fol.
See COLT .
fom (qetseph (Hos 10:7); aphros (Lk 9:39), aphrizo (Mk 9:18,20), epaphrizo (Jude 1:13)): Qetseph from qatsaph, "to break to pieces," or "to break forth into anger," "to be angry," occurs often in the sense of "wrath" or "anger" (e.g. Nu 1:53; Ps 38:1, etc.), and in this passage has been rendered "twigs" or "chips," "As for Samaria, her king is cut off, as foam (the Revised Version, margin "twigs") upon the water" (Hos 10:7). The other references are from the New Testament. In Jude, evil-doers or false teachers are compared to the "wild waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame." In Mark and Luke the references are to the boy with a dumb spirit who foamed at the mouth.
Alfred Ely Day
fod'-er.
See PROVENDER .
fold fold'-ing (verb; chabhaq, sabhakh; helisso): The verb occurs only 3 times in the King James Version, and in each instance represents a different word; we have chabhaq "to clasp" (Eccl 4:5), "The fool foldeth his hands together" (compare Prov 6:10); cabhak, "to interweave" (Nah 1:10, "folded together as thorns," the English Revised Version "like tangled thorns" the American Standard Revised Version "entangled like thorns"; See ENTANGLE ); helisso "to roll or fold up" (Heb 1:12, quoted from Ps 102:26 (Septuagint), the Revised Version (British and American) "As a mantle shalt thou roll them up"). Folding occurs as translation of galil, "turning" or "rolling" (1 Ki 6:34 bis, folding leaves of door).
See also HOUSE .
W. L. Walker
fok: The translation of `am, `am "a people or nation" (Gen 33:15, "some of the folk that are with me"; Prov 30:26, "The conies are but a feeble folk"); of le'om, with the same meaning (Jer 51:58, "the folk in the fire," the Revised Version (British and American) "the nations for the fire"); "sick folk" is the translation of arrhostos, "not strong" (Mk 6:5); of ton asthenounton, participle of astheneo, "to be without strength," "weak," "sick" (Jn 5:3, the Revised Version (British and American) "them that were sick"); "sick folks," of astheneis plural of asthenes, "without strength," the Revised Version (British and American) "sick folk" (Acts 5:16).
W. L. Walker
fol'-o ('achar, radhaph; akoloutheo, dioko) : Frequently the translation of 'achar, "after," e.g. Nu 14:24, "hath followed me fully," literally, "fulfilled after me" (Nu 32:11,12; Dt 1:36; Am 7:15); radhaph is "to pursue," and is often so translated; it is translated "follow" (Ps 23:6; Isa 5:11, etc.); "follow after" (Gen 44:4; Ex 14:4); reghel, "foot," is several times translated "follow" (literally, "at the foot of"; Ex 11:8; Jdg 8:5, etc.); halakh 'achar, "to go after" (Dt 4:3; 1Ki 14:8, etc.); yalakh 'achar, "to go on after" (Gen 24:5; Jdg 2:19, etc.); dabheq, "to cause to cleave to" is "follow hard after" (1 Sam 14:22; Ps 63:8, etc.).
In the New Testament, in addition to akoloutheo (Mt 4:20,22,25, etc.) various words and phrases are rendered "follow," e.g. Deute opiso mou, "Come after me" (Mt 4:19, "Follow me," the Revised Version (British and American) "Come ye after me"); dioko, "to pursue" (Lk 17:23; 1 Thess 5:15, the Revised Version (British and American) "follow after," etc.); mimeomai, "to imitate" (Heb 13:7, "whose faith follow," the Revised Version (British and American) "imitate their faith; 2 These 3:7,9; 3 Jn 1:11); compounds of akoloutheo with ex, para sun, etc. (2 Pet 1:16; Mk 16:20; Acts 16:17; Mk 5:37, etc.).
English Revised Version, "Follow after faithfulness" makes an important change in Ps 37:3, where the King James Version has "and verily thou shalt be fed"; but the American Standard Revised Version has "feed on his faithfulness," margin "feed securely or verily thou shalt be fed." For "attained" (1 Tim 4:6) the Revised Version (British and American) gives "followed until now."
W. L. Walker
fol'-o-er (mimetes): "Followers" is in the King James Version the translation of mimetes, "to imitate" (in the New Testament in the good sense of becoming imitators, or following an example), rendered by the Revised Version (British and American) "imitators" (1 Cor 4:16; 11:1; Eph 5:1; 1 Thess 1:6; 2:14; Heb 6:12); summimetai, "joint imitators" (Phil 3:17); in 1 Pet 3:13, the King James Version "followers of that which is good," the word, according to a better text, is zelotis, the Revised Version (British and American) "if ye be zealous of that which is good."
fol'-i.
See FOOL .
food:
LITERATURE
In a previous article (See BREAD ) it has been shown that in the Bible "bread" usually stands for food in general and how this came to be so. In a complementary article on MEALS the methods of preparing and serving food will be dealt with. This article is devoted specifically to the foodstuffs of the Orient, more especially to articles of food in use among the Hebrews in Bible times. These are divisible into two main classes.
Orientals in general are vegetarians, rather than flesh eaters. There is some reason to believe that primitive man was a vegetarian (See Gen 2:16; 3:2,6). It would seem, indeed, from a comparison of Gen 1:29 f with 9:3 f that Divine permission to eat the flesh of animals was first given to Noah after the Deluge, and then only on condition of drawing off the blood in a prescribed way (compare the kosher (kasher) meat of the Jews of today).
The chief place among the foodstuffs of Orientals must be accorded to the cereals, included in the American Standard Revised Version under the generic term "grain," in the King James Version and the English Revised Version "corn." The two most important of these in the nearer East are wheat (chiTTah) and barley (se`orim). The most primitive way of using the wheat as food was to pluck the fresh ears (Lev 23:14; 2 Ki 4:42), remove the husks by rubbing in the hands (Dt 23:25; Mt 12:1), and eat the grains raw. A common practice in all lands and periods, observed by the fellaheen of Syria today, has been to parch or roast the ears and eat the grain not ground. This is the parched corn (the American Standard Revised Version "'grain") so often mentioned in the Old Testament, which with bread and vinegar (sour wine) constituted the meal of the reapers to which Boaz invited Ruth (Ruth 2:14).
Later it became customary to grind the wheat into flour (kemach), and, by bolting it with a fine sieve, to obtain the "fine flour" (coleth) of our English Versions of the Bible, which, of course, was then made into "bread" (which see), either without leaven (matstsah) or with (lechem chamets Lev 7:13).
Meal, both of wheat and of barley, was prepared in very early times by means of the primitive rubbing-stones, which excavations at Lachish, Gezer and elsewhere show survived the introduction of the hand-mill (See MILL ; ComparePEFS , 1902, 326). Barley (se`orim) has always furnished the principal food of the poorer classes, and, like wheat, has been made into bread (Jdg 7:13; Jn 6:9,13). Less frequently millet (Ezek 4:9) and spelt (kuccemeth; See FITCHES ) were so used. (For details of baking, bread-making, etc., See BREAD . III, 1,2,3.)
Vegetable foods of the pulse family (leguminosae) are represented in the Old Testament chiefly by lentils and beans. The pulse of Dan 1:12 (zero`im) denotes edible "herbs" in general (Revised Version margin, compare Isa 61:11, "things that are sown"). The lentils (`adhashim) were and are considered very toothsome and nutritious. It was of "red lentils" that Jacob brewed his fateful pottage (Gen 25:29,34), a stew, probably, in which the lentils were flavored with onions and other ingredients, as we find it done in Syria today. Lentils, beans, cereals, etc., were sometimes ground and mixed and made into bread (Ezek 4:9). I found them at Gaza roasted also, and eaten with oil and salt, like parched corn.
The children of Israel, when in the wilderness, are said to have looked back wistfully on the "cucumbers .... melons .... leeks .... onions, and the garlic" of Egypt (Nu 11:5). All these things we find later were grown in Palestine. In addition, at least four varieties of the bean, the chickpea, various species of chickory and endive, the bitter herbs of the Passover ritual (Ex 12:8), mustard (Mt 13:31) and many other things available for food, are mentioned in the Mishna, our richest source of information on this subject. Cucumbers (qishshu'im) were then, as now, much used. The oriental variety is much less fibrous and more succulent. and digestible than ours, and supplies the thirsty traveler often with a fine substitute for water where water is scarce or bad. The poor in such cities as Cairo, Beirut and Damascus live largely on bread and cucumbers or melons. The cucumbers are eaten raw, with or without salt, between meals, but also often stuffed and cooked and eaten at meal time. Onions (betsalim), garlic (shummim) and leeks (chatsir) are still much used in Palestine as in Egypt. They are usually eaten raw with bread, though also used for flavoring in cooking, and, like cucumbers, pickled and eaten as a relish with meat (ZDPV, IX, 14). Men in utter extremity sometimes "plucked saltwort" (malluah) and ate the leaves, either raw or boiled, and made "the roots of the broom" their food (Job 30:4).
In Lev 19:23 f it is implied that, when Israel came into the land to possess it, they should "plant all manner of trees for food." They doubtless found such trees in the goodly land in abundance, but in the natural course of things needed to plant more. Many olive trees remain fruitful to extreme old age, as for example those shown the tourist in the garden of Gethsemane, but many more require replanting. Then the olive after planting requires ten or fifteen years to fruit, and trees of a quicker growth, like the fig, are planted beside them and depended on for fruit in the meantime. It is significant that Jotham in his parable makes the olive the first choice of the trees to be their king (Jdg 9:9), and the olive tree to respond, "Should I leave my fatness, which God and man honor in me, and go to wave to and fro over the trees?" (American Revised Version margin). The berries of the olive (zayith) were doubtless eaten, then as now, though nowhere in Scripture is it expressly so stated. The chief use of the berries, now as ever, is in furnishing "oil" (which see), but they are eaten in the fresh state, as also after being soaked in brine, by rich and poor alike, and are shipped in great quantities. Olive trees are still more or less abundant in Palestine, especially around Bethlehem and Hebron, on the borders of the rich plains of Esdraelon, Phoenicia, Sharon and Philistia, in the vale of Shechem, the plain of Moreh, and in the trans-Jordanic regions of Gilead and Bashan. They are esteemed as among the best possessions of the towns, and the culture of them is being revived around Jerusalem, in the Jordan valley and elsewhere throughout the land. They are beautiful to behold in all stages of their growth, but especially in spring. Then they bear an amazing wealth of blossoms, which in the breeze fall in showers like snowflakes, a fact that gives point to Job's words, "He shall cast off his flower as the olive-tree" (Job 15:33). The mode of gathering the fruit is still about what it was in ancient times (compare Ex 27:20).
Next in rank to the olive, according to Jotham's order, though first as an article of food, is the fig (in the Old Testament te'enah, in the New Testament suke), whose "sweetness" is praised in the parable (Jdg 9:11). It is the principal shade and fruit tree of Palestine, growing in all parts, in many spontaneously, and is the emblem of peace and prosperity (Dt 8:8; Jdg 9:10; 1 Ki 4:25; Mic 4:4; Zec 3:10; 1 Macc 14:12). The best fig and olive orchards are carefully plowed, first in the spring when the buds are swelling, sometimes again when the second crop is sprouting, and again after the first rains in the autumn. The "first-ripe fig" (bikkurah, Isa 28:4; Jer 24:2), i.e. the early fig which grows on last year's wood, was and is esteemed as a great delicacy, and is often eaten while it is young and green. The late fig (te'enim) is the kind dried in the sun and put up in quantities for use out of season. Among the Greeks and the Romans, as well as among the Hebrews, dried figs were most extensively used. When pressed in a mold they formed the "cakes of figs" (debhelah) mentioned in the Old Testament (1 Sam 25:18; 1 Ch 12:40), doubtless about such as are found today in Syria and Smyrna, put up for home use and for shipment. It was such a fig-cake that was presented as a poultice (the King James Version "plaster") for Hezekiah's boil (Isa 38:21; compare 2 Ki 20:7). As the fruit-buds of the fig appear before the leaves, a tree full of leaves and without fruit would be counted "barren" (Mk 11:12 f; compare Isa 28:4; Jer 24:2; Hos 9:10; Nah 3:12; Mt 21:19; Lk 13:7).
Grapes ('anabhim), often called "the fruit of the vine" (Mt 26:29), have always been a much-prized article of food in the Orient. They are closely associated in the Bible with the fig (compare "every man under his vine and under his fig-tree," 1 Ki 4:25). Like the olive, the fig, and the date-palm, grapes are indigenous to Syria, the soil and climate being most favorable to their growth and perfection. Southern Palestine especially yields a rich abundance of choice grapes, somewhat as in patriarchal times (Gen 49:11,12). J. T. Haddad, a native Syrian, for many years in the employment of the Turkish government, tells of a variety in the famous valley of Eshcol near Hebron, a bunch from which has been known to weigh twenty-eight pounds (compare Nu 13:23). Of the grapevine there is nothing wasted; the young leaves are used as a green vegetable, and the old are fed to sheep and goats. The branches cut off in pruning, as well as the dead trunk, are used to make charcoal, or for firewood. The failure of such a fruit was naturally regarded as a judgment from Yahweh (Ps 105:33; Jer 5:17; Hos 2:12; Joel 1:7). Grapes, like figs, were both enjoyed in their natural state, and by exposure to the sun dried into raisins (tsimmuqim), the "dried grapes" of Nu 6:3. In this form they were especially well suited to the use of travelers and soldiers (1 Sam 25:18; 1 Ch 12:40). The meaning of the word rendered "raisin-cake," the American Standard Revised Version "a cake of raisins" (2 Sam 6:19 and elsewhere), is uncertain. In Bible times the bulk of the grape product of the land went to the making of wine (which see). Some doubt if the Hebrews knew grape-syrup, but the fact that the Aramaic dibs, corresponding to Hebrew debhash, is used to denote both the natural and artificial honey (grape-syrup), seems to indicate that they knew the latter (compare Gen 43:11; Ezek 27:17; and See HONEY ).
Less prominent was the fruit of the mulberry figtree (or sycomore) (shiqmah), of the date-palm (tamar), the dates of which, according to the Mishna, were both eaten as they came from the tree, and dried in clusters and pressed into cakes for transport; the pomegranate (tappuach), the "apple" of the King James Version (See APPLE ), or quinch, according to others; the husks (Lk 15:16), i.e. the pods of the carob tree keration), are treated elsewhere. Certain nuts were favorite articles of food--pistachio nuts (boTnim), almonds (sheqedhim) and walnuts ('eghoz); and certain spices and vegetables were much used for seasoning: cummin (kammon), anise, dill (the King James Version) qetsach), mint (heduosmon) and mustard (sinapi), which see. Salt (melach), of course, played an important part, then as now, in the cooking and in the life of the Orientals. To "eat the salt" of a person was synonymous with eating his bread (Ezr 4:14), and a "covenant of salt" was held inviolable (Nu 18:19; 2 Ch 13:5).
Anciently, even more than now in the East, flesh food was much less used than among western peoples. In the first place, in Israel and among other Semitic peoples, it was confined by law to the use of such animals and birds as were regarded as "clean" (See CLEAN ;UNCLEANNESS ), or speaking according to the categories of Lev 11:2,3; Dt 14:4-20, domestic animals and game (see Driver on Dt 14:4-20). Then the poverty of the peasantry from time immemorial has tended to limit the use of meat to special occasions, such as family festivals (chaggim), the entertainment of an honored guest (Gen 18:7; 2 Sam 12:4), and the sacrificial meal at the local sanctuary.
The goat (`ez, etc.), especially the "kid of the goats" (Lev 4:23,18 the King James Version), was more prized for food by the ancient Hebrews than by modern Orientals, by whom goats are kept chiefly for their milk--most of which they supply (compare Prov 27:27). For this reason they are still among the most valued possessions of rich and poor (compare Gen 30:33; 32:14 with 1 Sam 25:2). A kid, as less valuable than a lamb, was naturally the readier victim when meat was required (compare Lk 15:29).
The sheep of Palestine, as of Egypt, are mainly of the fat-tailed species (Ovis aries), the tail of which was forbidden as ordinary food and had to be offered with certain other portions of the fat (Ex 29:22; Lev 3:9). To kill a lamb in honor of a gue st is one of the highest acts of Bedouin hospitality. As a rule only the lambs are killed for meat, and they only in honor of some guest or festive occasion (compare 1 Sam 25:18; 1 Ki 1:19). Likewise the "calves of the herd" supplied the daintiest food of the kind, though the flesh of the neat cattle, male and female, was eaten. The "fatted calf" of Lk 15:23 will be recalled, as also the "fatlings" and the "stalled" (stall-fed) ox of the Old Testament (Prov 15:17). Asharp contrast suggestive of the growth of luxury in Israel is seen by a comparison of 2 Sam 17:28 f with 1 Ki 4:22 f. The food furnished David and his hardy followers at Mahanaim was "wheat, and barley, and meal, and parched grain, and beans, and lentils, and parched pulse, and honey, and butter, and sheep, and cheese of the herd," while the daily provision for Solomon's table was "thirty measures of fine flour, and threescore measures of meal, ten fat oxen, and twenty oxen out of the pastures, and a hundred sheep, besides harts, and gazelles, and roebucks, and fatted fowl." Nehemiah's daily portion is given as "one ox and six choice sheep" (Neh 5:18).
Milk of large and small animals was a staple article of food (Dt 32:14; Prov 27:27). It was usually kept in skins, as among the Syrian peasants it is today (Jdg 4:19). We find a generic term often used (chem'ah) which covers also cream, clabber and cheese (Prov 30:33). The proper designation of cheese is gebhinah (Job 10:10), but chalabh also is used both for ordinary milk and for a cheese made directly from sweet milk (compare 1 Sam 17:18, charitse hechalabh, and our "cottage cheese").
See MILK .
Honey (debhash, nopheth ha-tsuphim), so often mentioned with milk, is ordinary bees' honey (See HONEY ). The expression "honey" in the combination debhash wechalabh, for which Palestine was praised, most likely means debhash temarim, i.e. "date-juice." It was much prized and relished (Ps 19:10; Prov 16:24), and seems to have been a favorite food for children (Isa 7:15).
Of game seven species are mentioned (Dt 14:5). The gazelle and the hart were the typical animals of the chase, much prized for their flesh (Dt 12:15), and doubtless supplied the venison of Esau's "savory meat" (Gen 25:28; 27:4).
Of fish as food little is said in the Old Testament (See Nu 11:5; Jer 16:16; Ezek 47:10; Eccl 9:12). No particular species is named, although thirty-six species are said to be found in the waters of the Jordan valley alone. But we may be sure that the fish which the Hebrews enjoyed in Egypt "for nought" (Nu 11:5) had their successors in Canaan (Kennedy). Trade in cured fish was carried on by Tyrian merchants with Jerusalem in Nehemiah's day (Neh 13:16), and there must have been a fish market at or near the fish gate (Neh 3:3). The Sea of Galilee in later times was the center of a great fish industry, as is made clear by the Gospels and by Josephus In the market of Tiberias today fresh fish are sold in great quantities, and a thriving trade in salt fish is carried on. The "small fishes" of our Lord's two great miracles of feeding were doubtless of this kind, as at all times they have been a favorite form of provision for a journey in hot countries.
As to the exact price of food in ancient times little is known. From 2 Ki 7:1,16 we learn that one ce'ah of fine flour, and two of barley, sold for a shekel (compare Mt 10:29). For birds allowed as food See Dt 14:11 and articles on CLEAN; UNCLEANNESS.
Pigeons and turtle doves find a place in the ritual of various sacrifices, and so are to be reckoned as "clean" for ordinary uses as well. The species of domestic fowl found there today seem to have been introduced during the Persian period (compare 2 Esdras 1:30; Mt 23:37; 26:34, etc.). It is thought that the fatted fowl of Solomon's table (1 Ki 4:23) were geese (see Mish). Fatted goose is a favorite food with Jews today, as it was with the ancient Egyptians.
Of game birds used for food (See Neh 5:18) the partridge and the quail are prominent, and the humble sparrow comes in for his share of mention (Mt 10:29; Lk 12:6). Then, as now, the eggs of domestic fowls and of all "clean" birds were favorite articles of food (Dt 22:6; Isa 10:14; Lk 11:12).
Edible insects (Lev 11:22 f) are usually classed with animal foods. In general they are of the locust family (See LOCUST ). They formed part of the food of John the Baptist (Mt 3:4, etc.), were regarded by the Assyrians as delicacies, and are a favorite food of the Arabs today. They are prepared and served in various ways, the one most common being to remove the head, legs and wings, to drop it in meal, and then fry it in oil or butter. It then tastes a little like fried frogs' legs. In the diet of the Baptist, locusts were associated with wild honey (See HONEY ).
As to condiments (see separate articles onSALT ;CORIANDER , etc.) it needs only to be said here that the caperberry (Eccl 12:5 margin) was eaten before meals as an appetizer and, strictly speaking, was not a condiment. Mustard was valued for the leaves, not for the seed (Mt 13:31). Pepper, though not mentioned in Scripture, is mentioned margin the Mishna as among the condiments. Before it came into use, spicy seeds like cummin, the coriander, etc., played a more important role than since.
The abhorrence of the Hebrews for all food prepared or handled by the heathen (See ABOMINATION ) is to be attributed primarily to the intimate association in early times between flesh food and sacrifices to the gods. This finds conspicuous illustration in the case of Daniel (Dan 1:8), Judas Maccabeus (2 Macc 5:27), Josephus (Vita, III), and their compatriots (see also Acts 15:20,29; 1 Cor 8:1-10; 10:19,28). As to sources of food supply and traffic in food stuffs, for primitive usages See Gen 18:7; 27:9; 1 Ki 21:2. As to articles and customs of commerce adopted when men became dwellers in cities, See Jer 37:21, where bakers were numerous enough in Jerusalem to give their name to a street or bazaar, where doubtless, as today, they baked and sold bread to the public (compare Mishna,passim). Extensive trade in "victuals" in Nehemiah's day is attested by Neh 13:15 f, and by specific mention of the "fish gate" (3:3) and the "sheep gate" (3:1), so named evidently because of their nearby markets. In John's Gospel (Jn 4:8; 13:29) we have incidental evidence that the disciples were accustomed to buy food as they journeyed through the land. In Jerusalem, cheese was clearly to be bought in the cheesemakers' valley (Tyropoeon), oil of the oil merchants (Mt 25:9), and so on; and Corinth, we may be sure, was not the only city of Paul's day that had a provision market ("shambles," 1 Cor 10:25 the Revised Version (British and American)).
LITERATURE.
Mishna B.M. i. 1,2 and passim; Josephus, Vita and BJ; Robinson's Researches, II, 416, etc.; and Biblical Dictionaries, articles on "Food," etc.
George B. Eager
fool nabhal, 'ewil, kecil, cakhal and forms; aphron, aphrosune, moros):
Taking the words generally, apart from the Wisdom literature, we find nabhal frequently translated "fool" and nebhalah, "folly"; nabhal, however, denotes a wicked person, an evil character, "shamelessly immoral," equivalent to "a son of Belial" (Cheyne), rather than a merely "foolish" person, and nebhalah, "wickedness," "shameless impropriety," rather than simple folly. We have almost a definition of nabhal in Isa 32:6: "For the fool will speak folly, and his heart will work iniquity, to practice profaneness, and to utter error against Yahweh, to make empty the soul of the hungry, and to cause the drink of the thirsty to fail." Abigail described her husband, Nabhal, as "a son of Belial" (the Revised Version (British and American) "worthless fellow"), "for as his name is, so is he" (1 Sam 25:25), and what we read of him bears out this character. Other occurrences of the words support the above meaning; they are generally associated with some form of wickedness, frequently with base and unnatural lewdness (Gen 34:7; Dt 22:21; Josh 7:15; Jdg 19:23,14; 20:6,10; 2 Sam 13:12). When in Ps 14:1; 53:1 it is said, "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God," it is followed by the statement, "They are corrupt, they have done abominable works," showing that more than "folly" is implied. In Isa 32:5,6 the King James Version nabhal is translated "vile person" and nebhalah "villany," the Revised Version (British and American) "fool" and "folly," Jer 29:23; halal, implying loud boasting is in the King James Version translated "foolish," but it means, rather, "arrogant," which the Revised Version (British and American) adopts (Ps 5:5; 73:3; 75:4, margin "fools"); cakhal, "a fool," also occurs (Gen 31:28; 1 Sam 13:13, etc.) for which word see (4) below; also ya'al "to be empty," "to be or become foolish" (Nu 12:11; Isa 19:13; Jer 5:4; 50:36).
In the Chokhmah or Wisdom literature, which, within the Bible, is contained in Job, Proverbs (especially), Ecclesiastes, Canticles, some Psalms and certain portions of the prophetic writings, "fool" and "folly" are frequent and distinctive words. Their significance is best seen in contrast with "Wisdom." This was the outcome of careful observation and long pondering on actual life in the light of religion and the Divine revelation. Wisdom had its seat in God and was imparted to those who "feared" Him ("The fear of Yahweh is the beginning (chief part) of knowledge" Prov 1:7). Such wisdom was the essence of life, and to be without it was to walk in the way of death and destruction. The fool was he who was thoughtless, careless, conceited, self-sufficient, indifferent to God and His Will, or who might even oppose and scoff at religion and wise instruction. See WISDOM . Various words are used to designate "the fool" and his "folly."
(1) nabhal (Job 2:10; 30:8; Ps 53:1; Prov 17:7-21); nebhalah (Job 42:8; Isa 9:17) (see above).
(2) 'ewil, one of the commonest, the idea conveyed by which is that of one who is hasty, impatient, self-sufficient (Prov 12:15; 15:5; 16:22); despising advice and instruction (Prov 1:7; 14:9; 24:7); ready to speak and act without thinking (Prov 10:14; 12:16; 20:3); quick to get angry, quarrel and cause strife (Prov 11:29; 14:17 'iwweleth; 29:9); unrestrained in his anger (Job 5:2; Prov 17:12); silly, stupid even with brute stupidity (Prov 7:22; 26:11; 27:22; compare Isa 19:11; Jer 4:22); he is associated with "transgression" (Ps 107:17; Prov 13:15; 17:18,19), with "sin" (Prov 24:9), with the "scoffer" (same place) ; 'iwweleth, "foolishness" occurs (Ps 38:5; 69:5; Prov 13:16; "folly," 14:8,24,29, etc.).
(3) kecil is the word most frequent in Proverbs. It is probably from a root meaning "thickness," "sluggishness," suggesting a slow, self-confident person, but it is used with a wide reference. Self-confidence appears (Prov 14:16; 28:26); ignorance (Eccl 2:14); hate of instruction (Prov 1:22; 18:2); thoughtlessness (Prov 10:23; 17:24); self-exposure (Prov 14:33; 15:2; 18:7; 29:11; Eccl 5:1; 10:12); anger and contention (Prov 18:6; 19:1; Eccl 7:9); rage (Prov 14:16; 17:12); indolence and improvidence (Eccl 4:5; Prov 21:20); silly merriment (Eccl 7:4,5,6); brutishness (Prov 26:11; compare Ps 49:10; 92:6); it is associated with slander (Prov 10:18), with evil (Prov 13:19).
(4) cakhal, cekhel, cikhluth, also occur. These are probably from a root meaning "to be stopped up" (Cheyne), and are generally taken as denoting thickheadedness; but they are used in a stronger sense than mere foolishness (compare 1 Sam 26:21; 2 Sam 24:10, etc.). These words do not occur in Prov, but in Eccl 2:12; 7:25; cikhluth is associated with "madness" ("Wickedness is folly, and .... foolishness is madness").
(5) pethi, "simple," is only once translated "foolish" (Prov 9:6 the King James Version).
(6) ba`ar, 'brutish," is translated "foolish" (Ps 73:22 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "brutish").
(7) taphel, "insipid," "untempered," is translated "foolish" (Lam 2:14); tiphlah, "insipidity" (Job 1:22, "foolishly," the English Revised Version, "with foolishness"; 24:12, "folly"; Jer 23:13, "folly," the King James Version margin"unsavoury, or, an absurd thing").
(8) toholah (Job 4:18: "Behold, he putteth no trust in his servants; and his angels he chargeth with folly" (Delitzsch, "imperfection," others, "error"), the King James Version margin"nor in his angels in whom he put light").
In the continuation of the Wisdom literature in The Wisdom of Solomon and Ecclus, "fool" frequently occurs with a signification similar to that in Proverbs; in The Wisdom of Solomon we have aphron (12:24; 15:5, etc.), in Ecclesiasticus, moros (18:18; 19:11, etc.; 20:13; 21:16, etc.).
In the New Testament we have various words translated "fool," "foolish," "folly," etc., in the ordinary acceptation of these terms; aphron, "mindless," "witless" (Lk 11:40; 12:20; 1 Cor 15:36); aphrosune, "want of mind or wisdom" (2 Cor 11:1; Mk 7:22); anoia, "want of understanding" (2 Tim 3:9); moraino, "to make dull," "foolish" (Rom 1:22; 1 Cor 1:20); moros, "dull," "stupid" (Mt 7:26; 23:17; 25:2; 1 Cor 1:25,27); moria, "foolishness" (1 Cor 1:18, etc.); morologia, "foolish talk" (Eph 5:4).
In Mt 5:22 our Lord says: "Whosoever shall say (to his brother), Thou fool (more), shall be in danger of the hell of fire (the Gehenna of fire)." Two explanations of this word are possible: (1) that it is not the vocative of the Greek moros--a word which was applied by Jesus Himself to the Pharisees (Mt 23:17,19), but represents the Hebrew morah, "rebel" applied in Nu 20:10 by Moses to the people, "ye rebels" (for which he was believed to be excluded from the promised land; compare 20:12; hence, we have in the Revised Version, margin "or moreh, a Hebrew expression of condemnation"); or (2) that, as our Lord spake in the Aramaic it is the Greek translation of a word representing the Hebrew nabhal, "vile, or worthless fellow," atheist, etc. (Ps 14:1; 53:1).
W. L. Walker
fool'-er-i: The plural "fooleries" occurs Ecclesiasticus 22:13 King James Version: "Talk not much with a fool .... and thou shalt never be defiled with his fooleries." The Greek word is entinagmos, "a striking or throwing in," "an attack," from entinasso, "to strike into," "cast at," etc. (1 Macc 2:36; 2 Macc 4:41; 11:11). the Revised Version (British and American) renders "Thou shalt not be defiled in his onslaught," margin "defiled: in his onslaught turn." The meaning is most probably "with what he throws out," i.e. his foolish or vile speeches, as if it were slaver.
foot (reghel, qarcol (only twice in parallel passages: 2 Sam 22:37 = Ps 18:36, where it probably means ankle); pous): The dusty roads of Palestine and other eastern lands make a much greater care of the feet necessary than we are accustomed to bestow upon them. The absence of socks or stockings, the use of sandals and low shoes rather than boots and, to an even greater degree, the frequent habit of walking barefoot make it necessary to wash the feet repeatedly every day. This is always done when entering the house, especially the better upper rooms which are usually carpeted. It is a common dictate of good manners to perform this duty to a visitor, either personally or through a servant; at least water for washing has to be presented (Gen 18:4; Lk 7:44). This has therefore become almost synonymous with the bestowal of hospitality (1 Tim 5:10). At an early date this service was considered one of the lowest tasks of servants (1 Sam 25:41), probably because the youngest and least trained servants were charged with the task, or because of the idea of defilement connected with the foot. It was, for the same reason, if rendered voluntarily, a service which betokened complete devotion. Jesus taught the greatest lesson of humility by performing this humble service to His disciples (Jn 13:4-15). The undoing of the latchets or leather thongs of the sandals (Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:27) seems to refer to the same menial duty.
Often the feet and shoes were dusted on the highway, as is being done in the Orient to this day, but if it were done in an ostentatious manner in the presence of a person or a community who had refused hospitality to a stranger, it was understood in the same sense in which the cutting in two of the tablecloth was considered in the days of knighthood: it meant rejection and separation (Mt 10:14; Acts 13:51).
The roads of the desert were not only dusty but rough, and the wanderer was almost sure to ruin his ill-made shoes and wound his weary feet. A special providence of God protected the children of Israel from this experience during the long journey through the wilderness. "Thy raiment waxed not old upon thee, neither did thy foot swell, these forty years" (Dt 8:4; 29:5).
In the house shoes and sandals were never worn; even the most delicate would put on shoes only when going out (Dt 28:56). The shoes were left outside of the house or in a vestibule. This was especially done in the house of God and at the time of prayer, for whenever or wherever that might be, the law was: "Put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground" (Ex 3:5; Josh 5:15; Acts 7:33). This custom still prevails among the Moslems of our day. Probably it was the idea of defilement through contact with the common ground which gave rise to its moral application by the Preacher, "Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God" (Eccl 5:1 (Hebrew 4:17)).
Nakedness of the feet in public, especially among the wealthier classes, who used to wear shoes or sandals, was a token of mourning (Ezek 24:17 and probably also Jer 2:25 and Isa 20:2-4). A peculiar ceremony is referred to in Dt 25:9,10, whereby a brother-in-law, who refused to perform his duty under the Levirate law, was publicly put to shame. "And his name shall be called in Israel, The house of him that hath his shoe loosed." See also Ruth 4:7,8.
Numerous are the phrases in which the word "foot" or "feet" is used in Biblical language. "To cover the feet" (1 Sam 24:3) is synonymous with obeying a call of Nature. "To speak with the feet" is expressive of the eloquence of abusive and obscene gesticulation among oriental people, where hands, eyes and feet are able to express much without the use of words (Prov 6:13). "To sit at the feet," means to occupy the place of a learner (Dt 33:3; Lk 10:39; Acts 22:3). Vanquished enemies had to submit to being trodden upon by the conqueror (a ceremony often represented on Egyptian monuments; Josh 10:24; Ps 8:6; 110:1; compare Isa 49:23). James warns against an undue humiliation of those who join us in the service of God, even though they be poor or mean-looking, by bidding them to take a lowly place at the feet of the richer members of the congregation (Jas 2:3). We read of dying Jacob that "he gathered up his feet into the bed," for he had evidently used his bed as a couch, on which he had been seated while delivering his charge to his several sons (Gen 49:33). "Foot" or "feet" is sometimes used euphemistically for the genitals (Dt 28:57; Ezek 16:25). In Dt 11:10 an interesting reference is made to some Egyptian mode of irrigating the fields, `the watering with the foot,' which mode would be unnecessary in the promised land of Canaan which "drinketh water of the rain of heaven." It is, however, uncertain whether this refers to the water-wheels worked by a treadmill arrangement or whether reference is made to the many tributary channels, which, according to representations on the Egyptian monuments, intersected the gardens and fields and which could be stopped or opened by placing or removing a piece of sod at the mouth of the channel. This was usually done with the foot. Frequently we find references to the foot in expressions connected with journeyings and pilgrimages, which formed so large a part in the experiences of Israel, e.g. Ps 91:12, "lest thou dash thy foot against a stone"; 94:18, "My foot slippeth"; 121:3, "He will not suffer thy foot to be moved," and many more. Often the reference is to the "walk," i.e. the moral conduct of life (Ps 73:2; Job 23:11; 31:5).
Figurative: In the metaphorical language of Isa 52:7 "the feet" are synonymous with "the coming."
H. L. E. Luering
foot'-man.
See WAR .
foot'-stool (kebhes; hupopodion, "trodden on"): The 15 Scripture references to this term may be classified as literal or figurative. Of the former are the two passages: 2 Ch 9:18 and Jas 2:3. In these the footstool was a sort of step or support for the feet placed before the throne or any pretentious seat.
Of figurative uses, there are the following groups: (1) Of the earth: Isa 66:1; Mt 5:35; Acts 7:49. (2) Of the ark: 1 Ch 28:2. (3) Of the Temple: Ps 99:5; 132:7; Lam 2:1; compare Isa 60:13. (4) Of heathen enemies subdued by the Messianic King: Ps 110:1; Mt 22:44 the King James Version; Mk 12:36; Lk 20:43; Acts 2:35; Heb 1:13; 10:13. Thus the uses of this term are mainly metaphorical and symbolic of subjection, either to God as universal Lord or to God's Son as King by redemptive right. Compare 1 Cor 15:25-27, in which all things, including death, are represented as subject to Christ and placed beneath His feet.
Leonard W. Doolan
for (ki (conjunction), le, from 'el (preposition), and various other words. In the New Testament also the words are various, chiefly gar, kai gar, hoti (conjunctions); anti apo eis dia (accusative), epi (dative and accusative), peri (genitive), pros (genitive and accusative), huper (genitive) (prepositions)): the English Revised Version and the American Standard Revised Version give in many cases more literal or more accurate renderings than those in the King James Version.
In the New Testament the most important preps. from a doctrinal point of view are anti, "face to face," "over against," "instead," "on behalf of," peri, "around," "about," "concerning," huper, "over," "on behalf of." The first has been claimed as stating the substitutionary nature of Christ's sacrifice as contrasted with huper and peri, more frequently used of it. But, although anti in the New Testament often means "instead of," "answering to," it does not necessarily imply substitution. On the other hand, in classical Greek huper is sometimes used in that sense (see Trench, Synonyms). "Here as always the root idea of the preposition, the root idea of the case, and the context must all be considered" (Robertson, Grammar, 124). Anti is found in this connection only in Mt 20:28, and Mk 10:45. In Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24, we have peri, also in Heb 10:6,8,18,26; 1 Pet 3:18; 1 Jn 2:2; 4:10. Lk 22:19,20 has huper, which is the word commonly used by Paul, as in Rom 5:6,8; 8:32; 14:15; 1 Cor 15:3, etc., also by John in his Gospel, 6:51; 10:11, etc., and 1 Jn 3:16; also Heb 2:9; 10:12; 1 Pet 2:21; 3:18; 4:1; in Rom 8:3 it is peri.
W. L. Walker
for'-a (2 Sam 3:22).
See WAR .
for-bar' (chadhal; anechomai): In the Old Testament chadhal, "to leave off," is the word most frequently translated "forbear" (Ex 23:5, etc.); damam, "to be silent," chasakh, "to keep back," mashakh, "to draw or stretch out," occur once each; the Revised Version (British and American) renders Ezek 24:17 (damam), "Sigh, but not aloud," margin "Hebrew be silent,"; Prov 24:11 (chasakh), "See that thou hold back," margin "or forbear thou not to deliver," the King James Version "if thou forbear to deliver"; Neh 9:30 (mashakh), "bear" instead of "forbear"; 'aph literally, "breathing," the "nose," hence, from violent breathing, "anger" ('erekh, "long," understood), and kul "to hold," are translated "forbearing" (Prov 25:15; Jer 20:9, respectively).
In the New Testament we have anechomai, "to hold self back or up," "with longsuffering, forbearing one another" (Eph 4:2,; Col 3:13); aniemi "to send back," the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) "forbear threatening' (Eph 6:9); pheidomai, "to spare," "but I forbear" (2 Cor 12:6); meergazesthai, "not to work," "to forbear working" (1 Cor 9:6); stego, "to cover," "conceal": "when I could no longer forbear" (1 Thess 3:1,5).
W. L.Walker
for-bar'-ans (anoche): "Forbearance" (anoche, "a holding back") is ascribed to God (Rom 2:4, "the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering"; 3:25 the Revised Version (British and American), "the passing over of the sins done aforetime, in the forbearance of God," the King James Version "remission" (margin "passing over") of sins, that are past, through the forbearance of God"); in Phil 4:5, to epieikes is translated by the Revised Version (British and American) "forbearance," margin "gentleness"; it is a Christian grace in likeness to God. "Forbearing" (The King James Version, margin) is substituted by the Revised Version (British and American) for "patient" (anexikakos, "holding up under evil") in 2 Tim 2:24.
W. L. Walker
for-bid' (kala; koluo): Occurs very seldom in the Old Testament except as the rendering of chalilah (see below); it is once the translation of kala', "to restrain" (Nu 11:28, "Joshua .... said My lord Moses forbid them"); twice of tsawah, "to command" (Dt 2:37, "and wheresoever Yahweh our God forbade us"; 4:23, "Yahweh thy God hath forbidden thee," literally, "commanded"); once of lo', "not," the Revised Version (British and American) "commanded not to be done" (Lev 5:17). In the phrases, "Yahweh forbid" (1 Sam 24:6; 26:11; 1 Ki 21:13), "God forbid" (Gen 44:7; Josh 22:29; 24:16; 1 Sam 12:23; Job 27:5, etc.), "My God forbid it me" (1 Ch 11:19), the word is chalilah, denoting profanation, or abhorrence (rendered, Gen 18:25 the King James Version, "that be far from thee"); the English Revised Version leaves the expressions unchanged; the American Standard Revised Version substitutes "far be it from me," "thee," etc., except in 1 Sam 14:45; 20:2, where it is, "Far from it."
In the New Testament koluo, "to cut short," "restrain" is the word commonly translated "forbid" (Mt 19:14, "forbid them not," etc.); in Lk 6:29, the Revised Version (British and American) has "withhold not"; diakoluo, with a similar meaning, occurs in Mt 3:14, "John forbade him," the Revised Version (British and American) "would have hindered him"; akolutos, "uncut off" (Acts 28:31), is translated "none forbidding him." The phrase "God forbid" (me genoito, "let it not be," Lk 20:16; Rom 3:4, etc.) is retained by the Revised Version (British and American), with margin "Be it not so," except in Gal 6:14, where the text has "Far be it from me"; me genoito is one of the renderings of chalilah in Septuagint. "God forbid" also appears in Apocrypha (1 Macc 2:21, the Revised Version (British and American) "Heaven forbid," margin, Greek "may he be propitious," 1 Macc 9:10, the Revised Version (British and American) "Let it not be").
W. L. Walker
for'-sis (chayil):
(1) The word is used as a military term, equivalent to army, in 2 Ki 25:23,16 (where the King James Version reads "armies"); 2 Ch 17:2; Jer 40:7, etc.
See ARMY .
(2) In Isa 60:5,11, it is rendered in the Revised Version (British and American) by "wealth," and in Ob verse 11, by "substance."
Two other Hebrew words are also translated "forces" in the King James Version, ma'amatstsim (Job 36:19), and ma`oz (Dan 11:38), the latter being rendered in the Revised Version (British and American) "fortresses."
ford (ma`abhar (Gen 32:22; "pass" (of Michmash), 1 Sam 13:23; "stroke" (the Revised Version, margin "passing"), Isa 30:32); ma`barah (Josh 2:7; Jdg 3:28; 12:5,6; Isa 16:2; "pass" (of Michmash), 1 Sam 14:4; "passages" (the Revised Version, margin "fords"), Jer 51:32); `abharah (2 Sam 15:28; 17:16; "ferry-boat" (the Revised Version, margin "convoy"), 2 Sam 19:18); from `abhar, "to pass over"; compare Arabic `abar, "to pass over" and ma`bar, "a ford"): In the journeyings of the children of Israel, in addition to the miraculous passages of the Red Sea and the Jordan, they had other streams to pass over, especially the Zered (Chisa') and the Arnon (Maujib) (Nu 21:12,13; Dt 2:24). The Jabbok (Zarqa) is frequently referred to, particularly in connection with Jacob (Gen 32:22). The most frequent references are to the Jordan which, in time of flood, was impassable (Josh 3:15). The lower Jordan is about 100 ft. wide, and from 5 to 12 ft. deep, so that in the absence of bridges, the places where it was possible to ford were of great importance. The passage of the Jordan is referred to in connection with Jacob (Gen 32:10), Gideon (Jdg 8:4), the children of Ammon (Jdg 10:9), Abner and his men (2 Sam 2:29), David (2 Sam 10:17; 17:22), Absalom (2 Sam 17:24), and others. Jesus undoubtedly crossed the Jordan, and John is thought to have baptized at the ford of the Jordan near Jericho. The fords of the Jordan are specifically mentioned in Josh 2:7 in connection with the pursuit of the spies who were hidden in Rahab's house, and in 2 Sam 15:28; 17:16 in connection with the flight of David. In the last two passages we have abharah, the same word which, in the account of David's return (2 Sam 19:18), is rendered "ferry-boat" (the Revised Version, margin "convoy").
See JORDAN .
Alfred Ely Day
for-kast'; (vb.) (chashabh): To forecast is both to plan or scheme beforehand and to consider or see beforehand. It is in the first sense that it is used in Dan 11:24,25 (the King James Version) as the translation of chashabh, "to think," "meditate," "devise," "plot," "He shall forecast his devices (The King James Version, margin "Hebrew think his thoughts") against the strongholds"; "They shall forecast devices against him," the Revised Version (British and American) "devise his devices"; compare Nah 1:9, "What do ye devise against Yahweh?" In the second sense, the word occurs in The Wisdom of Solomon 17:11 the Revised Version (British and American), "Wickedness .... always forecasteth the worst lot" (proeilephen), margin "Most authorities read hath added" (proseilephen).
W. L. Walker
for'-fa-ther:
(1) 'abh ri'shon, "first father," "chief father," hence, "early ancestor": "turned back to the iniquities of their forefathers" (Jer 11:10).
(2) progonos, "born before," "ancestor": "whom I serve from my forefathers" (2 Tim 1:3). It is translated "parents" (including grandparents) in 1 Tim 5:4: "and to requite their parents."
for'-frunt (panim): For "forefront," "front" is now generally used, since "back-front" has gone out of use. "Forefront" is the translation of panim, "face" (2 Ki 16:14; Ezek 40:19 bis; 47:1); of mul panim, "over against the face" (Ex 26:9; Lev 8:9, "And he put the mitre upon his head; also upon the mitre even upon his forefront, did he put the golden plate"; for "upon his forefront" the Revised Version (British and American) has "in front; 2 Sam 11:15, "in the forefront of the hottest battle"); of ro'sh, "head" (2 Ch 20:27); of shen, "tooth" (1 Sam 14:5, "The forefront (The King James Version, margin "Hebrew tooth") of the one was situated northward over against Michmash," the Revised Version (British and American) "The one crag rose up on the north in front of Michmash"); in 1 Macc 4:57 margin it is the translation of prosopon, "face": "They decked the forefront of the temple with crowns of gold."
The Revised Version (British and American) has "forefront" for "face" (Ezek 40:15), "in the forefront of" for "over against" (Josh 22:11).
W. L. Walker
for-go'.
See FORGO .
for'-ed (metsach; metopon):
(1) In a literal sense the word is used frequently in the Scriptures. Aaron and after him every high priest was to wear on the forehead the golden frontlet having the engraved motto, "Holy to Yahweh" (Ex 28:36,38). The condition of the forehead was an important criterion in the diagnosis of leprosy by the priest (Lev 13:42,43; 2 Ch 26:20). It was in the forehead that brave young David smote Goliath with the stone from his sling (1 Sam 17:49). The faulty translation of the King James Version in Ezek 16:12 has been corrected in the Revised Version (British and American), reference being had in the passage to a nose-ring, not to an ornament of the forehead. While the cutting or tattooing of the body was strictly forbidden to the Israelite on account of the heathen associations of the custom (Lev 19:28), we find frequent mention made of markings on the forehead, which were especially used to designate slaves (see Philo, De Monarchia, I) or devotees of a godhead (Lucian, De Syria Dea, 59). In 3 Macc 2:29 we read that Ptolemy IV Philopator branded some Jews with the sign of an ivy leaf, marking them as devotees of Bacchus-Dionysos. Possibly we may compare herewith the translation of Isa 44:5 (Revised Version margin): "And another shall write on his hand, Unto Yahweh" (or Yahweh's slave). Very clear is the passage Ezek 9:4,6 (and perhaps Job 31:35), where the word used for "mark" is taw, the name of the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet which in its earliest form has the shape of an upright plus sign (Baal Lebanon Inscr; 11th century BC) or of a lying (St Andrew's) cross X (Moabite Inscr, 9th century BC), the simplest sign in the old Israelite alphabet, and at the same time the character which in the Greek alphabet represents the X, the initial of Christ. In the New Testament we find a clear echo of the above-mentioned Old Testament passage, the marking of the foreheads of the righteous (Rev 7:3; 9:4; 14:1; 22:4). The godless followers of the beast are marked on the (right) hand and on the forehead (Rev 13:16; 14:9; 20:4), and the apocalyptic woman dressed in scarlet and purple has her name written on her forehead (Rev 17:5).
(2) In a metaphorical sense the expression, "a harlot's forehead," is used (Jer 3:3) to describe the shameless apostasy and faithlessness of Israel. Ezek speaks of the stiff-necked obstinacy and the persistent unwillingness of Israel to hear the message of Yahweh: "All the house of Israel are of a hard forehead and of a stiff heart" (Jer 3:7), and God makes his prophet's "forehead hard .... as an adamant harder than flint," whereby an unflinching loyalty to God and a complete disregard of opposition is meant (Jer 3:8,9). Compare the phrase: "to harden the face," under the wordFACE .
H. L. E. Luering
for'-in di-vin'-i-tiz (Acts 17:18 margin).
for'-in-er" The translation of nokhri, "unknown," "foreign," frequently rendered "stranger" (Dt 15:3; Ob 1:11); of toshabh, "a settler," "an alien resident" (Ex 12:45; the Revised Version (British and American) "sojourner"; compare Lev 25:47; Ps 39:12); of paroikos, "dwelling near," "sojourner" (Eph 2:19, the Revised Version (British and American) sojourners").
Revised Version has "foreigner" for "stranger" (Dt 17:15; 23:20; 29:22; Ruth 2:10; 2 Sam 15:19), for "alien" (Dt 14:21); "the hand of a foreigner" for "a stranger's hand" (Lev 22:25).
See ALIEN ;STRANGER AND SOJOURNER .
for-no', for-nol'-ej:
1. Meaning of the Term
2. Foreknowledge as Prescience
3. Foreknowledge Based on Foreordination
4. Foreknowledge as Equivalent to Foreordination
LITERATURE
The word "foreknowledge" has two meanings. It is a term used in theology to denote the prescience or foresight of God, that is, His knowledge of the entire course of events which are future from the human point of view; and it is also used in the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) to translate the Greek words proginoskein and prognosis in the New Testament, in which instances the word "fore-knowledge" approaches closely the idea of fore-ordination.
2. Fore-knowledge as Prescience:
In the sense of prescience foreknowledge is an aspect of God's omniscience (See OMNISCIENCE ). God's knowledge, according to the Scripture, is perfect, that is, it is omniscience. It is true that the Scripture makes use of anthropomorphic forms of expression as regards the way in which God obtains knowledge (Gen 3:8), and sometimes even represents Him as if He did not know certain things (Gen 11:5; 18:21); nevertheless the constant representation of the Scripture is that God knows everything. This perfect knowledge of God, moreover, is not merely a knowledge which is practically unlimited for all religious purposes, but is omniscience in the strictest sense of the term. In the historical books of the Old Testament the omniscience of God is a constant underlying presupposition when it is said that God watches men's actions, knows their acts and words, and discloses to them the future; while in the Psalms, Prophets and Wisdom literature, this Divine attribute becomes an object of reflection, and finds doctrinal expression. It cannot, however, be said that this attribute of God appears only late in the history of special revelation; it is a characteristic of the Biblical idea of God from the very first, and it is only its didactic expression which comes out with especial clearness in the later books. God's knowledge, then, is represented as perfect. Since He is free from all limits of space, His omniscience is frequently connected with His omnipresence. This is the thought which underlies the anthropomorphic expressions where God is represented as seeing, beholding and having eyes. God's eyes go to and fro throughout the whole earth (2 Ch 16:9), and are every place beholding the evil and the good (Prov 15:3). Even Sheol is naked and open to God's sight (Prov 15:11; Job 26:6). The night and darkness are light to Him, and darkness and light for God are both alike (Ps 139:12). All animals and fowls are His, and so are known by Him (Ps 50:11), and as their Creator God knows all the hosts of the heavenly bodies (Ps 147:4; Isa 40:26). He knows also the heart of man and its thoughts (1 Sam 16:7; 1 Ki 8:39; Ps 7:9 (Hebrew 10); 94:11; 139:2; Jer 11:20; 17:9,10; 20:12; Ezek 11:5). Furthermore, God knows man entirely in all his ways (Ps 139:1-5; Prov 5:21). He looks from heaven and sees all men (Ps 11:4; 14:2; 33:13,14,15). Evil and sin are also known to God (Gen 3:11; 6:5,9,13; 2 Sam 7:20; Ps 69:5 (Hebrew 6); Jer 16:17; 18:23). In a word, God knows with absolute accuracy all about man (Job 11:11; 34:21; Ps 33:15; Prov 5:21; Hos 5:3; Jer 11:20; 12:3; 17:9 f; 18:23). This perfect knowledge finds its classic expression in Ps 139.
God is also, according to the Old Testament, free from all limitations of time, so that His consciousness is not in the midst of the stream of the succeeding moments of time, as is the case with the human consciousness. God is not only without beginning or end of days, but with Him a thousand years are as one day. Hence, God knows in one eternal intuition that which for the human consciousness is past, present and future. In a strict sense, therefore, there can be no foreknowledge or prescience with God, and the distinction in God's knowledge made by theologians, as knowledge of reminiscence, vision and prescience, is after all an anthropomorphism. Nevertheless this is the only way in which we can conceive of the Divine omniscience in its relation to time, and consequently the Scripture represents the matter as if God's knowledge of future events were a foreknowledge or prescience, and God is represented as knowing the past, present and future.
It is God's knowledge of events which from the human point of view are future that constitutes His foreknowledge in the sense of prescience. God is represented as having a knowledge of the entire course of events before they take place. Such a knowledge belongs to the Scriptural idea of God from the very outset of special revelation. He knows beforehand what Abraham will do, and what will happen to him; He knows beforehand that Pharaoh's heart will be hardened, and that Moses will deliver Israel (Gen 15:13 ff; Ex 3:19; 7:4; 11:1 ff). The entire history of the patriarchal period of revelation exhibits plainly the foreknowledge of God in this sense. In prophecy this aspect of the Divine knowledge is made the subject of explicit assertion, and its religious significance is brought out. Nothing future is hidden from Yahweh (Isa 41:22 ff; 42:9; 43:9-13; 44:6-8; 46:10; Dan 2:22; Am 3:7), and this foreknowledge embraces the entire course of man's life (Ps 31:15 (Hebrew 16); 39:5 (Hebrew 6); 139:4-6,16; Job 14:5). These passages from Isa show that it is from the occurrence of events in accordance with Yahweh's prediction that the Prophet will prove his foreknowledge; and that in contrast with the worshippers of idols which are taken by surprise, Israel is warned of the future by the omniscient Yahweh.
In the New Testament likewise, God's omniscience is explicitly affirmed. Jesus taught that God knows the hidden secrets of man's heart (Lk 16:15); and this is also the teaching of the apostles (Acts 1:24; 15:8; 1 Cor 2:10; 3:20; 1 Thess 2:4; Rev 2:23). In a word, according to the author of the Epistle to the He, everything is open to God, so that He is literally omniscient (Heb 4:13). And as in the Old Testament, so also in the New Testament, foreknowledge in the sense of prescience is ascribed to God. Jesus asserts a foreknowledge by God of that which is hidden from the Son (Mk 13:32), and James asserts that all God's works are foreknown by Him (Acts 15:18). Moreover, the many references in the New Testament to the fulfillment of prophecy all imply that the New Testament writers ascribed foreknowledge, in this sense of foresight, to God.
Denials of the Divine foreknowledge, in this sense of prescience, have been occasioned, not by exegetical considerations, but by the supposed conflict of this truth with human freedom. It was supposed that in order to be free, an event must be uncertain and contingent as regards the fact of its futurition, and that too in the most absolute sense, that is, from the Divine as well as the human point of view. Hence, the Socinians and some Arminians denied the foreknowledge of God. It was supposed either that God voluntarily determines not to foresee the free volitions of man, or else that since God's omniscience is simply the knowledge of all that is knowable, it does not embrace the free acts of man which are by their nature uncertain and so unknowable. And upon this view of freedom, this denial of God's foreknowledge was logically necessary. If the certainty of events with respect to the fact of their futurition is inconsistent with freedom, then human freedom does conflict with God's foreknowledge, since God cannot know future events as certainly future unless they actually are so. Since, therefore, the Divine foreknowledge is quite as inconsistent with this view of freedom as is the Divine foreordination, the view of those who regard God as a mere onlooker on the course of future events which are supposed to be entirely independent of His purpose and control, does not help matters in the least. If God foreknows future events as certain, then they must be certain, and if so, then the certainty of their actually occurring must depend either upon God's decree and providential control, or else upon a fate independent of God. It was to escape these supposed difficulties that the doctrine known as scientia media was propounded. It was supposed that God has a knowledge of events as conditionally future, that is, events neither merely possible nor certainly future, but suspended upon conditions undetermined by God. But this hypothesis is of no help and is not true. Besides being contrary to the Scripture in its idea that many events lie outside the decree of God, and that God must wait upon man in His government of the world, there is really no such class of events as this theory asserts. If God foreknows that the conditions on which they are suspended will be fulfilled, then these events belong to the class of events which are certainly future; whereas if God does not know whether or not the conditions will be fulfilled by man, then His foreknowledge is denied, and these events in question belong to the class of those merely possible. Nor do the Scripture passages to which appeal is made, such as Gen 11:6; Ex 3:19; Dt 7:3,4; 1 Sam 23:10-13; 2 Sam 12:8, etc., afford a basis for this doctrine. The Scripture of course recognizes that God has put all things in relations of mutual dependence, and speaks of what can or cannot happen under such and such conditions; but none of these passages assert or imply that the events are suspended upon conditions which are either unknown or undetermined by God.
3. Foreknowledge Based on Foreordination:
God's foreknowledge, according to the Scripture teaching, is based upon His plan or eternal purpose, which embraces everything that comes to pass. God is never represented as a mere onlooker seeing the future course of events, but having no part in it. That God has such a plan is the teaching of the entire Scripture. It is implied in the Old Testament conception of God as an Omnipotent Person governing all things in accordance with His will. This idea is involved in the names of God in the patriarchal revelation, 'El, 'Elohim, 'El Shadday, and in the prophetic name Yahweh of Hosts. This latter name teaches not only God's infinite power and glory, but also makes Him known as interposing in accordance with His sovereign will and purpose in the affairs of this world, and as having also the spiritual powers of the heavenly world at His disposal for the execution of His eternal purpose. Hence, this idea of God comes to signify the omnipotent Ruler of the universe (Ps 24:10; Isa 6:3; 51:5; 54:5; Jer 10:16; Am 9:5; compare Oehler, Theol. of the Old Testament, English translation, II, 280).
Not only in this conception of God as omnipotent and sovereign Ruler is the thought of His eternal plan evolved; it is explicitly asserted throughout the whole Old Testament. The purpose of God as determining human history in the Book of Gen lies clearly upon the surface of the narrative, as, for example, in the history of Abraham and of Joseph. And where there is no abstract statement of this truth, it is evident that the writer regards every event as but the unfolding of the purpose of God. In the Psalms, Prophets, and Wisdom literature, this truth finds explicit and reiterated assertion. Yahweh has an eternal purpose (Ps 33:11), and this purpose will certainly come to pass (Isa 14:27; 43:13). This purpose includes all events and renders certain their occurrence (Isa 14:24; 40:10; 46:9,10; Zec 1:6). In the Wisdom literature the ethical character of this plan is dwelt upon, as well as its all-embracing character, and the certainty of its fulfillment (Prov 16:4,33; 19:21; 20:24; Job 28:23). The providential control wherewith Yahweh executes this plan includes the heart of man (Prov 21:1).
The New Testament likewise regards all history as but the unfolding of God's eternal purpose (Acts 4:28), which includes man's salvation (Eph 1:4,5; 2 Tim 1:9), the provision of Christ as Saviour (1 Pet 1:20), and the good works of the Christian (Eph 2:10).
See PREDESTINATION .
Now while the writers of the Old Testament and the New Testament do not write in an abstract or philosophical manner nor enter into metaphysical explanations of the relation between God's foreknowledge and foreordination, it is perfectly evident that they had a clear conception upon this subject. Although anthropomorphisms are used in regard to the manner in which God knows, He is never conceived as if He obtained His knowledge of the future as a mere onlooker gazing down the course of events in time. The idea that the omnipotent Creator and sovereign Ruler of the universe should govern the world and form His plan as contingent and dependent upon a mere foresight of events outside His purpose and control is not only contrary to the entire Scriptural idea of God's sovereignty and omnipotence, but is also contrary to the Scriptural idea of God's foreknowledge which is always conceived as dependent upon His sovereign purpose. According to the Scriptural conception, God foreknows because He has foreordained all things, and because in His providence He will certainly bring all to pass. His foreknowledge is not a dependent one which must wait upon events, but is simply the knowledge which God has of His own eternal purpose. Dillmann has called this "a productive foreknowledge" (Handbuch d. attest. Theol., 251). This is not exactly correct. The Old Testament does not conceive God's foreknowledge as "producing" or causing events. But when Dillmann says that in the Old Testament there is no hint of an "idle foreknowledge" on God's part, he is giving expression to the truth that in the Old Testament God's foreknowledge is based upon His foreordination and providential control of all things. The Divine foreknowledge, therefore, depends upon the Divine purpose which has determined the world plan (Am 3:7), and all its details (Job 28:26,27). Before man is born God knows him and chooses him for his work (Jer 1:5; Job 23:13,14), and God's thorough knowledge of man in Ps 139 is made to rest upon the fact that God has determined man's lot beforehand (Ps 139:14-16).
The same thing is true of the New Testament teaching on this subject. The Divine foreknowledge is simply God's knowledge of His own eternal purpose. This is especially clear in those cases where God's eternal purpose of redemption through Christ is represented as a mystery which is known by God and which can be known by man only when it pleases God to reveal it (Eph 1:9; 3:4,9).
4. Foreknowledge as Equivalent to Foreordination:
While, therefore, the foreknowledge of God in the sense of prescience is asserted in the New Testament, this is not the meaning of the term when used to translate the Greek words proginoskein and prognosis. These words which are translated in the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) by the word "foreknowledge," and once by the word "foreordain" (1 Pet 1:20 the King James Version), mean much more than mere intellectual foresight or prescience. Both the verb and the noun approach the idea of foreordination and are closely connected with that idea in the passages where these words occur. Thus, in Peter's speeches in Acts the predestination which finds expression in 1 Pet 4:28 is practically identified with the term prognosis in 2:23. Everything which happened to Jesus took place in accordance with "the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God," so that nothing happened except that which God had foreordained. In this verse the term foreknowledge is an expansion of the idea of God's "counsel" or plan, regarding it as an intelligent prearrangement, the idea of foreknowledge being assimilated to that of foreordination. The same idea is found in 1 Pet 1:20. Here the apostle speaks of Christ as a lamb "foreordained" by God before the foundation of the world. The Greek verb proegnosmenou, meaning literally, "foreknown" (as in the Revised Version (British and American)) is translated "foreordained" in the King James Version. It is evidently God's foreordination of Jesus as Saviour which Peter has in mind. Also in 1 Pet 1:2 those to whom the apostle is writing are characterized as "elect according to the foreknowledge (prognosis) of God," where the election is based on the "foreknowledge." By the prognosis or foreknowledge, however, far more is meant than prescience. It has the idea of a purpose which determines the course of the Divine procedure. If it meant simply prevision of faith or love or any quality in the objects of the election, Peter would not only flatly contradict Paul (Rom 9:11; Eph 1:3,4; 2 Tim 1:9); but also such a rendering would conflict with the context of this passage, because the objects of election are chosen "unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of .... Christ," so that their new obedience and relation to Christ are determined by their election by God, which election springs from a "foreknowledge" which therefore cannot mean a mere prescience.
In view of the fact that there was a classical use of the simple verb ginoskein in the sense of "resolve," and more especially of the fact that this word is used in the New Testament to denote an affectionate or loving regard or approbation in accordance with a common use of the Hebrew yadha` (Mt 7:23; 1 Cor 8:3; Gal 4:9; 2 Tim 2:19), there is nothing arbitrary in giving it this sense when compounded with the preposition pro when the context clearly demands it, as it does in the above passage (compare Johnstone, Commentary on Peter in the place cited.: per contra Meyer on passages in Acts and Romans). The word prognosis is, however, discriminated from "predestination." It is that loving regard in God from which the Divine election springs, which election Peter evidently regarded as sovereign, since sanctification is only a confirmation of it (2 Pet 1:10), and stumbling and disobedience are referred to `appointment to unbelief' (1 Pet 2:8). Here, then, we have a pregnant use of foreknowledge in which it is assimilated to the idea of purpose, and denotes a sovereign and loving regard.
The word prognosis is also found in this sense in the writings of Paul, in cases where it is manifestly impossible to regard it as a mere intellectual foresight, not only because of Paul's doctrine that election is absolutely sovereign (Eph 1:3,4; Rom 9:11; 2 Tim 1:9), but also because of the contexts in which the term occurs.
In Rom 8:29,30 the word "foreknow" occurs in immediate connection with God's predestination of the objects of salvation. Those whom God foreknew, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His son. Now the foreknowledge in this case cannot mean a mere prescience or foresight of faith (Meyer, Godet) or love (Weiss) in the subjects of salvation, which faith or love is supposed to determine the Divine predestination. This would not only contradict Paul's view of the absolutely sovereign and gracious character of election, but is diametrically opposed to the context of this passage. These verses form a part of the encouragement which Paul offers his readers for their troubles, including their own inward weakness. The apostle tells them that they may be sure that all things work together for good to them that love God; and these are defined as being those whom God has called in accordance with His purpose. Their love to God is evidently their love as Christians, and is the result of a calling which itself follows from an eternal purpose, so that their Christian love is simply the means by which they may know that they have been the subjects of this calll. They have not come within the sphere of God's love by their own choice, but have been "called" into this relationship by God, and that in accordance with an eternal purpose on His part.
What follows, therefore, must have as its motive simply to unfold and ground this assurance of salvation by tracing it all back to the "foreknowledge" of God. To regard this foreknowledge as contingent upon anything in man would thus be in flat contradiction with the entire context of the passage as well as its motive. The word "foreknowledge" here evidently has the pregnant sense which we found it to have in Peter. Hence, those whom God predestinates, calls, justifies and glorifies are just those whom He has looked upon with His sovereign love. To assign any other meaning to "foreknowledge" here would be out of accord with the usage of the term elsewhere in the New Testament when it is put in connection with predestination, and would contradict the purpose for which Paul introduces the passage, that is, to assure his readers that their ultimate salvation depends, not on their weakness, but on God's sovereign love and grace and power.
It is equally impossible to give the word prognosis any other sense in the other passage where Paul uses it. In Rom 11:2, speaking of the Jews, Paul says that "God did not cast off his people which he foreknew." It is quite impossible to regard this as meaning that God had a foresight or mere prevision of some quality in Israel which determined His choice of them, not only because it is the teaching of the entire Scripture that God's choice of Israel was sovereign and gracious, and not only because of the actual history of Israel, but also because of the context. Paul says that it would be absurd to suppose that God had cast off His people because He foreknew them, His foreknowledge of them being adduced as a ground for His not casting them off. Hence, the argument would have no force if anything in Israel, foreseen by God, were supposed to ground an assurance that He had not cast them off, because the context is full of the hardness of heart and unbelief of Israel. The foreknowledge here has evidently the same sense as in the former passage.
Foreknowledge, therefore, in the New Testament is more than mere prescience. It is practically identical with the Divine decree in two instances, and in the other places where the term occurs it denotes the sovereign loving regard out of which springs God's predestination or election of men to salvation.
See OMNISCIENCE ;PREDESTINATION .
LITERATURE.
Besides the Commentaries on the appropriate passages, especially those on Isaiah, see Dillmann, Handbuch d. alttest. Theol., 249-52; H. Schultz, Alttest. Theol., 417, 421; H Cremer, Die christliche Lehre volume den Eigenschaften Gottes, Beltrage zur Forderung christl. Theol., I, 93-101; Stewart, article "Foreknowledge," HDB, II, 51-53. Considerable Biblical as well as historical material will be found in works on systematic theology, such as Bohl, Dogmatik, 54-59; Bavinck, Gereformeerde Dogmatik2 I, 182-95. For a history of the discussion of the problem of foreknowledge and freedom see J. Muller, Die christl. Lehre volume der Sunde, III, 2, 2.
See also literature underOMNISCIENCE .
On the relation of foreknowledge and foreordination, and the meaning of prognosis, see K. Muller, Die gottliche Zuvorsehung und Erwahlung, 37 f, 81 f; Pfleiderer, Paulinismus2, 268 f; Urchristentum, 289; Gcnnrich, Studien zur Paulinischen Heilsordnung, S. K., 1898, 377 f; and on the meaning of proginoskein in Rom 8:29 see especially pp. 382-95; also Cremer, Bibl.-theol. Worterb., 263-65; Beyschlag, Neutest. Theol., II, 109; B. Weiss, Bio. Theol. of New Testament, English translation, I, 205 f; II, 6; H. Holtzmann, Lehrbuch d. neutest. Theol., II, 165 f; B.B. Warfield, article "Predestination," HDB, IV, 52-57. See also discussions of the meaning of proginoskein in the Commentaries on 1 Peter and Romans, especially Fritzsche on Rom 8:29, and Johnstone on 1 Pet 1:2.
See also literature underPREDESTINATION .
Caspar Wistar Hodge
for-or-dan', for-or-di-na'-shun: The word "foreordain" is uniformly used in the Revised Version (British and American) to render the Greek proorizo, in the passages where this verb occurs (Acts 4:28; Rom 8:29,30; 1 Cor 2:7; Eph 15,11). In the passages in Romans and Ephesians it takes the place of the King James Version word "predestinate," a return to the usage of the older English versions The word has simply the sense of determining beforehand. It is thus kindred in meaning with a number of other New Testament words expressing the idea of Divine purpose, as "foreknow" (in pregnant sense, Acts 2:23; Rom 8:29, etc.); "determine" (Acts 17:26); "appoint" (1 Pet 2:8). Foreordination, in the widest sense, is coextensive with the sphere of God's universal providence, being but another name for that Divine plan, purpose or counsel which embraces all things, great and small (Mt 10:29,30), that happen in Nature, or fall out in human life. Man's free actions are not regarded in Scripture as excluded from it (Acts 2:28). Foreordination, at the same time, is not to be conceived of as in any way overriding, or doing violence to, human freedom. Man acts freely, as Nature acts necessarily, but it is God who appoints the time, place and circumstances of the free act, permits its happening, and overrules it and its issues for the furthering of His own wise and holy ends. See PROVIDENCE . Foreordination in the sphere of grace has respect to the choice, calling and blessing of those who, through faith, are made partakers of eternal life (Rom 8:29,30; Eph 1:5,11). In this, its soteriological aspect, the subject is considered in special articles.
See CHOOSE ;ELECTION ;PREDESTINATION .
James Orr
for'-part: The translation of panim, "face" (Ex 28:27; 39:20; 1 Ki 6:20, the Revised Version (British and American) "within"; Ezek 42:7, the Revised Version (British and American) "before"), and of prora, the forward part of a ship, the prow (Acts 27:41, "the forepart stuck fast," the Revised Version (British and American) "the foreship struck").
ARV has "its forepart into" for "with his face towards" (Joel 2:20 margin "with its forepart"); "in the forepart thereof" for "before it" (Ex 28:25; 39:18).
for-run'-er (prodromos): This word occurs but once in the Bible: "Whither as a forerunner Jesus entered for us" (Heb 6:20). The word signifies one who comes in advance to a place where the rest are to follow, or one who is sent on before as a scout to take observations. In this sense Christ is our forerunner for He has gone into heaven to prepare a place for His people into which He will eventually lead them. The idea of a forerunner is peculiar to the Christian dispensation. The Old Testament Levitical economy knew nothing of such. The high priest was a representative, not a forerunner: where he led, namely, into the Holy of Holies, the people could not follow. He was not the pioneer of the people; Christ is. Christ goes nowhere but where His people may follow. He is the file-leader (compare Heb 12:2, "the author .... of faith"). He goeth before His people to prepare the way for them, to open the gates of heaven by His atoning blood and priestly intercession. The believer is led into full fellowship with God through Jesus Christ.
See also JOHN THE BAPTIST ;RUNNER .
William Evans
for'sal, for'-s'-l (Acts 27:40).
See SHIPS AND BOATS .
for'-ship (Acts 9,7:30).
See FOREPART ;SHIPS AND BOATS .
for'-skin (`orlah; akrobustia, often euphemistically translated "uncircumcision"):
(1) In the literal sense the word is frequently mentioned owing to the rite of circumcision in vogue in Israel since the days of Abraham (Gen 17:9-14) and among several other peoples of antiquity and modern times. The act of circumcision is represented in the temple of Khonsu, a medical deity, at Karnak. Among the Jews of antiquity circumcision had to be performed by means of a flint or stone knife (Ex 4:25; Josh 5:2,3) on the eighth day after birth (Gen 17:12; 21:4; Lev 12:3; Lk 2:21; Phil 3:5), even if this day was the Sabbath (Jn 7:23).
Very early we find the practice one of which the descendants of Abraham became proud (Gen 34:14), so that we see the uncircumcised despised and scorned (1 Sam 17:26), and in the time of oppression under King Antiochus Epiphanes many Israelites suffered martyrdom rather than give up the distinctive sign of their people (1 Macc 1:48,60,61; 2 Macc 6:10). Among the Arabs and all Mohammedans the custom of circumcision prevails from pre-Islamic times, for it is nowhere ordered in the Koran, and the appellation "uncircumcised" ghalaf)is considered the greatest possible insult.
A peculiar martial custom is mentioned in 1 Sam 18:25,27 (compare 2 Sam 3:14), where Saul is represented as asking "a hundred foreskins of the Philistines" as a dowry from David for the hand of Michal. This does not seem to have been an exceptional booty in war, especially if it meant that no very careful operation was expected to be performed, but the act became practically equivalent to extermination. We find in Egyptian history at the time of Ramses III, that an invasion into Egypt had been made by several Libyan tribes (see Diimichen, Histor. Inschr., I, plates I-VI, and II, plates 47 ff). The Egyptian army sent against the invaders defeated them and returned with a large number of karnatha which is a transcription into hieroglyphics of the Semitic word, qarenoth, the word being used euphemistically as is proven by the accompanying determinative sign of a phallus. See Chabas, Etudes sur l'antiquite historique d'apres lee sources egyptienne,, etc., 234; Bondi, Hebr.-Phoen. Lehnworte im Egyptischen, Leipzig, 1886, 72-74.
(2) Metaphorically the word is used in a variety of ways: (a) In the sense of "unlawful," "forbidden as food," "taboo." The fruit of newly planted trees was not to be eaten (Lev 19:23-25). (b) In the sense of "obstinacy," "opposition to God's law." The rite of circumcision meant submission under the law. While an outward form could not be identical with an inward attitude toward God, the use of the word "circumcision" was soon extended to that of purity and obedience of the heart (Dt 10:16; 30:6; and Col 2:11, where this circumcision is called a "circumcision not made with hands, .... the circumcision of Christ"). The uselessness of outward circumcision, which does not include obedience and purity, is shown by Paul (Rom 2:25; 1 Cor 7:18; compare Acts 7:51). (c) In the sense of "Gentiles," "non-Israelites" (Gal 2:7; Eph 2:11; Col 3:11).
See CIRCUMCISION ;CONCISION .
H. L. E. Luering
for'-est:
(1) choresh (compare proper name Harosheth), 2 Ch 27:4. In 1 Sam 23:15 ff translated "wood"; in Isa 17:9, "wood"; in Ezek 31:3, "forest-like shade." Applied to any thick growth of vegetation but not necessarily so extensive as (3).
(2) pardec: Neh 2:8, margin "park"; Eccl 2:5, the King James Version "orchards," the Revised Version (British and American) "parks"; Song 4:13, English Versions of the Bible "orchard," the Revised Version, margin "paradise." A word of Persian origin signifying probably an enclosure.
See PARADISE .
(3) ya`ar from root meaning "rugged"; compare Arabic wa`ar, "a rugged, stony region." It is sometimes rendered "forest" and sometimes (but less often in the Revised Version (British and American)) "wood." It is used of certain definite wooded tracts: "the forest in Arabia" (Isa 21:13, margin "thickets"); "the forest of Carmel" (2 Ki 19:23 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "of his fruitful field"); "the forest of Hereth" (1 Sam 22:5); "the forest of Lebanon" (1 Ki 7:2 f; 10:17-21; 2 Ch 9:16-20); "the forest of Ephraim," East of the Jordan (2 Sam 18:6,8,17). The word ya`ar appears also in well-known Kiriath-jearim, "the city of forests," and Mr. Jearim (Josh 15:10). Among numerous other references the following may be cited: Dt 19:5; Josh 17:15,18; 1 Ch 16:33; 2 Ki 2:24; Ps 80:13; 83:14; 96:12; 132:6; Eccl 2:6; Song 2:3; 1 Sam 7:2; 14:25,26; Jer 4:29; 46:23; Ezek 34:29; Mic 3:12; 7:14.
(4) cebhakh, from root meaning "to interweave." A "thicket" (Gen 22:13; Jer 4:7); "thicket of trees" (Ps 74:5); "thickets of the forest" (Isa 9:18; 10:34).
(5) 'adbhim, "thicket" (Jer 4:29).
From many references it is evident that Palestine had in Old Testament times much more extensive forests and woodlands than today. For a discussion of the subject See BOTANY .
E. W. G. Masterman
See EPHRAIM .
for-tel', for-told': The King James Version occurrences of these words in the New Testament represent as many Greek terms, and are in each case rendered differently in Revised Version: (1) Mk 13:23 (proeipon), the Revised Version (British and American) "told beforehand"; (2) Acts 3:24 (prokataggello), the Revised Version (British and American) simply "told"; (3) 2 Cor 13:2 (prolego), the Revised Version (British and American) "said beforehand," margin "plainly"; compare 1 Thess 3:4. The foretelling of future events is claimed in the Old Testament as a prerogative of Yahweh (Isa 41:22,23; 42:9, etc.; compare Dt 18:22).
See PROPHECY .
for'-fit (charam): "Forfeit" (from forisfacere, "to act beyond") implies loss through transgression or non-observance of some law or rule. The word occurs only once as the translation of charam, "to shut in," frequently to devote or consecrate a person or thing to God beyond redemption (compare Lev 27:28,29; Mic 4:13; Ezr 10:8, "That whosoever came not within three days, .... all his substance should be forfeited, and himself separated from the assembly of the captivity," King James Version margin, the American Revised Version, margin and the Revised Version (British and American) "devoted"; compare 1 Esdras 9:4, "Their cattle should be seized to the use of the temple" (anieroo, "to consecrate," "devote"); 6:32, "all his goods seized for the king" (ta huparchonia autou einai (eis) basilika)).
The Revised Version (British and American) has "forfeited" (qadhesh, "consecrated,'; "devoted") for "defiled" (Dt 22:9), margin "Hebrew consecrated"; "forfeit his life" for "lose his own soul" (psuche) (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36); "lose or forfeit his own self" for "lose himself or be cast away" (Lk 9:25, heauton de apolesas e zemiotheis; zemioo is the Septuagint for `anash, "to be mulcted," or "fined," Ex 21:22; Dt 22:19; Prov 17:26 m; 19:19; 21:11; 22:3); Weymouth renders Lk 9:25, "to have lost or forfeited his own self" (or "had to pay his own self--his own existence--as a fine"); in the other instances of zemioo (1 Cor 3:15; Phil 3:8), the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) render "suffer loss," "suffered .... loss"; 2 Cor 7:9 the King James Version, "receive damage."
W. L. Walker
forj, for'-jer (Taphal): "Forgers of lies" occurs in Job's reply to his comforters (13:4; compare 14:17); the word is the translation of Taphal, "to patch," "lay on," "besmear," hence, to impute, overcharge, etc.; in Ps 119:69, "forged" occurs with a similar meaning: "The proud have forged a lie against me" (compare Sirach 51:2). "Forger," in the sense of "one who forges, makes, anything," is the Revised Version (British and American) rendering of laTas "to smite," or "hammer," in Gen 4:22 King James Version: "Tubal-cain, an instructor of every artificer in brass and iron," the Revised Version (British and American) "the forger of every cutting instrument of brass and iron," margin "an instructor of every artificer of copper and iron."
W. L. Walker
for-get', for-get'-ful (shakhach; epilanthanomai): "Forget" is to fail to hold in mind, and the forgetfulness may be either innocent or blameworthy. In the Old Testament the word is most frequently used as translation of shakhach in a blameworthy sense: to forget the covenant, the law, Yahweh their God (Dt 4:9,23,11; 6:12; Jdg 3:7; 1 Sam 12:9; Ps 44:20, etc.). In an innocent or neutral, sometimes good, sense it is used in Gen 27:45; Dt 24:19; Job 9:27; 11:16; 24:20; Ps 102:4, etc. It is also used of God forgetting or not seeming to care (Ps 9:12; 10:11,12; 13:1; 42:9; 77:9; Isa 49:15, etc.). To "forget" sometimes means to forsake (Ps 45:10; 74:19, etc.).
In the New Testament epilanthanomai is used of simple forgetting (Mt 16:5; Mk 8:14, etc.; in Lk 12:6 the sense of care is implied); Phil 3:13, "forgetting the things which are behind," has the force of leaving behind. "Forgetful" in Jas 1:25 is epilesmone, the Revised Version (British and American) "a hearer that forgetteth." "Forgetfulness" Ps 88:12, "the land of forgetfulness," is a synonym for Sheol, where all forget and are forgotten. the Revised Version (British and American) has "forget not" for "be ignorant of" (2 Pet 3:8; similarly 3:5).
W. L. Walker
for-giv'-nes (kaphar, nasa', calach; apoluein charizesthai, aphesis paresis):
1. Etymology
2. Pagan and Jewish Ideas
3. The Teaching of Christ
4. Conditions of Forgiveness
5. The Offended Party
6. Divine and Human Forgiveness
7. Forgiveness and Justification
8. Old Testament Teaching
9. Limitations of Forgiveness
10. Christ's Power to Forgive Sins
11. The Need of an Atonement
12. The New Testament Doctrine of Atonement
Of the seven words, three Hebrew and four Greek, which are used to express the idea of forgiveness, the last two occur in this sense only once each. Apoluein (Lk 6:37) is used because of the analogy of sin to debt, and denotes the release from it. It has the meaning "forgiveness" in 2 Macc 12:45 also, in which passage the word for sin is expressed. In Rom 3:25 Paul uses paresis instead of the usual aphesis. The former means "putting aside," "disregarding," "pretermission"; the latter, "putting away" completely and unreservedly (Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, section xxxiii). It does not mean forgiveness in the complete sense, and in the King James Version is incorrectly translated "remission." Nor does it mean that God had temporarily suspended punishment which at some later date He might inflict (Sanday on Rom 3:25). It was apparent that God had treated sins as though He had forgiven them, though in fact such an attitude on the part of God was without such a foundation as was later supplied by an adequate atonement, and so the apostle avoids saying that God forgave them. This passing over of sins had the tendency of destroying man's conception of God's righteousness, and in order to avert this Christ was set forth as a propitiation and God's disregard of sin (paresis) became a real forgiveness (aphesis); compare Acts 14:16; 17:30. Charizesthai is not found outside of the writings of Luke and Paul, and in the sense "to forgive sins" is peculiarly Pauline (2 Cor 2:7; 12:13; Eph 3:2; Col 2:13; 3:13). It expresses, as no other of these words does, his conception of the graciousness of God's pardon. Kaphar (Dt 21:8; Ps 78:38; Jer 18:23) and calah (Nu 30:5,8,12; 1 Ki 8:30,34,36,39,50, etc.) are used only of Divine forgiveness, while nasa' is used in this sense (Ex 32:32; Nu 14:19; Josh 24:19; Ps 25:18; 32:1,5; 99:8; Isa 2:9), and also of human forgiveness (Gen 50:17; Ex 10:17; 1 Sam 25:28). Remission (Mt 26:28; Mk 1:4; Lk 1:77; 24:47; Acts 2:38; 10:43; Heb 9:22; 10:18) and blotting out (Ps 51:1,9; Isa 43:25; Jer 18:23; Acts 3:19) are synonyms of forgiveness, and to understand it fully such words as save, justify, reconcile and atonement should also be considered.
Forgiveness was not a pagan virtue. The large-souled man might disregard offenses in cases where he considered them beneath his notice, but to forgive was weak-spirited (F. W. Robertson on 1 Cor 4:12). Even in the Old Testament, man's forgiveness of his fellow-man is infrequently mentioned. In every case the one asking forgiveness is in a position of subserviency, and is petitioning for that to which he has no just right (Gen 50:17; Ex 10:17; 1 Sam 15:25; 25:28). The Imprecatory Psalms attest the fact that forgiveness of enemies was not esteemed as a virtue by Israel. They could appeal to the law which enjoined upon them to seek neither the peace nor the prosperity of their avowed enemies (Dt 23:6; compare Ezr 9:12). Jesus gave the popular summing-up of the law and not its exact words when he said, "Ye have heard that it was said .... hate thine enemy" (Mt 5:43), and this certainly does represent their attitude and their understanding of the teaching of the Scriptures.
Christ taught that forgiveness is a duty. No limit can be set to the extent of forgiveness (Lk 17:4) and it must be granted without reserve. Jesus will not admit that there is any wrong so gross nor so often repeated that it is beyond forgiveness. To Him an unforgiving spirit is one of the most heinous of sins (Bruce, Parabolic Teaching, 376 ff). This is the offense which God will not forgive (Mt 18:34,35). It is the very essence of the unpardonable sin (Mk 3:22-30). It was the one blemish of the elder son which marred an otherwise irreproachable life (Lk 15:28-30). This natural, pagan spirit of implacability Jesus sought to displace by a generous, forgiving spirit. It is so far the essence of His teaching that in popular language "a Christian spirit" is not inappropriately understood to be synonymous with a forgiving disposition. His answer to Peter that one should forgive not merely seven times in a day, but seventy times seven (Mt 18:21,22), not only shows that He thought of no limit to one's forgiveness, but that the principle could not be reduced to a definite formula.
Jesus recognized that there are conditions to be fulfilled before forgiveness can be granted. Forgiveness is part of a mutual relationship; the other part is the repentance of the offender. God does not forgive without repentance, nor is it required of man. The effect of forgiveness is to restore to its former state the relationship which was broken by sin. Such a restoration requires the cooperation of both parties. There must be both a granting and an acceptance of the forgiveness. Sincere, deep-felt sorrow for the wrong which works repentance (2 Cor 7:10) is the condition of mind which insures the acceptance of the forgiveness. Hence, Jesus commands forgiveness when the offender turns again, saying, "I repent" (Lk 17:3,1). It was this state of mind which led the father joyfully to welcome the Prodigal before he even gave utterance to his newly formed purpose (Lk 15:21).
It is not to be supposed, however, that failure to repent upon the part of the offender releases the offended from all obligation to extend forgiveness. Without the repentance of the one who has wronged him he can have a forgiving state of mind. This Jesus requires, as is implied by, "if ye forgive not every one his brother from your hearts" (Mt 18:35). It is also implied by the past tense in the Lord's Prayer: "as we also have forgiven our debtors" (Mt 6:12). It is this forgiving spirit which conditions God's forgiveness of our sins (Mk 11:25; Mt 6:14,15). In such a case the unforgiving spirit is essentially unrepentance (Mt 18:23-35). "Of all acts, is not, for a man, repentance the most Divine?"
The offended is to go even farther and is to seek to bring the wrongdoer to repentance. This is the purpose of the rebuking commanded in Lk 17:3. More explicitly Jesus says, "If thy brother sin against thee, go, show him his fault between thee and him alone" (Mt 18:15-17). He is to carry his pursuit to the point of making every reasonable effort to win the wrongdoer, and only when he has exhausted every effort may he abandon it. The object is the gaining of his brother. Only when this is evidently unattainable is all effort to cease.
The power of binding and loosing, which means forbidding and allowing, was granted to Peter (Mt 16:19) and to the Christian community (Mt 18:18; Jn 20:23). It clearly implies the possession of the power to forgive sins. In the case of Peter's power it was exercised when he used the keys of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 16:19). This consisted in the proclamation of the gospel and especially of the conditions upon which men might enter into relationship with God (Acts 2:38; 10:34 ff). It was not limited to Peter only, but was shared by the other apostles (Mt 16:19; 18:18). Christ left no fixed rules the observance or non-observance of which would determine whether one is or is not in the kingdom of God. He gave to His disciples principles, and in the application of these principles to the problems of life there had to be the exercise of discriminating judgment. The exercise of this judgment was left to the Christian community (2 Cor 2:10). It is limited by the principles which are the basis of the kingdom, but within these principles the voice of the community is supreme. The forgiveness here implied is not the pronouncing of absolution for the sins of individuals, but the determination of courses of conduct and worship which will be acceptable. In doing this its decisions will be ratified in heaven (Westcott on Jn 20:23).
That there is a close analogy between human and Divine forgiveness is clearly implied (Mt 5:23,14; 6:12; Mk 11:25; Lk 6:37; Col 1:14; 3:13). God"s forgiveness is conditional upon man's forgiveness of the wrongs done him, not because God forgives grudgingly but because forgiveness alone indicates that disposition of mind which will humbly accept the Divine pardon.
6. Divine and Human Forgiveness:
Repentance is a necessary ingredient of the fully developed forgiveness. There is no essential difference between the human and the Divine pardon, though the latter is necessarily more complete. It results in the complete removal of all estrangement and alienation between God and man. It restores completely the relationship which existed prior to the sin. The total removal of the sin as a result of the Divine forgiveness is variously expressed in the Scriptures: "Thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back" (Isa 38:17); "Thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea" (Mic 7:19); "I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more" (Jer 31:34); "I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions" (Isa 43:25); "As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us" (Ps 103:12). Ideally this same result is attained in human forgiveness, but actually the memory of the sin remains with both parties as a barrier between them, and even when there is a complete restoration of amity the former state of alienation cannot entirely be removed from memory. When God forgives, however, He restores man to the condition of former favor. Release from punishment is involved, though Divine forgiveness is more than this. In most cases the consequences, which in some instances are spoken of as punishment, are not removed, but they lose all penal character and become disciplinary. Nor does the forgiveness remove from human mind the consciousness of sin and the guilt which that involved, but it does remove the mistrust which was the ground of the alienation. Mistrust is changed into trust, and this produces peace of mind (Ps 32:5-7; Rom 5:1); consciousness of the Divine love and mercy (Ps 103:2 ff); removes fear of punishment (2 Sam 12:13); and awakens love to God.
7. Forgiveness and Justification:
Paul rarely uses the term "forgiveness," but in its place prefers justification. They are to his understanding practically synonymous (Stevens, Theology of the New Testament, 418). He preferred the latter, however, because it was better fitted to express the idea of secure, present and permanent acceptance in the sight of God. It connoted both a complete and a permanent state of grace. In popular thought forgiveness is not so comprehensive, but in the Biblical sense it means no less than this. It removes all of the guilt and cause of alienation from the past; it assures a state of grace for the present; and promises Divine mercy and aid for the future. Its fullness cannot adequately be conveyed by any one term or formula.
Divine, like human, forgiveness is always contingent upon the fulfillment of conditions. It must be preceded by repentance and a firmly fixed intention not to repeat the offense. In addition to this, one was required to conform to certain legal or formal acts before the assurance of pardon was his. These acts were expressive of the sinner's state of mind. They consisted of certain acts of sacrifice in the pre-Christian times and of baptism during the ministry of John the Baptist (Mk 1:4; Lk 3:3) and under Christ (Acts 2:38; 22:16). These acts are never regarded as in any sense a quid pro quo in return for which the benefit of forgiveness is granted. It is an act of pure grace on God's part, and these acts are required as expressions of the man's attitude toward God. The state of mind required in order to obtain the gift of forgiveness is that to which the Prodigal Son came (Lk 15:17-19), and that of the sinner who went to his house justified rather than the Pharisee (18:9-14), because he realized that forgiveness was to him an act of pure favor.
There was real and actual forgiveness of sins in the Old Testament times as well as since Christ. Certain passages have been construed to teach that the Law provided only for a passing over or rolling back of sins, and that there was not then an actual forgiveness.
The sacrifices prescribed by the Law were not adequate atonements, so that there was constant necessity of yearly remembrance of sin (Heb 10:3; compare Lev 16:21). The atonement of Christ is, however, of permanent adequacy, and became retroactive in the sense that it unified in Christ the Divine arrangement for saving mankind in all ages (Heb 11:40). "The passing over of the sins done aforetime" (Rom 3:25) does not imply a partial or apparent forgiveness, but means that they were forgiven, though seemingly without adequate recognition on the part of God of their heinous character. In view of God's righteous character men might naturally have expected punishment, but instead the offenders were spared (compare Acts 14:16; 17:30). No expression in the Old Testament suggests any inadequacy of the forgiveness extended to Israel, but on the other hand many passages may be quoted to show how rich and full it was deemed to be (Ps 103; Mic 7:19; Isa 38:17, Jer 31:34).
9. Limitations of Forgiveness:
Two passages seem to limit God's forgiveness. They are Christ's discussion of the unpardonable sin (Mt 12:31,32; Mk 3:28-30; Lk 12:10), and the one which mentions the sin unto death (1 Jn 5:16; compare Heb 6:4-6). In the former passage there is mentioned a sin which has no forgiveness, and in the latter, one on behalf of which the apostle cannot enjoin prayer that it be forgiven, though he does not prohibit it. In both cases the sin is excluded from the customary forgiveness which is extended to sins of all other classes.
The act of the Pharisees which led Jesus to speak of the unpardonable sin was the attributing of a good deed wrought by Him through the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28) to Beelzebub. No one could do such a thing unless his moral nature was completely warped. To such a person the fundamental distinctions between good and evil were obliterated. No ordinary appeal could reach him, for to him good seemed evil and evil seemed good. The possibility of winning him back is practically gone; hence, he is beyond the hope of forgiveness, not because God has set an arbitrary line of sinfulness, beyond which His grace of forgiveness will not reach, but because the man has put himself beyond the possibility of attaining to that state of mind which is the essential condition of Divine forgiveness. It is practically certain that John did not have any particular sinful act in mind when he spoke of the sin which is unto death.
See BLASPHEMY .
There is no possible way of determining what specific sin, if any, he refers to. Probably the same principle applies in this case as in that of the unpardonable sin. God's forgiveness is limited solely by the condition that man must accept it in the proper spirit.
There are some passages which seem to imply that forgiveness was the principal Messianic task. This is suggested by the name given to the Messiah during His earthly career (Mt 1:21), and by the fact that He was the Saviour. The remission of sins was the preparation for the advent of the Messiah (Lk 1:77), and repentance and remission of sins were the prerequisites to a state of preparation for the kingdom.
10. Christ's Power to Forgive Sins:
It is not surprising, therefore, that we find Jesus laying claim to the power to forgive sins. This provoked a bitter controversy with the Jews, for it was axiomatic with them that no one could forgive sins but God only (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21; 7:49). This Jesus did not question, but He would have them infer from His power to forgive sins that He was the possessor of Divine power. Jesus asserted His possession of this power on two occasions only, though it has been insufficiently inferred from Jn 5:14; 8:11 that He was accustomed to pronounce absolution upon all of those He healed. On one of these occasions He not merely asserted that He possessed the power, but demonstrated it by showing Himself to be the possessor of the Divine gift of healing. The impostor might claim some such intangible power as the authority to forgive sins, but he would never assert the possession of such easily disproved power as the ability to heal the sick. But Jesus claimed both, and based His claim to be the possessor of the former on the demonstration that He possessed the latter. God would not support an impostor, hence, his aid in healing the paralytic proved that Jesus could forgive sins. The multitude accepted this logic and "glorified God, who had given such authority unto men" (Mt 9:2-9; compare Mk 2:3-12; Lk 5:18-26).
On the other occasion when His possession of this power was under discussion (Lk 7:36-50), He offered no other proof than the forgiven woman's deep gratitude and love. One expression that He uses, however, has raised some discussion as to the relative order in time of her love and forgiveness (Lk 7:47). Did she love because she was forgiven, or vice versa? Manifestly the forgiveness precedes the love, in spite of the fact that Lk 7:47 seems to assert the opposite, for this is the bearing of the parable of the Two Debtors (7:41-43), and the latter part of 7:47 has the same implication. It is clear that she had previously repented and had been accepted, and the anointing of Jesus was an outpouring of her gratitude. The phrase of 7:47, "for she loved much," is proof of the greatness of her sin rather than a reason why she was forgiven. In both cases where Jesus forgave sins, He did so because the state of mind of the person forgiven showed worthiness of the blessing. To this as a condition of forgiveness there is no exception. Christ's prayer on the cross (Lk 23:34) would not avail to secure the pardon of His murderers without their repentance.
Though forgiveness is on God's part an act of pure grace prompted by His love and mercy, and though He forgives freely all those who comply with the condition of repentance and abandonment of sin, yet this does not dispense with the necessity of an atonement. The parable of the Prodigal Son was spoken to teach the freedom of God's forgiveness and acceptance of returning sinners, and the duty of men to assume the same attitude toward them. This much it teaches, but it fails to set forth entirely God's attitude toward sin. With reference to the sinner God is love and mercy, but with reference to sin He is righteous, and this element of God's nature is no less essential to Him than His love, and must be considered in any effort to set forth completely the doctrine of God's forgiveness of sinners. The atonement of Christ and the many atonements of the Law were manifestations of this phase of God's nature.
12. The New Testament Doctrine of Atonement:
The idea of an atonement is fundamental in the teachings of the New Testament (Rom 5:10; 2 Cor 5:18-21; Col 1:21). It is very clearly implied in such terms as reconciliation and propitiation, and is no less present in pardon, remission and forgiveness. The doctrine of the atonement is not developed by Jesus, but it is strongly hinted at and is unmistakably implied in the language of Mt 20:28; 26:28; Mk 10:45; Lk 24:46,47. John the Baptist's salute, "Behold, the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world!" (Jn 1:29), also implies it. In the writings of the apostles it is repeatedly and clearly affirmed that our forgiveness and reconciliation to God is based upon the death of Christ. "In none other is there salvation" (Acts 4:12); through Him is the redemption (Rom 3:24); God set Him forth to be a propitiation (Rom 3:25); through Him "we have now received the reconciliation" (Rom 5:11); "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself" (2 Cor 5:19); "Him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our behalf" (2 Cor 5:21); and "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us" (Gal 3:13). Such citations might be greatly multiplied. That which was so perfectly accomplished by the offering of Christ was in an analagous though imperfect way accomplished by the sacrifices required by the Law. It had "a shadow of the good things to come" (Heb 10:1).
The unvarying effect of sin is to produce an estrangement between the injurer and the wronged. The nature of God is such and the relationship between Him and man is of such a character that sin brings about an alienation between them. It is this presupposition of an estrangement between them which renders the atonement necessary before forgiveness can be extended to man. This estrangement must be removed, and the alienation be transformed into a reconciliation. In what then does the alienation consist?
The sin of man produces a changed attitude toward each other on the part of both God and man. God holds no personal pique against man because of his sin. The New Testament language is very carefully chosen to avoid any statement which would seem to convey such a conception. Yet God's holy righteousness is such that He cannot be indifferent to sin. His wrath must rest upon the disobedient (Jn 3:36; Rom 1:18). It is not merely impersonal. It is not enough to say He hates the sin. Man's unrighteousness has not merely alienated him from God, but God also from him. The word "enemies" (echthroi) of Rom 5:10 is passive, and means the object of God's enmity (Sunday, at the place). It was because of this fact that God set forth Christ to be a propitiation to show His righteousness because of the passing over of sins done aforetime (Rom 3:25,26). God's passing over, without inflicting punishment, the sins of pre-Christian times had placed in jeopardy His righteousness; had exposed Him to the implication that He could tolerate sin. God could not be true to Himself while He tolerated such an imputation, and so instead of visiting punishment upon all who sinned--which would have been one way of showing His righteousness--He set forth Christ to death ("in his blood"), and in this way placed Himself beyond the imputation of unrighteousness while it enabled Him to show mercy to sinners. The effect of sin upon man was to estrange him from God, to lead him farther and farther away from his Maker. Each successive sin produced a greater barrier between the two. Now the atonement was designed to remove the cause of this estrangement and restore the former relationship between God and man. This too, it has been observed, is the purpose of forgiveness, so that the atonement finds its completion in forgiveness. It should be noted that the reconciliation originates with God and not with man (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19). God woos man before the latter seeks God. The effect of the atonement on man is to reconcile him, attract him, to God. It shows him God's love for man, and the forgiveness, in that it removes sin completely, takes away the estranging factor between them and so wins man back to God. "We love, because he first loved us." At the same time the atonement is such a complete expression of both the love and the righteousness of God that, while on the one hand it exhibits his yearning for man, on the other it shows that He is not tolerant toward sin. In the atonement of Christ, therefore, is the meeting-place and the reconcilement of God's holy horror of sin and the free bestowal of forgiveness upon penitent believers.
William Charles Morro
for-go' (from for, negative, and go): Occurs in Ecclesiasticus 7:19, as translation of astocheo, which means "to miss the mark," "turn or swerve from." "Forgo not a wise and good wife (the King James Version "woman"); for her grace is above gold," meaning "Turn not away from her"; in Ecclesiasticus 8:9, the word is rendered "miss not"; compare 1 Tim 1:6; 6:21; 2 Tim 2:18.
fork (shelosh qilleshon): This compound word, meaning strictly "three points" or "three prongs," is found only once (1 Sam 13:21), and doubtless there refers to the agricultural tool now known as the pitchfork. It might, however, also be a weapon.
form (yatsar, to'ar; morphe):
(1) To form is "to fashion," "create," "produce." In the Old Testament it is for the most part the translation of yatsar, "to form," "to fashion" (Gen 2:7, etc., "Yahweh God formed man of the dust of the ground," etc.); also of chul and chil, "to be twisted" "turned round" "to bring forth (in pain)" (compare Isa 13:8; Mic 4:10; Dt 32:18 the King James Version, "God that formed thee"; Job 26:13 the King James Version; Ps 90:2, "or ever thou hadst formed the earth" etc.; Prov 26:10 the King James Version). In the New Testament we have morphoo, "to form" (Gal 4:19, "until Christ be formed in you"); plasso, "to form," "to mold" (Rom 9:20, "him that formed it"; 1 Tim 2:13, "Adam was first formed"; 2 Macc 7:23, "the Creator .... who formed the generation of man," the Revised Version (British and American) "fashioned"; 7:22, "that formed the members (diarrhuthmizo)," the Revised Version (British and American) "brought into order").
(2) Form (noun) is used for (a) appearance, mar'eh, "sight," "appearance" (Job 4:16, "I could not discern the form thereof" the Revised Version (British and American) "appearance" with "form" for "image" (temunah) in next sentence); tselem, Aramaic "image" (Dan 3:19, "The form of his visage was changed"); rew, "form," "likeness" (Dan 2:31; 3:25, the Revised Version (British and American) "aspect"); to'ar, "visage," "form" (1 Sam 28:14, "What form is he of?"); (b) the fixed or characteristic form of anything, tabhnith, "model," "form" (Ezek 8:3; 10:8, "the form of a hand"; 8:10, "every form of creeping things"); morphe, characteristic form as distinguished from schema, changing fashion (Phil 2:6, "in the form of God"; 2:7, "the form of a servant"; less distinctly Mk 16:12, "in another form"); (c) shape, model, pattern, mold, tsurah, "shape," from tsur, "to cut or carve" (Ezek 43:11, ter, "the form of the house," etc.); mishpat, "rule" (2 Ch 4:7 the King James Version); tupos, "type," "impress" (Rom 6:17, the Revised Version, margin "pattern"); hupotuposis, "outline," pattern (2 Tim 1:13, the Revised Version (British and American) "pattern"); morphosis, "form," "appearance" (Rom 2:20, "the form of knowledge"); (d) orderly arrangement, giving shape or form (Gen 1:2; Jer 4:23, the earth was "without form," tohu, the Revised Version (British and American) "waste"; The Wisdom of Solomon 11:17, amorphos); "form of speech" (2 Sam 14:20, aspect, panim, "face," the Revised Version (British and American) "to change the face of the matter"); as giving comeliness or beauty, to'ar (Isa 52:14; 53:2, "He hath no form nor comeliness"; compare Gen 29:17; 39:6, etc.; The Wisdom of Solomon 15:5, "desiring the form (eidos) of a dead image," the Revised Version (British and American) "the breathless form"); (e) Show, without substance, morphosis, "form" (2 Tim 3:5, "holding a form of godliness").
ARV has "didst form" for "hast possessed" (Ps 139:13, so the English Revised Version, margin; both have "formed" for "made" (Ps 104:26), the American Standard Revised Version for "framed" twice (Isa 29:16); both for "formed thee," "gave bi