt and Christian Belief. Paley's Evidences and Butler's Analogy may profitably be consulted. On continuance of miracles, see Bushnell, Nature and the Supernatural, chapter xiv, and Christlieb, as above, Lecture V.
H. Wace
See SPIRITUAL GIFTS ;MIRACLE .
me-razh' (sharabh, "heat-mirage"; Arabic sarab, from verb which means "to go forth," "to flow"; hence, "flowing of water"): "The glowing sand shall become a pool, and the thirsty ground springs of water" (Isa 35:7); the King James Version has "parched ground" and the Revised Version margin "mirage." The same Hebrew word is also used in Isa 49:10, "Neither shall the heat (margin "mirage") nor sun smite them." These are the only uses of the word in the Scriptures, although mirages are very common in the drier parts of the country. However, the context in both cases seems to justify the translation usually given, rather than "mirage."
Alfred H. Joy
mir.
See CHALKSTONE ;CLAY ;MARSH .
mir'-i-am (miryam; Septuagint and the New Testament Mariam; English Versions of the Bible of the New Testament "Mary"):
(1) Daughter of Amram and Jochebed, and sister of Aaron and Moses. It is probable that it was she who watched the ark of bulrushes in which the child Moses was laid (Ex 2:4). She associated herself with her brothers in the exodus, is called "the prophetess," and led the choir of maidens who sang the triumph-song after the crossing of the Red Sea (Ex 15:20 f). Along with Aaron, she opposed Moses at Hazeroth (Nu 12:1-5). She was smitten with leprosy in punishment, but on Aaron's intercession was pardoned and healed (Nu 12:10-15). She died and was buried at Kadesh (Nu 20:1). In the Deuteronomic Law respecting leprosy, Miriam is mentioned as a warning to the Israelites (Dt 24:8 f). In Mic 6:4, she is referred to along with Moses and Aaron as a leader of God's people.
(2) Son (or daughter) of Jether (1 Ch 4:17). The latter half of the verse is in its present situation unintelligible; it should probably follow verse 18 (see Curtis, Chronicles, in the place cited.).
John A. Lees
mur'-ma (mirmah, "deceit"): A Benjamite (1 Ch 8:10).
mir'er.
See LOOKING-GLASS .
mis'-a-el, mi'-sa-el (Codex Alexandrinus Misael; Codex Vaticanus Meisael):
(1) One of those who stood on Ezra's left hand as he expounded the Law (1 Esdras 9:44 = "Mishael," Neh 8:4).
(2) In The Song of the Three Children verse 66 (Septuagint Dan 3:88), for "Mishael," one of Daniel's companions in captivity.
mi-sa'-yas, mi-si'-as: the Revised Version margin = "Masias."
mis'-chif: The word, in the sense of "hurt" or "evil" befalling, plotted against, or done to, anyone, represents a variety of Hebrew terms (e.g. 'acon, the King James Version Gen 42:4; 44:29; Ex 21:22; ra`, 1 Sam 23:9; 2 Sam 16:8; 1 Ki 11:25, etc.; `amal, Ps 7:14,16; 10:7,14; Prov 24:2, etc.). Sometimes the Revised Version (British and American) changes the word, as to "evil" (Ex 32:12,22); in Acts 13:10, to "villany" (rhadiourgia).
In the Revised Version (British and American) Apocrypha the word is used for kaka, "evils," Additions to Esther 13:5 (compare Sirach 19:28); kakia, "evil," 1 Macc 7:23; and Latin malum, "evil," 2 Esdras 15:56. "Mischievous" is used, Additions to Esther 14:19, for ponereuomai, "to be evil." The use in the King James Version Apocrypha is considerably more extended (Sirach 11:33; 19:27; 27:27, etc.).
James Orr
mis'-gab (ha-misgabh; Codex Vaticanus Amath; Codex Alexandrinus to krataioma): Named with Nebo and Kiriathaim in the denunciation of doom against Moab (Jer 48:1). No trace of any name resembling this has been found. Possibly we should take it, not as a place-name, but as an appellation of some strong fortress, perhaps of Kir-moab itself. The term is elsewhere translated "high fortress" (Isa 25:12, etc.).
mish'-a-el, mi'-sha-el (misha'el, perhaps = "who is equal to God?"):
(1) A Kohathite, 4th in descent from Levi (Ex 6:22). He and his brother Elzaphan carried out Moses' order to remove from the sanctuary and the camp the corpses of Nadab and Abihu (Lev 10:4 f).
(2) A supporter of Ezra at the reading of the Law (Neh 8:4).
(3) The Hebrew name of one of Daniel's 3 companions (Dan 1:6,7,11,19; 2:17). His Babylonian name was MESHACH (which see).
mi'-shal (mish'al): A town in the territory of Asher (Josh 19:26, the King James Version "Misheal," Maasa), assigned to the Gershonite Levites (Josh 21:30; Codex Vaticanus Bassellan; Codex Alexandrinus Masaal = "Mashal" of 1 Ch 6:74). Eusebius, Onomasticon (s.v. "Masan") places it near Carmel by the sea. It is not identified.
mi'-sham (mish`am): A Benjamite, son of Elpaal (1 Ch 8:12).
mish'-e-al.
See MISHAL .
mish'ma (mishma`):
(1) A son of Ishmael (Gen 25:14; 1 Ch 1:30).
(2) A Simeonite (1 Ch 4:25).
mish-man'-a (mishmannah): A Gadite warrior who joined David at Ziklag (1 Ch 12:10).
mish'-na.
See TALMUD .
mish'-ne (ha-mishneh; 2 Ki 22:14; 2 Ch 34:22, the King James Version "college," the Revised Version (British and American) "second quarter," margin "Hebrew Mishneh"; Zeph 1:10, the King James Version "the second," the Revised Version (British and American) "second quarter," margin "Hebrew: Mishneh"): A part of Jerusalem, apparently not far from the FISH GATE (which see) and the MAKTESH (which see). The translation "college" is due to Targum of Jonathan on 2 Ki 22:14. The Revised Version (British and American) interpretation of Mishneh is connected with the belief that Hezekiah, when he built "the other wall without" (1 Ch 32:5), made the second wall on the North. There seems little evidence of this (see JERUSALEM ,VI , 11), and the "second" may refer to the district of the city on the west hill or perhaps to the hill itself.
See COLLEGE .
E. W. G. Masterman
mi'-shor.
See PLAIN , and also note inHDB ,III , 309.
mish'-ra-its (ha-mishra`i): One of the families of Kiriath-jearim (1 Ch 2:53).
mis'-par (micpar): An exile who returned with Zerubbabel (Ezr 2:2). the King James Version spells the name "Mizpar." In the parallel verse of Nehemiah it appears as "Mispereth" (Neh 7:7).
mis'-pe-reth (micpereth).
See MISPAR .
miz-re-foth-ma'-im (misrephoth mayim; Septuagint Maseron, Masereth Memphomaim): A place to which Joshua chased the various tribes, which were confederated under Jabin, after their defeat at the waters of Merom (Josh 11:8). It follows the mention of great Sidon, as though it was a place in the same region but farther from the point of departure. In Josh 13:6, it is also mentioned in connection with the Sidonians, as though it was included in their territory, so it must have been in the coast district, or Phoenicia, which was in that period dominated by Sidon. The Canaanites who were among the tribes forming the hosts of Jabin would naturally seek refuge among their brethren in Sidon and its territory. They fled across the hill country which lies between the waters of Merom and the coast, but as Sidon is situated considerably to the North of Merom, some would seek the coast by a more southerly route, and we may look for Misrephoth-maim there. Dr. Thomson (LB, II, 266-67, edition 1882) locates it at Ras el-Musheirifeh, some 13 miles South of Tyre, where there was a stronghold, and where the fugitives might find refuge (see LADDER OF TYRE ). Though the name hardly suggests Misrephoth-maim, the identification may be accepted until some better one is found.
H. Porter
('edh; achlus, homichie): Mist is caused by particles of water vapor filling the air until it is only partially transparent. Mist and haze produce much the same effect, the one being due to moisture in the atmosphere and the other to dust particles. Mist or fog is not common on the plains of Palestine and Syria at sea-level, but is of almost daily occurrence in the mountain valleys, coming up at night and disappearing with the morning sun (The Wisdom of Solomon 2:4). It is nothing else than a cloud touching the land. In the account of creation, "there went up a mist from the earth," giving a description of the warm humid atmosphere of the carboniferous ages which agrees remarkably with the teaching of modern science (Gen 2:6). The word is used figuratively in Acts 13:11 to describe the shutting out of light. Those who bring confusion and uncertainty are compared to "mists driven by a storm" (2 Pet 2:17).
See VAPOR .
Alfred H. Joy
mis'-tres (ba`alah, gebhereth): Is the translation of ba`alah, "lady," "owner" (1 Ki 17:17; Nah 3:4); in 1 Sam 28:7, "a woman that hath a familiar spirit" is literally, "the mistress of a familiar spirit"; of gebhereth (Gen 16:4,8,9; 2 Ki 5:3; Ps 123:2; Prov 30:23; Isa 24:2); in Isa 47:5,7, we have the King James Version and the English Revised Version "lady," the American Standard Revised Version "mistress."
mit (lepton): The smallest copper or bronze coin current among the Jews. They were first struck by the Maccabean princes with Hebrew legends, and afterward by the Herods and the Roman procurators with Greek legends. The "widow's mite" mentioned in Mk 12:42 and Lk 21:2 was probably of the first kind, since those with Greek legends were regarded as unlawful in the temple service. According to Mark, the lepton was only half a kodrantes (Latin quadrans), which would indicate a value of about one-fourth of a cent or half an English farthing.
See MONEY .
H. Porter
mith'-ka (mithqah "sweetness"; the King James Version Mithcah): Name given owing to sweetness of pasture or water. A desert camp of the Israelites between Terah and Hashmonah (Nu 33:28 f).
See WANDERINGS OF ISRAEL .
mith'-nit (ha-mithni): Designation of Jehoshaphat, one of David's officers (1 Ch 11:43).
mith-ra-da'-tez (Codex Alexandrinus Mithradates; Codex Vaticanus Mithridates; the King James Version Mithridates):
(1) The treasurer of Cyrus to whom the king committed the vessels which had been taken from the temple and who delivered them to the governor, Sanabassar (1 Esdras 2:11 = "Mithredath" of Ezr 1:8).
(2) Apparently another person of the same name--one of the commissioners stationed in Samaria who wrote a letter to Artaxerxes persuading him to put a stop to the rebuilding of Jerusalem (1 Esdras 2:16 = "Mithredath" of Ezr 4:7).
S. Angus
mith'-re-dath (mithredhath; Persian = "gift of Mithra" or "consecrated to Mithra"):
(1) The Persian treasurer through whom Cyrus restored the sacred vessels to the returning Jewish exiles (Ezr 1:8).
(2) A Persian, perhaps an official, who was associated with Bishlam and Tabeel in corresponding with Artaxerxes concerning the restoration of Jerusalem (Ezr 4:7). In 1 Esdras 2:11,16, the name is written MITHRADATES (which see).
mi'-ter In the King James Version this word renders two Hebrew words, both of which, however, come from the same stem, namely, tsanaph, "to coil" or "to wrap round." In Ex 28, a mitre (the Revised Version margin "turban") is enumerated among Aaron's articles of dress, which were to be made by tailors of recognized skill. On the forefront of the mitre was a "plate of pure gold" with the words "Holy to Yahweh" (i.e. consecrated to Yahweh) inscribed upon it. This gold plate was fastened to the mitre by a blue ribbon. The material of the mitre was fine linen or silk. The word for the headtire (the King James Version "bonnet") of the ordinary priest was a different word. Ezekiel uses the word in connection with Zedekiah (21:26); the prophet associated regal and priestly functions with the throne. It is possible, however, that the two sentences--"remove the mitre," and "take off the crown"--refer to the degradation of the priesthood and of the throne which the downfall of Jerusalem will involve. The Septuagint varies between kidaris and mitra, the former word being used in Sirach 45:12.
T. Lawns
mit-i-le'-ne, mit-i-lye'-nye (Mitulene, or Mutilene as usually on coins):
In antiquity the most important city of the Asiatic Aeolians and of the island of Lesbos. It had 2 harbors and strong fortresses. The city was noted for its high culture and for its zeal for art and science from the earliest times. The island, under the leadership of Mitylene, revolted in 428 BC from the Athenian confederacy. The city was besieged by the Athenians and finally taken. The inhabitants of Mitylene were treated with great severity; the walls were dismantled, and the city was deprived of its power on the sea. In the time of Alexander the Great, Mitylene suffered most through the Persians, and later by the occupation of the Macedonians, but afterward regained its power and prosperity, and still later was favored by the Roman emperors, being made a free city by Pompey.
In the Middle Ages, the name Mitylene was applied to the whole island. The present capital, often called simply Castro, has a large castle built on the site of the ancient acropolis (in 1373). The city was conquered by the Turks in 1462. It contains 14 mosques, 7 churches, and has a population of about 15,000.
On his third missionary journey, Paul traveled to the Hellespont from Philippi, thence through the Troad by land to Assos on the southern side--where extensive excavations were carried on in 1881 by an American archaeological expedition--thence by ship to Mitylene (Acts 20:14), where he spent the night. Leaving Lesbos, he sailed southward to a point opposite the island of Chios (Acts 20:15). There is no record that a Christian church had been established in Mitylene at this time.
LITERATURE.
Tozer, Islands of the Aegean, 121, 134 f, 136; Ramsay, Paul the Traveler, 291 ff.
J. E. Harry
mikst, mul'-ti-tud.
See MINGLED PEOPLE .
mi'-zar, (har mits`ar; oros mikros): The name of a mountain found only in Ps 42:6; "I remember thee from the land of Jordan, and the Hermons, from the hill Mizar." The term may be taken as an appellative meaning "littleness" and the phrase mehar mits`ar would then mean "from the little mountain," i.e. the little mountain of Zion. Some scholars think that the "m" in mehar may have arisen from dittography, and that we should read, "from the land of Jordan, and the Hermons, O thou little mountain (of Zion)." G.A. Smith discusses the question in a note (HGHL, 477). He suggests that certain names found in the district (za`ura, wady za`arah, and Khirbet Mazara) may be a reminiscence of the name of a hill in the district called Mits`ar; and surly none other would have been put by the Psalmist in apposition to the Hermons. Cheyne says: "To me this appendage to Hermonim seems a poetic loss. Unless the little mountain has a symbolic meaning I could wish it away." I cannot see this: the symbolic meanings suggested for Hermonim and Mits`ar are all forced, and even if we got a natural one, it would be out of place after the literal land of Jordan. To employ all as proper names is suitable to a lyric. No identification is at present possible.
W. Ewing
miz'-pa, miz'-pe: This name is pointed both ways in the Hebrew, and is found usually with the article. The meaning seems to be "outlook" or "watchtower." It is natural, therefore, to look for the places so named in high positions commanding wide prospects.
(1) (ha-mitspah (Gen 31:49; Jdg 11:11,34), mitspah (Hos 5:1), mitspeh ghil`adh (Jdg 11:29); Massepha, ten skopian, and other forms): It seems probable that the same place is intended in all these passages, and that it is identical with Ramath-mizpeh of Josh 13:26. It is the place where Jacob and Laban parted in Mt. Gilead; consequently it lay to the North of Mahanaim. Here was the home of Jephthah, to which he returned after the defeat of the Aremonites, only to realize how his rash vow had brought desolation to his house. It was taken by Judas Maccabeus, who destroyed the inhabitants and burned the city (1 Macc 5:35). Jerash, and Kal`at er-Rabad; but these seem all to lie South of any possible site for Mahanaim. A ruined site was discovered by Dr. Schumacher (M und NPDV, 1897, 86), with the name Macfa, which is just the Arabic equivalent of the Hebrew Mitspah. It lies some distance to the Northwest of Jerash and claims consideration in any attempt to fix the site of Mizpah.
(2) ('erets ha-mitspah (Josh 11:3), biq`ath mitspeh (verse 8); Masseuman, Massephath, and other forms): The "land of Mizpah" and the "valley of Mizpah" may be taken as applying to the same district. It lay on the southwest slopes of Hermon Northeast of the Waters of Merom. The site must be looked for on one of the heights in the region indicated, from which a wide view is obtained. MuTallah, a Druze village standing on a hill to the North of `Abil and East of Nahr el-Chasbany, was suggested by Robinson. The present writer agrees with Buhl (GAP, 240) that the ancient castle above Banias, Kal`at ec-Cubeibeh, occupies a more likely position.
(3) (mitspeh; Maspha): A town in the Shephelah of Judah named with Dilan, Joktheel and Lachish (Tell el-Hesy). Eusebius, Onomasticon mentions a Macfa in the neighborhood of Eleutheropolis, to the North. The identification proposed by Van de Velde and Guerin would suit this description. They would locate Mizeph at Tell ec-Cafiyeh, about 7 1/2 miles Northwest of Beit Jibrin, "a conspicuous hill with a glittering white cliff rising like an isolated block above the adjacent country" (PEFS, 1903, 276). Many identify this site with Gath, but the name and character of the place point rather to identification with Mizpeh, the Blanche Guarde or Alba Specula of the Middle Ages.
(4) (ha-mitspah; Massema, Maspha): A town in the territory of Benjamin (Josh 18:26). Hither came the men of Israel to deal with the Benjamites after the outrage on the Levite's concubine (Jdg 20:1,3; 21:1,5,8). At Mizpah, Samuel gathered his countrymen. While there crying to God in their distress, they were attacked by the Philistines, whom they defeated with great slaughter (1 Sam 7:5, etc.). Here also Saul, the son of Kish, was chosen king, after which Samuel told the people the "manner of the kingdom" (10:17, etc.). Mizpah was fortified by Asa, king of Judah, with materials which Baasha, king of Israel, had used to fortify Ramah (1 Ki 15:22; 2 Ch 16:6). When Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem and made Gedaliah, the son of Ahikam, governor of the remnant of the people left in the land of Judah, the governor's residence was fixed at Mizpah (2 Ki 25:23). Here he was joined by Jeremiah, whom Nebuzaradan, captain of the Babylonian guard, had set free. At Mizpah, Ishmael, son of Nathaiah, treacherously slew Gedaliah and many who were with him. Two days later he murdered a company of pilgrims, throwing their dead bodies into the great cistern which Asa had made when strengthening the place against possible attack by Baasha of Samaria. He then made prisoners of the people, including the king's daughters, and attempted to convey them away to the Ammonites, an attempt that was frustrated by Johanan, son of Kareah (Jer 40; 41). Mizpah was the scene of memorable assembly in a day of sore anxiety for Judah, when Judas Maccabeus called the warriors of Judah together for counsel and prayer (1 Macc 3:46). From this passage we also learn that the place was an ancient sanctuary--"for in Mizpah there was a place of prayer aforetime for Israel."
It has been proposed to identify Mizpah with Tell Nasbeh, a site on the watershed South of Bireh. The Abbe Raboisson established the fact that Jerusalem can be seen from this point. In this respect it agrees with Maundeville's description. "It is a very fair and delicious place, and it is called Mt. Joy because it gives joy to pilgrims' hearts, for from that place men first see Jerusalem." But Jer 41:10 may be taken as decisive against this identification. Ishmael departed to go east. From Tell Nasbeh this would never have brought him to the great waters that are in Gibeon (PEFS, 1898, 169, 251; 1903, 267). A more probable identification is with Neby Samwil, a village on high ground 4 1/2 miles Northwest of Jerusalem, the traditional burying-place of Samuel. It is 2,935 ft. above sea-level, and 500 ft. higher than the surrounding land. Here the pilgrims coming up by way of Beth-heron from Jaffa, the ancient route, first saw the Holy City. The mosque of the village was formerly a church, dating from Crusading times; and here the tomb of Samuel is shown. If this is the ancient Mizpah, a very slight detour to the North would bring Ishmael to the great waters that are in Gibeon, el-Jib (Gibeon) being only a mile and a quarter distant.
(5) (mitspeh mo'abh "Mizpeh of Moab"; Masepha): A town in Moab to which David took his parents for safety during Saul's pursuit of him (1 Sam 22:3). It is possibly to be identified with Kir-moab, the modern Kerak, whither David would naturally go to interview the king. But there is no certainty. Possibly we should read "Mizpah" instead of "the hold" in 1 Sam 22:5.
(6) In 2 Ch 20:24, probably we should read "Mizpah" instead of "watch-tower": ha-mitspeh la-midhbar would then point to a Mizpeh of the Wilderness to be sought in the district of Tekoa (20:20).
W. Ewing
miz'-par.
See MISPAR .
miz'-ra-im (mitsrayim):
(1) A son of Ham, and ancestor of various peoples, Ludim, Anamim, etc. (Gen 10:6,13; 1 Ch 1:8,11).
See TABLE OF NATIONS .
(2) The name of Egypt.
See EGYPT .
The land of Ham.--cham, was another name for the land of Egypt. It occurs only in Ps 105:23,17; 106:22; Ps 78:51 probably refers to the land of Ham, though it may refer to the children of Ham. The origin and significance of this name are involved in much obscurity. Two improbable etymologies and one probable etymology for Ham as a name of Egypt have been proposed, and the improbable ones very much urged: (1) Ham is often thought to be a Hebrew appropriation of the Egyptian name "Kemt," a name for the "black land" as distinguished from "desherr," the red land of the desert which surrounded it. This etymology is very attractive, but phonetically very improbable to say the least. (2) Ham has sometimes been connected directly with cham, the second son of Noah whose descendants under the name Mitsraim occupied a part of Northeastern Africa. But as there is no trace of this name among the Egyptians and no use of it in the historical books of the Old Testament, this can hardly be said to be a probable derivation of the word. (3) There is a third proposed etymology for Ham which connects it ultimately but indirectly with Ham, the second son of Noah. Some of the earliest sculptures yet found in Egypt represent the god Min (Menu; compare Koptos by Professor Petrie). This god seems also to have been called Khem, a very exact Egyptian equivalent for Cham, Ham, the second son of Noah and the ancestor of the Hamitic people of Egypt. That Ham the son of Noah should be deified in the Egyptian pantheon is not surprising. The sensuality of this god Min or Khem also accords well with the reputation for licentiousness borne by Ham the son of Noah. These facts suggest very strongly a trace in Egyptian mythology of the actual history of the movements of Hamitic people. (4) While the preceding division (3) probably states the real explanation of the early name of Egypt, it still remains to be noted that the use of the name Ham by the Psalmist may be entirely poetic. Until it be found that the name Ham was applied to Egypt by other writers of that period it will ever be in some measure unlikely that the Psalmist was acquainted with the mythological use of the name Ham in Egypt, and so, in equal measure, probable that he meant nothing more than to speak of the land of the descendants of Ham the son of Noah.
See also HAM .
M. G. Kyle
miz'-a (mizzah, "strong," "firm"): Grandson of Esau, one of the "dukes" of Edom (Gen 36:13,17; 1 Ch 1:37).