wik'-ed-nes:
The state of being wicked; a mental disregard for justice, righteousness, truth, honor, virtue; evil in thought and life; depravity; sinfulness; criminality. See SIN . Many words are rendered "wickedness." There are many synonyms for wickedness in English and also in the Hebrew. Pride and vanity lead to it: "All the proud, and all that work wickedness (rish`ah) shall be stubble" (Mal 4:1). Akin to this is the word `awen, "iniquity," "vanity": "She eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness" (Prov 30:20). Then we have the word hawwah, meaning "mischief," "calamity," coming from inward intent upon evil: "Lo, this is the man that made not God his strength, but trusted in the abundance of his riches, and strengthened himself in his wickedness" (Ps 52:7); zimmah, "wickedness" in thought, carnality or lust harbored: "And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness" (Lev 20:14); `awlah, "perverseness," "Neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as at the first" (2 Sam 7:10). The word for evil ra`) is many times employed to represent wickedness: "Remember all their wickedness" (Hos 7:2). Wickedness like all forms and thoughts of wrong, kept warm in mind, seems to be a thing of growth; it begins with a thought, then a deed, then a character, and finally a destiny. Even in this life men increase in wickedness till they have lost all desire for that which is good in the sight of God and good men; the men in the vision of Isaiah seem to be in a condition beyond which the human heart cannot go: "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness" (Isa 5:20). Shades of thought are added by such words as roa`, "evil," "badness": "Give them according to their work, and according to the wickedness of their doings" (Ps 28:4). And resha` or rish`ah, also gives the common thought of wrong, wickedness. The prophets were strong in denunciations of all iniquity, perverseness, and in announcing the curse of God which would certainly follow.
Wickedness, malignity, evil in thought and purpose is presented by the word poneria: "But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why make ye trial of me, ye hypocrites?" (Mt 22:18). Jesus points out the origin of all wrong: "For from within, out of the heart of men, evil thoughts proceed .... wickednesses, deceit, lasciviousness .... all these evil things proceed from within, and defile the man" (Mk 7:21-23). See Imitation of Christ, xiii, 5.
David Roberts Dungan
wid'-o ('almanah; chera): In the Old Testament widows are considered to be under the special care of Yahweh (Ps 68:5; 146:9; Prov 15:25). Sympathetic regard for them comes to be viewed as a mark of true religion (Job 31:16; Jas 1:27). Deuteronomy is rich in counsel in their behalf (24:17, etc.).
The word is first mentioned in the New Testament in Acts 6:1: "There arose a murmuring of the Grecian Jews against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration." Paul charges that they be particularly cared for, especially those that are "widows indeed," i.e. poor, without support and old (1 Tim 5:2-16). Some try to find proof in this passage of that ecclesiastical order of widows mentioned in post-apostolic writings.
See LITERATURE ,SUB-APOSTOLIC ;WOMAN ,IV , 5.
George B. Eager
wif.
See MARRIAGE ;RELATIONSHIPS ,FAMILY .
See MARRIAGE ;RELATIONSHIPS ,FAMILY .
wild best: (1) ziz, only with sadhay, "field," in the expression, ziz sadhay, translated "wild beasts of the field" (Ps 50:11; 80:13); compare Targum to Ps 80:13, ziza', "worm" (BDB); Arabic ziz, "worm." (2) tsiyim (Isa 13:21; 34:14; Jer 50:39). (3) 'iyim (Isa 13:21; 34:14; Jer 50:39). (4) chay, "living thing," often translated "wild beast" in English Versions of the Bible (1 Sam 17:46, etc.). (5) In Apocrypha (Additions to Esther 16:24, etc.) and the New Testament (Mk 1:13), therion. (6) Acts 10:12 the King James Version; Acts 11:6, tetrapodon, the Revised Version (British and American) "four-rooted beast."
(1), (2) and (3) are of doubtful etymology, but the context makes it clear in each case that wild beasts of some sort are meant. The Targum ziza', "worm," is possible in Ps 80:13, though not probable in view of the parallel "boar": "The boar out of the wood doth ravage it, and the wild beasts of the field feed on it," i.e. on the vine (figurative) brought out of Egypt. In Ps 50:11, however, such an interpretation is out of the question. All the references from 50:8 to 50:13 are to large animals, bullocks, goats, cattle and birds. Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) and the Septuagint have in 80:13 "wild beast" and in 50:11 "beauty of the field" (translated)!
Tsiyim, doubtfully referred to tsiydh, "drought," occurs in prophecies of the desolation of Babylon in Isa 13:21 ("wild beasts of the desert") and Jer 50:39, of Edom in Isa 34:14, of Assyria in Isa 23:13 ("them that dwell in the wilderness"). It is associated in these passages with names of wild beasts and birds, some of them of very doubtful meaning, such as tannim, 'ochim, 'iyim, se`irim, benoth ya`anah. Wild beasts of some sort are clearly meant, though the kind can only be conjectured. The word occurs in Ps 74:14 ("the people inhabiting the wilderness") where it is possible to understand "beasts" instead of people. It occurs also in Ps 72:9 ("they that dwell in the wilderness"), where it seems necessary to understand "men." If the reading stands, it is not easy to reconcile this passage with the others.
'Iyim occurs in Isa 13:21 and 34:14 and in Jer 50:39, three of the passages cited for tsiyim. the King James Version referring to 'i, "island," renders "wild beasts of the islands" (Isa 13:22). the Revised Version (British and American) has "wolves," margin "howling creatures"; compare Arabic `anwa', "to howl," and ibn-'awa' or wawi, "jackal."
See JACKAL .
Alfred Ely
(re'em): The word "unicorn" occurs in the King James Version in Nu 23:22; 24:8; Dt 33:17; Job 39:9,10; Ps 22:21; 29:6; 92:10; Isa 34:7 (the King James Version margin "rhinoceros"). the Revised Version (British and American) has everywhere "wild-ox" (margin "ox-antelope," Nu 23:22). The Septuagint has monokeros, "one-horned," except in Isa 34:7, where we find hoi hadroi, "the large ones," "the bulky ones." In this passage also the Septuagint has hoi krioi, "the rams," instead of English Versions of the Bible "bullocks." Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) has rhinoceros in Nu 23:22; 24:8; Dt 33:17; Job 39:9,10; and unicornis in Ps 22:21 (21:22); 29:6 (28:6); 92:10 (91:11); Isa 34:7.
As stated in the articles on ANTELOPE and CATTLE, re'em and te'o (Dt 14:5; Isa 51:20) may both be the Arabian oryx (Oryx beatrix), of which the common vernacular name means "wild-ox." It may be presumed that "ox-antelope" of Nu 23:22 the Revised Version margin is meant to indicate this animal, which is swift and fierce, and has a pair of very long, sharp and nearly straight horns. The writer feels, however, that more consideration should be given to the view of Tristram (Natural History of the Bible) that re'em is the urus or aurochs, the primitive Bos taurus, which seems to be depicted in Assyrian monuments and referred to as remu (BDB). The etymology of re'em is uncertain, but the word may be from a root signifying "to rise" or "to be high." At any rate, there is no etymological warrant for the assumption that it was a one-horned creature. The Arabic raim, is used of a light-colored gazelle. The great strength and fierceness implied in most of the references suit the wild-ox better than the oryx. On the other hand, Edom (Isa 34:7) was adjacent to the present home of the oryx, while there is no reason to suppose that the wild-ox came nearer than Northern Assyria. There is possibly a reference to the long horns of the oryx in "But my horn hast thou exalted like the horn of the wild-ox" (Ps 92:10). For te'o, The Septuagint has orux, in Dt 14:5 (but seutlion hemiephthon, "half-boiled beet" (!) in Isa 51:20). Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) has oryx in both passages. While we admit that both re'em and te'o may be the oryx, it is perhaps best to follow the Revised Version margin, rendering re'em "wild-ox." The rendering of "antelope" (Revised Version) for te'o is defensible, but "oryx" would be better, because the oryx is the
only antelope that could possibly be meant, it and the gazelle (tsebhi), already mentioned in Dt 14:5, being the only antelopes known to occur in Palestine and Arabia. In Isa 34:7 it seems to be implied that the re'em might be used in sacrifice.
Figurative: The wild-ox is used as a symbol of the strength of Israel: "He hath as it were the strength of the wild-ox". (Nu 23:22; 24:8). In the blessing of the children of Israel by Moses it is said of Joseph:
"And his horns are the horns of the wild-ox:
With them he shall push the peoples all of them,
even the ends of the earth" (Dt 33:17).
The Psalmist (Ps 29:5,6) in describing the power of Yahweh says:
"Yea, Yahweh breaketh in pieces the cedars of Lebanon.
He maketh them also to skip like a calf;
Lebanon and Sirion like a young wild-ox."
Again, in praise for Yahweh's goodness (Ps 92:10): "But my horn hast thou exalted like the horn of the wildox."
In Job 39:9-12 the subduing and training of the wild-ox are cited among the things beyond man's power and understanding.
Alfred Ely Day
wil'-der-nes.
See DESERT ;JUDAEA ,WILDERNESS OF ;WANDERINGS OF ISRAEL .
See TESTAMENT .
vo-lish'-un ('abhah, ratson; thelo) boulomai, thelema: "Will" as noun and verb, transitive and intrans, carries in it the idea of "wish," "purpose," "volition." "Will" is also used as an auxiliary of the future tense of other words, but the independent verb is frequent, and it is often important to distinguish between it and the mere auxiliary, especially in the New Testament.
In the Old Testament the word chiefly rendered "to will" is 'abhah, "to breathe after," "to long for." With the exception of Job 39:9; Isa 1:19, it is accompanied by a negation, and is used of both man and God. Several other words are employed, but only sparsely. "Will" as noun is the translation chiefly of ratson, "good-will," "willfulness" (Gen 49:6), with emphasis on the voluntariness of action (Lev 1:3; 19:5; 22:19,29, etc.); also of nephesh, and a few other words. In the New Testament "will" is chiefly the translation of thelo and boulomai, the difference between the two being that thelo expresses an active choice or purpose, boulomai, "passive inclination or willingness, or the inward predisposition from which the active choice proceeds" (compare Mk 15:9,12 with 15:15). "Will," noun, is thelema. With the exception of a few passages, it is used of the will of God (over all, Mt 18:14; in all things to be done, Mt 6:10; 26:42 parallel, etc.; ordering all things, Eph 1:11, etc.); human will, however, may oppose itself to the will of God (Lk 23:25; Jn 1:13; Rom 7:18; here the capacity to will is distinguished from the power to do, etc.). Boulema is properly counsel or purpose. While it is possible to oppose the will of God, His counsel or purpose cannot be frustrated (Acts 2:23; 4:28; Rom 9:19; Eph 1:11; Heb 6:17); it may, however, be resisted for a time (Lk 7:30).
In Apocrypha, for "will" we have thelema (1 Esdras 9:9 (of God); Ecclesiasticus 43:16; 1 Macc 3:60; Ecclesiasticus 8:15, "his own will"); boule (The Wisdom of Solomon 9:13, the Revised Version (British and American) "counsel); boulema (2 Macc 15:5, "wicked will," the Revised Version (British and American) "cruel purpose"); "willful" (Ecclesiasticus 30:8) is proales, the Revised Version (British and American) "headstrong"; "willing" (The Wisdom of Solomon 14:19), boulomai, the Revised Version (British and American) "wishing"; thelo (Ecclesiasticus 6:35); "wilt" (The Wisdom of Solomon 12:18), thelo, the Revised Version (British and American) "hast the will" (compare 2 Macc 7:16).
The Revised Version (British and American) has many changes, several of them of note as bringing out the distinction between the auxiliary and the independent verb. Thus, Mt 11:27, "willeth to"; Jn 7:17, "if any man willeth to do his will"; 1 Tim 6:9, the American Standard Revised Version "they that are minded to be rich," the English Revised Version "desire," etc.
The words employed and passages cited show clearly that man is always regarded as a responsible being, free to will in harmony with the divine will or contrary to it. This is further shown by the various words denoting refusal. "Ye will not come to me, that ye may have life" (Jn 5:40). So with respect to temptation. We may even choose and act deliberately in opposition to the will of God. Yet God's counsel, His will in its completeness, ever prevails, and man, in resisting it, deprives himself of the good it seeks to confer upon him.
In modern psychology the tendency is to make will primary and distinctive of personality.
W. L. Walker
In Col 2:23, "a show of wisdom in will-worship," for ethelothreskia), a word found nowhere else but formed exactly like "will-worship": worship originating in the human will as opposed to the divine, arbitrary religious acts, worthless despite their difficulty of performance.
wil'-o-tre (tsaphtsaphah): Comparison with the Arabic cafcaf, "the willow," makes it very probable that thc translation of Ezek 17:5 is correct.
wil'-oz (`arabhim); itea (Lev 23:40; Job 40:22; Ps 137:2; Isa 15:7; 44:4)): In all references this tree is mentioned as beside running water. They may all refer to the willow, two varieties of which, Salix fragilis and S. alba, occur commonly in Palestine, or to the closely allied Populus euphratus (also Natural Order Salicaceae), which is even more plentiful, especially on the Jordan and its tributaries. The Brook of the Willows (Isa 15:7) must have been some stream running from Moab to the Jordan or Dead Sea. Popular fancy has associated the willows of Ps 137:2 with the so-called "weeping willow" (Salix babylonica), but though this tree is found today in Palestine, it is an introduction from Japan and cannot have existed "by the waters of Babylon" at the time of the captivity.
E. W. G. Masterman
Evidently mentioned as the boundary of Moab (Isa 15:7) and generally identified with the brook Zered.
wim'-p'l: the Revised Version (British and American) substitutes "shawls" for the King James Version "wimples" in Isa 3:22. The precise article of dress intended is unknown.
See DRESS .
wind (anemos:
Unequal distribution of heat in the atmosphere causes currents of air or wind. The heated air rises and the air from around rushes in. The direction from which a current comes determines its name, as west wind coming from the West but blowing toward the East. When two currents of air of different directions meet, a spiral motion sometimes results.
See WHIRLWIND .
In Palestine the west wind is the most common. It comes from the sea and carries the moisture which condenses to form clouds, as it is turned upward by the mountains, to the cooler layers of the atmosphere. If the temperature reached is cool enough the cloud condenses and rain falls. Elijah looked toward the West for the "small cloud," and soon "the heavens grew black with clouds and wind" (1 Ki 18:44 f). "When ye see a cloud rising in the west, straightway ye say, There cometh a shower; and so it cometh to pass" (Lk 12:54).
The south wind is frequent in Palestine. If it is slightly Southwest, it may bring rain, but if it is due South or Southeast, there is no rain. It is a warm wind bringing good weather. "When ye see a south wind blowing, ye say, There will be a scorching heat; and it cometh to pass" (Lk 12:55). In the cooler months it is a gentle, balmy wind, so that the "earth is still by reason of the south wind" (Job 37:17; compare Song 4:16).
The north wind is usually a strong, continuous wind blowing down from the northern hills, and while it is cool it always "drives away rain," as correctly stated in Prov 25:23, the King James Version; yet it is a disagreeable wind, and often causes headache and fever.
The east wind or sirocco (from Arabic shark= "east") is the "scorching wind" (Jas 1:11) from the desert. It is a hot, gusty wind laden with sand and dust and occurs most frequently in May and October. The temperature in a given place often rises 15 or 20 degrees within a few hours, bringing thermometer to the highest readings of the year. It is customary for the people to close up the houses tightly to keep out the dust and heat. The heat and dryness wither all vegetation (Gen 41:6). Happily the wind seldom lasts for more than three days at a time. It is the destructive "wind of the wilderness" (Job 1:19; Jer 4:11; 13:24): "Yahweh caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all the night" (Ex 14:21) for the children of Israel to pass; the "rough blast in the day of the east wind" (Isa 27:8). The strength of the wind makes it dangerous for ships at sea: "With the east wind thou breakest the ships of Tarshish" (Ps 48:7). Euraquilo or Euroclydon (Acts 27:14 the King James Version), which caused Paul's shipwreck, was an East-Northeast wind, which was especially dangerous in that region.
The wind is directly of great use to the farmer in Palestine in winnowing the grain after it is threshed by treading out (Ps 1:4; 35:5; Isa 17:13). It was used as a sign of the weather (Eccl 11:4). It was a necessity for traveling on the sea in ancient times (Acts 28:13; Jas 3:4), but too strong a wind caused shipwreck (Jon 1:4; Mt 8:24; Lk 8:23).
The Scriptural references to wind show many illustrative and figurative uses: (1) Power of God (1 Ki 19:11; Job 27:21; 38:24; Ps 107:25; 135:7; 147:18; 148:8; Prov 30:4; Jer 10:13; Hos 4:19; Lk 8:25): "He caused the east wind to blow in the heavens; and by his power he guided the south wind" (Ps 78:26). (2) Scattering and destruction: "A stormy wind shall rend it" (Ezek 13:11; compare 5:2; 12:14; 17:21; Hos 4:19; 8:7; Jer 49:36; Mt 7:25). (3) Uncertainty: "tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine" (Eph 4:14; compare Prov 27:16; Eccl 1:6; Jn 3:8; Jas 1:6). (4) Various directions: "toward the four winds of heaven" (Dan 11:4; compare 8:8; Zec 2:6; Mt 24:31; Mk 13:27). (5) Brevity: "a wind that passeth away" (Ps 78:39; compare 1:4; 35:5; 103:16). (6) Nothingness: "Molten images are wind" (Isa 41:29; compare Jer 5:13).
Alfred H. Joy
win'-do.
See HOUSE ,II , 1, (9).
See ASTRONOMY , sec. III, 4.
(chemeth (Gen 21:14 margin), n'odh (Jdg 4:19 "'bottle") nebhel, nebhel (1 Sam 10:3 margin), ('obh) (Job 32:19); askos (Mt 9:17; Mk 2:22; Lk 5:37; compare askoputine, Judith 10:5, the Revised Version (British and American) "leathern bottle")): These words are all used to designate skins for the containing of liquids, nebhel, however, being the most common in the case of wine. The Israelite, like the modern Arabic and Syrian, used mainly the skin of the goat and the sheep, but the skins of the ox and the camel have also been put to this purpose. The skin is removed from the animal by drawing it over the body from the neck downward, half the skin on each of the limbs being also retained. It is then tanned, the hair cut close, turned inside out, and has all the openings save one closed with cords, when it is ready for use. The reference to "a wineskin in the smoke" in Ps 119:83 is generally explained on the supposition of its being hung there for mellowing purposes, but this can scarcely be accepted, for wine is never left for any length of time in the skin on account of its imparting a disagreeable flavor to the contents. The explanation of the New Testament passages is that the new wine, still liable to continue fermenting to a small extent at least, was put into new, still expansible skins, a condition that had ceased in the older ones.
See WINE .
W. M. Christie
win, win'-pres:
(1) (~yayin), apparently from a non-Tsere root allied to Greek oinos, Latin vinum, etc. This is the usual word for "wine" and is found 141 times in Massoretic Text. (2) chemer, perhaps "foaming" (Dt 32:14 and Massoretic Text Isa 27:2 (but see the English Revised Version margin)); Aramaic chamar (Ezr 6:9; 7:22; Dan 5:1,2,4,23). (3) tirosh. Properly this is the fresh grape juice (called also mishreh, Nu 6:3), even when still in the grape (Isa 65:8). But unfermented grape juice is a very difficult thing to keep without the aid of modern antiseptic precautions, and its preservation in the warm and not over-cleanly conditions of ancient Palestine was impossible. Consequently, tirosh came to mean wine that was not fully aged (although with full intoxicating properties (Jdg 9:13; Hos 4:11; compare Acts 11:13)) or wine when considered specifically as the product of grapes (Dt 12:17; 18:4, etc.). The Septuagint always (except Isa 65:8; Hos 4:11) translates by oinos and the Targums by chamar. the King James Version has "wine" 26 times, "new wine" 11 times, "sweet wine" in Mic 6:15; the Revised Version (British and American) "vintage" in Nu 18:12; Mic 6:15 (with the same change in Neh 10:37,39 the Revised Version margin; Isa 62:8 the English Revised Version margin). Otherwise the English Revised Version has left the King James Version unchanged, while the American Standard Revised Version uses "new wine" throughout. (4) Two apparently poetic words are `acic (the Revised Version (British and American) "sweet wine," Isa 49:26; Am 9:13; Joel 1:5; 3:18, "juice"; Song 8:2), and cobhe' ("wine," Isa 1:22; "drink," Hos 4:18 (margin "carouse"); Nah 1:10). (5) For spiced wine three words occur: mecekh, Ps 75:8 (English Versions of the Bible "mixture"); mimcakh, Prov 23:30 ("mixed wine"); Isa 65:11 (the Revised Version (British and American) "mingled wine"); mezegh, Song 7:2 (the Revised Version (British and American) "mingled wine"); compare also yayin hareqach, Song 8:2 ("spiced wine"). (6) mamethaqqim, literally, "sweet," Neh 8:10.
(7) shekhar (22 times), translated "strong drink" in English Versions of the Bible. Shekhar appears to mean "intoxicating drink" of any sort and in Nu 28:7 is certainly simply "wine" (compare also its use in parallelism to "wine" in Isa 5:11,22, etc.). In certain passages (Lev 10:9; Nu 6:3; 1 Sam 1:15, etc.), however, it is distinguished from "wine," and the meaning is not quite certain. But it would seem to mean "drink not made from grapes." Of such only pomegranate wine is named in the Bible (Song 8:2), but a variety of such preparations (made from apples, quinces, dates, barley, etc.) were known to the ancients and must have been used in Palestine also. The translation "strong drink" is unfortunate, for it suggests "distilled liquor," "brandy," which is hardly in point.
(8) In the Apocrypha and New Testament "wine" represents oinos, with certain compounds, except in Acts 2:13, where the Greek is gleukos, "sweet," English Versions of the Bible "new wine."
See also BLOOD ;DRINK ;FLAGON ;FRUIT ;HONEY .
(1) Properly speaking, the actual wine press was called gath (Jdg 6:11, etc.), and the receiving vat ("fat") yeqebh (Nu 18:27, etc.), but the names were interchangeable to some degree (Isa 16:10; Job 24:11; compare Isa 5:2, the Revised Version (British and American) text and margin) and either could be used for the whole apparatus (see GATH and compare Jdg 7:25; Zec 14:10). In Isa 63:3 the Hebrew has purah, "wine trough" a word found also in Hag 2:16 where it seems to be a gloss (so, apparently, the American Standard Revised Version).
(2) In the Apocrypha (Sirach 33:16) and in the New Testament 21:33; Rev 14:19,20 (twice); 19:15) "winepress" is lenos; in Mk 12:1 hupolenion, by which only the receiving vat seems to be meant (the Revised Version (British and American) a pit for a winepress").
For the care of the vine, its distribution, different varieties, etc., see VINE . The ripening of the grapes took place as early as June in the Jordan valley, but on the coast not until August, while in the hills it was delayed until September. In whatever month, however, the coming of the vintage was the signal for the villagers to leave their homes in a body and to encamp in booths erected in the vineyards, so that the work might be carried on without interruption. See TABERNACLES ,FEAST OF . It was the great holiday season of the year and the joy of the vintage was proverbial (Isa 16:10; Jer 25:30; 48:33; compare Jdg 9:27), and fragments of vintage songs seem to be preserved in Isa 27:2; 65:8. The grapes were gathered usually by cutting off the clusters (see SICKLE ), and were carried to the press in baskets.
Many of the ancient wine presses remain to the present day. Ordinarily they consisted of two rectangular or circular excavations, hewn (Isa 5:2) in the solid rock to a depth of 2 or 3 feet. Where possible one was always higher than the other and they were connected by a pipe or channel. Their size, of course, varied greatly, but the upper vat was always wider and shallower than the lower and was the press proper, into which the grapes were thrown, to be crushed by the feet of the treaders (Isa 63:1-3, etc.). The juice flowed down through the pipe into the lower vat, from which it was removed into jars (Hag 2:16) or where it was allowed to remain during the first fermentation.
Many modifications of this form of the press are found. Where there was no rock close to the surface, the vats were dug in the earth and lined with stonework or cement, covered with pitch. Or the pressvat might be built up out of any material (wood was much used in Egypt), and from it the juice could be conducted into a sunken receptacle or into jars. Not infrequently a third (rarely a fourth) vat might be added between the other two, in which a partial settling and straining could take place. Wooden beams are often used either to finish the pressing or to perform the whole operation, and holes into which the ends of these beams fitted can still be seen. A square of wood attached to the beam bore down on the pile of grapes, while the free end of the beam was heavily weighted. In the simpler presses the final result was obtained by piling stones on the mass that remained after the treaders had finished their work.
It is a general principle of wine-making (compare that "the less the pressure the better the product"; therefore the liquid that flowed at the beginning of the process, especially that produced by the mere weight of the grapes themselves when piled in heaps, was carefully kept separate from that which was obtained only under heavy pressure. A still lower grade was made by adding water to the final refuse the mixture to ferment. Possibly this last concoction is sometimes meant by the word "vinegar" (chomets).
In the climate of Palestine fermentation begins almost immediately, frequently on the same day for juice pressed out in the morning, but never later than the next day. At first a slight foam appears on the surface of the liquid, and from that moment, according to Jewish tradition, it is liable to the wine-tithe (Ma`aseroth 1 7). The action rapidly becomes more violent, and while it is in progress the liquid must be kept in jars or in a vat, for it would burst even the newest and strongest of wine-skins (Job 32:19). Within about a week this violent fermentation subsides, and the wine is transferred to other jars or strong wine-skins (Mk 2:22 and parallel's), in which it undergoes the secondary fermentation. At the bottom of the receptacles collects the heavier matter or "lees" (shemarim, Ps 75:8 ("dregs"); Jer 48:11; Zeph 1:12 in Isa 25:6 the word is used for the wine as well), from which the "wines on the lees" gather strength and flavor.
At the end of 40 days it was regarded as properly "wine" and could be offered as a drink offering (`Edhuyyoth 6 1). The practice after this point seems to have varied, no doubt depending on the sort of wine that was being made. Certain kinds were left undisturbed to age "on their lees" and were thought to be all the better for so doing, but before they were used it was necessary to strain them very carefully. So Isa 25:6, `A feast of wine aged on the lees, thoroughly strained.' But usually leaving the wine in the fermentation vessels interfered with its improvement or caused it to degenerate. So at the end of 40 days it was drawn off into other jars (for storage, 1 Ch 27:27, etc.) or wine-skins (for transportation, Josh 9:4, etc.). So Jer 48:11: `Moab has been undisturbed from his youth, and he has rested on his lees and has not been emptied from vessel to vessel. .... Therefore his flavor remains unchanged (or "becomes insipid") and his scent is unimproved (or "lacks freshness")'; compare Zeph 1:12.
Jars were tightly sealed with caps covered with pitch. The very close sealing needed to preserve sparkling wines, however, was unknown to the Hebrews, and in consequence (and for other reasons) such wines were not used. Hence, in Ps 75:8, "The wine foameth," the allusion must be to very new wine whose fermentation had not yet subsided, if indeed, the translation is not wrong (the Revised Version margin "The wine is red"). The superiority of old wine to new was acknowledged by the Hebrews, in common with the rest of the world (Sirach 9:10; Lk 5:39), but in the wines of Palestine acetous fermentation, changing the wine into vinegar, was likely to occur at any time. Three years was about the longest time for which such wines could be kept, and "old wine" meant only wines that had been, stored for a year or more (Bab. Bath. 6 3).
See also CRAFTS ,II , 19.
In Old Testament times wine was drunk undiluted, and wine mixed with water was thought to be ruined (Isa 1:22). The "mixed" or "mingled wines" (see I, 1, (5), above) were prepared with aromatic herbs of various sorts and some of these compounds, used throughout the ancient world, were highly intoxicating (Isa 5:22). Wine mixed with myrrh was stupefying and an anesthetic (Mk 15:23). At a later period, however, the Greek use of diluted wines had attained such sway that the writer of 2 Maccabees speaks (15:39) of undiluted wine as "distasteful" (polemion). This dilution is so normal in the following centuries that the Mishna can take it for granted and, indeed, R. Eliezer even forbade saying the table-blessing over undiluted wine (Berakhoth 7 5). The proportion of water was large, only one-third or one-fourth of the total mixture being wine (Niddah 2 7; Pesachim 108b).
NOTE.
The wine of the Last Supper, accordingly, may be described in modern terms as a sweet, red, fermented wine, rather highly diluted. As it was no doubt the ordinary wine of commerce, there is no reason to suppose that it was particularly "pure."
Throughout the Old Testament, wine is regarded as a necessity of life and in no way as a mere luxury. It was a necessary part of even the simplest meal (Gen 14:18; Jdg 19:19; 1 Sam 16:20; Isa 55:1, etc.), was an indispensable provision for a fortress (2 Ch 11:11), and was drunk by all classes and all ages, even by the very young (Lam 2:12; Zec 9:17). "Wine" is bracketed with "grain" as a basic staple (Gen 27:28, etc.), and the failure of the winecrop or its destruction by foreigners was a terrible calamity (Dt 28:30,39; Isa 62:8; 65:21; Mic 6:15; Zeph 1:13, etc.). On the other hand, abundance of wine was a special token of God's blessing (Gen 27:28; Dt 7:13; Am 9:14, etc.), and extraordinary abundance would be a token of the Messianic age (Am 9:13; Joel 3:18; Zec 9:17). A moderate "gladdening of the heart" through wine was not looked upon as at all reprehensible (2 Sam 13:28; Est 1:10; Ps 104:15; Eccl 9:7; 10:19; Zec 9:15; 10:7), and while Jdg 9:13 represented a mere verbal remnant of a long-obsolete concept, yet the idea contained in the verse was not thought shocking. "Drink offerings," indeed, were of course a part of the prescribed ritual (Lev 23:13, etc.; see SACRIFICE ), and a store of wine was kept in the temple (tabernacle) to insure their performance (1 Ch 9:29). Even in later and much more moderate times, Sirach writes the laudation of wine in 31:27, and the writer of 2 Maccabees (see above) objects as strongly to pure water as he does to pure wine. Christ adapted Himself to Jewish customs (Mt 11:19 parallel Lk 7:34; Lk 22:18), and exegetes usually suppose that the celebrated verse 1 Tim 5:23 is meant as a safeguard against ascetic (Gnostic?) dualism, as well as to give medical advice.
On the temporal conditioning of the Biblical customs, the uncompromising opposition of the Bible to excess, and the non-applicability of the ancient attitude to the totally different modern conditions, see DRUNKENNESS .
The figurative uses of wine are very numerous, but are for the most part fairly obvious. Those offering difficulty have been discussed in the course of the article. For wine in its commercial aspect see TRADE .
Burton Scott Easton
win'-bib-er: In Prov 23:20, cobhe yauin; in Mt 11:19 = Lk 7:34, oinopotes, of habitual wine-drinkers. The accusation was falsely brought against Jesus of being "a gluttonous man and a winebibber," because, unlike John, He ate and drank with others.
win'-fat, win'-pres, win'-vat.
See CRAFTS ,II , 19;VINE ;WINE .
wingz (kanaph; pterux): Biblical references to the wings of birds are common, especially in Psalms, many of them exquisitely poetical. Often the wings of an eagle are mentioned because they are from 7 to 9 feet in sweep, of untiring flight, and have strength to carry heavy burdens: so they became the symbol of strength and endurance. Ancient monuments and obelisks are covered with the heads of bulls, lions, different animals, and men even, to which the wings of an eagle were added to symbolize strength. Sometimes the wings of a stork are used to portray strong flight, as in the vision of Zechariah: "Then lifted I up mine eyes, and saw, and, behold, there came forth two women, and the wind was in their wings; now they had wings like the wings of a stork; and they lifted up the ephah between earth and heaven" (5:9). The wings of a dove symbolized love. Wings in the abstract typified shelter, strength or speed, as a rule, while in some instances their use was ingenious and extremely poetical, as when Job records that the Almighty used wings to indicate migration: "And stretcheth her wings toward the south" (39:26). In Ps 17:8 there is a wonderful poetical imagery in the plea, "Hide me under the shadow of thy wings." In Ps 18:10 there is a reference to "the wings of the wind." And in 55:6 the Psalmist cries, "Oh that I had wings like a dove!" The brightness and peace of prosperous times are beautifully described in Ps 68:13, the wings of a dove covered with silver, and her pinions with pale green gold.' The first rays of dawn are compared to "the wings of the morning" (139:9). Solomon was thinking of the swiftness of wings when he said, "For riches' certainly make themselves wings, like an eagle that flieth toward heaven" (Prov 23:5). So also was Isaiah in 40:31, "They that wait for Yahweh shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; they shall walk, and not faint." In Mal 4:2 the King James Version, there is a beautiful reference, "But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings." the Revised Version (British and American) changes "his" to "its." Wings as an emblem of love were used by Jesus in the cry, "O Jerusalem .... how often would I have gathered thy children .... as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings" (Mt 23:37).
Gene Stratton-Porter
wink (razam, literally, "to roll the eyes"): The act or habit of winking was evidently considered to be evil both in its motives and in its results. The idea of its facetiousness, prevalent in our day, is nowhere apparent in the Scriptures. It is mentioned frequently, but is always associated with sin, in the Old Testament especially in the sense of conceit, pride, and rebellion against God: "Why doth thine heart carry thee away? and what do thy eyes wink at, that thou turnest thy spirit against God" (Job 15:12,13 the King James Version). So also Ps 35:19: "Neither let them wink with the eye that hate roe without a cause." "A naughty person, a wicked man, walketh with froward mouth. He winketh with his eyes," etc. (Prov 6:12,13 the King James Version). "He that winketh with the eye causeth sorrow" (Prov 10:10). See Watkinson, Education of the Heart, "Ethics of Gesture," 194 ff.
In the New Testament the word is used to express the longsuffering patience and forgiveness of God toward erring Israel: "And the times of this ignorance God winked at" (Acts 17:30 the King James Version, hupereidon, "overlooked," and so translated in the Revised Version (British and American); compare The Wisdom of Solomon 11:23; Ecclesiasticus 30:11). The use of "winked" in this connection would in our day, of course, be considered in bad taste, if not actually irreverent, but it is an excellent example of the colloquialism of the King James Version.
Arthur Walwyn Evans
win'-o-ing.
See AGRICULTURE ;FAN ;THRESHING .
win'-ter (choreph, from charaph, "to inundate," "overflow"): The rainy season, also the autumn harvest season (Gen 8:22; Ps 74:17; Zec 14:8). It is also the time of cold (Jer 36:22; Am 3:15). The verb "to winter" occurs in Isa 18:6. Cethaw has the same meaning as Choreph (Song 2:11). cheimon, corresponds to choreph as the rainy season, and the verb paracheimazo, signifies "to pass the winter" (Acts 27:12), the noun from which is paracheimasia (same place).
See SEASONS .
(beth ha-choreph (Jer 36:22; Am 3:15)): See underSUMMER-HOUSE . The "winter-house" in Jeremiah is that of King Jehoiakim; mention is made of the fire burning in the brazier.
wiz'-dum:
1. Linguistic
2. History
3. Religious Basis
4. Ideals
5. Teaching of Christ
6. Remainder of the New Testament
(1) James
(2) Paul
7. Hypostasis
LITERATURE
In the Revised Version (British and American) the noun "wisdom" and its corresponding adjective and verb ("be wise," "act wisely," etc.) represent a variety of Hebrew words: bin (binah, and in the English Revised Version tebunah), sakhal (sekhel, sekhel), lebh (and in the English Revised Version labhabh), tushiyah (and in the English Revised Version Te`em, `ormah, piqqach. None of these, however, is of very frequent occurrence and by far the most common group is the verb chakham, with the adjective chakham, and the nouns chokhmah, chokhmoth, with something over 300 occurrences in the Old Testament (of which rather more than half are in Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes). Cokhmah, accordingly, may be treated as the Hebrew equivalent for the English "wisdom," but none the less the two words do not quite correspond. For chokhmah may be used of simple technical skill (Ex 28:3; 35:25, etc.; compare The Wisdom of Solomon 14:2; Sirach 38:31; note that the English Versions of the Bible gives a false impression in such passages), of military ability (Isa 10:13), of the intelligence of the lower animals (Prov 30:24), of shrewdness applied to vicious (2 Sam 13:3) or cruel (1 Ki 2:9 Hebrew) ends, etc. Obviously no one English word will cover all these different uses, but the general meaning is clear enough--"the art of reaching one's end by the use of the right means" (Smend). Predominantly the "wisdom" thought of is that which comes through experience, and the "wise man" is at his best in old age (Job 12:12; 15:10; Prov 16:31; Sirach 6:34; 8:9; 25:3-6, etc.; contrast Job 32:9; Eccl 4:13; The Wisdom of Solomon 4:9; Sirach 25:2). And in religion the "wise man" is he who gives to the things of God the same acuteness that other men give to worldly affairs (Lk 16:8). He is distinguished from the prophets as not having personal inspiration, from the priestly school as not laying primary stress on the cult, and from the scribes as not devoted simply to the study of the sacred writings. But, in the word by itself, a "wise man" need not in any way be a religious man.
In the Revised Version (British and American) Apocrypha and New Testament the words "wisdom," "wise," "act wisely," etc., are always translations of phronimos, or of their cognates. For "wisdom," however, sophia is in almost every case the original word, the sole exception in the New Testament being Lk 1:17 (phronesis).
See also PRUDENCE .
(1) In the prophetic period, indeed, "wise" generally has an irreligious connotation. Israel was fully sensible that her culture was beneath that of the surrounding nations, but thought of this as the reverse of defect. Intellectual power without moral control was the very fruit of the forbidden tree (Gen 3:5), and "wisdom" was essentially a heathen quality (Isa 10:13; 19:12; 47:10; Ezek 28:3-5; Zec 9:2; specifically Edomite in Jer 49:7; Ob 1:8; contrast Baruch 3:22,23) that deserved only denunciation (Isa 5:21; 29:14; Jer 4:22; 9:23; 18:18, etc.). Certainly at this time Israel was endeavoring to acquire a culture of her own, and there is no reason to question that Solomon had given it a powerful stimulus (1 Ki 4:29-34). But the times were too distracted and the moral problems too imperative to allow the more spiritually-minded any opportunity to cultivate secular learning, so that "wisdom" in Israel took on the unpleasant connotation of the quality of the shrewd court counselors, with their half-heathen advice (Isa 28:14-22, etc.). And the associations of the word with true religion are very few (Dt 4:6; Jer 8:8), while Dt 32:6; Jer 4:22; 8:9 have a satirical sound--`what men call "wisdom" is really folly!' So, no matter how much material may have gathered during this period (see PROVERBS ), it is to the post-exilic community that we are to look for the formation of body of Wisdom literature really associated with Israel's religion.
(2) The factors that produced it were partly the same as those that produced scribism (see SCRIBES ). Life in Palestine was lived only on the sufferance of foreigners and must have been dreary in the extreme. Under the firm hand of Persia there were no political questions, and in later times the nation was too weak to play any part in the conflicts between Antioch and Alexandria. Prophecy had about disappeared, fulfillment of the Messianic hope seemed too far off to affect thought deeply, and the conditions were not yet ripe that produced the later flame of apocalyptic enthusiasm. Nor were there vital religious problems within the nation, now that the fight against idolatry had been won and the ritual reforms established. Artistic pursuits were forbidden (compare especially The Wisdom of Solomon 15:4-6), and the Jewish temperament was not of a kind that could produce a speculative philosophy (note the sharp polemic against metaphysics, etc., in Sirach 3:21-24). It was in this period, to be sure, that Jewish commercial genius began to assert itself, but there was no satisfaction in this for the more spiritually-minded (Sirach 26:29). So, on the one hand, men were thrown back on the records of the past (scribism), while on the other the problems of religion and life were studied through sharp observation of Nature and of mankind. And the recorded results of the latter method form the Wisdom literature.
(3) In this are included Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, with certain psalms (notably Ps 19; 37; 104; 107; 147; 148); in the Apocrypha must be added Sirach and Wisdom, with part of Baruch; while of the other writings of the period parts of Philo, 4 Maccabees, and the Abikar legend belong here also. How far foreign influence was at work it is hard to say. Egypt had a Wisdom literature of her own (see EGYPT ) that must have been known to some degree in Palestine, while Babylonia and Persia could" not have been entirely without effect--but no specific dependence can be shown in any of these cases. For Greece the case is clearer, and Greek influence is obvious in Wisdom, despite the particularistic smugness of the author. But there was vitality enough in Judaism to explain the whole movement without recourse to outside influences, and, in any case, it is most arbitrary and untrue to attribute all the Wisdom speculation to Greek forces (as, e.g., does Siegfried, HDB).
The following characteristics are typical of the group: (1) The premises are universal. The writers draw from life wherever found, admitting that in some things Israel may learn from other nations. The Proverbs of Lemuel are referred explicitly to a non-Jewish author (Prov 31:1 the Revised Version margin), and Sirach recommends foreign travel to his students (34:10,11; 39:4). Indeed, all the princes of the earth rule through wisdom (Prov 8:16; compare Eccl 9:15). And even some real knowledge of God can be obtained by all men through the study of natural phenomena (Ps 19:1; Sirach 16:29 through 17:14; 42:15 through 43:33; The Wisdom of Solomon 13:2,9; compare Rom 1:20).
(2) But some of the writers dissent here (Job 28:28; 11:7; Eccl 2:11; 8:16,17; 11:5; The Wisdom of Solomon 9:13(?)). And in any case this wisdom needs God's explicit grace for its cultivation (Sirach 51:13-22; The Wisdom of Solomon 7:7; 8:21), and when man trusts simply to his own attainments he is bound to go wrong (Prov 3:5-7; 19:21; 21:30; 28:11; Sirach 3:24; 5:2,3; 6:2; 10:12; Baruch 3:15-28). True wisdom must center about God (Prov 15:33; 19:20 f), starting from Him (Prov 1:7; 9:10; Ps 111:10; Sirach 21:11; Job 28:28) and ending in Him (Prov 2:5); compare especially the beautiful passage Sirach 1:14-20. But the religious attitude is far from being the whole of Wisdom. The course is very difficult (Prov 2:4 f; 4:7; Sirach 4:17; 14:22,23; The Wisdom of Solomon 1:5; 17:1); continual attention must be given every department of life, and man is never done learning (Prov 9:9; Sirach 6:18; Eccl 4:13).
(3) The attitude toward the written Law varies. In Ecclesiastes, Job and Proverbs it is hardly mentioned (Prov 28:7-9 (?); 29:18 (?)). Wisdom, as a special pamphlet against idolatry, has little occasion for specific reference, but its high estimate of the Law is clear enough (The Wisdom of Solomon 2:12-15; 18:9). Sirach, especially, can find no terms high enough for the praise of the Law (especially Sirach 24; 36; compare 9:15; 21:11, etc.), and he identifies the Law with Wisdom (24:23-25) and claims the prophets as Wisdom teachers (44:3,4). Yet this perverse identification betrays the fact that Sirach's interest is not derived from a real study of the Law; the Wisdom that was so precious to him must be in the sacred books! Compare Baruch 4:1 (rather more sincere).
(4) The attitude toward the temple-worship is much the same. The rites are approved (Prov 3:9; Sirach 35:4-8; 38:11; Sirach seems to have an especial interest in the priesthood, 7:29-33; 50:5-21), but the writers clearly have no theory of sacrifice that they can utilize for practical purposes. And for sacrifice (and even prayer, Prov 28:9) as a substitute for righteousness no condemnation is too strong (Prov 7:14; 15:8; 20:25; 21:3,17; Sirach 34:18-26; 35:1-3,12; Eccl (5:1).
(5) An outlook on life beyond the grave is notably absent in the Wisdom literature. Wisdom is the only exception (The Wisdom of Solomon 3:1, etc.), but Greek influence in Wisdom is perfectly certain. In Job there are expressions of confidence (14:13-15; 19:25-29), but these do not determine the main argument of the book. Proverbs does not raise the question, while Ecclesiastes and Sirach categorically deny immortality (Eccl 9:2-10; Sirach 14:16; 17:27,28; 30:4; note that the Revised Version (British and American) in Sirach 7:17; 48:11 is based on a glossed text; compare the Hebrew). Even the Messianic hope of the nation is in the background in Prov (2:21,22 (?)), and it is altogether absent in Job and Ecclesiastes. To Sirach (35:19; 36:11-14; 47:22) and Wisdom (3:8; 5:16-23) it is important, however, but not even these works have anything to say of a personal Messiah (Sirach 47:22 (?)).
(6) That in all the literature the individual is the center of interest need not be said. But this individualism, when combined with the weak eschatology, brought dire confusion into the doctrine of retribution (see SIN ). Sirach stands squarely by the old doctrine of retribution in this life: if at no other time, a man's sins will be punished on his deathbed (1:13; 11:26). Neither Job nor Ecclesiastes, however, are content with this solution. The latter leaves the problem entirely unsolved (8:14, etc.), while the former commends it to God's unsearchable ways.
The basis of the Wisdom method may be described then as that of a "natural" religion respecting revelation, but not making much use of it. So the ideal is a man who believes in God and who endeavors to live according to a prudence taught by observation of this world's laws, with due respect, however, to Israel's traditional observances.
(1) From many standpoints the resulting character is worthy of admiration. The man was intelligent, earnest, and hard-working (Proverbs has a particular contempt for the "sluggard"; and compare Eccl 9:10). Lying and injustice are denounced on almost every page of the literature, and unceasing emphasis is laid on the necessity for benevolence (Ps 37:21; 112:5,9; Job 22:7; 31:16-20; Prov 3:27,28; 14:31; 21:13; 22:9; Eccl 11:1; Sirach 4:16; 7:34,35; 29:11-13; 40:24, etc.). All of the writers feel that life is worth the living--at their most pessimistic moments the writers of Job and Ecclesiastes find attraction in the contemplation of the world. In Proverbs and Sirach the outlook is even buoyant, Sirach in especial being far from indifferent to the good things of life (30:23-25; 31:27; compare Eccl 2:24 and contrast The Wisdom of Solomon 2:6-9).
(2) The faults of the Wisdom ideal are the faults of the postulates. The man is always self-conscious and self-centered. All intense enthusiasms are repressed, as likely to prove entangling (Eccl 7:16,17 is the most extreme case), and the individual is always calculating (Sirach 38:17), even among his friends (Sirach 6:13; Prov 25:17) and in his family (Sirach 33:19-23). Benevolence itself is to be exercised circumspectly (Prov 6:1-5; 20:16; Sirach 12:5-7; 29:18), and Sirach, in particular, is very far from feeling an obligation to love all men (25:7; 27:24; 30:6; 50:25,26). So "right" and "wrong" become confused with "advantage" and "disadvantage." Not only is adultery wrong (Prov 2:17; Sirach 23:23), but the injured husband is a dangerous enemy (Prov 5:9-11,14; 6:34,35; Sirach 23:21). As a resuit the "moral perspective" is affected. With some of the finest moral observations in Proverbs and Sirach are combined instructions as to table manners (Prov 23:1-3; Sirach 31:12-18) and merely humorous observations (Prov 20:14), while such passages as Prov 22:22-28 and Sirach 41:17-24 contain extraordinary conglomerations of disparate motives.
(3) So hope of earthly recompense becomes a very explicit motive (Prov 3:10; 11:25, etc.; The Wisdom of Solomon 7:8-12 is the best statement on the other side). Even though riches are nothing in themselves (Prov 10:2; 11:28; 23:4,5; 28:11; Eccl 5:13; Sirach 11:19; 31:5-7; all the literature denounces the unrighteous rich), yet Wisdom is to be desired as bringing not only righteousness but riches also (Prov 8:21; 11:25; 13:18; Sirach 4:15; 20:27,28; The Wisdom of Solomon 6:21). This same desire for advantage gives an unpleasant turn to many of the precepts which otherwise would touch the highest point; perhaps Prov 24:17,18 is the most extreme case: "Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, .... lest Yahweh .... turn away his wrath from him" (!)
(4) But probably the most serious fault was that the Wisdom method tended to produce a religious aristocracy (Sirach 6:22, etc.). It was not enough that the heart and will should be right, for a long course of almost technical training was needed (the "house of instruction" in Sirach 51:23 is probably the school; compare Prov 9:4). The uninstructed or "simple" (Prov 1:22, etc.) were grouped quite simply with the "sinners"; knowledge was virtue and ignorance was vice. Doubtless Wisdom cried in the streets (Prov 1:20,21; 8:1-13; 9:1-6, almost certainly a reference to the canvassing efforts of the teachers for pupils), but only men of ability and leisure could obey the call to learn. And despite all that is said in praise of manual labor (Prov 12:11; 24:27; 28:19; Sirach 7:15; 38:31,32,34), Sirach is merely frank when he says explicitly (38:25-34) that Wisdom cannot be for artisans (a carpenter as Messiah evidently would have been unthinkable to Sirach; Mk 6:3). Scribism was at work along the same lines of development, and the final union of the Wisdom method with the scribal produced a class who called the common people accursed (Jn 7:49).
The statement of the methods and ideals of the Wisdom school is also virtually a statement of our Lord's attitude toward it and an explanation of why much of His teaching took the form it did. As to the universality of the premises He was at one with the Wisdom writers, one great reason for the universality of the appeal of His teaching. Almost everything in the life of the time, from the lily of the field to the king on his throne, contributed its quota to His illustrations. And from the Wisdom method also the form of His teaching--the concise, antithetical saying that sticks in the memory--was derived to some degree. (Of all the sayings of Christ, perhaps Lk 14:8-10--a quotation of Prov 25:6,7--comes nearest to the pure Wisdom type.) In common with the Wisdom writers, also, is the cheerful outlook, despite the continual prospect of the Passion, and we must never forget that all morbid asceticism was entirely foreign to Him (Lk 7:34 parallel Mt 11:19). With the self-conscious, calculating product of the Wisdom method, however, He had no patience. Give freely, give as the Father giveth, without regard to self, in no way seeking a reward, is the burden of His teaching, and such a passage as Lk 6:27-38 seems to have been aimed at the head of such writers as Sirach. The attack on the religious aristocracy is too familiar to need recapitulation. Men by continual exercise of worldly prudence could make themselves as impervious to His teaching as by obstinate adherence to a scribal tradition, while His message was for all men on the sole basis of a desire for righteousness on their part. This was the true Wisdom, fully justified of her children (Lk 7:35; compare Mt 11:19), while, as touching the other "Wisdom," Christ could give thanks that God had seen fit to hide His mysteries from the wise and prudent and reveal them unto "babes" (Lk 10:21 parallel Mt 11:25).
6. Remainder of the New Testament:
(1) James
The remainder of the New Testament, despite many occurrences of the words "wise," "wisdom," etc., contains very little that is really relevant to the technical sense of the words. The one notable exception is James, which has even been classed as "Wisdom literature," and with some justice. For James has the same appeal to observation of Nature (1:11; 3:3-6,11,12; 5:7, etc.), the same observation of human life (2:2,3,15,16; 4:13, etc.), the same antithetical form, and even the same technical use of the word "wisdom" (1:5; 3:15-17). The fiery moral zeal, however, is far above that of the other Wisdom books, even above that of Job.
(2) Paul
Paul, on the other hand, belongs to an entirely different class, that of intense religious experience, seeking its premises in revelation. So the Wisdom method is foreign to him and the absence of Nature illustrations from his pages is notorious (even Rom 11:17 is an artificially constructed figure). Only one passage calls for special comment. The "wisdom" against which he inveighs in 1 Cor 1-3 is not Jewish but Greek-speculation in philosophy, with studied elegance in rhetoric. Still, Jewish or Greek, the moral difficulty was the same. God's message was obscured through an overvaluation of human attainments, and so Paul's use of such Old Testament passages as Isa 29:14; Job 5:13; Ps 94:11 (in 1 Cor 1:19; 3:19,20) is entirely lust. Against this "wisdom" Paul sets the doctrine of the Cross, something that outraged every human system but which, all the more, taught man his entire dependence on God.
Yet Paul had a "wisdom" of his own (1 Cor 2:6), that he taught to Christians of mature moral (not intellectual: 1 Cor 3:1-3) progress. Some commentators would treat this wisdom as doctrinal and find it in (say) Romans; more probably it is to be connected with the mystical experiences of the Christian whose life has become fully controlled by the Spirit (1 Cor 2:10-13). For religious progress is always accompanied by a higher insight that can never be described satisfactorily to persons without the same experience (1 Cor 2:14).
(1) One characteristic of the Wisdom writers that proved of immense significance for later (especially Christian) theology was a love of rhetorical personification of Wisdom (Prov 1:20-33; 8:1 through 9:6; Sirach 4:11-19; 6:23-31; 14:20-15:10; 24; 51:13-21; The Wisdom of Solomon 6:12 through 9:18; Baruch 3:29-32). Such personifications in themselves are not, of course, remarkable (compare e.g. the treatment of "love" in 1 Cor 13), but the studied, somewhat artificial style of the Wisdom writers carries out the personification with a curious elaboration of details: Wisdom builds her house, marries her disciple, mingles wine, etc. The most famous passage is Prov 8:22-31, however. The Wisdom that is so useful to man was created before man, before, indeed, the creation of the world. When the world was formed she was in her childhood, and while God formed the world she engaged in childish play, under His shelter and to His delight. So Prov 8:30 should be rendered, as the context makes clear that 'mwn should be pointed 'amun, "sheltered," and not 'amon, "as a master-workman." And "Wisdom" is a quality of man (Prov 8:31-36), not a quality of God.
(2) Indeed, "Wisdom" is an attribute rarely predicated of God in the Old Testament (1 Ki 3:28 Isa 10:13; 31:2; Jer 10:12; 51:15; compare Dan 5:11), even in the Wisdom writers (Job 5:12 ff; 9:4; Ps 104:24; Prov 3:19). Partly this reticence seems to be due to a feeling that God's knowledge is hardly to be compared in kind to man's, partly to the fact that to the earlier writers "Wisdom" had a profane sound. Later works, however, have less hesitation in this regard (e.g., Sirach 42:21; Baruch 3:32, the Massoretic Text pointing and the Septuagint of Prov 8:30), so that the personifications became personifications of a quality of God. The result was one of the factors that operated to produce the doctrine of the "Word" as it appeared in the Palestinian form.
See LOGOS .
(3) In the Apocrypha, however, the most advanced step is taken in Wisdom. Wisdom is the only-begotten of God (The Wisdom of Solomon 7:22), the effulgence of eternal light (The Wisdom of Solomon 7:26; compare Heb 1:3), living with God (The Wisdom of Solomon 8:3) and sharing (?) His throne (The Wisdom of Solomon 9:4). She is the origin (or "mother") of all creatures (The Wisdom of Solomon 7:12; compare 8:6), continualiar active in penetrating (The Wisdom of Solomon 7:24), ordering (The Wisdom of Solomon 8:1), and renewing (The Wisdom of Solomon 7:27) all things, while carrying inspiration to all holy souls (The Wisdom of Solomon 7:23), especially to Israel (The Wisdom of Solomon 10:17,18). Here there is no doubt that the personification has ceased to be rhetorical and has become real. Wisdom is thought of as a heavenly being, not so distinctively personal, perhaps, as an angel, but none the less far more than a mere rhetorical term; i.e. she is a "hypostasis."
(4) Most of Wisdom's description is simply an expansion of earlier Palestinian concepts, but it is evident that other influence has been at work also and that that influence was Greek. The writer of Wisdom was touched genuinely by the Greek philosophy, and in The Wisdom of Solomon 7:24, at any rate, his "Wisdom" is the logos spermatikos of the Stoics, with more than suspicions of Greek influence elsewhere in the descriptions. This combination of Jewish and Greek thought was still further elaborated by Philo--and still further confused. For Philo endeavored to operate with the Wisdom doctrine in its Palestinian form, the Wisdom doctrine into which Wisdom had already infused some Loges doctrine, and the Logos doctrine by itself, without thoroughly understanding the discordant character of his terms. The result is one of the most obscure passages in Philo's system. Sometimes, as in DeFug. section 109, chapter xx, Wisdom is the mother of the Logos, as God is its Father (compare Cherubim, sections 49, 50, chapter xiv), while, again, the relation can be inverted almost in the same context and the Logos appears as the source of Wisdom (De Fug. section 97, chapter xviii).
See LOGOS .
(5) Philo's influence was incalculable, and Wisdom, as a heavenly power, plays an almost incredible role in the Gnostic speculations of the 2nd and 3rd centuries, the Gnostic work, Pistis Sophia, probably attaining the climax of unreality. The orthodox Fathers, however, naturally sought Wisdom within the Trinity, and Irenaeus made an identification with the Holy Spirit (iv. 20, 3). Tertullian, on the other hand, identified Wisdom with the Son (probably following earlier precedent) in Adv. Prax., 7, and this identification attained general acceptation. So Prov 8:22-30 became a locus classicus in the Christological controversies (an elaborate exposition in Athanaslus, Orat. ii. 16-22), and persisted as a dogmatic proof-text until a very modern period.
LITERATURE.
The Old Testament Theologies, particularly those of Smend, edition 2 (1899), and Bertholet (1911). For the intermediate period, GJV, III, edition 4 (1909), and Boasset, Die Religion des Judentums, edition 2 (1906). Special works: Toy, "Wisdom Literature," EB, IV (1903); Meinhold, Die Weisheit Israels (1908); Friedlander, Griechische Philosophie im Altes Testament (1904, to be used cautiously). On Philo, compare especially Drummond, Philo Judaeus,II , 201-13 (1888).
See also the articles on the various books and compareLOGOS ;PHILO ,JUDAEUS .
Burton Scott Easton
lit'-er-a-tur. See preceding article.
(sophia): Lk 11:49 reads: "Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send unto them prophets and apostles; and some of them they shall kill and persecute." The patristic and many later commentators, on the basis of the parallel in Mt 23:34, took "wisdom of God" here to be a self-designation of Christ--an interpretation, however, that is obviously impossible. Somewhat similar is the view (Meyer) that treats the words as a Lukan designation of Christ, with the assumption that Luke here reintroduces Christ as the speaker in order to give solemnity to the judgment pronounced. But this is incredibly awkward and has no parallel in the Lukan use for even more solemn passages. Much simpler is the interpretation (Hofmann, B. Weiss, Plummer) that regards Christ as announcing here a decree formed by God in the past. But it is the behavior of the present generation that is in point (compare Lk 13:8,9; 20:13; altogether different is Lk 10:21). And the circumstantial wording of what follows is inappropriate for such a decree, is without parallel in Christ's teaching, and implies rather a written source. In the Old Testament, however, no passage exists that resembles this (Prov 1:20-31 (so Godet) is quite out of the question). So many exegetes (Holtzmann, J. Weiss, Loisy, Harnack) find here a quotation from some lost source that our Lord approved and that was familiar to His hearers. This is certainly the most natural explanation. Nor can it be said to be impossible that Christ recognized genuine prophetic inspiration in some writing that was meant to have transitory value only and not to be preserved for future generations. Perhaps this bore the title "Wisdom of God" or represented "Wisdom" as speaking, as in Prov 1:22-33.
Burton Scott Easton
See SIRACH .
1. The Wisdom Section, The Wisdom of Solomon 1:1 through 11:14
2. The Historical Section, The Wisdom of Solomon 11:5 through 19:22
XI. USE OF WISDOM BY CHRISTIAN WRITERS
LITERATURE
In the Greek manuscripts (Codex Vaticanus, Codex Alexandrinus, Codex Sinaiticus, etc.) the book is called "The Wisdom of Solomon" Sophia Salomonos, the form of the latter word varying in the best manuscripts). In the Syriac (Peshitta) its title is "The Book of the Great Wisdom of Solomon." Solomon was among the Jews and the early Christians the patron of didactic, as David was of lyrical, and Moses of religious-legal, literature, and their names came to be associated with literary compositions with which they had nothing to do. We read in the Old Testament of the wisdom of Solomon (1 Ki 3:7-14; compare Sirach 47:12-18 (14-19)), and the whole of the Book of Proverbs is called by his name, though he is at most the author of but a part. Solomon speaks in the first person in this book (The Wisdom of Solomon 6 through 9), as he does in Eccl 1:12 ff, for that he is made the speaker until the close of The Wisdom of Solomon 9 is made certain by 7:1 ff; 9:2 ff. As long as he was thought to be the composer of this book it continued to be called "The Wisdom of Solomon" among the Jews and the early Christians.
Influenced by the Greek thought and style of the book, Jerome came to the conclusion that Solomon was not its author and he accordingly altered its title to "The Book of Wisdom" (Liber sapientiae), and it is this designation that the book bears in the Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) and the versions made from it, though in the Protestant translations (German, English, Welsh, etc.) the title "The Wisdom of Solomon" is continued, as these, follow the Greek version and not the Latin Luther's title is The Wisdom of Solomon to Tyrants". (Die Weisheit Salamos an die Tyrannen). Epiphanius and Athanasius quote the book under the name "All-Virtuous Wisdom" (Panaretos Sophia), a title by which Proverbs and Sirach are also known in the writings of some of the Fathers.
In the manuscripts and odd of the Greek Bible and in the Vulgate, English Versions of the Bible, etc., Wisdom follows Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles, and is followed by Sirach. Some of the Fathers, believing the book to be by Solomon, thought it divinely-inspired and therefore canonical; so Hippolytus, Cyprian, Ambrose, etc. Other Fathers, though denying the Solomonian authorship of the book, yet accorded it canonical rank; so Origen, Eusebius, Augustine, etc. On the other hand there were some in the early church who refused to acknowledge the book as in any way authoritative in matters of doctrine. The Council of Trent included it with the rest of the Protestant Apocrypha (except 1 and 2 Esdras and Pr Man) in the Canon, so that the Romanist Bible includes it, but the Protestant Bible excludes it.
The book is made up of two main parts so different as to suggest difference of authorship. (1) The wisdom section (The Wisdom of Solomon 1:1 through 11:4): In this part the writer describes and commends Wisdom, warning his readers against neglecting it. (2) The historical section (The Wisdom of Solomon 11:5 through 19:22).
1. The Wisdom Section, The Wisdom of Solomon 1:1 through 11:14:
(1) Righteousness:
Righteousness (i.e. Wisdom in operation) leads to immortality, unrighteousness to death (The Wisdom of Solomon 1).
(2) Contrasted Fortunes of the Wise (Righteous) and Unwise (Ungodly) (The Wisdom of Solomon 2:1 through 6:21).
(a) Sensual pleasures issue in death while God intended all men to live spiritually (The Wisdom of Solomon 2); (b) the lot of the wise (righteous) is a happy one. Their sufferings are disciplinary and remedial; they shall live forever and reign hereafter over the nations (Gentiles) (The Wisdom of Solomon 3:1-9); (c) but the lot of the wicked and of their children is a miserable one; the wise (righteous) shall be happy though childless (The Wisdom of Solomon 3:10-19); (d) virtuous childlessness secures immortality before guilty parenthood (The Wisdom of Solomon 4:1-6); (e) though the wise (righteous) die early, yet they have rest in their death, and accomplish their life mission in the allotted time (of Enoch) (The Wisdom of Solomon 4:7-14); (f) the ungodly (unwise) shall come to a wretched end: then they shall see and envy the prosperity of the righteous. Though they shall pass tracelessly away, the righteous shall rejoice in a life that is endless (The Wisdom of Solomon 4:15 through 5:23); (g) kings ought therefore to rule according to Wisdom and thus attain to immortality (The Wisdom of Solomon 6:1-21).
(3) Wisdom.
Speaking in the name of Solomon, the writer praises Wisdom and commends it to kings ("judges"= "rulers" in The Wisdom of Solomon 6:1, is but a synonym) (The Wisdom of Solomon 6:1 through 11:4). (a) All men come into the world with the same universal need of Wisdom which leads to true kingship and immortality (The Wisdom of Solomon 6:1-25); (b) I (Solomon) sought Wisdom as the main thing and in obtaining it had along with it every good thing, including knowledge of every kind (The Wisdom of Solomon 7:1 through 8:21); (c) the prayer which Solomon offered for Wisdom (The Wisdom of Solomon 9:1-18); (d) how Wisdom defended the heroes of Hebrew history, from the first man, Adam, to the Israelites at the Red Sea and in the wilderness (The Wisdom of Solomon 10:1 through 11:4).
2. The Historical Section, The Wisdom of Solomon 11:5 through 19:22:
In this second part of the book Solomon no longer speaks in the first person (as in The Wisdom of Solomon 6 through 9), nor is Wisdom once mentioned or for certain referred to, though most writers see in this part the attempt of the author of The Wisdom of Solomon 1:1 through 11:4 to exemplify in concrete instances the working of that Wisdom of which in the first part he describes the nature and issues.
(1) Contrasted treatment by God (not Wisdom) of the Israelites and their foes (The Wisdom of Solomon 11:5-12). By what things their foes were punished they were benefited (The Wisdom of Solomon 11:5). (a) The Egyptians (The Wisdom of Solomon 11:5 through 12:2): Water a boon to Israel, a bane to Egypt (The Wisdom of Solomon 11:6-14). The Egyptians punished by the animals they worshipped (The Wisdom of Solomon 11:15-20), though there was a relenting on God's part that sinners might repent (The Wisdom of Solomon 11:21 through 12:2). (b) The Canaanites (The Wisdom of Solomon 12:3-27): The abominations of the worship and the divine punishment with the lessons this last teaches.
(2) Idolatry described and condemned (The Wisdom of Solomon 13 through 15). These chapters form a unity in themselves, a digression from the historical survey closed with The Wisdom of Solomon 12:27 and continued in 16:1-19. The digression may of course be due to the allusion in 11:5-12 to the sins of the Egyptians and Canaanites. Kinds of idolatry: (a) Nature-worship (fire, wind, air, water, heavenly bodies), due often to sincere desire to find out God (13:1-9); (b) worship of idols in animal form, a much grosset sin (13:10-19); (c) God's indignation against all forms of idolatry (14:1-11); (d) origin of image-worship (14:15-21); the father mourning for his deceased son makes an image of him and then worships it (14:15); rulers are often flattered and then deified (14:16 f); artists often make images so attractive as to tempt men to regard them as gods (14:18-21); (e) immoral results of idolatry: "The worship of idols .... a beginning and cause and end of every evil" (14:27) (14:22-31); (f) Israel was free from idolatry and in consequence enjoyed the divine favor (15:1-5); (g) the folly of idolatry: the image man made less capable than man its maker and worshipper; the Egyptians the worst offenders (15:6-19).
(3) In five different respects the fortunes of Egypt and Israel in the past are contrasted, Nature using similar means to punish the Egyptians and to reward the Israelites (The Wisdom of Solomon 16 through 19:22), namely, in respect of the following: (a) animals, quail (The Wisdom of Solomon 16:1-4) and fiery serpents (The Wisdom of Solomon 16:5-14) (The Wisdom of Solomon 16:1-14); (b) fire and water, heat and cold (The Wisdom of Solomon 16:15-29); (c) light and darkness (The Wisdom of Solomon 17:1 through 18:4); (d) death (The Wisdom of Solomon 18:5-25); (e) passage of the Red Sea (The Wisdom of Solomon 19:1-22).
There is not so much manifest poetry in this book as in Sirach, though there is large amount of genuine poetry characterized by parallelism, but not by meter in the ordinary sense of the term. In parts of the book, which must be pronounced prose, parallelism is nevertheless often found (see The Wisdom of Solomon 10:1 ff). There are far fewer epigrammatic sentences in Wisdom than in Sirach, but on the other hand there is a far greater number of other rhetorical devices, assonances (The Wisdom of Solomon 1:10; 4:2; 5:15; 7:13), alliterations (The Wisdom of Solomon 2:23; 5:12,18; 6:11; 12:15), antitheses (The Wisdom of Solomon 13:18 f), etc. See for details Speaker's Apocrypha (Farrar), I, 404 ff.
Nearly all writers on the book believe it to be one homogeneous whole, the work of one mind. They point for proof to the fact that the whole book is a consistent whole directed against the two evils, apostasy and idolatry; that the language is from beginning to end uniform, such as one writer would be likely to employ.
For a statement of contrary views and a reply to them see the Commentary of Grimm, pp. 9-15. Until about the middle of the 18th century no doubt had been expressed as regards the unity of the book. (1) Houbigant (Notae criticae in universos New Testament libros, 1777, 169) divided the book into two parts: The Wisdom of Solomon 1 through 9 written by Solomon in Hebrew, The Wisdom of Solomon 10 through 19 composed in Greek at a later time, perhaps by the translation into Greek of chapters 1 through 9. Against the Solomonian authorship see VIII , below, and against a Hebrew original see X, below. Doederlein adopted Houbigant's division of the book, denying, however, the authorship by Solomon. (2) Eichhorn (Einleitung in das New Testament, 142 ff) divided the book also into two parts: The Wisdom of Solomon 1 through 11 and 11:2 through 19. He held that the whole was composed in Greek by two different writers or by the same writer at different times. (3) Nachtigal (Das Buch der Welshelf, 1799) went much farther, holding that the book is nothing more than anthology, but he has had no followers in this. (4) Bretschneider (De lib. Sap., 1804) ascribes the book to three principal authors and to a final editor. The Wisdom of Solomon 1 through 6:8 was composed in Hebrew in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes (died 164 BC) by a Palestinian Jew, though it is an excerpt from a larger work; 6:9 through 10 is the work of an Alexandrian Jew, a contemporary of our Lord; The Wisdom of Solomon 11 was inserted by the final editor as seemingly necessary to connect parts 2 and 3; The Wisdom of Solomon 12 through 19 were written about the same time by a Jewish partisan of slender education and narrow sympathies.
Summary.
Perhaps, on the whole, the arguments in favor of the unity of the book outweigh those against it. But the evidence is by no means decisive. The Wisdom section (The Wisdom of Solomon 1:1 through 11:4) is a much finer bit of writing than the rest of the book, and it bears the general characteristics of the Wisdom literature. Yet even within this larger unity The Wisdom of Solomon 6 through 9 stand out from the rest, since only in them is Solomon made to speak in the first person (compare Eccl 1:12 ff); but these four chapters agree with the rest of the Wisdom section in other respects. Within the historical section (The Wisdom of Solomon 11:5 through 19:22) The Wisdom of Solomon 13 through 15 stand together as if a separate treatise on idolatry (see III , above), though if originally independent an editor has logically joined chapter 15 to chapter 12 ; compare "for" (gar), "etc." (13:1). Indeed the book in its present form is made at least externally one, though it is not absolutely certain whether or not this external unity is due to editorial revision. Some scholars have maintained that the book as it stands is a torso (so Eichhorn, etc.). Calmer infers this from the fact that the historical sketch closes with the entrance of the Israelites into Canaan. Others say that the writer's sketch was cut short by some unforeseen event (Grotius, Eichhorn), or that the remainder of the once complete work has been lost in transmission (Heydenreich). But on the other hand it must be remembered that the writer's record is limited by his purpose, and that the history of the Egyptians supplies an admirable and adequate illustration of the wickedness and calamitous results of unfaithfulness to God and His law.
In the treatment of this section it is assumed with some hesitation that the book is throughout the work of one man. The following is a brief statement of the teaching of this book concerning theology, anthropology, deontology, martiology, soteriology, and eschatology.
Theology in the strict sense, i.e. the doctrine about God: God is incomparably powerful (The Wisdom of Solomon 11:21 f), omni-present (The Wisdom of Solomon 1:7; 12:1) and all-loving (The Wisdom of Solomon 11:24). He made the world out of formless matter (The Wisdom of Solomon 11:17, the doctrine of the Alexandrian Judaism). He did not create the world out of nothing as the Old Testament (Gen 1:1 ff) and even Sirach teach (see SIRACH ,BOOK OF ,IV , 1). The author's highest conception of creation is the conversion of chaos into cosmos. It is the order and beauty of the universe that amaze the writer, not the stupendous power required to make such a universe out of nothing (The Wisdom of Solomon 11:20; 13:3). Though God is said to be just (The Wisdom of Solomon 12:15), kind (The Wisdom of Solomon 1:13; 11:17-26; 12:13-16; 15:1; 16:7), and is even addressed as Father (The Wisdom of Solomon 14:3), yet He is in a unique sense the Favorer and Protector of Israel (The Wisdom of Solomon 16:2; 18:8; 19:22); yet according to The Wisdom of Solomon 12:2-20 even the calamities He heaps up upon the foes of Israel were designed to lead them to repentance (12:2-20), though in The Wisdom of Solomon 11 f we are clearly taught that while the sufferings of the Israelites were remedial, those of their enemies were purely penal. The conception of God in Wisdom agrees on the whole with that of Alexandrian Judaism (circa 100 BC); i.e. it lays principal stress on His transcendence, His infinite aloofness from man and the material world. We have therefore in this book the beginning of the doctrine of intermediaries which issued in Philo's Powers, the media through which the Absolute One comes into definite relation with men.
In Wisdom as in the later books of the Old Testament (exilic and post-exilic), the expression "the Spirit of the Lord" denotes the person of God. What God does is done by the Spirit. Thus, it is His Spirit that fills and sustains the world, that observes all human actions (The Wisdom of Solomon 1:7 f), that is present everywhere (The Wisdom of Solomon 12:1). Wisdom does not hypostatize "the Spirit of the Lord," making it an intermediary between God and His creatures, but the way is prepared for this step.
Much that is said of the Spirit of the Lord in this book is said of Wisdom, but much more, and there is a much closer approach to hypostatization in the case of Wisdom. At the creation of the world Wisdom was with God (compare Prov 8:22-31), sat by His throne, knew His thoughts and was His associate (The Wisdom of Solomon 8:3; 9:4,9), made all things, taught Solomon the Wisdom for which he prayed (The Wisdom of Solomon 7:22); all powerful, seeing all things (The Wisdom of Solomon 7:23), pervading all things (The Wisdom of Solomon 7:24), an effluence of the glory of the Almighty (The Wisdom of Solomon 7:25); she teaches sobriety, understanding, righteousness and courage (The Wisdom of Solomon 8:7, the four cardinal virtues of the Stoic philosophy). For detailed account of the conception of Wisdom in this book see WISDOM .
In Philo the Logos is the intermediary power next to Deity, but in Wisdom the term keeps to the Old Testament sense, "word," that by which God addresses men. It never means more, though some hold (Gfrorer, Philo, etc., I 225 ff) that in The Wisdom of Solomon 9:1 f; 12:9; 16:12; 18:22, Logos has the technical sense which it bears in Philo; but a careful examination of the passages shows that nothing more than "word" is meant (see LOGOS ). The only other superhuman beings mentioned in the book are the gods of the Gentiles which are distinctly declared to be nonentities, the product of man's folly (14:13 f), and the Devil who is, however, but once referred to as identical with the serpent of Gen 3. The book does not once speak of a Canon of Scripture or of any divine revelation to man in written form, though it often quotes from the Pentateuch and occasionally from Isaiah and Psalms, never, however, naming them. Wisdom is thus much more universalistic and in harmony with Wisdom literature than Sirach, which identifies Wisdom with the Law and the Prophets and has other distinctly Jewish features.
In its psychology Wisdom follows the dichotomy of Platonism. Man has but two parts, soul and body (The Wisdom of Solomon 1:4; 8:19 f; 9:15), the word soul (psuche) including the reason (nous) and the spirit (pneuma). The Wisdom of Solomon 15:11 is the only passage which seems to teach the doctrine of the trichotomy of man, but in reality it does nothing of the kind, for the parallelism shows that by "soul" and "spirit" the same thing is meant. Philo teaches the same doctrine (see Drummond, Philo, etc., I, 316 ff). Man's soul is breathed into the body (15:11; compare Gen 2:7) and taken back again by God (15:8). The writer adopts the Platonic theory of the pre-existence of souls (8:20; compare 15:8,11,16), which involves the belief in a kind of predestination, for the previous doings of the soul determine the kind of body into which it enters. Solomon's soul, being good, entered an undefiled body (8:20). R. H. Charles (Eschatology, etc., 254 f) is hardly correct when he says that according to Wisdom (1:4; 9:15, etc.) matter is inherently sinful. This doctrine was definitely taught by Philo, who accepted Heraclitus' epigram, soma sema, "The body is a tomb." So it is said (12:10; 13:1) that man is by nature evil, his wickedness being inborn. But if he sins it is his own affair, for he is free (1:16; 5:6,13). The writer borrows two words from Greek poetry and philosophy which appear to involve a negation of human freedom, namely, anake, "necessity" and dike "justice" "avenging justice". The first blinds the eyes of the ungodly (17:17), but the blindness is judicial, the result of a course of evil (see 19:1-5). The second term is used in Greek philosophy in the sense of nemesis, and it has that sense in The Wisdom of Solomon 1:8, etc. But throughout this book it is assumed that punishment for sin is deserved, since man is free. The author of Wisdom believes in a twofold division into good (wise) and bad (ungodly), and, unlike the writers of the later parts of the Old Testament, he holds it possible for a person to pass from one class into another. But does not God, according to parts of Wisdom, as of the Old Testament, appear to show undue favoritism to Israel and neglect of other people? Thus Israel is "God's Son" (18:13), His children (sons, 12:19,21; 16:10,26), His sons and daughters (9:7). They are His holy and elect ones (3:9; 4:15; and especially 10:17; 18:1,5). But the Israelites were treated as they were, not because they were Israelites, but because they were morally better than the nations around (see Drummond, op. cit., II, 207 ff).
Under the term "deontology" here, religious and ethical practice is included. (1) As might be expected in a Wisdom book, little importance is attached to the Law of Moses and its requirements. Though historical allusions are made to the offering of sacrifices, the singing of psalms and the taking upon themselves of the obligation of the covenant of the Law (The Wisdom of Solomon 18:9); though, moreover, reference is made to the offering of incense by Aaron (The Wisdom of Solomon 18:21), and Solomon is made to utter the words "temple," "altar," "tabernacle" (The Wisdom of Solomon 9:8), yet in other respects nothing is said of the temple and its feasts, of the priesthood, of sacrifice, or of the laws of clean and unclean. Yet the duty of worshipping the one true God and Him only and the evil results of worshipping idols are strongly and constantly insisted upon, especially in the second or historical part of the book (The Wisdom of Solomon 11:5 to end). (2) The cardinal virtues inculcated are those of the Stoic philosophy, namely, prudence (sophrosune), common-sense (phronesis), justice dikaiosune) and courage (andreia), showing that the writer was influenced by the philosophy of the Greeks.
As a historical fact, the writer adopts the account in Gen 3 of the entrance of sin into the world. "By the envy of the Devil, death (i.e. as the connection proves, spiritual death) entered into the world" (The Wisdom of Solomon 2:24). In The Wisdom of Solomon 14:27, however, sin is made to have its root in idolatry, meaning perhaps that all sin consists in not giving-proper heed to the one true God, and that the moral monstrosities of his time were outgrowths of idolatrous worship. The freedom of the will is taught explicitly or implicitly throughout the book (see aboveVI , 2).
The book is silent as to a Messiah who shall deliver his people. It is Wisdom that saves man: "Because of her I shall have immortality" (The Wisdom of Solomon 8:13); immortality lies in kinship to Wisdom (The Wisdom of Solomon 8:17); all who give heed to the commands of Wisdom have the assurance of incorruption, and incorruption brings men near to God (The Wisdom of Solomon 6:18 f). The knowledge of God's power is the root of immortality (The Wisdom of Solomon 15:2).
The doctrine of individual immortality is explicitly taught in this book. Man (= all men) was created for incorruption (The Wisdom of Solomon 2:23; 6:19; 12:1). The righteous have the full hope of immortality (The Wisdom of Solomon 3:4) and shall live forever (The Wisdom of Solomon 5:15). When the wicked die they have no hope (The Wisdom of Solomon 3:18), since they suffer for their sins in this present world as well as in that which is to come (The Wisdom of Solomon 3:16,18). The doctrine of a resurrection of the body is not taught. If the author accepted Philo's doctrine of the inherent sinfulness of matter (see aboveVI , 2), as R. H. Charles holds, he could not believe in a bodily resurrection. After death there is to be a day of decision (diagnosis, the word used in Acts 25:21; see The Wisdom of Solomon 3:18); there will be an examination (exetasis) into the counsels of the ungodly. The sins of the wicked shall be reckoned up (The Wisdom of Solomon 4:20), but the righteous man shall stand in great boldness before the face of them that afflicted him (The Wisdom of Solomon 5:1). The teaching of the book as to the future of the righteous does not seem to be consistent. According to The Wisdom of Solomon 3:1 ff, the righteous pass at death immediately into the bliss of God; but the teaching of 4:20 f is that the wicked and the righteous shall be assembled in one place to receive their sentence.
The writer's purpose appears to have been to recommend to his fellow-countrymen in Alexandria the claims of religion under the names of Wisdom, Righteousness, etc., and to warn them against falling into the idolatry of the Egyptians. In addition to glorifying Wisdom, he gives an ironical account of the rise of idolatry, and he uses strong language in pointing out the disastrous consequences in this world and the next of a life away from the true God (see above,III ). The book is ostensibly addressed to rulers, but they are mentioned only in The Wisdom of Solomon 6:1-11,20-25, and the appeal of the book is to men as such. In addressing rulers the author uses a rhetorical device. It might be argued that if rulers with their superior advantages need such exhortations and warnings, how much more ordinary men!
Plumptre (Ecclesiastes, 70) and Siegfried (HDB, iV, 928) contend that the Solomon of this book is made to answer the Solomon of Ecclesiastes. But the author does not show any acquaintance with Ecclesiastes, and it is hardly likely that this last book was known at the time in Alexandria, for though composed about 200 BC, it was not put into Greek for a long time afterward. Besides, there is nothing about idolatry in Ecclesiastes. The conclusion reached in the genuine parts of this last book is a counsel of despair: "All is vanity." A reply to that book would seek to show that life is worth living for the sake of the present and the future. The Book of Wisdom denounces idolatry in the most scathing language: how can this and the like be a polemic against Ecclesiastes?
The author was an Alexandrian Jew, well read in the Septuagint whose phrases he often uses, fairly acquainted with Greek philosophy as taught at Alexandria and also with physical science as known at the time (see The Wisdom of Solomon 7:17-20; 8:8). He was beyond all doubt a Jew, for the views he advocates are those of an enlightened but strong Judaism; his interests are even narrowly Jewish (note the fiercely anti-Gentile sentiments of The Wisdom of Solomon 11:10-13,17-23), and his style is largely tinged by the vocabulary and the phraseology of the Greek version of the Hebrew Scriptures. That he was an Alexandrian or at least an Egyptian Jew is equally probable. No Palestinian could have written the language of this work with its rhetorical devices (see above,IV ), or have displayed the acquaintance which the book reveals with Greek philosophy as modified by Jewish-Alexandrian thought.
Other Views.
These include: (1) that Solomon is the author: see above,II . No modern scholar takes this view seriously, though singularly enough it has been revived by D. S. Margoliouth; (2) that Zerubbabel is the author (J. M. Faber); (3) that the author was one of the translators of the Septuagint; (4) that the author belonged to the Therapeutae: so Gfrorer (Philo, II, 265), Dahne (Philo, II, 270); compare Jost (Geschichte des Judaismus, I, 378). This has been inferred from The Wisdom of Solomon 16:28, the Therapeutae being, it is said, a Jewish sect which, like the Zarathustrians, worshipped toward the rising sun. But we know very little about this sect, and there is no decisive evidence that it ever existed. If, however, Eusebius (Historia Ecclesiastica, II, 17) is right in saying that Philo's Therapeutae were Christians (the earliest Christian sect of Alexandria), it is clear that no member of this sect wrote Wisdom, for the book is wholly free from Christian influence; (5) that Ben Sira is the author (Augustine); (6) that Apollos is the author: so Noack (Der Ursprung des Christenthums, I, 222); Plumptre (Expositor, I, 329 ff, 409 ff); see summary of grounds in Speaker's Apocrypha (Farrar), I, 413 ff; but the author must have been a Jew and he wrote too early to allow of this hypothesis; (7) that Philo is the author: thus Jerome writes (Praef. in lib. Sol.): Nonnulli scriptorum hunt ease Judaei Philonis affirmant. This view was supported by Luther and other scholars; compare the Muratorian Fragment (in Zahn's text) inXI , below. But the teaching of this book represents an earlier stage of Alexandrian Jewish speculation than that found in Philo's works, and the allegorical method of interpretation so rampant in the latter is almost wholly absent from Wisdom. (8) It has been held by some (Kirschbaum, Weisse, etc.) that whoever the author was he must have been a Christian, but the whole trend and spirit of the book prove the contrary.
The book was probably composed about 120-100 BC. The evidence is literary, historical and philosophical. The book must have been written after the Septuagint version of the Pentateuch and Isaiah had been made, since the author has evidently used this version of both books and perhaps of the Psalms as well (compare The Wisdom of Solomon 3:1 and Ps 31:5(6); and also The Wisdom of Solomon 15:15 f and Ps 115:4-7 (= Ps 135:15-18)). Now we know from Sirach (Prolegomena) that the Septuagint of the Pentateuch, the Prophets and of at least a portion of the Writings (Hagiographa) was completed by 132 BC, when the younger Siracide finished his translation of Sirach (see SIRACH ,BOOK OF ,VIII ). It may therefore be inferred that Wisdom was written after 132 BC. Moreover, in The Wisdom of Solomon 4:1 the author shows an acquaintance with Sirach 16:1-4 in Greek, for the pseudo-Solomon does not seem to have known Hebrew, or he would sometimes at least have quoted from the Hebrew text. This confirms the conclusion drawn from the use of the Septuagint that this book is at least as late as, say, 130 BC, and almost certainly later. The book was composed earlier than any of the New Testament writings, or some of the latter would have been quoted or referred to. Moreover, it may be assumed that the Greek Canon was complete in the time of our Lord, and thus included Wisdom as well as the rest of the Old Testament Apocrypha. But see International Journal of Apocrypha, October, 1913, p. 77, article by the present writer. It must have taken a long time after writing for the book to gain the respect which secured its canonization. A date 100 BC agrees with all the facts.
The Wisdom of Solomon 3:1; 5:1; 6:5-9 imply that at the time of writing the Jews addressed were suffering under the lash of persecution, and we have the resulting feeling of, animosity against the Egyptians, the persecuting power, expressed in 11:16-19. Now we know that the early Ptolemies treated the Jews with consideration, and Ptolemy VII (Physcon, 145-117 BC) was the first to adopt a contrary policy toward the Jews of Egypt, owing to the support they had given to Cleopatra. Josephus (Apion, II, 5) gives an account of the vengeance which this king wreaked upon the Jews of Alexandria at this time. Nevertheless, the literary manner and the restrained spirit with which these matters are referred to show that the writer is describing a state of things which belongs to the past, though to a recent past. A date about 100 BC would admirably suit the situation of the author at the time of composition.
The teaching of the book (see above,VI ) belongs to that stage in the development of Alexandrian Judaism which existed about 100BC . We have not in this book the allegorization characteristic of Philo (born 20 BC, died 40 AD), nor had his Logos doctrine as yet become a part of the creed of Alexandrian Jews.
Scholars are practically agreed that the book was composed in Greek D. S. Margoliouth attempted to prove a Hebrew original (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1890, 263-97; see reply by Freudenthal,JQR ,III , 722-53), but the evidence he offers has convinced nobody.
(1) The Greek of Wisdom is free, spontaneous and idiomatic. There are a few Hebraisms, but only such as characterize Hellenistic Greek in general; Wisdom is very different in this from Sirach which abounds with Hebraisms, due no doubt to translation from a Hebrew original. (2) The rhetorical devices so common in the Greek of the book can be due only to the original text; they could hardly occur in such profusion in a translation. In addition to those mentioned above in IV, note the Greek rhetorical figures chiasmus (The Wisdom of Solomon 1:1 through 4:8; 3:15) and sorites (The Wisdom of Solomon 6:7-20). (3) The translation of Sirach into Hebrew before the discovery of the Hebrew fragments had been often attempted and found comparatively easy; but it is very difficult to put Wisdom into Hebrew because the style is so thoroughly Greek. (4) No trace of a Hebrew original has thus far been found. What Nachmanides saw was not the original Hebrew, but a translation in Hebrew from the original text. Jerome (Praef. in lib. Sol.) says that though he had himself seen Sirach in Hebrew, a Hebrew text of Wisdom was not to be found.
XI. Use of Wisdom by Christian Writers.
It has been thought that the following parts of the New Testament have been influenced by Wisdom: Lk 2:7 (compare The Wisdom of Solomon 7:4); Lk 12:20 (compare The Wisdom of Solomon 15:8); Lk 9:31 (compare The Wisdom of Solomon 3:2); Lk 19:44 (compare The Wisdom of Solomon 3:7). The Logos doctrine of John (see Jn 1:1, etc.) has certainly a connection with the doctrine of Wisdom in Wisdom (see Gregg, Commentary, liv ff). Grafe (Theologische Abhandlungen, Freiburg in B., 1892) endeavors to prove that Paul made large use of Wisdom (see also Sanday and Headlam, Romans, 51 f, 267-69); but this has been denied; see further Dearie (Commentary, 15 ff). The book was certainly known to Clement of Rome, Tatian, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria and Hippolytus. The Muratorian Fragment states the work to have been "composed by the friends of Solomon in his honor" (ll. 69-71). Zahn (Gesch. Kan., II, 101, following a suggestion of Tregelles) prefers to read "composed by Philo in Solomon's honor"--an easy change in the Greek (philonos for philon). Origen (Contra Celsus, v.29) calls it "the work entitled Wisdom of Solomon," so intimating doubt as to the authorship.
The text in Codex Vaticanus pointed with collations in Swete's Old Testament in Greek, is on the whole the best, though both Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Ephraemi (which is incomplete) have good texts, Codex Alexandrinus being fairly trustworthy. The text is found also in fair preservation in many cursives.
The Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) is identical with, but has slight variations from, the Old Latin Lagarde (Mittheilungen, 243-86) gives the Latin version of Sirach and Wisdom found in Codex Amiaut. This last is a literal rendering from the Greek.
The Syriac (Peshitta) version found in the London Polyglot and in Lagarde (Lib. Apocrypha Syr) was made immediately from the Greek, but apparently from the text in Codex Alexandrinus or in one like it.
LITERATURE.
Besides the works cited in the course of the foregoing article and the general works (commentaries, etc.) on the Apocrypha mentioned under APOCRYPHA (which see), the following are to be noted:
(1) Commentaries: Bauermeister, Commentary in Sap. Sol. libr., 1828; Grimm, Komm. uber das Buch der Weisheit, 1857, also his excellent commentary in the Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch, series 1860; J.H. Schmid, Das Buch der Welsheit: Uebersetzt und erklart, 1857; Gutberlet, Das Buch der Weisheit, 1874; W. J. Deane, The Book of Wisdom, Greek Vulgate and the King James Version with "Commentary." (1881, full and fairly scholarly); Speaker's Apocrypha (Farrar) is interesting and often helpful; Siegfried's "Introduction" and "Commentary" in Kautzsch's Die Apocrypha is slight, but also often helpful; The Wisdom of Solomon by J. A. E. Gregg (the Revised Version (British and American) with "Introduction" and "Commentary," Cambridge Bible) is brief and popular, but trustworthy; A. T. S. Goodrick, The Book of Wisdom, 1913 (admirable); S. Holmes (in the Oxford Apocrypha, with Introduction and Comm.).
(2) Of the dict. arts., that in Encyclopedia Biblica (by C. H. Toy) is perhaps the best; that in HDB (Siegfried) is fair but defective.
(3) In addition to the works by Gfrorer and Dahne discussing the philosophy of the book, the following works may be mentioned: Bruch, Weisheits-Lehre der Hebraer, 1851 (322-78); Zeller, Die Philosophic der Griechen (1881), III, part 2, 271-74, 4th edition, 272-96; Kubel, "Die ethischen Grundanschauungen der Weisheit Salomos," in Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 1865, 690-722; Menzel, Der griechische Einfluss auf Prediger und Weisheit Salomos, 1889, 39-70; Bois, Essai sur les origines de la philosophic judeo-alexandrine, 1890, 211-309, 337-412. The work by Drummond, often quoted, has been carefully done and is interestingly written (Philo Judaeus, 1888, 2 volumes; see I, 177-229).
For detailed bibliography see Schurer,GJV 4, 1909,III , 508 ff;HJP , 1886,II , 3, pp. 236 f, is necessarily very defective.
T. Witton Davies
wiz'-men: In addition to the uses of "wise" specified in the article WISDOM, the adjective is employed occasionally as the technical description of men who are adepts in magic, divination, etc. (e.g. in Gen 41:8; Ex 7:11; Est 1:13; Dan 2:27; 5:15). Naturally, however, in the ancient world the boundary between genuine knowledge and astrology, etc., was exceedingly vague, and it was never denied that real knowledge could be gained along lines that we know to be futile. So the initiation of Moses into all the wisdom of the Egyptians (Acts 7:22) or of Daniel into all the learning of the Chaldeans (Dan 1:4) met with no disapproval. These great men could be trusted to avoid the moral and religious pitfalls of such pursuits. For the ordinary Israelites, however the uncompromising prohibition of idolatry closed the door definitely to all studies of this kind. See ASTROLOGY ;DIVINATION , etc. And for the Wise-men of Mt 2 see MAGI .
Burton Scott Easton
wiz.
See WISDOM .
wish: The word appears both as a substantive and as a verb in the Old Testament, having a variety of meanings: (1) The substantive, peh, means "mouth" and also "speech." In this form it occurs in Job 33:6 margin: "Behold, I am according to thy wish in God's stead." Elihu here refers to Job's expressed desire for an umpire (9:33), and one who would maintain his right with God (16:21). (2) The verb: (a) haphets, "willing," or "desirous" (Ps 40:14 the King James Version); (b) sha'-al, "to ask," "petition," "supplicate" (Job 31:30 the King James Version); (c) another variation of meaning is found in Ps 73:7 where maskith, "to imagine," is translated "wish": "They have more than heart could wish"; (d) euchomai, "to solicit," "to implore" (Rom 9:3).
Arthur Walwyn Evans
wist, wit'-i, wot: The verb "to wit" in the King James Version is interchangeable with "to know," and is conjugated with a present "wot," and a past "wist." This inflection is derived from more complicated forms in the older English, and in post-Elizabethan times has become quite obsolete. (But compare the roots in "wisdom," "witness.") "Wit," then, is simply "knowledge," and "witty" is "having knowledge," although the noun and the adjective have become narrowly specialized in modern English (compare the similar evolution of "knowing," in its use as an adjective). Even in Elizabethan English, however, the indicative of "to wit" was becoming displaced by "know," and "wot" and "wist" together occur only 24 times in the King James Version (not at all in Apocrypha). the English Revised Version has retained all the New Testament examples, but in the Old Testament has altered about half the occurrences to "know," but has followed no discoverable rule in so doing ("wot" retained only in Josh 2:5). the American Standard Revised Version has changed to "know" throughout (Old Testament and New Testament). The infinitive "to wit" is still in use (chiefly in legal formulas) before an apposition, and the King James Version has introduced it rather frequently to clarify a construction (Josh 17:1; 1 Ki 2:32, etc.), and the Revised Version (British and American) has usually retained it (omitted in Josh 17:1; 2 Ch 4:12). In the other uses of this inf. (Gen 24:21; Ex 2:4) it is replaced by "to know," while the very obsolete expression in 2 Cor 8:1, the King James Version "We do you to wit" (i.e. "We cause you to know"; see Do), has become in the Revised Version (British and American) "We make known unto you."
The noun "wit" is found in Ps 107:27, "at their wits' (the King James Version "wit's") end," for chokhmah, "wisdom," "technical skill"; compare the Revised Version margin "All their wisdom is swallowed up." The meaning is "their skilled seamanship cannot cope with the danger" (the phrase is very commonly misapplied). "Wit" occurs also 1 Esdras 4:26 (dianoia, "mind"); 2 Esdras 5:9 (sensus, here "intelligence"); Sirach 31:20 (psuche, "soul," with the force of "reason").
Witty is found in the King James Version, the Revised Version margin Prov 8:12, "witty inventions" (mezimmah, "discretion" (so the Revised Version (British and American)); if "and" is not read in this verse, translate "discrete knowledge"). In Judith 11:23 occurs "witty in thy words" (agathos, "good," here probably = "thou hast spoken sound sense"). The Wisdom of Solomon 8:19 the King James Version has "a witty child," the Revised Version (British and American) "a child of parts," margin "goodly" (euphues, "well grown," "of a good disposition," "clever"). "Wittingly" occurs in Gen 48:14 (sakhal, "act intelligently").
Burton Scott Easton
wich, wich'-kraft:
1. Meaning and Use of the Words
2. Biblical Usage
3. Common Elements in Witchcraft and Ancient Oriental Magic
4. Rise, Spread and Persecution of Witchcraft
LITERATURE
1. Meaning and Use of the Words:
The word "witch" seems to denote etymologically "one that knows." it is historically both masculine and feminine; indeed the Anglo-Saxon form wicca, to which the English word is to be traced, is masculine alone. "Wizard" is given as masculine for witch, but it has in reality no connection with it. Wright (English Dialect Dictionary, VII, 521) says he never heard an uneducated person speak of wizard. When this word is used by the people it denotes, he says, a person who undoes the work of a witch. Shakespeare often uses "witch" of a male (compare Cymbeline, I, 6, l. 166: "He is .... a witch"). In Wycliff's translation of Acts 8:9 Simon Magus is called "a witch" ("wicche"). Since the 13th century the word "witch" has come more and more to denote a woman who has formed a compact with the Devil or with evil spirits, by whose aid she is able to cause all sorts of injury to living beings and to things. The term "witchcraft" means in modern English the arts and practices of such women.
Since the ideas we attach to "witch" and "witchcraft" were unknown in Bible times, the words have no right place in our English Bible, and this has been recognized to some extent but not completely by the Revisers of 1884. The word "witch" occurs twice in the King James Version, namely, (1) in Ex 22:18, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch (the Revised Version (British and American) "a sorceress") to live"; (2) in Dt 18:10, "or a witch" (the Revised Version (British and American) "or a sorcerer"). The Hebrew word is in both cases the participle of the verb (kishsheph), denoting "to practice the magical article." See MAGIC , V, 2. In the first passage, however, the feminine ending (-ah) is attached, but this ending denotes also one of a class and (on the contrary) a collection of units; see Kautzsch, Hebrew Grammar 28, section 122,s,t.
The phrase "the witch of Endor" occurs frequently in literature, and especially in common parlance, but it is not found in the English Bible. The expression has come from the heading and summary of the King James Version, both often so misleading. In 1 Sam 28, where alone the character is spoken of, English Versions of the Bible translates the Hebrew 'esheth ba`alath 'obh by "a woman that hath a familiar spirit." A literal rendering would be "a woman who is mistress of an 'obh or ghost," i.e. one able to compel the departed spirit to return and to answer certain questions. This woman was therefore a necromancer, a species of diviner (see DIVINATION ,IV ;ENDOR ,WITCH OF ;FAMILIAR ), and not what the term "witch" imports.
The word "witchcraft" occurs thrice in the King James Version in 1 Sam 15:23, "the sin of witchcraft" should be as in the Revised Version margin, "the sin of divination," the latter representing the Hebrew word qecem, generally translated "divination".
See DIVINATION , sec. VII, 1.
The phrase "used witchcraft" (of Manasseh, 2 Ch 33:16) is properly rendered in the Revised Version (British and American) "practised sorcery," the Hebrew verb (kishsheph) being that whence the participles in Ex 22:18 and Dt 18:10, translated in the King James Version "witch," are derived (see above). The word translated in the King James Version "witchcraft" in Gal 5:20 (pharmakeia) is the ordinary Greek one for "sorcery," and is so rendered in the Revised Version (British and American), though it means literally the act of administering drugs and then of giving magical potions. It naturally comes then to stand for the magician's art, as in the present passage and also in The Wisdom of Solomon 12:4; 18:13; and in the Septuagint of Isa 47:9, where it represents the Hebrew noun keshaphim, translated "sorceries"; compare the Hebrew verb kishsheph; see above.
The plural "witchcrafts" (in the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American)) stands for the Hebrew noun just noticed (keshaphim) in 2 Ki 9:22; Mic 5:12; Nah 3:4, but in all three passages a proper rendering would be "sorceries" or "magical arts." "Witchcrafts" is inaccurate and misleading.
The verb "bewitch" occurs in Acts 8:9,11 the King James Version (of Simon Magus bewitching the people) and in Gal 3:1 ("O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you?"). In the first context the Greek verb is existemi, which is properly rendered by the Revisers "amazed"; in 3:13 the passive of the same verb is translated "he was amazed" (the King James Version "He wondered"). In Gal 3:1, the verb is baskaubaino, which is used of a blinding effect of the evil eye and has perhaps an occult reference, but it has nothing whatever to do with "witch" or "witchcraft."
3. Common Elements in Witchcraft and Ancient Oriental Magic:
Though the conceptions conveyed by the English word "witch" and its cognates were unknown to the Hebrews of Bible times, yet the fundamental thought involved in such terms was familiar enough to the ancient Hebrews and to other nations of antiquity (Babylonians, Egyptians, etc.), namely, that there exists a class of persons called by us magicians, sorcerers, etc., who have superhuman power over living creatures including man, and also over Nature and natural objects. This power is of two kinds: (1) cosmic, (2) personal. For an explanation see MAGIC ,II . it is in Assyrio-Babylonian literature that we have the completest account of magical doctrine and practice. The words used in that literature for the male and female magician are ashipu and ashiptu, which correspond to the Hebrew mekhashsheph and mekhashshephah in Dt 18:10 and Ex 22:18 (see 2, above) and are cognate to 'ashshaph (see Dan 1:20; 2:2,10, etc.), which means a magician (the Revised Version (British and American) "enchanter"). Other Babylonian words are kashshapu and kashshaptu, which in etymology and in sense agree with the Hebrew terms mekhashsheph and mekhashshephah mentioned above. But neither in the Babylonian or Hebrew words is there the peculiar idea of a witch, namely, one who traffics with malicious spirits for malicious ends. indeed the magician was a source of good (male and female) as conceived by the Babylonians, especially the ashipu and ashiptu, to the state and to individuals, as well as of evil, and he was often therefore in the service of the state as the guide of its policy. And the same applies to the magician as the Hebrews regarded him, though the true teachers and leaders in Israel condemned magic and divination of every sort as being radically opposed to the religion of Yahweh (Dt 18:10 f). Of course, if a Babylonian magician used his art to the injury of others he was punished as other criminals, and in case of the death of the victim he was executed as a murderer. It is, however, noteworthy in its bearing on "witchcraft" that the female magician or sorceress played a larger part in ancient Babylonia than her male counterpart, and the same is true of the Greeks and other ancient people. This arose perhaps from the fact that in primitive times men spent their time in fighting and hunting; the cooking of the food and the healing of the sick, wounded, etc., by magical potions and otherwise, falling to the lot of the woman who stayed at home. In the early history of the Hebrews inspired women played a greater role than in later time; compare Miriam (Ex 15:20 f; Nu 12); Deborah (Jdg 5:12); Huldah (2 Ki 22:14 ff). Note also the 'ishshah chakhamah, or "wise woman" of 2 Sam 14:2 ff; 20:16.
The first two sections of the Code of Hammurabi are as follows: "1. If a man has laid a curse (kispu = keshaphim) upon (another) man and it is not justified, he that laid the curse shall be put to death. 2. If a man has put a spell upon (another) man and it is not justified, he upon whom the spell is laid shall go to the holy river; into the holy river shall he plunge. If the holy river overcome him (and he is drowned), the man who put the spell upon him shall take possession of his house. If the holy river declares him innocent and he remains unharmed the man who laid the spell shall be put to death. He that plunged into the river shall take possession of the house of him who laid the spell upon him." Not a word is said here of a female that weaves a spell, but probably the word "man" in the Babylonian is to be taken as including male and female (so Canon C. H. W. Johns in a private letter, dated December 22, 1912).
4. Rise, Spread, and Persecution of Witchcraft:
In the early and especially in the medieval church, the conception of the Devil occupied a very important place, and human beings were thought to be under his dominion until he was exorcised in baptism. It is to this belief that we owe the rise and spread of infant baptism. The unbaptized were thought to be Devil-possessed. The belief in the existence of women magicians had come down from hoary antiquity. It was but a short step to ascribe the evil those women performed to the Devil and his hosts. Then it was natural to think that the Devil would not grant such extraordinary powers without some quid pro quo; hence, the witch (or wizard) was supposed to have sold her (or his) soul to the Devil, a proceeding that would delight the heart of the great enemy of good always on the alert to hinder the salvation of men; compare the Faust legend. For the conditions believed to be imposed by the Devil upon all who would be in league with him see A. Lehmann, Aberglaube und Zauberei2 (1908), 110 ff.
This idea of a covenant with the Devil is wholly absent from the early heathen conception of magic; nor do we in the latter read of meetings at night between the magicians and the demons with whom they dealt, such as took place on the Witches' Sabbath. The witches were believed to have sexual commerce with devils and to be capable only of inflicting evil, both thoughts alien to oriental and therefore to Biblical magic.
The history and persecution and execution of women, generally ignorant and innocent, supposed to have been guilty of witchcraft, do not fall within the scope of this article, but may be perused in innumerable works: see "Literature" below. In Europe alone, not to mention America (Salem, etc.), Sprenger says that over nine million suspected witches were put to death on the flimsiest evidence; even if this estimate be too high the actual number must have been enormous. The present writer in his booklet, The Survival of the Evangelical Faith ("Essays for the Times," 1909), gives a brief account of the defense of the reality of witch power by nearly all the Christian theologians of the 17th century and by most of those living in the early 18th century (see pp. 23 ff). See also MAGIC , and The Expositor T,IX , 157 ff.
LITERATURE.
In addition to the literature cited under articles DIVINATION and MAGIC (which see), the following worlds may be mentioned (the books on witchcraft proper are simply innumerable): Reginald Scot, The Discovery of Witchcraft (aimed at preventing the persecution of witches, 1584; republished London, 1886); reply to the last work by James I of England: Daemonologie, 1597; Casaubon, On Credulity and Incredulity .... A Treatise Proving Spirits, Witches and Supernatural Operations, 1668; Joseph Glanrill, Saducismus Triumphatus: Full and Plain Evidences concerning Witches and Apparitions (the last two books are by theologians who class with "atheists"--a vague word in those times for unbelief--all such as doubt the power of witches and deny the power of devils upon human life). For the history of witchcraft and its persecutions see howard Williams, The Superstitions of Witchcraft, 1865, and (brief but interesting and compact) Charles Mackay, Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular Delusions (2 volumes, 1851, 101-91). See also Sir W. Scott, Demonology and Witchcraft, 1830; W. R. Halliday, Greek Divination: A Study of its Methods and Principles, London, Macmillan (important); and article by the present writer in The Expositor, January, 1914, on "The Words Witch and Witchcraft in history and in Literature." For a full account of the witch craze and persecution at Salem, near Boston, U.S.A., see The Wonders of the Invisible World by Cotton Mather, D. D., with a further account by increase Mather, D. D., and compare Demon Possession by J. L. Nevins, 303-10.
T. Witton Davies
with'-erd (nabhel, "to fade away," "to be dried up"): (1) Used figuratively to express leanness of soul, spiritual impotence, a low condition of spiritual life, a lack of moral nourishment: "My heart is smitten like grass, and withereth" (Ps 102:4). The contrasting figure emphasizes this idea: "All my fountains are in thee" (Ps 87:7). Also Ps 1:3, where the freshness and beauty of the righteous man's life are thus described: "And he shall be like a tree planted by the streams of water, .... whose leaf also doth not wither." In the New Testament xeraino, "to wither," is used to carry out the same idea of moral decay, or malnutrition of soul (Mt 13:6; 21:19). (2) "Wither" also had a physiological meaning, expressing both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament the idea of bodily impotence, especially, though not exclusively, of the limbs. Jeroboam was struck suddenly with paralysis of the arm, which is said to have "dried up" (1 Ki 13:4-6); "probably due to sudden hemorrhage affecting some part of the brain, which may under certain circumstances be only temporary" (HDB, 1-vol, 599). "Their skin cleaveth to their bones; it is withered" (Lam 4:8).
In the New Testament (Mt 12:10; Mk 3:1; Lk 6:6) "withered hand" was probably our modern "infantile paralysis," which may leave one or more limbs shrunken and powerless without detriment to the general health.
Arthur Walwyn Evans
withs, (yetharim lachim, margin "new bowstrings," the King James Version margin "new (moist) cords" (Jdg 16:7); Septuagint neura hugra): The material with which Samson was bound by Delilah (Jdg 16:8) was probably some moist "gut" such as was used for bowstrings. Compare metharim, "bowstrings" (Ps 21:12; yether, Job 30:11; Ps 11:2); lahim, translated "green," means "fresh," "sappy" or "moist."
wit'-nes (nouns `edh, and `edhah, and verb `anah; martus, with all derivative words and their compounds): The word "witness" is used of inanimate things, e.g. the heap of stones testifying to the covenant between Jacob and Laban (Gen 31:44-54), and the Song of Moses. (Dt 31:19,21). The main use of the word is forensic, and from this use all other applications are naturally derived. Important legal agreements required the attestation of witnesses, as in the case of the purchase of property, or a betrothal (Ruth 4:1-11, where we are told that the ancient form of attestation was by a man drawing off his shoe and giving it to his neighbor).
The Mosaic Law insisted on the absolute necessity of witnesses in all cases which came before a judge, especially in criminal cases. Not only in criminal cases, but in all cases, it was necessary to have at least two witnesses to make good an accusation against a person (Dt 17:6; 19:15; compare Nu 35:30; Mt 18:16; Jn 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19). According to the Talmud (Pesachim 113b), if in a case of immorality only one witness came forward to accuse anyone, it was regarded as sinful on the part of that witness.
On the other hand, anyone who, being present at the adjuration (Lev 5:1 the Revised Version (British and American)), refused to come forward as a witness when he had testimony to bear, was considered to have sinned (Prov 29:24). Among those not qualified to be witnesses were the near relations of the accuser or the accused, friends and enemies, gamesters, usurers, tax-gatherers, heathen, slaves, women and those not of age (Sanhedhrin 3 3, 4; Ro'sh Ha-shanah 1 7; Babha' Kamma' 88a; compare Ant,IV , viii, 15). No one could be a witness who had been paid to render this service (Bekhoroth 4 6). In cases of capital punishment there was an elaborate system of warning and cautioning witnesses. Each witness had to be heard separately (Sanhedhrin 5; compare 3 5). If they contradicted one another on important points their witness was invalidated (Sanhedhrin 5).
No oath was required from witnesses. The meaning of Lev 5:1 was not that witnesses had to take an oath, as some think; it describes the solemn adjuration of the judge to all those with knowledge of the case to come forward as witnesses (see OATH ). When a criminal was to be put to death, the witnesses against him were to take the foremost share in bringing about his death (Dt 17:7; compare Acts 7:58), in order to prove their own belief in their testimony. In the case of a person condemned to be stoned, all the witnesses had to lay their hands on the head of the condemned (Lev 24:14). "False witnessing" was prohibited in the Decalogue (Ex 20:16); against it the lexicon talionis was enforced, i.e. it was done to the witness as he meant to do to the accused (Dt 19:16-21). The Sadducees held that only when the falsely accused had been executed, the false witnesses should be put to death; the Pharisees, that false witnesses were liable to be executed the moment the death sentence had been passed on the falsely accused (Makkoth 17). In spite of prohibitions, false witnessing was a very common crime among the people (Ps 27:12; 35:11; Prov 6:19; 12:17; 14:5; 19:5; 24:28; Mt 26:60; Acts 6:13).
In Acts 22:20; Rev 2:13; 17:6 the word martus, "witness", seems to be beginning to acquire the meaning of "martyr," as in the King James Version, although the Revised Version (British and American) translates "witness" in the first two passages, retaining "martyr" only in the third with "witness" in the m. For "Tabernacle of Witness" see TABERNACLE .
Paul Levertoff
This phrase arises from the words of Rom 8:16: "The Spirit himself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are children of God." With this may be grouped, as illustrative, 1 Jn 5:10: "he that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in him." in interpreting, we may approach the former passage through the latter. To the man who "believeth on the Son of God," so as to prove him by reliance, He becomes self-evidential in experience, verifying himself to the believer as the divine response to his whole spiritual need. Thus, believed on as the Son, he awakens in the soul which he embraces the filial attitude toward God, the cry, "Abba, Father." On the other side the Spirit, both in the written Word (e.g. Jn 1:12) and in his secret converse with the believer in the life of faith, assures him of the paternal love toward him, as toward a "dear child," (Eph 5:1) of the Father of his Lord. There is thus a concurrent "witnessing." The believer's spirit says, "Thou art my Father"; the Spirit, says to the believer's spirit, "Thou art His child." We may compare Rom 5:5: "The love of God hath been shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Spirit."
Handley Dunelm
wiz'-ard.
See ASTROLOGY , 1;DIVINATION ;FAMILIAR ;MAGIC ;WITCH ,WITCHCRAFT .