red'-ing (miqra'; anagnosis): As a noun occurs once in the Old Testament (Neh 3:8) and 3 times in the New Testament (Acts 13:15; 2 Cor 3:14; 1 Tim 4:13), each time with reference to the public reading of the Divine Law. The verb "to read" (qara'; anaginosko) occurs frequently both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament: (1) often in the sense of reading aloud to others, especially of the public reading of God's Law or of prophecy, as by Moses (Ex 24:7), Ezra (Neh 8:3,18), Jesus in the synagogue at Nazareth (Lk 4:16), of the regular reading of the Law and the Prophets in the synagogues (Acts 13:27; 15:21), and of the reading of apostolic epistles in the Christian church (Col 4:16; 1 Thess 5:27); (2) also in the sense of reading to one's self, whether the divine word in Law or prophecy (Dt 17:19; Acts 8:28-30, etc.), or such things as private letters (2 Ki 5:7; 19:14; Acts 23:34, etc.).
D. Miall Edwards
red'-i (]~mahir]): Occurs twice in the sense of apt, skillful (Ezr 7:6; Ps 45:1). the Revised Version (British and American) gives "ready" for "fit" (Prov 24:27), for "asketh" (Mic 7:3), for "prepared" (Mk 14:15), for "not be negligent" (2 Pet 1:12).
re-a'-ya, re-i'-a (re'ayah, "Yah has seen"; Septuagint: Codex Vaticanus, Rhada, A, Rheia):
(1) The eponym of a Calebite family (1 Ch 4:2). The word "Reaiah" should probably be substituted for "Haroeh" in 1 Ch 2:52, but both forms may be corruptions.
(2) A Reubenite (1 Ch 5:5, the King James Version "Reaia").
See JOEL .
(3) The family name of a company of Nethinim (Ezr 2:47; Neh 7:50 = 1 Esdras 5:31).
rep'-ing (qatsar; therizo): Reaping in ancient times, as at present, consisted in either pulling up the grain by the roots or cutting it with a sickle (See SICKLE ), and then binding the stalks into bundles to be carried to the threshing-floor. If the Egyptian sculptures are true to life, reaping was sometimes divided into two operations, the heads of grain and the stalks being reaped separately. In Palestine and Syria both pulling and cutting are still practiced, the former when the ground is stony and the spears scarce. Even where the sickle is used, much of the grain comes up by the roots, owing to the toughness of the dried stalks or the dullness of the sickle. The reaper sometimes wears pieces of cane on the fingers of the hand which gathers the grain in order to protect them from injury by the sharp grasses or the sickle. There were definite laws established by the Hebrews in regard to reaping (Lev 19:9; 23:10; 25:5,11; Dt 16:9). Samuel mentions the task of reaping the harvest as one of the requirements which would be made by the king for whom the people were clamoring (1 Sam 8:12).
Figurative:
The certainty of the consequences of good and evil doing were often typified by the sowing and the reaping of harvests (Job 4:8; Prov 22:8; Hos 8:7; 10:12,13; 2 Cor 9:6; Gal 6:7,8). "They that sow in tears shall reap in joy" is found in the liberated captives' song (Ps 126:5). "He that regardeth the clouds shall not reap," i.e. a lack of faith in God's care will be punished (Eccl 11:4); compare also the lesson of trust drawn from the birds (Mt 6:26; Lk 12:24). Sowing and not reaping the harvest is mentioned as a punishment for disobedience (Job 31:8; Jer 12:13; Mic 6:15). Reaping where he sowed not, showed the injustice of the landlord (Mt 25:26), as did also the withholding of the reapers' wages (Jas 5:4). In God's Kingdom there is a division of labor: "He that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together" (Jn 4:36-38). In John's vision he saw an angel reap the earth (Rev 14:15,16).
See AGRICULTURE ;GLEANING .
James A. Patch
rer'-word ('acaph, "to gather," Nu 10:25; Josh 6:9 (the King James Version margin "gathering host"); Isa 52:12).
See ARMY ;DAN ,TRIBE OF ;WAR , 3.
re'-z'n, re'-z'n-a-b'l, re'-z'n-ing (yakhach, etc.; logos, dialogizomai, -ismos, etc.): "Reason" with related terms, has a diversity of meanings, representing a large number of Hebrew and Greek words and phrases. In the sense of "cause" or "occasion" it stands in 1 Ki 9:15 for dabhar, "a word" (the Revised Version margin "account"), but in most cases renders prepositional forms as "from," "with," "because of," "for the sake," etc. As the ground or argument for anything, it is the translation of ta`am (Prov 26:16, the Revised Version margin "answers discreetly"), of yakhach, as in Isa 1:18, "Come now, and let us reason together" (compare Job 13:3; 15:3); in 1 Sam 12:7, the word is shaphaT, the Revised Version (British and American) "that I may plead," etc. The principal Greek words for "reason," "reasoning," are those given above. The Christian believer is to be ready to give a reason (logos) for the hope that is in him (1 Pet 3:15 the King James Version). "Reason" as a human faculty or in the abstract sense appears in Apocrypha in The Wisdom of Solomon 17:12 (logismos); Ecclesiasticus 37:16, "Let reason (logos) go before every enterprise," the Revised Version (British and American) "be the beginning of every work." In Acts 18:14, "reason would" is literally, kata logon, "according to reason"; in Rom 12:1, for "reasonable (logikos) service," the Revised Version (British and American) has "spiritual," and in the margin "Greek `belonging to the reason.' " In the Revised Version (British and American) "reason," etc., occurs much oftener than in the King James Version (compare Lev 17:11; Dt 28:47; Jdg 5:22; Job 20:2; 23:7, etc.; Lk 3:15; 12:17; Acts 17:17, etc.).
W. L. Walker
re-bek'-a (rebha`, "fourth part"; Septuagint: Codex Vaticanus Rhobe; Codex Alexandrinus Rhebek): One of the five chieftains of Midian who were slain by the Israelites, under Moses (Nu 31:8; Josh 13:21). Like his comrades, he is termed a "king" in Numbers, but a "chief" or "prince" in Joshua.
re-bek'-a (ribhqah; Septuagint and New Testament Rhebekka, whence the usual English spelling Rebecca): Daughter of Bethuel and an unknown mother, grand-daughter of Nahor and Milcah, sister of Laban, wife of Isaac, mother of Esau and Jacob.
Her name is usually explained from the Arabic, rabqat, "a tie-rope for animals," or, rather, "a noose" in such a rope; its application would then by figure suggest the beauty (?) of her that bears it, by means of which men are snared or bound; The root is found in Hebrew only in the noun meaning "hitching-place" or "stall," in the familiar phrase "fatted calf" or "calf of the stall," and in view of the meaning of such names as Rachel and Eglah the name Rebekah might well mean (concrete for abstract, like riqmah, chemdah, etc.) a "tied-up calf" (or "lamb"?), one therefore peculiarly choice and fat.
Rebekah is first mentioned in the genealogy of the descendants of Nahor, brother of Abraham (Gen 22:20-24). In fact, the family is there carried down just so far as is necessary in order to introduce this woman, for whose subsequent appearance and role the genealogy is obviously intended as a preparation. All this branch of the family of Terah had remained in Aram when Abraham and Lot had migrated to Canaan, and it is at Haran, "the city of Nahor," that we first meet Rebekah, when in Genesis 24 she is made known to Abraham's servant at the well before the gate.
That idyllic narrative of the finding of a bride for Isaac is too familiar to need rehearsal and too simple to require comment. Besides, the substance both of that story and of the whole of Rebekah's career is treated in connection with the sketches of the other actors in the same scenes. Yet we note from the beginning the maiden's decision of character, which appears in every line of the narrative, and prepares the reader to find in subsequent chapters the positive, ambitious and energetic woman that she there shows herself.
Though the object of her husband's love (Gen 24:67), Rebekah bore him no children for 20 years (Gen 25:20,26). Like Sarah, she too was barren, and it was only after that score of years and after the special intercession of Isaac that God at length granted her twin sons. "The purpose of God according to election," as Paul expresses the matter in Rom 9:11, was the cause of that strange oracle to the wondering, inquiring parents, "The elder shall serve the younger" (Gen 25:23).
Whether because of this oracle or for some other reason, it was that younger son, Jacob, who became the object of his mother's special love (Gen 25:28). She it was who led him into the deception practiced upon Isaac (Gen 27:5-17), and she it was who devised the plan for extricating Jacob from the dangerous situation into which that deception had brought him (Gen 27:42-46). When the absence of Jacob from home became essential to his personal safety, Rebekah proposed her own relations in Aram as the goal of his journey, and gave as motive the desirability of Jacob's marrying from among her kindred. Probably she did not realize that in sending her favorite son away on this journey she was sending him away from her forever. Yet such seems to have been the case. Though younger than Isaac, who was still living at an advanced age when Jacob returned to Canaan a quarter of a century later, Rebekah seems to have died during that term. We learn definitely only this, that she was buried in the cave of Machpelah near Hebron (Gen 49:31).
Outside of Genesis, Rebekah is alluded to in Scripture only in the passage from Romans (9:10-12) already cited. Her significance there is simply that of the wife of Isaac and the mother of two sons of such different character and destiny as Esau and Jacob. And her significance in Gen, apart from this, lies in her contribution to the family of Abraham of a pure strain from the same eastern stock, thus transmitting to the founders of Israel both an unmixed lineage and that tradition of separateness from Canaanite and other non-Hebrew elements which has proved the greatest factor in the ethnological marvel of the ages, the persistence of the Hebrew people.
J. Oscar Boyd
re-buk': As a verb "rebuke" is in the Old Testament the translation of ga`ar and yakhach; another word, ribh, in Neh 5:7, is in the Revised Version (British and American) translated "contended with." "Rebuke" (noun) is most frequently the translation of ge`arah; also in the King James Version of cherpah (Isa 25:8; Jer 15:15, the Revised Version (British and American) "reproach"), and of a few other words signifying reproach, etc. "Rebuker" (mucar, literally, "correction," "chastisement") in Hos 5:2 has the Revised Version margin "Hebrew `rebuke.'" In the New Testament "to rebuke" is most often the translation of epitimao (Mt 8:26; 16:22; 17:18, etc.); also in the King James Version of elegcho, always in the Revised Version (British and American) rendered "reprove" (1 Tim 5:20; Tit 1:13; 2:15; Heb 12:5; Rev 3:19). Another word is epipletto (once, 1 Tim 5:1); "without rebuke" in Phil 2:15 is in the Revised Version (British and American) "without blemish." On the other hand, the Revised Version (British and American) has "rebuke" for several words in the King James Version, as for "reprove" (2 Ki 19:4; Isa 37:4), "reproof" (Job 26:11; Prov 17:10), "charged" (Mk 10:48). In Isa 2:4; Mic 4:3, the English Revised Version has "reprove" for "rebuke," and in the margin "decide concerning," which is text in the American Standard Revised Version. In Ecclesiasticus 11:7 we have the wise counsel: "Understand first, and then rebuke" (epitimao).
W. L. Walker
re'-ka (rekhah; Codex Vaticanus Rhechab; Codex Alexandrinus Rhepha; the King James Version Rechah): In 1 Ch 4:12 certain persons are described as "the men of Recah," but there is absolutely no information either about the place or its position.
re-set.
See CUSTOM .
re-sev'-er: Found in the King James Version (Isa 33:18); but the Revised Version (British and American) substitutes "he that weighed the tribute." The Hebrew is shoqel, which means "one who weighs," "a weigher."
re'-kab, rek'-a-bits (rekhabh, rekhabhim): Rechab is the name of two men of some prominence in the Old Testament records:
(1) A Benjamite of the town of Beeroth, son of Rimmon (2 Sam 4:2); he and his brother Baanah were "captains" of the military host of Ish-bosheth. On the death of Abner (2 Sam 3:30) the two brothers treacherously entered Ish-bosheth's house, when at noon he was resting and helpless, beheaded him, and escaped with the head to David at Hebron (2 Sam 4:6-8). They expected to receive reward and honor from David for the foul deed, which left him without a rival for the throne of all Israel. But the just and noble-minded king ordered their immediate execution (2 Sam 4:9-12), as in the case of the Amalekite, who asserted that he had killed Saul (2 Sam 1). For some reason the Beerothites left their own town and fled to Gittaim, another town in Benjamin, where they were still living when the Books of Samuel were written (2 Sam 4:3).
(2) The more prominent of the men bearing this name was a Kenite (See KENITES ), a descendant of Hammath (1 Ch 2:55). A part of the Kenite tribe joined the Israelites during the wilderness wanderings (Nu 10:29-32; Jdg 1:16; 4:17), becoming identified with the tribe of Judah, although Heber and Jael his wife were settled in Northern Palestine (Jdg 4:17). Rechab was the ancestor or founder of a family, or order, in Israel known as the Rechabites, who at various times were conspicuous in the religious life of the nation. The most notable member of this family was Jehonadab (2 Ki 10:15 ff,23), or Jonadab, as he is called in Jer 35. Jehonadab was a zealous Yahweh-worshipper and took part with Jehu in the extirpation of Baal-worship and the house of Ahab. He set for his descendants a vow of asceticism: that they should drink no wine, nor plant fields or vineyards, nor build nor live in houses throughout their generations (Jer 35:6,7). That must have been a singular feature in Palestinian life: the simple, nomadic life of this family from generation to generation in the midst of settled agricultural and industrial conditions! They followed this simple life in order to guard against the enervating tendencies of sensualism, and as a covenant of fidelity to Yahweh, to whom they wholly devoted themselves when they joined themselves to Israel. Jeremiah used the Rechabites, who had been driven into Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar's investment of the land, as an object-lesson to covenant-breaking Judah. The Rechabites, hungry and thirsty, refused wine when it was set before them, because of the command of their ancestor Jonadab (Jer 35:8-10); but Judah refused to heed Yahweh's commands or to keep His covenant (Jer 35:14,15).
If the Rechab of Neh 3:14 is the same as this Kenite, then his descendant Malchijah, who assisted Nehemiah in rebuilding the wall of Jerusalem, may have abandoned the vow of his ancestors, for he was "ruler of the district of Beth-haccherem" (i.e. "house of the vineyard").
Edward Mack
re'-ka (rekhah).
See RECAH .
re-klin'-ing (Jn 13:23).
See MEALS ,III ;TRICLINIUM .
rek'-on-sil, rek-on-sil-i-a'-shun (@katallasso], katallage, also the compound form apokatallasso; once the cognate diallassomai is used in Mt 5:24):
1. The Terms
(1) New Testament Usage
(2) Old Testament Usage
(3) Special Passage in 1 Samuel 29:4
(4) Usage in the Apocrypha
2. Non-doctrinal Passage--Matthew 5:24
3. Doctrinal Passages
(1) Romans 5
(2) 2 Corinthians 5:18-20
(3) Ephesians 2:16
(4) Colossians 1:20-22
LITERATURE
In the last case, Mt 5:24, the word is not used in a doctrinal sense, though its use is very helpful in considering the force of the other terms. All the other instances are in Paul's Epistles (Rom 5:10; 1 Cor 7:11; 2 Cor 5:18-20, the verb; Rom 5:11; 11:15; 2 Cor 5:18,19, the noun; Eph 2:16; Col 1:22, the compound). The word "reconcile" has a double meaning and usage, and the context must in each case determine how it is to be taken. The great doctrine is the reconciliation of God and men, but the question to be decided is whether it is God who is reconciled to men, or men who are reconciled to God, and different schools of theology emphasize one side or the other. The true view embraces both aspects. The word "to reconcile" means literally to exchange, to bring into a changed relationship. Some maintain that it is only a change in the sinner that is intended, a laying aside of his enmity, and coming into peaceful relations with God. But that manifestly does not exhaust the meaning, nor is it in the great Pauline passages the primary and dominant meaning.
The Old Testament usage does not materially help in the elucidation of the New Testament terms, for though the word occurs in a number of passages in the King James Version, it is in the Revised Version (British and American) generally changed to "atonement," which more accurately represents the Hebrew kaphar, which is generally rendered by "atonement," and by hilaskomai or exilaskomai in the Greek (In one passage of the New Testament (Heb 2:17), the phrase "to make reconciliation" represents the Greek hilaskomai, and is better rendered in the Revised Version (British and American) by "to make propitiation.") The making atonement or propitiation is the basis of the reconciliation, the means of its accomplishment, and the fact that the translators of the King James Version sometimes rendered kaphar by "reconcile" shows that they understood reconciliation to have the Godward aspect. Whatever may be said of the nature of the atonement or propitiation in the old dispensation, it was something contemplated as appeasing or satisfying, or at least in some way affecting God so as to make Him willing, or render it possible for Him, to enter into, or abide in, gracious relations with men. In one passage in the Old Testament where "reconciliation" occurs (2 Ch 29:24) it represents a different Hebrew word, but here the Revised Version (British and American) has changed it into "sin-offering," which is in harmony with the general meaning and usage of the Hebrew.
(3) Special Passage in 1 Samuel 29:4.
There is yet another Hebrew word rendered "reconcile" in 1 Sam 29:4, and inasmuch as this passage in the Septuagint has as the equivalent of the Hebrew the Greek word diallasso, it is of some importance in guiding to the New Testament meaning. On one occasion when the Philistines gathered together to battle against Israel, David and his band of men accompanied Achish king of Gath to the muster-place. "The princes of the Philistines" did not at all appreciate the presence of "these Hebrews," and although Achish testified in favor of David's fidelity, they were very indignant, and demanded that David and his men be sent back, "lest in the battle he become an adversary to us: for wherewith should this fellow reconcile himself unto his lord? should it not be with the heads of these men?" The Hebrew is ratsah, which means "to be pleased with" or "to accept favorably," and the Hithpael form here used is "to make himself pleasing or acceptable," "to reconcile himself." But assuredly the Philistines' idea of David reconciling himself to Saul was not that he should lay aside his enmity against Saul, and so become friends with him. The enmity was on Saul's side, and the thought of the princes was that David by turning against them in the battle would gratify Saul, and lead him to lay aside his enmity against David.
It may be noted that in 2 Macc 5:20, katallage is used evidently of the Godward side: "And the place which was forsaken in the wrath of the Almighty was, at the reconciliation of the great Sovereign, restored again with all glory." The verb occurs in 2 Macc 1:5 when again the Godward side seems intended, though not perhaps so certainly: "May God .... hearken to your supplications, and be reconciled with you," and in 7:33: "If for rebuke and chastening our living Lord has been angered a little while, yet shall he again be reconciled with his own servants," and 8:29: "They besought the merciful Lord to be wholly reconciled with his servants." In these two, especially the last, it is unquestionably the laying aside of the divine displeasure that is meant.
2. Non-doctrinal Passage--Matthew 5:24:
Before passing on to look at the great utterances in the Epistles, we may now look at the non-doctrinal passage referred to at the beginning. There is, indeed, another non-doctrinal instance in 1 Cor 7:11, where the wife who has departed from her husband is enjoined either to "remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband." But as it is indeterminate whether the wife or the husband is the offending party, and so which is the one to be influenced, the passage does not help us much. But Mt 5:24 is a very illuminating passage. Here as in the passage from 1 Samuel, the word used is diallasso, but it is practically identified in meaning with katallasso. The injunction is given by Christ to the one who is at variance with his brother, not to complete his offering until first he has been reconciled to his brother. But the whole statement shows that it is not a question of the one who is offering the gift laying aside his enmity against his brother, but the reverse. Christ says, "If therefore thou art offering thy gift at the altar, and there rememberest (not that thou hast a grudge against thy brother but) that thy brother hath aught against thee"--the brother was the offended one, he is the one to be brought round--"leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way, first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift." Plainly it means that he should do something to remove his brother's displeasure and so bring about a reconciliation.
Turning now to Rom 5, how stands the matter? Paul has been speaking of the blessed results of justification; one of these results is the shedding abroad of the love of God in the heart. Then he dwells upon the manifestation of that love in the death of Christ, a love that was displayed to the loveless, and he argues that if in our sinful and unloving state we were embraced by the love of God, a fortiori that love will not be less now that it has already begun to take effect. If He loved us when we were under His condemnation sufficiently to give His Son to die for our salvation, much more shall His love bestow upon us the blessings secured by that death. "Much more then, being now justified by his blood, shall we be saved from the wrath of God through him" (Rom 5:9).
It is well to note, then, that there is "wrath" on the part of God against sin and sinners. One of the key-thoughts of the apostle in this epistle is that "the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men" (Rom 1:18), and the coming day of judgment is "the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God" (Rom 2:5). And because of this stern fact, the gospel is a revelation not only of love, but specifically "a righteousness of God" (Rom 1:17). And he shows that the essence of the gospel is found in the propitiatory death of the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom 3:24,25,26), through whom alone can men who have been "brought under the judgment of God" (Rom 3:19) find justification, salvation, deliverance from the wrath of God (Rom 4:25; 5:1-6). Of course it is not necessary to add that the wrath of God is not to be thought of as having any unworthy or capricious element in it--it is the settled opposition of His holy nature against sin.
(b) Reconciliation, Godward, as Well as Manward:
The apostle proceeds (Rom 5:10): "For if, while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life." Now if, as many maintain, it is only the reconciliation on the manward side that is meant, that the manifested love led to the sinner laying aside his enmity, it would entirely reverse the apostle's argument. He is not arguing that if we have begun to love God we may reckon upon His doing so and so for us, but because He has done so much, we may expect Him to do more. The verse is parallel to the preceding, and the being reconciled is on the same plane as being justified; the being justified was God's action, and so is the reconciling. Justification delivers from "the wrath of God"; reconciliation takes effect upon enemies.
(c) The Meaning of the Word "Enemies":
The word "enemies" is important. By those who take the manward aspect of reconciliation as the only one, it is held that the word must be taken actively--those who hate God. But the passive meaning, "hatred of God," seems far the preferable, and is indeed demanded by the context. Paul uses the verb echthroi, "enemies," in Rom 11:28, in antithesis to "beloved" of God, and that is the consistent sense here. The enemies are those who are the objects of the wrath of the previous verse. And when we were thus hated of God, the objects of His just displeasure on account of our sin, "we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son." God laid aside His enmity, and in the propitiatory death of Christ showed Himself willing to receive us into His favor.
By this propitiation, therefore, the barrier was removed, and, God having assumed a gracious attitude toward the sinner, it is possible for the sinner now, influenced by His love, to come into a friendly relationship with God. And so in the second phrase, the two meanings, the Godward and the manward, may coalesce: "being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." The reconciliation becomes mutual, for there is no kind of doubt that sinners are enemies to God in the active sense, and require to lay aside their hostility, and so be reconciled to Him. But the first step is with God, and the reconciliation which took place in the death of His Son could only be the Godward reconciliation, since at that time men were still uninfluenced by His love. But, perhaps, just because that first reconciliation is brought about through the divine love which provides the propitiation, the apostle avoids saying "God is reconciled," but uses the more indirect form of speech. The manward aspect is emphasized in the next verse, although the Godward is not lost sight of: "We also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation" (Rom 5:11). It is therefore something that comes from God and does not proceed from man. God is the first mover; He makes the reconciliation as already indicated, and then the fruit of it is imputed to the believing sinner, and the very fact that our receiving the reconciliation, or being brought into a state of reconciliation; follows the being reconciled of Rom 5:10, shows that the other is divine reconciliation as the basis of the human.
(a) The Godward Aspect Primary:
In the same way the great passage in 2 Cor 5:18-20 cannot be understood apart from the conception that there is a reconciliation on the divine side. There is unquestionably reference to the human side of the matter as well, but, as in Romans, the Godward aspect is primary and dominating: "All things are of God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and gave unto us the ministry of reconciliation." It might be possible to argue from the King James Version that this describes the process going on under gospel influences, men being brought into gracious relations with God, but the aorist of the Greek rightly rendered by the Revised Version (British and American), "who reconciled us to himself," points back to the historic time when the transaction took place. It cannot be simply the surrender of the sinner to God that is meant, though that comes as a consequence; it is a work that proceeds from God, is accomplished by God, and because of the accomplishment of that work it is possible for a ministry of reconciliation to be entrusted to men. To make this mean the human aspect of the reconciliation, it would be necessary unduly to confine it to the reconciliation of Paul and his fellow-workers, though even then it would be a straining of language, for there is the other historic act described, "and gave unto us the ministry of reconciliation." The plain meaning is that through Jesus Christ, God established the basis of agreement, removed the barrier to the sinner's approach to Himself, accomplished the work of propitiation, and, having done so, He entrusts His servants with the ministry of reconciliation, a ministry which, basing itself upon the great propitiatory, reconciling work of Christ, is directed toward men, seeking to remove their enmity, to influence them in their turn to be reconciled with God. This is more clearly set forth in the verse which follows, which in explaining the ministry of reconciliation says: "To wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not reckoning unto them their trespasses." Here there can be no question that the historic Incarnation is meant, and the reconciling of the world can be nothing other than the objective work of atonement culminating in the cross. And in that transaction there can be no thought of the sinner laying aside his hostility to God; it is God in Christ so dealing with sin that the doom lying upon the guilty is canceled, the wrath is averted, propitiation is made.
(b) The Manward Side also Prominent:
God, in a word, enters into gracious relations with a world of sinners, becomes reconciled to man. This being done, gracious influences can be brought to bear upon man, the chief of which is the consideration of this stupendous fact of grace, that God has in Christ dealt with the question of sin. This is the substance of the "word of reconciliation" which is preached by the apostle. So he continues, "We are ambassadors therefore on behalf of Christ, as though God were entreating by us: we beseech you on behalf of Christ, be ye reconciled to God." Here is the human side. The great matter now is to get the sinner to lay aside his enmity, to respond to the gracious overtures of the gospel, to come into harmony with God. But that is only possible because the reconciliation in the Godward aspect has already been accomplished. If the first reconciliation, "the reconciliation of the world unto himself," had been the laying aside of human enmity, there could now be no point in the exhortation, "Be ye reconciled to God."
The two passages where the compound word occurs are in complete harmony with this interpretation. Eph 2:16: "And might reconcile them both (Jew and Gentile) in one body unto God through the cross, having slain the enmity thereby," is the outcome of Christ "making peace" (2:15), and the reconciling work is effected through the cross, reconciliation both Godward and manward, and, having made peace, it is possible for Christ to come and preach peace to them that are far off--far off even though the reconciling work of the cross has been accomplished.
So in Col 1:20, "And through him to reconcile all things unto himself, having made peace through the blood of his cross; through him, I say, whether things upon the earth, or things in the heavens." Here the thought of the apostle trembles away into infinity, and there seems a parallel to the thought of Heb 9:23, that according to the typical teaching even "the things in the heavens" in some way stood in need of cleansing. May it be that the work of Christ in some sense affected the angelic intelligence, making it possible for harmony to be restored between redeemed sinners and the perfect creation of God? In any case, the reconciling all things unto Himself is not the laying aside of the creaturely hostility, but the determining of the divine attitude. Then comes the specific reference to the human side, "And you, being in time past alienated and enemies in your mind in your evil works, yet now hath he reconciled in the body of his flesh through death"; there, as in Romans, the two phases coalescing, God appearing gracious through the work of Christ, sinners coming into gracious relation with Him. "Having made peace through the blood of his cross," the ground of peace has been established. Christ has done something by His death which makes it possible to offer peace to men. God has laid aside His holy opposition to the sinner, and shows Himself willing to bring men into peace with Himself. He has found satisfaction in that great work of His Son, has been reconciled, and now calls upon men to be reconciled to Him--to receive the reconciliation.
See ATONEMENT ;PROPITIATION ;WRATH .
LITERATURE.
See the works on New Testament Theology of Weiss, Schmid, Stevens, etc.; Denney, Death of Christ; articles on "Reconciliation" in Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (five volumes), Hastings, Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels, etc.
Archibald M'Caig
rek'-ord, rek'-ord: (1) The English word, where it occurs in the Old Testament and the New Testament in the sense of testimony, is translated in the Revised Version (British and American) "witness" (Dt 30:19; 31:28; Jn 1:19,32; 8:13,14; Rom 10:2, etc.). See WITNESS . But in Job 16:19 for the King James Version "my record," the Revised Version (British and American) has "he that voucheth for me." (2) In Ezr 4:15; 6:2 (dokhran, dikhron), and Est 6:1 (zikkaron), the word denotes Persian state chronicles; compare 1 Macc 14:23; 2 Macc 2:1.
re-kor'-der (mazkir; the Revised Version margin "chronicler"): A high functionary in the court of the Jewish kings, part of whose duty seems to have been to chronicle the events of the reign, but who also occupied a position corresponding with that of the modern vizier (2 Sam 8:16; 20:24; 1 Ch 18:15, etc.). His high rank is shown by the facts that, with other officers, he represented Hezekiah in speaking with Rabshakeh (2 Ki 18:18), and, in the reign of Josiah, superintended the repairs of the temple (2 Ch 34:8).
re-kuv'-er: "Recover" has (1) the transitive meaning of "to retake" or "regain" (anything); and (2) the intransitive sense of "to regain health" or "become well." In Judith 14:7 it means "restore to consciousness." In the former sense it is in the Old Testament the translation of natsal, "to snatch away" (Jdg 11:26; 1 Sam 30:8,22; in Hos 2:9, the Revised Version (British and American) "pluck away"); also of shubh (Qal and Hiphil 1 Sam 30:19 the King James Version; 2 Sam 8:3, etc.), and of various other words in single instances. In 2 Ki 5:3,6,7,11, "to restore to health" is 'acaph. In its intransitive sense "recover" is chiefly the translation of chayah, "to live," "revive" (2 Ki 1:2, etc.; Isa 38:9,21). "Recover" appears only twice in the King James Version of the New Testament; Mk 16:18 (for kalos hexousin) and 2 Tim 2:26 (from ananepho, the Revised Version margin "Greek: `return to soberness' "); but the Revised Version (British and American) has "recover" for "do well" in Jn 11:12 (sothesetai; margin "Greek: `be saved'"). "Recovering" (of sight) (anablepsis) occurs in Lk 4:18.
W. L. Walker
See COLORS , (10).
See REVELATION OF JOHN .
See HORSE ,RED ;REVELATION OF JOHN .
(yam-cuph (Ex 10:19 and often), but in many passages it is simply hayam, "the sea"' Septuagint with 2 or 3 exceptions renders it by he eruthra thalassa, "the Red Sea"; Latin geographers Mare Rubrum):
1. Name
2. Peculiarities
3. Old Testament References
4. Passage through the Red Sea by the Israelites
Objections
(1) Steep Banks of the Channel
(2) Walls Formed by the Water
(3) The East Winds
(4) The Miraculous Set Aside
LITERATURE
The Hebrew name yam-cuph has given rise to much controversy. Yam is the general word for sea, and when standing alone may refer to the Mediterranean, the Dead Sea, the Red Sea, or the Sea of Galilee. In several places it designates the river Nile or Euphrates. Cuph means a rush or seaweed such as abounds in the lower portions of the Nile and the upper portions of the Red Sea. It was in the cuph on the brink of the river that the ark of Moses was hidden (Ex 2:3,5). But as this word does not in itself mean red, and as that is not the color of the bulrush, authorities are much divided as to the reason for this designation. Some have supposed that it was called red from the appearance of the mountains on the western coast, others from the red color given to the water by the presence of zoophytes, or red coral, or some species of seaweed. Others still, with considerable probability, suppose that the name originated in the red or copper color of the inhabitants of the bordering Arabian peninsula. But the name yam-cuph, though applied to the whole sea, was especially used with reference to the northern part, which is alone mentioned in the Bible, and to the two gulfs (Suez and Aqabah) which border the Sinaitic Peninsula, especially the Gulf of Suez.
The Red Sea has a length of 1,350 miles and an extreme breadth of 205 miles. It is remarkable that while it has no rivers flowing into it and the evaporation from its surface is enormous, it is not much salter than the ocean, from which it is inferred that there must be a constant influx of water from the Indian Ocean through the Straits of Bab-el-Mandeb, together with an outflow of the more saline water beneath the surface. The deepest portion measures 1,200 fathoms. Owing to the lower land levels which prevailed in recent geological times, the Gulf of Suez formerly extended across the lowland which separates it from the Bitter Lakes, a distance of 15 or 20 miles now traversed by the Suez Canal, which encountered no elevation more than 30 ft. above tide. In early historic times the Gulf ended at Ismailia at the head of Lake Timsah. North of this the land rises to a height of more than 50 ft. and for a long time furnished a road leading from Africa into Asia. At a somewhat earlier geological (middle and late Tertiary) period the depression of the land was such that this bridge was also submerged, so that the Red Sea and the Mediterranean were connected by a broad expanse of water which overflowed the whole surface of Lower Egypt.
The evidence of the more recent depression of the land surface in all Lower Egypt is unmistakable. Raised beaches containing shells and corals still living in the Red Sea are found at various levels up to more than 200 ft. above tide. One of the most interesting of these is to be seen near the summit of the "Crow's Nest," a half-mile South of the great pyramids, where, near the summit of the eminence, and approximately 200 ft. above tide, on a level with the base of the pyramids, there is a clearly defined recent sea beach composed of water-worn pebbles from 1 inches to 1 or 2 ft. in diameter, the interstices of which are filled with small shells loosely cemented together. These are identified as belonging to a variable form, Alectryonia cucullata Born, which lives at the present time in the Red Sea. On the opposite side of the river, on the Mokattam Hills South of Cairo, at an elevation of 220 ft. above tide, similar deposits are found containing numerous shells of recent date, while the rock face is penetrated by numerous borings of lithodomus mollusks (Pholades rugosa Broc.). Other evidences of the recent general depression of the land in this region come from various places on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean. According to Lartet at Ramleh, near Jaffa, a recent beach occurs more than 200 ft. above sea-level containing many shells of Pectunculus violascens Lamk, which is at the present time the most abundant mollusk on the shore of the adjoining Mediterranean. A similar beach has been described by Dr. Post at Lattakia, about 30 miles North of Beirut; while others, according to Hull, occur upon the island of Cyprus. Further evidence of this depression is also seen in the fact that the isthmus between Suez and the Bitter Lakes is covered with recent deposits of Nile mud, holding modern Red Sea shells, showing that, at no very distant date, there was an overflow of the Nile through an eastern branch into this slightly depressed level. The line of this branch of the Nile overflow was in early times used for a canal, which has recently been opened to furnish fresh water to Suez, and the depression is followed by the railroad. According to Dawson, large surfaces of the desert North of Suez, which are now above sea-level, contain buried in the sand "recent marine shells in such a state of preservation that not many centuries may have elapsed since they were in the bottom of the sea" (Egypt and Syria, 67).
The Red Sea is connected with the children of Israel chiefly through the crossing of it recorded in Exodus (see 4, below); but there are a few references to it in later times. Solomon is said (1 Ki 9:26) to have built a navy at "Ezion-geber, which is beside Eloth, on the shore of the Red Sea, in the land of Edom." This is at the head of the Gulf of Aqabah, the eastern branch of the Red Sea. Here his ships were manned by Hiram king of Tyre with "shipmen that had knowledge of the sea" (1 Ki 9:27). And (1 Ki 9:28) "they came to Ophir, and fetched from thence gold." But Eloth was evidently lost to Israel when Edom successfully revolted in the time of Joram (2 Ki 8:20). For a short time, however, it was restored to Judah by Amaziah (2 Ki 14:22); but finally, during the reign of Ahaz, the Syrians, or more probably, according to another reading, the Edomites, recovered the place and permanently drove the Jews away. But in 1 Ki 22:48 Jehoshaphat is said to have "made ships of Tarshish to go to Ophir for gold: but they went not; for the ships were broken at Ezion-geber"; while in 2 Ch 20:36 Jehoshaphat is said to have joined with Ahaziah "to make ships to go to Tarshish; and they made the ships in Ezion-geber."
Unless there is some textual confusion here, "ships of Tarshish:" is simply the name of the style of the ship, like "East Indiaman," and Tarshish in Chronicles may refer to some place in the East Indies. This is the more likely, since Solomon's "navy" that went to Tarshish once every 3 years came "bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks," which could hardly have come from any other place than India.
See SHIPS AND BOATS ,II , 1, (2).
4. Passage through the Red Sea by the Israelites:
Until in recent times it was discovered that the Gulf of Suez formerly extended 30 miles northward to the site of the present Ismailia and the ancient Pithom, the scene of the Biblical miracle was placed at Suez, the present head of the Gulf. But there is at Suez no extent of shoal water sufficient for the east wind mentioned in Scripture (Ex 14:21) to have opened a passage-way sufficiently wide to have permitted the host to have crossed over in a single night. The bar leading from Suez across, which is now sometimes forded, is too insignificant to have furnished a passage-way as Robinson supposed (BR(3), I, 56-59). Besides, if the children of Israel were South of the Bitter Lakes when there was no extension of the Gulf North of its present limits, there would have been no need of a miracle to open the water, since there was abundant room for both them and Pharaoh's army to have gone around the northern end of the Gulf to reach the eastern shore, while South of Suez the water is too deep for the wind anywhere to have opened a passage-way. But with an extension of the waters of the Gulf to the Bitter Lakes and Lake Timsah, rendered probable by the facts cited in the previous paragraph, the narrative at once so perfectly accords with the physical conditions involved as to become not only easily credible, but self-evidencing.
The children of Israel were at Rameses (Ex 12:37) in the land of Goshen, a place which has not been certainly identified, but could not have been far from the modern Zagazig at the head of the Fresh Water Canal leading from the Nile to the Bitter Lakes. One day's journey eastward along Wady Tumilat, watered by this canal brought them to Succoth, a station probably identical with Thuket, close upon the border line separating Egypt from Asia. Through the discoveries of Naville in 1883 this has been identified as Pithom, one of the store-cities built by Pharaoh during the period of Hebrew oppression (Ex 1:11). Here Naville uncovered vast store pits for holding grain built during the reign of Rameses II and constructed according to the description given in Ex 1: the lower portions of brick made with straw, the middle with stubble, and the top of simple clay without even stubble to hold the brick together (see Naville, "The Store-City Pithom and the Route of the Exodus," Egyptian Exploration Fund, 1885; M. G. Kyle, "A Re-examination of Naville's Works," Records of the Past, VIII, 1901, 304-7). The next day's journey brought them to Etham on the "edge of the wilderness" (Ex 13:20; Nu 33:6), probably in the vicinity of the modern Ismailia at the head of Lake Timsah. From this point the natural road to Palestine would have been along the caravan route on the neck of land referred to above as now about 50 ft. above sea-level. Etham was about 30 miles Southeast of Zoan or Tanis, the headquarters at that time of Pharaoh, from which he was watching the movements of the host. If they should go on the direct road to Palestine, his army could easily execute a flank movement and intercept them in the desert of Etham. But by divine command (Ex 14:2) Moses turned southward on the west side of the extension of the Red Sea and camped "before Pihahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, before Baal-zephon" (Ex 14:22 Nu 33:5-7). At this change of course Pharaoh was delighted, seeing that the children of Israel were "entangled in the land" and "the wilderness" had "shut them in." Instead of issuing a flank movement upon them, Pharaoh's army now followed them in the rear and "overtook them encamping by the sea, beside Pi-hahiroth," the location of which is essential to a proper understanding of the narrative which follows.
In Ex 14:2, Pi-hahiroth is said to be "between Migdol and the sea, before Baal-zephon." Now though Migdol originally meant "watch-tower," it is hardly supposable that this can be its meaning here, otherwise the children of Israel would have been moving directly toward a fortified place. Most probably, therefore, Migdol was the tower-like mountain peak marking the northeast corner of Jebel Geneffeh, which runs parallel with the Bitter Lakes, only a short distance from their western border. Baal-zephon may equally well be some of the mountain peaks on the border of the Wilderness of Paran opposite Cheloof, midway between the Bitter Lakes and Suez. In the clear atmosphere of the region this line of mountains is distinctly visible throughout the whole distance from Ismailia to Suez. There would seem to be no objection to this supposition, since all authorities are in disagreement concerning its location. From the significance of the name it would seem to be the seat of some form of Baal worship, naturally a mountain. Brugsch would identify it with Mr. Cassius on the northern shore of Egypt. Naville (see Murray's Illustrated Bible Dictionary, "Red Sea, Passage of") would connect it with the hill called Tussum East of Lake Timsah, where there is a shrine at the present day visited every year about July 14 by thousands of pilgrims to celebrate a religious festival; but, as this is a Mohammedan festival, there seems no reason to connect it with any sanctuary of the Canaanites. Dawson favors the general location which we have assigned to Pi-hahiroth, but would place it beside the narrow southern portion of the Bitter Lakes.
Somewhere in this vicinity would be a most natural place for the children of Israel to halt, and there is no difficulty, such as Naville supposes, to their passing between Jebel Geneffeh and the Bitter Lakes; for the mountain does not come abruptly to the lake, but leaves ample space for the passage of a caravan, while the mountain on one side and the lake on the other would protect them from a flank movement by Pharaoh and limit his army to harassing the rear of the Israelite host. Protected thus, the Israelites found a wide plain over which they could spread their camp, and if we suppose them to be as far South as Cheloof, every condition would be found to suit the narrative which follows. Moses was told by the Lord that if he would order the children of Israel to go forward, the sea would be divided and the children of Israel could cross over on dry ground. And when, in compliance with the divine command, Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, "Yahweh caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all the night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided. And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground: and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left. And the Egyptians pursued, and went in after them into the midst of the sea, all Pharaoh's horses, his chariots, and his horsemen" (Ex 14:21-30). But when the children of Israel were safely on the other side the waters returned and overwhelmed the entire host of Pharaoh. In the Song of Moses which follows, describing the event, it is said that the waters were piled up by the "blast of thy (God's) nostrils" (Ex 15:8), and again, verse 10, "Thou didst blow with thy wind, the sea covered them." Thus 3 times the wind is mentioned as the means employed by God in opening the water. The competency of the wind temporarily to remove the water from the passage connecting the Gulf of Suez with the Bitter Lakes, provided it was only a few feet deep, is amply proved by facts of recent observation. Major General Tullock of the British army (Proc. Victoria Inst., XXVIII, 267-80) reports having witnessed the driving off of the water from Lake Menzaleh by the wind to such an extent as to lower the level 6 ft., thus leaving small vessels over the shallow water stranded for a while in the muddy bottom. According to the report of the Suez Canal Company, the difference between the highest and the lowest water at Suez is 10 ft. 7 inches, all of which must be due to the effect of the wind, since the tides do not affect the Red Sea. The power of the wind to affect water levels is strikingly witnessed upon Lake Erie in the United States, where according to the report of the Deep Waterways Commission for 1896 (165, 168) it appears that strong wind from the Southwest sometimes lowers the water at Toledo, Ohio, on the western end of the lake to the extent of more than 7 ft., at the same time causing it to rise at Buffalo at the eastern end a similar amount; while a change in the wind during the passage of a single storm reverses the effect, thus sometimes producing a change of level at either end of the lake of 14 ft. in the course of a single day. It would require far less than a tornado to lower the water at Cheloof sufficiently to lay bare the shallow channel which we have supposed at that time to separate Egypt from the Sinaitic Peninsula.
See EXODUS , THE .
Objections:
Several objections to this theory, however, have been urged which should not pass without notice.
(1) Steep Banks of the Channel:
Some have said that the children of Israel would have found an insuperable obstacle to their advance in the steep banks on either side of the supposed channel. But there were no steep banks to be encountered. A gentle sag leads down on one side to the center of the depression and a correspondingly gentle rise leads up on the other.
(2) Walls Formed by the Water:
Much has also been made of the statement (Ex 14:22) that "the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left"; but when we consider the rhetorical use of this word "wall" it presents no difficulty. In Prov 18:11 we are told that "The rich man's wealth is his strong city, And as a high wall in his own imagination." In Isa 26:1 we are told that God will appoint salvation "for walls and bulwarks." Again Nahum (3:8) says of Egypt that her "rampart was the sea (margin "the Nile"), and her wall was of the sea." The water upon either side of the opening served the purpose of a wall for protection. There was no chance for Pharaoh to intercept them by a flank movement. Nor is there need of paying further attention to the poetical expressions in the Song of Moses, where among other things it is said "that the deeps were congealed in the heart of the sea," and that the "earth (instead of the water) swallowed them."
Again it is objected that an east wind does not come from the right direction to produce the desired result. On the other hand it is an east wind only which could have freed the channel from water. A north wind would have blown the water from the Bitter Lakes southward, and owing to the quantity of water impounded would have increased the depth of the water in the narrow passage from the southern end of Suez. An east wind, however, would have pressed the water out from the channel both ways, and from the contour of the shore lines would be the only wind that could have done so.
Again, it is objected that this explanation destroys the miraculous character of the event. But it should be noted that little is said in the narrative about the miraculous. On the other hand, it is a straightforward statement of events, leaving their miraculous character to be inferred from their nature. On the explanation we have given the transaction it is what Robinson felicitously calls a mediate miracle, that is, a miracle in which the hand of God is seen in the use of natural forces which it would be impossible for man to command. If anyone should say that this was a mere coincidence, that the east wind blew at the precise time that Moses reached the place of crossing, the answer is that such a coincidence could have been brought about only by supernatural agency. There was at that time no weather bureau to foretell the approach of a storm. There are no tides on the Red Sea with regular ebb and flow. It was by a miracle of prophecy that Moses was emboldened to get his host into position to avail themselves of the temporary opportunity at exactly the right time. As to the relation of the divine agency to the event, speculation is useless. The opening of the sea may have been a foreordained event in the course of Nature which God only foreknew, in which case the direct divine agency was limited to those influences upon the human actors that led them to place themselves where they could take advantage of the natural opportunity. Or, there is no a priori difficulty in supposing that the east wind was directly aroused for this occasion; for man himself produces disturbances among the forces of Nature that are as far-reaching in their extent as would be a storm produced by direct divine agency. But in this case the disturbance is at once seen to be beyond the powers of human agency to produce.
It remains to add an important word concerning the evidential value of this perfect adjustment of the narrative to the physical conditions involved. So perfect is this conformity of the narrative to the obscure physical conditions involved, which only recent investigations have made clear, that the account becomes self-evidencing. It is not within the power of man to invent a story so perfectly in accordance with the vast and complicated conditions involved. The argument is as strong as that for human design when a key is found to fit a Yale lock. This is not a general account which would fit into a variety of circumstances. There is only one place in all the world, and one set of conditions in all history, which would meet the requirements; and here they are all met. This is scientific demonstration. No higher proof can be found in the inductive sciences. The story is true. It has not been remodeled by the imagination, either of the original writers or of the transcribers. It is not the product of mythological fancy or of legendary accretion.
LITERATURE.
Dawson, Egypt and Syria; Hull, Mt. Seir, Sinai and Western Palestine; Naville, "The Store-City Pithom and the Route of the Exodus," Egyptian Exploration Fund, 1885; Kyle, "Bricks without Straw at Pithom: A Re-examination of Naville's Works," Records of the Past, VIII, 1901, 304-7; Wright, Scientific Confirmations of Old Testament History, 83-117.
George Frederick Wright
re-dem'-er, re-demp'-shun (paraq, "to tear loose," "to rescue," padhah, ga'al; agorazo, referring to purchase, lutroumai, from lutron, "a ransom"):
1. Gradual Moralizing of Idea of Redemption
2. Redemption as Life in Individual
3. Redemption as Social
4. Redemption as Process
5. Moral Implications in Scriptural Idea of Redeemer
6. Uniqueness of Son of God as Redeemer
LITERATURE
The idea of redemption in the Old Testament takes its start from the thought of property (Lev 25:26; Ruth 4:4 ff). Money is paid according to law to buy back something which must be delivered or rescued (Nu 3:51; Neh 5:8). From this start the word "redemption" throughout the Old Testament is used in the general sense of deliverance. God is the Redeemer of Israel in the sense that He is the Deliverer of Israel (Dt 9:26; 2 Sam 7:23; 1 Ch 17:21; Isa 52:3). The idea of deliverance includes deliverance from all forms of evil lot, from national misfortune (Isa 52:9; 63:9; compare Lk 2:38), or from plague (Ps 78:35,52), or from calamity of any sort (Gen 48:16; Nu 25:4,9). Of course, the general thought of the relation of Israel to God was that God had both a claim upon Israel (Dt 15:15) and an obligation toward Israel (1 Ch 17:21; Ps 25:22). Israel belonged to Him, and it was by His own right that He could move into the life of Israel so as to redeem Israel. On the other hand, obligation was upon Him to redeem Israel.
In the New Testament the idea of redemption has more a suggestion of ransom. Men are held under the curse of the law (Gal 3:13), or of sin itself (Rom 7:23 f). The Redeemer purchases their deliverance by offering Himself as payment for their redemption (Eph 1:7; 1 Pet 1:18).
1. Gradual Moralizing of Idea of Redemption:
Throughout both the Old Testament and the New Testament there is to be observed a gradual moralizing of the meaning of redemption. The same process of moralizing has continued throughout all the Christian ages. Starting with the idea of redemption price, conceived almost in material terms, religious thought has advanced to conceptions entirely moral and spiritual. Through the Scriptures, too, the idea of redemption becomes more specffic with the progress of Christian revelation. In the beginning God is the Redeemer from distresses of all kinds. He redeems from calamity and from sorrows. This general idea, of course, persists throughout the revelation and enters largely into our thinking of today, but the growing moral discernment of the Biblical writers comes to attach more and more importance to sin as the chief disturber of man's welfare. We would not minimize the force of the Scriptural idea that God is the Deliverer from all misfortune to which man falls heir, but the Scriptural emphasis moves more and more to deliverance from sin. Paul states this deliverance as a deliverance from the law which brings sin out into expression, but we must not conceive his idea in any artificial fashion. He would have men delivered not only from the law, but also from the consequences of evil doing and from the spirit of evil itself (Rom 8:2).
2. Redemption as Life in the Individual:
In trying to discern the meaning of redemption from sin, toward which the entire progress of Biblical and Christian thought points, we may well keep in mind the Master's words that He came that men might have life and might have it more abundantly (Jn 10:10). The word "life" seems to be the final New Testament word as a statement of the purpose of Christ. God sent His Son to bring men to life. The word "life,"' however, is indefinite. Life means more at one period of the world's history than at another. It has the advantage, nevertheless, of always being entirely intelligible in its essential significance. Our aim must be to keep this essential significance in mind and at the same time to provide for an increasing fullness and enlargement of human capacity and endeavor. The aim of redemption can only be to bring men to the fullest use and enjoyment of their powers. This is really the conception implicit even in the earliest statements of redemption. The man redeemed by money payment comes out of the prison to the light of day, or he comes out of slavery into freedom, or he is restored to his home and friends. The man under the law is redeemed from the burden and curse of the law. Paul speaks of his experience under the law as the experience of one chained to a dead body (Rom 7:24). Of course, relief from such bondage would mean life. In the more spiritual passages of the New Testament, the evil in men's hearts is like a blight which paralyzes their higher activities (Jn 8:33-51).
In all redemption, as conceived of in Christian terms, there is a double element. There is first the deliverance as from a curse. Something binds a man or weights him down: redemption relieves him from this load. On the other hand, there is the positive movement of the soul thus relieved toward larger and fuller life. We have said that the Biblical emphasis is always upon deliverance from sin as the essential in redemption, but this deliverance is so essential that the life cannot progress in any of its normal activities until it is redeemed from evil. Accordingly in the Scriptural thought all manner of blessings follow deliverance. The man who seeks first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness finds all other things added unto him (Mt 6:33). Material, intellectual and social blessings follow as matters of course from the redemption of the inner spirit from evil. The aim of redemption, to beget in men's hearts the will to do right, once fulfilled, leads men to seek successfully along all possible avenues for life. This, of course, does not mean that the redeemed life gives itself up to the cultivation of itself toward higher excellencies. It means that the redeemed life is delivered from every form of selfishness. In the unselfish seeking of life for others the redeemed life finds its own greatest achievement and happiness (Mt 16:25).
Just as the idea of redemption concerned itself chiefly with the inner spirit; so also it concerns itself with the individual as the object of redemption. But as the redemption of the inner spirit leads to freedom in all realms of life, so also the redemption of the individual leads to large social transformations. It is impossible to strike out of the Scriptures the idea of a redeemed humanity. But humanity is not conceived of in general or class terms. The object of redemption is not humanity, or mankind, or the masses. The object of redemption is rather men set in relation to each other as members of a family. But it would do violence to the Scriptural conception to conceive of the individual's relations in any narrow or restricted fashion (1 Cor 12:12-27).
An important enlargement of the idea of redemption in our own time has come as men have conceived of the redemption of individuals in their social relationships. Very often men have thought of redemption as a snatching of individuals from the perils of a world in itself absolutely wicked. Even the material environment of men has at times been regarded as containing something inherently evil. The thought of redemption which seems most in line with Scriptural interpretation would seem to be that which brings the material and social forces within reach of individual wills. Paul speaks of the whole creation groaning and travailing in pain waiting for the revelation of the sons of God (Rom 8:22). This graphic figure sets before us the essentially Christian conception of the redemption of the forces in the midst of which men are placed. Those redeemed for the largest life, by the very force of their life, will seize all powers of this world to make them the servants of divine purposes. The seer saw a great multitude which no man could number, of every kindred and nation and tongue, shouting the joys of salvation (Rev 7:9), yet the implication nowhere appears that these were redeemed in any other fashion than by surrendering themselves to the forces of righteousness.
We have said that the aim of redemption is to bring men to the largest and fullest life. We have also said that "life" is a general term. To keep close to the Scriptural conceptions we would best say that the aim of redemption is to make men like Christ (Rom 8:9). Otherwise, it might be possible to use the word "life" so as to imply that the riotous exercise of the faculties is what we mean by redemption. The idea of redemption, as a matter of fact, has been thus interpreted in various times in the history of Christian thinking. Life has been looked upon as sheer quantitative exuberance--the lower pleasures of sense being reckoned as about on the same plane with the higher. We can see the moral and spiritual anarchy which would thus be brought about. In Christ's words to His disciples He once used the expression, "Ye are clean because of the word which I have spoken unto you" (Jn 15:3). In this particular context the idea does not seem to be that of an external washing. Christ seems rather to mean that His disciples are cleansed as a vineyard is cleansed by pruning away some of the branches that others may bear fruit. In other words, the redemption of life is to be interpreted so that stress is laid upon the qualitative rather than the quantitative. Christ indeed found place in His instructions and in His own life for the normal and healthy activities of human existence. He was not an ascetic; He went to feasts and to weddings, but His emphasis was always upon life conceived of in the highest terms. We can say then that the aim of redemption is to beget in men life like that in Christ.
5. Moral Implications in the Scriptural Idea of Redeemer:
Moreover, redemption must not be conceived of in such fashion as to do away with the need of response upon the part of the individual will. The literal suggestion of ransom has to do with paying a price for a man's deliverance, whether the man is willing to be delivered or not. Of course, the assumption in the mind of the Biblical writers was that any man in prison or in slavery or in sickness would be overjoyed at being redeemed; but in dealing with men whose lives are set toward sin we cannot always make this assumption. The dreadfulness of sin is largely in the love of sinning which sinning begets. Some thinkers have interpreted redemption to mean almost a seizing of men without regard to their own will. It is very easy to see how this conception arises. A man who himself hates sin may not stop to realize that some other men love sin. Redemption, to mean anything, must touch this inner attitude of will. We cannot then hold to any idea of redemption which brings men under a cleansing process without the assent of their own wills. If we keep ourselves alive to the growing moral discernment which moves through the Scriptures, we must lay stress always upon redemption as a moral process. Not only must we say that the aim of redemption is to make men like Christ, but we must say also that the method of redemption must be the method of Christ, the method of appealing to the moral will. There is no Scriptural warrant for the idea that men are redeemed by fiat. The most we can get from the words of Christ is a statement of the persistence of God in His search for the lost: `(He goeth) after that which is lost, until he finds it' (Lk 15:4). Some would interpret these words to mean that the process of redemption continues until every man is brought into the kingdom. We cannot, in the light of the New Testament, limit the redeeming love of God; but we cannot, on the other hand, take passages from figurative expressions in such sense as to limit the freedom of men. The redemption must be conceived of as respecting the moral choices of men. In our thought of the divine search for the control of inner human motive we must not stop short of the idea of men redeemed to the love of righteousness on its own account. This would do away with the plan of redeeming men by merely relieving them of the consequences of their sins. Out of a changed life, of course, there must come changed consequences. But the Scriptural teaching is that the emphasis in redemption is always moral, the turning to life because of what life is.
Having thus attempted to determine, at least in outline, the content of the Christian idea of redemption, it remains for us to point out some implications as to the work of the Redeemer. Throughout the entire teaching on redemption in the Scriptures, redemption is set before us primarily as God's own affair (Jn 3:16). God redeems His people; He redeems them out of love for them. But the love of God is not to be conceived of as mere indulgence, partiality, or good-humored affection. The love of God rests down upon moral foundations. Throughout the Scriptures, therefore, we find implied often, if not always clearly stated, the idea that God is under obligations to redeem His people. The progress of later thinking has expanded this implication with sureness of moral discernment. We have come to see the obligations of power. The more powerful the man the heavier his obligations in the discharge of this power. This is a genuinely Christian conception, and this Christian conception we apply to the character of God, feeling confident that we are in line with Scriptural teaching. Hence, we may put the obligations of God somewhat as follows: God is the most obligated being in the universe. If a man is under heavy obligations to use aright the power of controlling the forces already at work in the world, how much heavier must be the obligations on the Creator who started these forces! The obligation becomes appalling to our human thought when we think that creation includes the calling of human beings into existence and endowing them with the unsolicited boon of freedom. Men are not in the world of their own choice. Vast masses of them seem to be here as the outworking of impulses almost blind. The surroundings of men make it very easy for them to sin. The tendencies which at least seem to be innate are too often tragically inclined toward evil. Men seem, of themselves, utterly inadequate for their own redemption. If there is to be redemption it must come from God, and the Christian thought of a moral God would seem to include the obligation on the part of God to redeem those whom He has sent into the world. Christ has made clear forever the absolutely binding nature of moral considerations. If the obligation to redeem men meant everything to Christ, it must also mean everything to the God of Christ. So we feel in line with true Christian thinking in the doctrine that redemption comes first as a discharge of the obligations on the part of God Himself.
If we look for the common thought in all the Christian statements of God's part in redemption we find it in this: that in all these statements God is conceived of as doing all that He can do for the redemption of man. If in earlier times men conceived of the human race as under the dominion of Satan, and of Satan as robbed of his due by the deliverance of man and therefore entitled to some compensation, they also conceived of God Himself as paying the ransom to Satan. If they thought of God as a feudal lord whose dignity had been offended by sin, they thought of God as Himself paying the cost due to offended dignity. If their idea was that a substitute for sinners must be furnished, the idea included the thought of God as Himself providing a substitute. If they conceived of the universe as a vast system of moral laws--broken by sin--whose dignity must be upheld, they thought of God Himself as providing the means for maintaining the dignity of the laws. If they conceived of men as saved by a vast moral influence set at work, they thought of this influence as proceeding, not from man, but from God. The common thought in theories of redemption then, so far as concerns God's part, is that God Himself takes the initiative and does all He can in the discharge of the obligation upon Himself. Each phrasing of the doctrine of redemption is the attempt of an age of Christian thinking to say in its own way that God has done all that He can do for men.
6. Uniqueness of the Son of God as Redeemer:
It is from this standpoint that we must approach the part played by Christ in redemption. This is not the place for an attempt at formal statement, but some elements of Christian teaching are, at least in outline, at once clear. The question is, first, to provide some relation between God and Christ which will make the redemptive work of Christ really effective. Some have thought to find such a statement in the conception that Christ is a prophet. They would empty the expression, "Son of God," of any unique meaning; they would make Christ the Son of God in the same sense that any great prophet could be conceived of as a son of God. Of course, we would not minimize the teaching of the Scripture as to the full humanity of Christ, and yet we may be permitted to voice our belief that the representation of Christ as the Redeemer merely in the same sense in which a prophet is a redeemer does not do justice to the Scripture teaching; and we feel, too, that such a solution of the problem of Christ would be inadequate for the practical task of redemption. If Christ is just a prophet giving us His teaching we rejoice in the teaching, but we are confronted with the problem as to how to make the teaching effective. If it be urged that Christ is a prophet who in Himself realized the moral ideal, we feel constrained to reply that this really puts Christ at a vast distance from us. Such a doctrine of Christ's person would make Him the supreme religious genius, but the human genius stands apart from the ordinary mass of men. He may gather up into Himself and realize the ideals of men; He may voice the aspirations of men and realize those aspirations; but He may not be able to make men like unto Himself. Shakespeare is a consummate literary genius. He has said once and for all many things which the common man thinks or half thinks. When the common man comes upon a phrase of Shakespeare he feels that Shakespeare has said for all time the things which he would himself have said if he had been able. But the appreciation of Shakespeare does not make the ordinary man like Shakespeare; the appreciation of Christ has not proved successful in itself in making men like unto Christ.
If, on the contrary, without attempting formal theological construction, we put some real meaning into the idea of Christ as the Son of God and hold fast to a unique relationship between Christ and God which makes Christ the greatest gift that God can give us, we find indeed that Christ is lifted up to essentially divine existence; but we find also that this divinity does not estrange Him from us. Redemption becomes feasible, not merely when we have a revelation of how far up man can go, but when we have also a revelation of how far down God can come. If we can think of God as having in some real way come into the world through His Son Jesus Christ, that revelation makes Christ the Lord who can lead us to redemption.
Such a conception furnishes the dynamic which we must have in any real process of redemption. We need not only the ideal, but we need power by which to reach the ideal. If we can feel that the universe is under the sway of a moral God, a God who is under obligations to bear the burdens of men, and who willingly assumes these obligations, we really feel that moral life at its fullest and best is the greatest fact in the universe. Moreover, we must be true to the Scriptures and lift the entire conception of redemption beyond the realm of conscience to the realm of the heart. What the conscience of God calls for, the love of God willingly discharges. The Cross of Christ becomes at once the revelation of the righteousness of God and the love of God. Power is thus put back of human conscience and human love to move forward toward redemption (Rom 8:35-39).
The aim of the redemption in Christ then is to lift men out of death toward life. The mind is to be quickened by the revelation of the true ideals of human life. The conscience is to be reenforced by the revelation of the moral God who carries on all things in the interests of righteousness. The heart is to be stirred and won by the revelation of the love which sends an only begotten Son to the cross for our redemption. And we must take the work of Christ, not as a solitary incident or a mere historic event, but as a manifestation of the spirit which has been at work from the beginning and works forever. The Lamb was slain from the foundation of the world (Rev 13:8); the spirit of God revealed in the cross of Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever. We have in the cross a revelation of holy love which, in a sense, overpowers and at the same time encourages. The cross is the revelation of the length to which God is willing to go in redemption rather than set aside one jot or tittle of His moral law. He will not redeem men except on terms which leave them men. He will not overwhelm them in any such manner as to do away with their power of free choice. He will show men His own feeling of holiness and love. In the name of a holy love which they can forever aspire after, but which they can never fully reach, men call to Him for forgiveness and that forgiveness men find forever available.
It remains to add one further item of Scriptural teaching, namely that redemption is a continuous process. If we may again use the word "life," which has been the key to this discussion, we may say that the aim of redemption is to make men progressively alive. There are not limits to the development of human powers touched by the redemptive processes of God. The cross is a revelation of divine willingness to bear with men who are forever being redeemed. Of course, we speak of the redeemed man as redeemed once and for all. By this we mean that he is redeemed once and for all in being faced about and started in a right direction, but the progress toward full life may be faster or slower according to the man and the circumstances in the midst of which he is placed. Still the chief fact is the direction in which the man is moving. The revelation of God who aids in redemption is of the God who takes the direction as the chief fact rather than the length of the stride or the rate of the movement. Every man is expected to do his best. If he stumbles he is supposed to find his way to his feet; if he is moving slowly, he must attempt to move faster; if he is moving at a slower rate than he can attain, he must strive after the higher rate, but always the dynamic force is the revelation of the holy love of God.
The Scriptures honor the prophets in whatever land or time they appear. The Scriptures welcome goodness under any and all circumstances. They have a place for a "light that lighteneth every man that cometh into the world," but they still make it clear that the chief force in the redemption of men is the revelation of holy love in Jesus Christ. The redemption, we repeat, is never conceived of in artificial or mechanical terms. If any man hath not the spirit of Christ he does not belong to Christ (Rom 8:9). The aim of redemption is to beget this spirit, and this spirit is life.
LITERATURE.
H. C. Sheldon, Systematic Theology; Clarke, Outline of Christian Theology; Brown, Christian Theology in Outline; Mackintosh, Doctrine of Person of Christ; Bowne, Studies in Christianity; Tymms, The Christian Atonement.
Francis J. McConnell
red'-nes.
See DRUNKENNESS ,II .
re-dound' (from re-, "back," and undare, "to surge as a wave"): To be sent back as a reaction, to overflow; occurs only as the translation of perisseuo, "to be over and above," "to superabound" (frequent in the New Testament); in 2 Cor 4:15, "might through the thanksgiving of many redound to the glory of God," the Revised Version (British and American) "may cause the thanksgiving to abound."
red: (1) achu, translated "reed-grass" (Gen 41:2,18; Job 8:11 margin). See FLAG . (2) 'ebheh, translated "swift," margin "reed" (Job 9:26). The "ships of reed" are the light skiffs made of plaited reeds used on the Nile; compare "vessels of papyrus" (Isa 18:2). (3) 'aghammim, translated "reeds," margin "marshes," Hebrew "pools" (Jer 51:32); elsewhere "pools" (Ex 7:19; 8:5; Isa 14:23, etc.). See POOL . (4) `aroth; achi, translated "meadows," the King James Version "paper reeds" (Isa 19:7). See MEADOW . (5) qaneh; kalamos (the English "cane" comes from Hebrew via Latin and Greek canna), "stalk" (Gen 41:5,22); "shaft" (Ex 37:17, etc.); "reed," or "reeds" (1 Ki 14:15; 2 Ki 18:21; Isa 36:6; 42:3; Ps 68:30, the King James Version "spearman"); "calamus" (Ex 30:23; Song 4:14; Ezek 27:19); "sweet cane," margin "calamus" (Isa 43:24; Jer 6:20); "bone" (Job 31:22); used of the cross-beam of a "balance" (Isa 46:6); "a measuring reed" (Ezek 40:3); "a staff of reed," i.e. a walking-stick (Isa 36:6; Ezek 29:6); the "branches" of a candlestick (Ex 37:18). (6) kalamos, "a reed shaken with the wind" (Mt 11:7; Lk 7:24); "a bruised reed" (Mt 12:20); they put "a reed in his right hand" (Mt 27:29,30); "They smote his head with a reed" (Mk 15:19); "put it on a reed" (Mt 27:48; Mk 15:36); "a measuring reed" (Rev 11:1; 21:15,16); "a pen" (3 Jn 1:13).
It is clear that qaneh and its Greek equivalent kalamos mean many things. Some refer to different uses to which a reed is put, e.g. a cross-beam of a balance, a walking-stick, a measuring rod, and a pen (see above), but apart from this qaneh is a word used for at least two essentially different things: (1) an ordinary reed, and (2) some sweet-smelling substance.
(1) The most common reed in Palestine is the Arundo donax (Natural Order Gramineae), known in Arabic as qacabfarasi, "Persian reed." It grows in immense quantities in the Jordan valley along the river and its tributaries and at the oases near the Dead Sea, notably around `Ain Feshkhah at the northwest corner. It is a lofty reed, often 20 ft. high, of a beautiful fresh green in summer when all else is dead and dry, and of a fine appearance from a distance in the spring months when it is in full bloom and the beautiful silky panicles crown the top of every reed. The "covert of the reed" (Job 40:21) shelters a large amount of animal and bird life. This reed will answer to almost all the requirements of the above references.
(2) Qaneh is in Jer 6:20 qualified qaneh ha-Tobh, "sweet" or "pleasant cane," and in Ex 30:23, qeneh bhosem, "sweet calamus," or, better, a "cane of fragrance." Song 4:14; Isa 43:24; Ezek 27:19 all apparently refer to the same thing, though in these passages the qaneh is unqualified. It was an ingredient of the holy oil (Ex 30:23); it was imported from a distance (Jer 6:20; Ezek 27:19), and it was rare and costly (Isa 43:24). It may have been the "scented calamus" (Axorus calamus) of Pliny (NH, xii.48), or some other aromatic scented reed or flag, or, as some think, some kind of aromatic bark. The sweetness refers to the scent, not the taste.
E. W. G. Masterman
mezh'-ur-ing (qeneh ha-middah): In Ezekiel's vision of the temple a "man" (an angel) appears with a "measuring reed" to measure the dimensions of the temple (Ezek 40:3 ff; 42:16 ff). The reed is described as 6 cubits long, "of a cubit and a handbreadth each," i.e. the cubit used was a handbreadth longer than the common cubit (See CUBIT ;WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ;TEMPLE ). In the Apocalypse this idea of a measuring reed reappears for measuring the temple (Rev 11:1) and the holy city (Rev 21:15,16, "a golden reed"). The thought conveyed is exactitude in the dimensions of these edifices, symbolic of the symmetry and perfection of God's church.
James Orr
(Gen 41:2,18; Job 8:11 margin).
re-el-a'-ya, re-el-i'-a (re`elyah): One of the 12 chiefs who returned with Zerubbabel (Ezr 2:2 parallel Neh 7:7). In the passage in Neh the name is Raamiah" (ra`amyah), and in 1 Esdras 5:8 "Resaias." Which is the original, it is almost impossible to decide; "Reelaiah" seems preferable.
re-el'-i-as (Codex Alexandrinus Rheelias (Fritzschel); Codex Vaticanus followed by Swete, Boroleias; the King James Version Reelius): One of the "leaders" with Zerubbabel in the return from exile (1 Esdras 5:8, margin "Reelaiah"). It occupies the place of "Bigvai" in Ezr 2:2; Neh 7:7, but in form it must be the equivalent of "Reelaiah" of Ezr and "Raamiah" of Nehemiah. It is perhaps a duplicate of "Resaias."
re-e-sa'-yas, re-e-si'-as: the King James Version; the Revised Version (British and American) RESAIAS (which see).
re-fin'-er, re-fin'-ing: Two Hebrew words have been translated "refine": (1) tsaraph, literally, to "fuse" (Zec 13:9; Isa 48:10; Mal 3:2,3, etc.). The same word is rendered also "tried" (Ps 66:10); "melt" (Jer 6:29 the King James Version); "purge" (Isa 1:25). (2) zaqaq, literally, to "strain" or "sift." In the case of silver and gold the term probably referred to some washing process in connection with refining, as in Mal 3:3 both tsaraph and zaqaq are used (1 Ch 28:18; 29:4; Job 28:1). The same word in Isa 25:6 referred to the straining of wine. Greek puroo, in the passive, literally, "to be ignited," is translated "refined," in Rev 1:15; 3:18.
The ancient process of refining gold has already been described under METALLURGY (which see). Most of the Bible references are to the refining of silver (Prov 25:4; Zec 13:9; Isa 48:10). The silver used by the ancients was probably obtained by smelting lead sulfide ore, rich in silver (argentiferous galena). After the ore had been reduced to a metallic condition, the lead was separated from the silver by blowing hot air over the surface of the melted metal. The lead was thus changed to lead oxide which, in a powdered condition, was driven away by the air blast. The resulting lead oxide, called in the Bible silver dross, was used for glazing pottery (Prov 26:23), a use to which it is still put by Syrian potters. The description of refining in Ezek 22:18-22 may indicate that a flux (compare "as with lye," Isa 1:25 the American Revised Version margin) was sometimes added to the melted metal to dissolve the oxides of copper, lead, tin and iron as they formed, thus leaving the silver pure. Crude processes similar to those described above are used in the Taurus Mountains today.
Figurative:
In the various Bible references the refining of precious metals is used figuratively to illustrate the kind of trial God's children are called upon to go through. If they are of the right metal the dross will finally be blown away, leaving pure, clear, shining silver. If of base metal they will be like the dross described in Jer 6:29,30. The refiner may blow fiercely, but in vain, for nothing but lead dross appears.
James A. Patch
re-form' (yacar): The word in the Revised Version (British and American) is found only in Lev 26:23, in the phrase "ye will not be reformed." The meaning is, "to be instructed," or, more fully, "to let one's self be chastened," i.e. by God's discipline to learn the lessons of this chastening.
The Hebrew word is the same in a similar connection in Jer 6:8, where it is rendered, "Be thou instructed," and in Jer 31:18, "I was chastised." Ps 2:10 ("instructed"); Prov 29:19 ("corrected") use the Hebrew term of admonition by the words of man.
The King James Version also has "reform" in 2 Esdras 8:12; The Wisdom of Solomon 9:18.
ref-or-ma'-shun: The word is found only in Heb 9:10, being the translation of diorthosis, in its only occurrence. This Greek word means etymologically "making straight," and was used of restoring to the normally straight condition that which is crooked or bent. In this passage it means the rectification of conditions, setting things to rights, and is a description of the Messianic time.
re-fresh', re-fresh'-ing: "Refresh" occurs a few times in the Old Testament as the translation of naphash, "to take breath," figurative "to be refreshed" (Ex 23:12; 31:17; 2 Sam 16:14); of rawach, "to have room (1 Sam 16:23; Job 32:20, margin "find relief," the King James Version margin "may breathe"); of ca`adh, "to support" (1 Ki 13:7); and in the New Testament as the translation of anapauo, "to give rest" (1 Cor 16:18; 2 Cor 7:13; Philem 1:7,20; in compound middle, Rom 15:32 the King James Version); also of anapsucho, "to invigorate," "revive" (2 Tim 1:16), and other words. "Refreshing" is in Isa 28:12 marge`ah, "rest" or "quiet"; and in Acts 3:19, anapsuxis, "seasons of refreshing," through the coming of Jesus, the Christ; compare 2 Esdras 11:46 and the King James Version, Sirach 43:22 hilaroo).
W. L. Walker
ref'-uj: A place of resort and safety. The principal words in the Old Testament are machceh (Ps 14:6; 46:1; 62:7,8; Isa 4:6, etc.), and manoc (2 Sam 22:3; Ps 59:16, etc.), both applied chiefly to God as a "refuge" for His people. For the King James Version "refuge" in Dt 33:27, the Revised Version (British and American) has "dwelling-place," and in Ps 9:9, "high tower." Conversely, the Revised Version (British and American) has "refuge" for the King James Version "shelter" in Ps 61:3, and "hope" in Jer 17:17.
`are ha-miqlaT; poleis ton phugadeuterion (compare 1 Macc 10:28), and other forms):
Six cities, three on each side of the Jordan, were set apart and placed in the hands of the Levites, to serve as places of asylum for such as might shed blood unwittingly. On the East of the Jordan they were Bezer in the lot of Reuben, Ramoth-gilead in the tribe of Gad, and Golan in the territory of Manasseh. On the West of the Jordan they were Hebron in Judah, Shechem in Mt. Ephraim, and Kedesh in Naphtali (Nu 35:6,14; Josh 20:2,7 ff; 21:13,21,27,32,38; Bezer is named in 21:36, but not described as a City of Refuge). An account of these cities is given in separate articles under their names. Dt 19:2 speaks of three cities thus to be set apart, referring apparently to the land West of the Jordan.
From time immemorial in the East, if a man were slain the duty of avenging him has lain as a sacred obligation upon his nearest relative. In districts where more primitive conditions prevail, even to this day, the distinction between intentional and unintentional killing is not too strictly observed, and men are often done to death in revenge for what was the purest accident. To prevent such a thing where possible, and to provide for a right administration of justice, these cities were instituted. Open highways were to be maintained along, which the manslayer might have an unobstructed course to the city gate.
The regulations concerning the Cities of Refuge are found in Nu 35; Dt 19:1-13; Josh 20. Briefly, everything was to be done to facilitate the flight of the manslayer, lest the avenger of blood, i.e. the nearest of kin, should pursue him with hot heart, and, overtaking him, should smite him mortally. Upon reaching the city he was to be received by the elders and his case heard. If this was satisfactory, they gave him asylum until a regular trial could be carried out. They took him, apparently, to the city or district from which he had fled, and there, among those who knew him, witnesses were examined. If it were proved that he was not a willful slayer, that he had no grudge against the person killed, and had shown no sign of purpose to injure him, then he was declared innocent and conducted back to the city in which he had taken refuge, where he must stay until the death of the high priest. Then he was free to return home in safety. Until that event he must on no account go beyond the city boundaries. If he did, the avenger of blood might slay him without blame. On the other hand, if he were found guilty of deliberate murder, there was no more protection for him. He was handed over to the avenger of blood who, with his own hand, took the murderer's life. Blood-money, i.e. money paid in compensation for the murder, in settlement of the avenger's claim, was in no circumstances permitted; nor could the refugee be ransomed, so that he might "come again to dwell in the land" until the death of the high priest (Nu 35:32).
A similar right of refuge seems to have been recognized in Israel as attaching to the altar in the temple at Jerusalem (1 Ki 1:50; 2:28; compare Ex 21:12 f). This may be compared with the right of asylum connected with the temples of the heathen.
W. Ewing
re-fuz': Formerly used with the additional meaning "reject," and hence, the change from the King James Version to the Revised Version (British and American) in 1 Sam 16:7; Ezek 5:6; 1 Tim 4:4; 1 Pet 2:7, etc.
re-fut': Only in Jude 1:22, the American Revised Version margin "And some refute while they dispute with you," where the Revised Version (British and American) in the text reads "And on some have mercy, who are in doubt."
The Greek text of Jude 1:22,23 is very uncertain, being given very differently in the various manuscripts. the Revised Version (British and American) text follows the two oldest manuscripts, Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. Instead of eleate, "have mercy," the reading elegchete, "refute," "convict," has the powerful support of Codex Alexandrinus, Codex Ephraemi, the best cursives, Vulgate, Memphitic, Armenian and Ethiopian versions, and is placed in the text by Lachmann, Tischendorf, and Tregelles (Westcott-Hort in list of "Suspected Readings" says: "Some primitive error probable: perhaps the first eleate an interpolation"). Compare Jude 1:15, where the same Greek word occurs in the same sense (the King James Version "convince," the Revised Version (British and American) "convict"); compare also 1 Tim 5:20; Tit 1:9, where the same idea of refuting the sinful occurs.
D. Miall Edwards
re'-gem (reghem, "friend" (?)): A Calebite, the son of Jahdai (1 Ch 2:47), mentioned as the eponym of a Calebite family or clan.
re'-gem-me'-lek, re'-gem-mel'-ek (reghem melekh): One of a deputation sent to inquire concerning the propriety of continuing the commemoration of the destruction of the temple by holding a fast (Zec 7:2). The text of the passage is in disorder. The name may mean "friend of the king"; hence, some have sought to remove the difficulty by interpreting reghem melekh as a title, not a personal name, reading the clause, "They of Beth-el had sent SHAREZER (q.v. (2)), the friend of the king."
re-jen-er-a'-shun, re-:
1. First Biblical Sense (Eschatological)
2. Second Biblical Sense (Spiritual)
II. THE BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF REGENERATION
III. LATER DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOCTRINE
LITERATURE
The theological term "regeneration" is the Latin translation of the Greek expression palingenesia, occurring twice in the New Testament (Mt 19:28; Tit 3:5). The word is usually written paliggenesia, in classical Greek. Its meaning is different in the two passages, though an easy transition of thought is evident.
1. First Biblical Sense (Eschatological):
In Mt 19:28 the word refers to the restoration of the world, in which sense it is synonymical to the expressions apokatastasis panton, "restoration of all things" (Acts 3:21; the verb is found in Mt 17:11, apokatastsei panta, "shall restore all things"), and anapsuxis, "refreshing" (Acts 3:19), which signifies a gradual transition of meaning to the second sense of the word under consideration. It is supposed that regeneration in this sense denotes the final stage of development of all creation, by which God's purposes regarding the same are fully realized, when "all things (are put) in subjection under his feet" (1 Cor 15:27). This is a "regeneration in the proper meaning of the word, for it signifies a renovation of all visible things when the old is passed away, and heaven and earth are become new" (compare Rev 21:1). To the Jew the regeneration thus prophesied was inseparably connected with the reign of the Messiah.
We find this word in the same or very similar senses in profane literature. It is used of the renewal of the world in Stoical philosophy. Josephus (Ant., XI, iii, 9) speaks of the anaktesis kai paliggenesia tes patridos, "a new foundation and regeneration of the fatherland," after the return from the Babylonian captivity. Philo (ed. Mangey, ii.144) uses the word, speaking of the post-diluvial epoch of the earth, as of a new world, and Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (xi.1), of a periodical restoration of all things, laying stress upon the constant recurrence and uniformity of all happenings, which thought the Preacher expressed by "There is no new thing under the sun" (Eccl 1:9). In most places, however, where the word occurs in philosophical writings, it is used of the "reincarnation" or "subsequent birth" of the individual, as in the Buddhistic and Pythagorean doctrine of the transmigration of souls (Plut., edition Xylander, ii.998c; Clement of Alexandria, edition Potter, 539) or else of a revival of life (Philo i.159). Cicero uses the word in his letters to Atticus (vi.6) metaphorically of his return from exile, as a new lease of life granted to him.
See ESCHATOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT , IX .
2. Second Biblical Sense (Spiritual):
This sense is undoubtedly included in the full Biblical conception of the former meaning, for it is unthinkable that a regeneration in the eschatological sense can exist without a spiritual regeneration of humanity or the individual. It is, however, quite evident that this latter conception has arisen rather late, from an analysis of the former meaning. It is found in Tit 3:5 which, without absolute certainty as to its meaning, is generally interpreted in agreement with the numerous nouns and verbs which have given the dogmatical setting to the doctrine of regeneration in Christian theology. Clement of Alexandria is the first to differentiate this meaning from the former by the addition of the adjective pneumatike, "spiritual" (compare anapsuxis, Acts 3:20; See REFRESHING ). In this latter sense the word is typically Christian, though the Old Testament contains many adumbrations of the spiritual process expressed thereby.
II. The Biblical Doctrine of Regeneration.
It is well known that in the earlier portions of the Old Testament, and to a certain degree all through the Old Testament, religion is looked at and spoken of more as a national possession, the benefits of which are largely visible and tangible blessings. The idea of regeneration here occurs therefore--though no technical expression has as yet been coined for the process--in the first meaning of the word elucidated above. Whether the divine promises refer to the Messianic end of times, or are to be realized at an earlier date, they all refer to the nation of Israel as such, and to individuals only as far as they are partakers in the benefits bestowed upon the commonwealth. This is even true where the blessings prophesied are only spiritual, as in Isa 60:21,22. The mass of the people of Israel are therefore as yet scarcely aware of the fact that the conditions on which these divine promises are to be attained are more than ceremonial and ritual ones. Soon, however, great disasters, threatening to overthrow the national entity, and finally the captivity and dispersion which caused national functions to be almost, if not altogether, discontinued, assisted in the growth of a sense of individual or personal responsibility before God. The sin of Israel is recognized as the sin of the individual, which can be removed only by individual repentance and cleansing. This is best seen from the stirring appeals of the prophets of the exile, where frequently the necessity of a change of attitude toward Yahweh is preached as a means to such regeneration. This cannot be understood otherwise than as a turning of the individual to the Lord. Here, too, no ceremony or sacrifice is sufficient, but an interposition of divine grace, which is represented under the figure of a washing and sprinkling from all iniquity and sin (Isa 1:18; Jer 13:23). It is not possible now to follow in full the development of this idea of cleansing, but already in Isa 52:15 the sprinkling of many nations is mentioned and is soon understood in the sense of the "baptism" which proselytes had to undergo before their reception into the covenant of Israel. It was the symbol of a radical cleansing like that of a "new-born babe," which was one of the designations of the proselyte (compare Ps 87:5; see also the tractate Yebhamoth 62a). Would it be surprising that Israel, which had been guilty of many sins of the Gentiles, needed a similar baptism and sprinkling? This is what Ezek 36:25 suggests: "I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you." In other passages the cleansing and refining power of fire is alluded to (e.g. Mal 3:2), and there is no doubt that John the Baptist found in such passages the ground for his practice of baptizing the Jews who came to him (Jn 1:25-28 and parallel's).
The turning of Israel to God was necessarily meant to be an inward change of attitude toward Him, in other words, the sprinkling with clean water, as an outward sign, was the emblem of a pure heart. It was Isaiah and Jeremiah who drew attention to this (Isa 57:15; Jer 24:7; 31:33-35; 32:38-40, et passim). Here again reference is made to individuals, not only to the people in general (Jer 31:34). This promised regeneration, so lovingly offered by Yahweh, is to be the token of a new covenant between God and His people (Jer 31:31; Ezek 11:19-21; 18:31,32; 37:23,24).
The renewing and cleansing here spoken of is in reality nothing else than what Dt 30:6 had promised, a circumcision of the heart in contradistinction to the flesh, the token of the former (Abrahamic) covenant (of circumcision, Jer 4:4). As God takes the initiative in making the covenant, the conviction takes root that human sin and depravity can be effectually eliminated only by the act of God Himself renewing and transforming the heart of man (Hos 14:4). This we see from the testimony of some of Israel's best sons and daughters, who also knew that this grace was found in the way of repentance and humiliation before God. The classical expression of this conviction is found in the prayer of David: "Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right (margin "stedfast") spirit within me. Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy Spirit from me. Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation; and uphold me with a willing spirit" (Ps 51:10-12). Jeremiah puts the following words into the mouth of Ephraim: "Turn thou me, and I shall be turned" (Jer 31:18). Clearer than any passages of the Old Testament, John the Baptist, forerunner of Christ and last flaming torch of the time of the earlier covenant, spoke of the baptism, not of water, but of the Holy Spirit and of fire (Mt 3:11; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:33), leading thus to the realization of Old Testament foreshadowings which became possible by faith in Christ.
In the teaching of Jesus the need of regeneration has a prominent place, though nowhere are the reasons given. The Old Testament had succeeded--and even the Gentile conscience agreed with it--in convincing the people of this need. The clearest assertion of it and the explanation of the doctrine of regeneration is found in the conversation of Jesus with Nicodemus (Jn 3). It is based upon (1) the observation that man, even the most punctilious in the observance of the Law, is dead and therefore unable to "live up" to the demands of God. Only He who gave life at the beginning can give the (spiritual) life necessary to do God's will. (2) Man has fallen from his virginal and divinely-appointed sphere, the realm of the spirit, the Kingdom of God, living now the perishing earthly life. Only by having a new spiritual nature imparted to him, by being "born anew" (Jn 3:3, the Revised Version margin "from above," Greek anothen), by being "born of the Spirit" (Jn 3:6,8), can he live the spiritual life which God requires of man.
These words are a New Testament exegesis of Ezekiel's vision of the dead bones (Ezek 37:1-10). It is the "breath from Yahweh," the Spirit of God, who alone can give life to the spiritually dead.
But regeneration, according to Jesus, is more than life, it is also purity. As God is pure and sinless, none but the pure in heart can see God (Mt 5:8). This was always recognized as impossible to mere human endeavor. Bildad the Shuhite declared, and his friends, each in his turn, expressed very similar thoughts (Job 4:17; 14:4): "How then can man be just with God? Or how can he be clean that is born of a woman? Behold, even the moon hath no brightness, and the stars are not pure in his sight: how much less man, that is a worm! and the son of man, that is a worm!" (Job 25:4-6).
To change this lost condition, to impart this new life, Jesus claims as His God-appointed task: "The Son of man came to seek and to save that which was lost" (Lk 19:10); "I came that they may have life, and may have it abundantly" (Jn 10:10). This life is eternal, imperishable: "I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, and no one shall snatch them out of my hand" (Jn 10:28). This life is imparted by Jesus Himself: "It is the spirit that giveth life; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I have spoken unto you are spirit, and are life" (Jn 6:63). This life can be received on the condition of faith in Christ or by coming to Him (Jn 14:6). By faith power is received which enables the sinner to overcome sin, to "sin no more" (Jn 8:11).
The parables of Jesus further illustrate this doctrine. The prodigal is declared to have been "dead" and to be "alive again" (Lk 15:24). The new life from God is compared to a wedding garment in the parable of the Marriage of the King's Son (Mt 22:11). The garment, the gift of the inviting king, had been refused by the unhappy guest, who, in consequence, was `cast out into the outer darkness' (Mt 22:13).
Finally, this regeneration, this new life, is explained as the knowledge of God and His Christ: "And this is life eternal, that they should know thee the only true God, and him whom thou didst send, even Jesus Christ" (Jn 17:3). This seems to be an allusion to the passage in Hosea (4:6): "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me."
It may be said in general that the teaching of the apostles on the subject of regeneration is a development of the teaching of Jesus on the lines of the adumbrations of the Old Testament. Considering the differences in the personal character of these writers, it is remarkable that such concord of views should exist among them. Paul, indeed, lays more stress on the specific facts of justification and sanctification by faith than on the more comprehensive head of regeneration. Still the need of it is plainly stated by Paul. It is necessary to salvation for all men. "The body is dead because of sin" (Rom 8:3-11; Eph 2:1). The flesh is at enmity with God (Eph 2:15); all mankind is "darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God" (Eph 4:18). Similar passages might be multiplied. Paul then distinctly teaches that thus is a new life in store for those who have been spiritually dead. To the Ephesians he writes: "And you did he make alive, when ye were dead through your trespasses and sins" (2:1), and later on: "God, being rich in mercy, .... made us alive together with Christ" (2:4,5). A spiritual resurrection has taken place. This regeneration causes a complete revolution in man. He has thereby passed from under the law of sin and death and has come under "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" (Rom 8:2). The change is so radical that it is possible now to speak of a "new creature" (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15, margin "new creation"), of a "new man, that after God hath been created in righteousness and holiness of truth" (Eph 4:24), and of "the new man, that is being renewed unto knowledge after the image of him that created him" (Col 3:10). All "old things are passed away; behold, they are become new" (2 Cor 5:17).
Paul is equally explicit regarding the author of this change. The "Spirit of God," the "Spirit of Christ" has been given from above to be the source of all new life (Rom 8); by Him we are proved to be the "sons" of God (Gal 4:6); we have been adopted into the family of God (huiothesia, Rom 8:15; Gal 4:5). Thus Paul speaks of the "second Adam," by whom the life of righteousness is initiated in us; just as the "first Adam" became the leader in transgression, He is "a life-giving spirit" (1 Cor 15:45). Paul himself experienced this change, and henceforth exhibited the powers of the unseen world in his life of service. "It is no longer I that live," he exclaims, "but Christ liveth in me: and that life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith which is in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself up for me" (Gal 2:20).
Regeneration is to Paul, no less than to Jesus, connected with the conception of purity and knowledge. We have already noted the second New Testament passage in which the word "regeneration" occurs (Tit 3:5): "According to his mercy he saved us, through the washing (margin "laver") of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, which he poured out upon us richly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour." In 1 Cor 12:13 such cleansing is called the baptism of the Spirit in agreement with the oft-repeated promise (Joel 2:28 (in the Hebrew text 3:1); Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16; Acts 1:5; 11:16). There is, of course, in these passages no reference to mere water baptism, any more than in Ezek 36:25. Water is but the tertium comparationis. As water cleanseth the outer body, so the spirit purifies the inner man (compare 1 Cor 6:11; 1 Pet 3:21).
The doctrine that regeneration redounds in true knowledge of Christ is seen from Eph 3:15-19 and 4:17-24, where the darkened understanding and ignorance of natural man are placed in contradistinction to the enlightenment of the new life (see also Col 3:10). The church redeemed and regenerated is to be a special "possession," an "heritage" of the Lord (Eph 1:11,14), and the whole creation is to participate in the final redemption and adoption (Rom 8:21-23).
James finds less occasion to touch this subject than the other writers of the New Testament. His Epistle is rather ethical than dogmatical in tone, still his ethics are based on the dogmatical presuppositions which fully agree with the teaching of other apostles. Faith to him is the human response to God's desire to impart His nature to mankind, and therefore the indispensable means to be employed in securing the full benefits of the new life, i.e. the sin-conquering power (1:2-4), the spiritual enlightenment (1:5) and purity (1:27). There seems, however, to be little doubt that James directly refers to regeneration in the words: "Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures" (1:18). It is supposed by some that these words, being addressed "to the twelve tribes which are of the Dispersion" (1:1), do not refer to individual regeneration, but to an election of Israel as a nation and so to a Christian Israel. In this case the aftermath would be the redemption of the Gentiles. I understand the expression "first-fruits" in the sense in which we have noticed Paul's final hope in Rom 8:21-32, where the regeneration of the believing people of God (regardless of nationality) is the first stage in the regeneration or restoration of all creation. The "implanted (the Revised Version margin "inborn") word" (Jas 1:21; compare 1 Pet 1:23) stands parallel to the Pauline expression, "law of the Spirit" (Rom 8:2).
Peter uses, in his sermon on the day of Pentecost, the words "refreshing" (Acts 3:19) and "restoration of all things" (Acts 3:21) of the final completion of God's plans concerning the whole creation, and accordingly looks here at God's people as a whole. In a similar sense he says in his Second Epistle, after mentioning "the day of God": "We look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness" (2 Pet 3:13). Still he alludes very plainly to the regeneration of individuals (1 Pet 1:3,13). The idea of a second birth of the believers is clearly suggested in the expression, "newborn babes" (1 Pet 2:2), and in the explicit statement of 1 Pet 1:23: "having been begotten again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, through the word of God, which liveth and abideth." It is in this sense that the apostle calls God "Father" (1 Pet 1:17) and the believers "children of obedience" (1 Pet 1:14), i.e. obedient children, or children who ought to obey. We have seen above that the agent by which regeneration is wrought, the incorruptible seed of the word of God, finds a parallel in Paul's and James's theology. All these expressions go back probably to a word of the Master in Jn 15:3. We are made partakers of the word by having received the spirit. This spirit (compare the Pauline "lifegiving spirit," 1 Cor 15:45), the "mind" of Christ (1 Pet 4:1), is the power of the resurrected Christ active in the life of the believer. Peter refers to the same thought in 1 Pet 3:15,21. By regeneration we become "an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession" in whom divine virtues, "the excellencies of him who called you" (1 Pet 2:9), are manifested. Here the apostle uses well-known Old Testament expressions foreshadowing New Testament graces (Isa 61:6; 66:21; Ex 19:6; Dt 7:6), but he individualizes the process of regeneration in full agreement with the increased light which the teaching of Jesus has brought. The theology of Peter also points out the contact of regeneration with purity and holiness (1 Pet 1:15,16) and true knowledge (1 Pet 1:14) or obedience (1 Pet 1:14; 3:16). It is not surprising that the idea of purity should invite the Old Testament parallel of "cleansing by water." The flood washed away the iniquity of the world "in the days of Noah," when "eight souls were saved through water: which also after a true likeness (the Revised Version margin "in the antitype") doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation (the Revised Version margin "inquiry," "appeal") of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection (-life) of Jesus Christ" (1 Pet 3:20,21).
The teaching of John is very closely allied with that of Jesus, as we have already seen from the multitude of quotations we had to select from John's Gospel to illustrate the teaching of the Master. It is especially interesting to note the cases where the apostle didactically elucidates certain of these pronouncements of Jesus. The most remarkable apostolic gloss or commentary on the subject is found in Jn 7:39. Jesus had spoken of the change which faith in Him ("coming to him") would cause in the liv