si'-a, si'-a-ha (ci'a'): One of the remnant which returned from captivity (Neh 7:47; Ezr 2:44).T+>shuthalchi): A son of Ephraim (Nu 26:35,36; compare 1 Ch 7:20,21), and his descendants.
sib'-e-ki, sib-e-ka'-i (cibbekhay): One of the valiant men in David's army (2 Sam 21:18; 1 Ch 11:29; 20:4; 27:11).
sib'o-leth (cibboleth).
See SHIBBOLETH .
sib'-ma.
See SEBAM .
sib-ra'-im, sib'-ra-im (cibhrayim; Codex Vaticanus Sebram; Codex Alexandrinus Sephram): A place named as on the boundary of Palestine in Ezekiel's ideal delineation, "between the border of Damascus and the border of Hamath" (Ezek 47:16). It may possibly be represented by the modern Khirbet Sanbariyeh on the west bank of Nahr el-Chasbany, about 3 miles Southeast of `Abil.
sib'-i-lin, -lin or'-a-k'-lz.
See APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE , sec. B, V.
si-ka'-ri-i.
See ASSASSINS .
si'-kem (shekhem). the King James Version in Gen 12:6.
See SHECHEM .
sik, sik'-nes (chalah (Gen 48:1, etc.), choli (Dt 28:61, etc.), tachalu' (Dt 29:21, etc.), machalah (Ex 23:25, etc.), daweh (Lev 15:33, etc.), 'anash (2 Sam 12:15, etc.); astheneo (Mt 10:8, etc.;. compare 2 Macc 9:22), [@kakos echon (Lk 7:2), kakos echontas (Mt 4:24, etc.), arrhostos (Sirach 7:35; Mt 14:14, etc.), arrhostema (Sirach 10:10, etc.), with various cognates, kamno (Jas 5:15); Latin morbus (2 Esdras 8:31)): Compared with the number of deaths recorded in the historical books of the Bible the instances in which diseases are mentioned are few. "Sick" and "sickness" (including "disease," etc.) are the translations of 6 Hebrew and 9 Greek words and occur 56 times in the Old Testament and 57 times in the New Testament. The number of references in the latter is significant as showing how much the healing of the sick was characteristic of the Lord's ministry. The diseases specified are varied. Of infantile sickness there is an instance in Bath-sheba's child (2 Sam 12:15), whose disease is termed 'anash, not improbably trismus nascentium, a common disease in Palestine. Among adolescents there are recorded the unspecified sickness of Abijah (1 Ki 14:1), of the widow's son at Zarephath (1 Ki 17:17), the sunstroke of the Shunammite's son (2 Ki 4:19), the epileptic boy (Mt 17:15), Jairus' daughter (Mt 9:18), and the nobleman's son (Jn 4:46). At the other extreme of life Jacob's death was preceded by sickness (Gen 48:1). Sickness resulted from accident (Ahaziah, 2 Ki 1:2), wounds (Joram, 2 Ki 8:29), from the violence of passion (Amnon, 2 Sam 13:2), or mental emotion (Dan 8:27); see also in this connection Song 2:5; 5:8. Sickness the result of drunkenness is mentioned (Hos 7:5), and as a consequence of famine (Jer 14:18) or violence (Mic 6:13). Daweh or periodic sickness is referred to (Lev 15:33; 20:18), and an extreme case is that of Lk 8:43.
In some examples the nature of the disease is specified, as Asa's disease in his feet (1 Ki 15:23), for which he sought the aid of physicians in vain (2 Ch 16:12). Hezekiah and Job suffered from sore boils, Jehoram from some severe dysenteric attack (2 Ch 21:19), as did Antiochus Epiphanes (2 Macc 9:5). Probably the sudden and fatal disease of Herod was similar, as in both cases there is reference to the presence of worms (compare Acts 12:23 and 2 Macc 9:9). The disease of Publius' father was also dysentery (Acts 28:8). Other diseases specified are paralysis (Mt 8:6; 9:2), and fever (Mt 8:14). Not improbably the sudden illness of the young Egyptian at Ziklag (1 Sam 30:11), and the illness of Ben-hadad which weakened him so that he could not resist the violence of Hazael, were also the common Palestine fever (2 Ki 8:15) of whose symptoms and effects there is a graphic description in Ps 38. Unspecified fatal illnesses were those of Elisha (2 Ki 13:14), Lazarus (Jn 11:1), Tabitha (Acts 9:37). In the language of the Bible, leprosy is spoken of as a defilement to be cleansed, rather than as a disease to be cured.
The proverb concerning the sick quoted by the Lord at Capernaum (Mk 2:17) has come down to us in several forms in apocryphal and rabbinical writings (Babha' Qamma' 26:13; Sanhedhrin 176), but is nowhere so terse as in the form in which He expresses it. The Lord performed His healing of the sick by His word or touch, and one of the most emphatic charges which He gave to His disciples when sending them out was to heal the sick. One of the methods used by them, the anointing with oil, is mentioned in Mk 6:13 and enjoined by James (5:15). In later times the anointing which was at first used as a remedial agent became a ceremonial in preparation for death, one of the seven sacraments of the Roman church (Aquinas, Summa Theologia suppl. ad Piii. 29).
The duty of visiting the sick is referred to in Ezek 34:4,16, and by the Lord in the description of the Judgment scene (Mt 25:36,43). It is inculcated in several of the rabbinical tracts. "He that visits the sick lengthens his life, he who refrains shortens it," says Rabbi Ischanan in Nedharim 29. In Shulchan `Arukh, Yoreh De`ah there is a chapter devoted to this duty, which is regarded as incumbent on the Jew, even though the sick person be a Gentile (Gittin 61a). The church's duty to the sick, so long neglected, has, within the last century, been recognized in the mission field, and has proved, in heathen lands, to be the most important of all pioneer agressive methods.
While we find that the apostles freely exercised their gifts of healing, it is noteworthy that we read of the sickness of two of Paul's companions, Epaphroditus (Phil 2:26) and Trophimus (2 Tim 4:20), for whose recovery he seems to have used no other means than prayer.
See also DISEASE .
Alexander Macalister
sik'-'l (chermesh (Dt 16:9; 23:25), maggal; compare Arabic minjal (Jer 50:16; Joel 3:13); drepanon (Mk 4:29; Rev 14:14-19)): Although the ancients pulled much of their grain by hand, we know that they also used sickles. The form of this instrument varied, as is evidenced by the Egyptian sculptures. The earliest sickle was probably of wood, shaped like the modern scythe, although much smaller, with the cutting edge made of sharp flints set into the wood. Sickle flints were found at Tel el-Chesy. Crescent-shaped iron sickles were found in the same mound. In Palestine and Syria the sickle varies in size. It is usually made wholly of iron or steel and shaped much like the instrument used in western lands. The smaller-sized sickles are used both for pruning and for reaping.
James A. Patch
sish'-i-on (Sikuon, Sukuon, Sukion): Mentioned in 1 Macc 15:23 in the list of countries and cities to which Lucius the Roman consul (probably Lucius Calpurnius Piso, 139 BC) wrote, asking them to be friendly to the Jews. The Jewish dispersion had already taken place, and Jews were living in most of the seaports and cities of Asia Minor, Greece and Egypt (compare Sib Or 3:271, circa 140 BC , and Philo).
Sicyon was situated 18 miles West of Corinth on the south side of the Gulf of Corinth. Its antiquity and ancient importance are seen by its coins still extant, dating from the 5th century. Though not as important as Corinth in its sea trade, the burning of that city in 143 BC, and the favor shown to Sicyon by the Roman authorities in adding to its territory and assigning to it the direction of the Isthmian games, increased its wealth and influence for a time.
S. F. Hunter
sid'-im, (`emeq ha-siddim; Septuagint he pharangx (or koilas) he haluke): The place mentioned in Gen 14:3-8 as being the scene of encounter between Chedorlaomer and his allies with the kings of Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, Zeboiim and Zoar. In 14:3 it is identified with the Salt Sea, and in 14:10 it is said to have been full of slime pits ("bitumen").
According to the traditional view, the Vale of Siddim was at the southern end of the Dead Sea. But in recent years a number of eminent authorities have maintained that it was at the northern end of the Dead Sea, in the vicinity of Jericho. Their argument has mainly been drawn from incidental references in the scene (Gen 13:1-13) describing the parting of Lot and Abram, and again in the account of Moses' vision from Pisgah (Dt 34:3).
In the account of Abram and Lot, it is said that from Bethel they saw "all the Plain of the Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere, before Yahweh destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah." The word here translated "plain" means "circle," and well describes the view which one has of the plain about Jericho from Bethel as he looks down the valley past Ai. But it seems to go beyond the text to assume that the Vale of Siddim was within that circle of vision, for it is said in Gen 13:12 simply that Lot dwelt "in the cities of the Plain, and moved his tent as far as Sodom." In the vision of Moses, likewise, we have a very general and condensed description, in which it is said that he was shown "the Plain of the valley of Jericho, the city of palm-trees, unto Zoar," which, as we learn from Gen 19:22, was not far from the Vale of Siddim. It is true that from the traditional site of Pisgah the south end of the Dead Sea could not be seen. But we are by no means sure that the traditional site of Pisgah is the true one, or that the import of this language should be restricted to the points which are actually within range of vision.
The tendency at the present time is to return to the traditional view that the Vale of Siddim was at the south end of the Dead Sea. This is supported by the fact that Jebel Usdum, the salt mountain at the southwest corner of the Dead Sea, still bears the name of Sodom, Usdum being simply another form of the word. A still stronger argument, however, is drawn from the general topographical and geological conditions. In the first place, Zoar, to which Lot is said to have fled, was not far away. The most natural site for it is near the mouth of the Wady Kerak, which comes down from Moab into the southern end of the Dead Sea (See ZOAR ); and this city was ever afterward spoken of as a Moabite city, which would not have been the case if it had been at the north end of the sea. It is notable in Josh 13:15-21, where the cities given to Reuben are enumerated, that, though the slopes of Pisgah are mentioned, Zoar is not mentioned.
In Gen 14, where the battle between Amraphel and his allies with Sodom and the other cities of the plain is described, the south end of the Dead Sea comes in logical order in the progress of their campaign, and special mention is made of the slime or bitumen pits which occurred in the valley, and evidently played an important part in the outcome of the battle.
At the south end of the Dead Sea there is an extensive circle or plain which is better supplied with water for irrigation than is the region about Jericho, and which, on the supposition of slight geological changes, may have been extremely fertile in ancient times; while there are many indications of such fertility in the ruins that have been described by travelers about the mouth of the Kerak and other localities nearby. The description, therefore, of the fertility of the region in the Vale of Siddim may well have applied to this region at the time of Lot's entrance into it.
There are very persistent traditions that great topographical changes took place around the south end of the Dead Sea in connection with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, while the opinion has been universally prevalent among the earlier historical writers that the site of Sodom and Gomorrah is beneath the waters of the Dead Sea.
Geological investigations, so far from disproving these traditions, render them altogether possible and credible. There is a remarkable contrast between the depths of the north end of the Dead Sea and of the south end. Near the north end the depth descends to 1,300 ft., whereas for many miles out from the south end it is very shallow, so that at low water a ford exists, and is occasionally used, from the north end of the salt mountain across to el-Lisan.
The precipitous salt cliffs of Jebel Usdum which border the southwest corner of the Dead Sea would indicate that, in comparatively recent times, there had been abrupt subsidence of a good many feet in the bottom of the Dead Sea at that end.
Such subsidences of limited areas and in connection with earthquakes are by no means uncommon. In 1819 an area of 2,000 square miles about the delta of the Indus sank beneath the level of the sea, so that the tops of the houses were barely seen above the water. A smaller area in the delta of the Selenga River sank during the last century beneath the waters of Lake Baikal. Professor R.S. Tarr of Cornell University has recently described the effect of an earthquake on the shores of Alaska, in which there was a change of level of 47 ft.
More probably (See ARABAH ;DEAD SEA ) there has been a rise in the waters of the Dead Sea since Abraham's time, caused by the encroachment upon the original area of evaporation by the deltas which have been pushed into the main part of the depression by the Jordan, and various smaller streams descending from the highlands on either side. In consequence of these encroachments, the equilibrium between precipitation and evaporation could be maintained only by a rise in the water causing it to spread over the shallow shelf at the south end, thus covering a large part of the Vale of Siddim with the shoal water now found between el-Lisan and Jebel Usdum.
George Frederick Wright
si'-de (Side): An ancient town of Pamphylia, occupying a triangular promontory on the coast. It was one of the towns to which a letter favorable to the Jews was sent by the Roman consul Lucius (1 Macc 15:23). The town seems to have been of considerable antiquity, for it had existed long before it fell into the possession of Alexander the Great, and for a time it was the metropolis of Pamphylia. Off the coast the fleet of Antiochus was defeated by the Rhodians. During the 1st century, Side was noted as one of the chief ports of pirates who disposed of much of their booty there. The ruins of the city, which are now very extensive, bear the name Eski Adalia, but among them there are no occupied houses. The two harbors protected by a sea wall may still be traced, but they are now filled with sand. The wall on the land side of the city was provided with a gate which was protected with round towers; the walls themselves are of Greek-Roman type. Within the walls the more important of the remains are three theaters near the harbors, and streets with covered porticoes leading from the city gate to the harbors. Without the walls, the street leading to the city gate is lined with sarcophagi, and among the shrubbery of the neighboring fields are traces of many buildings and of an aqueduct.
E. J. Banks
sidz (yarekhah, "thigh," "flank"): the Revised Version (British and American) substitutes "innermost parts" for the King James Version "sides" in Jon 1:5; compare 1 Sam 24:3.
si'-don (tsidhon): The oldest son of Canaan (Gen 10:15).
si'-don (tsidhon; Sidon; the King James Version, Sidon and Zidon; the Revised Version (British and American) SIDON only):
One of the oldest Phoenician cities, situated on a narrow plain between the range of Lebanon and the sea, in latitude 33 degrees 34 minutes nearly. The plain is well watered and fertile, about 10 miles long, extending from a little North of Sarepta to the Bostrenus (Nahr el-'Auly). The ancient city was situated near the northern end of the plain, surrounded with a strong wall. It possessed two harbors, the northern one about 500 yds. long by 200 wide, well protected by little islets and a breakwater, and a southern about 600 by 400 yards, surrounded on three sides by land, but open to the West, and thus exposed in bad weather. The date of the founding of the city is unknown, but we find it mentioned in the Tell el-Amarna Letters in the 14th century BC, and in Gen 10:19 it is the chief city of the Canaanites, and Joshua (Josh 11:8) calls it Great Sidon. It led all the Phoenician cities in its early development of maritime affairs, its sailors being the first to launch out into the open sea out of sight of land and to sail by night, guiding themselves by the stars. They were the first to come into contact with the Greeks and we find the mention of them several times in Homer, while other Phoenician towns are not noticed. Sidon became early distinguished for its manufactures and the skill of its artisans, such as beautiful metal-work in silver and bronze and textile fabrics embroidered and dyed with the famous purple dye which became known as Tyrian, but which was earlier produced at Sidon. Notices of these choice articles are found in Homer, both in the Iliad and the Odyssey. Sidon had a monarchical form of government, as did all the Phoenician towns, but it also held a sort of hegemony over those to the South as far as the limit of Phoenicia. It likewise made one attempt to establish an inland colony at Laish or Dan, near the headwaters of the Jordan, but this ended in disaster (Jdg 18:7,27,28). The attempt was not renewed, but many colonies were established over-sea. Citium, in Cyprus, was one of the earliest.
(1) The independence of Sidon was lost when the kings of the XVIIIth and XIXth Dynasties of Egypt added Palestine and Syria to their dominions (1580-1205 BC). The kings of Sidon were allowed to remain on the throne as long as they paid tribute, and perhaps still exercised authority over the towns that had before been subject to them. When the power of Egypt declined under Amenhotep IV (1375-1358), the king of Sidon seems to have thrown off the yoke, as appears from the Tell el-Amarna Letters. Rib-addi of Gebal writes to the king of Egypt that Zimrida, king of Sidon, had joined the enemy, but Zimrida himself claims, in the letters he wrote, to be loyal, declaring that the town belonging to him had been taken by the Khabiri (Tab. 147). Sidon, with the other towns, eventually became independent of Egypt, and she retained the hegemony of the southern towns and perhaps added Dor, claimed by the Philistines, to her dominion. This may have been the reason for the war that took place about the middle of the 12th century BC, in which the Philistines took and plundered Sidon, whose inhabitants fled to Tyre and gave the latter a great impetus. Sidon, however, recovered from the disaster and became powerful again. The Book of Judges claims that Israel was oppressed by Sidon (10:12), but it is probable Sidon stands here for Phoenicia in general, as being the chief town.
(2) Sidon submitted to the Assyrian kings as did the Phoenician cities generally, but revolted against Sennacherib and again under Esar-haddon. The latter destroyed a large part of the city and carried off most of the inhabitants, replacing them by captives from Babylon and Elam, and renamed it Ir-Esar-had-don ("City of Esar-haddon"). The settlers readily mingled with the Phoenicians, and Sidon rose to power again when Assyria fell, was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar at the time of his siege of Jerusalem and Tyre, and was taken, having lost about half of its inhabitants by plague. The fall of Babylon gave another short period of independence, but the Persians gained control without difficulty, and Sidon was prominent in the Persian period as the leading naval power among the Phoenicians who aided their suzerain in his attacks upon Greece. In 351 BC, Sidon rebelled under Tabnit II (Tennes), and called in the aid of Greek mercenaries to the number of 10,000; but Ochus, the Persian king, marched against him with a force of 300,000 infantry and 30,000 horse, which so frightened Tabnit that he betrayed the city to save his own life. But the citizens, learning of the treachery, first burned their fleet and then their houses, perishing with their wives and children rather than fall into the hands of Ochus, who butchered all whom he seized, Tabnit among them. It is said that 40,000 perished in the flames. A list of the kings of Sidon in the Persian period has been recovered from the inscriptions and the coins, but the dates of their reigns are not accurately known. The dynasty of the known kings begins with Esmunazar I, followed by Tabnit I, Amastoreth; Esmunazar II, Strato I (Bodastart), Tabnit II (Tennes) and Strato II. Inscriptions from the temple of Esmun recently discovered give the name of a Bodastart and a son Yatonmelik, but whether the first is one of the Stratos above mentioned or a third is uncertain; also whether the son ever reigned or not. As Bodastart calls himself the grandson of Esmunazar, he is probably Strato I who reigned about 374-363 BC, and hence, his grandfather, Esmunazar I, must have reigned in 400 BC or earlier. Strato II was on the throne when Alexander took possession of Phoenicia and made no resistance to him, and even aided him in the siege of Tyre, which shows that Sidon had recovered after the terrible disaster it suffered in the time of Ochus. It perhaps looked upon the advance of Alexander with content as its avenger. The destruction of Tyre increased the importance of Sidon, and after the death of Alexander it became attached to the kingdom of the Ptolemies and remained so until the victory of Antiochus III over Scopas (198 BC), when it passed to the Seleucids and from them to the Romans, who granted it a degree of autonomy with native magistrates and a council, and it was allowed to coin money in bronze.
Sidon comes into view several times in the New Testament; first when Christ passed into the borders of Tyre and Sidon and healed the daughter of the Syro-phoenician woman (Mk 7:24-30); also when Herod Agrippa I received a delegation from Tyre and Sidon at Caesarea (Acts 12:20), where it appears to have been outside his jurisdiction. Paul, on his way to Rome, was permitted to visit some friends at Sidon (Acts 27:3). See also Mt 11:21 f and Mk 3:8.
It was noted for its school of philosophy under Augustus and Tiberius, its inhabitants being largely Greek; and when Berytus was destroyed by an earthquake in 551, its great law school was removed to Sidon. It was not of great importance during the Crusades, being far surpassed by Acre, and in modern times it is a small town of some 15,000.
LITERATURE.
See PHOENICIA .
H. Porter
si-do'-ni-anz: Natives or inhabitants of Sidon (Dt 3:9; Josh 13:4,6; Jdg 3:3; 1 Ki 5:6).
sej (matsor (Dt 28:52,53; 1 Ki 15:27; 2 Ki 25:2; Isa 29:3; Ezek 4:2); "to be besieged," "to suffer siege," ba-matsor bo' (Dt 20:19; 2 Ki 24:10; 25:2)):
1. In Early Hebrew History
2. In the Monarchy
3. Preliminaries to Siege
4. Siege Operations: Attack
(1) Investment of City
(2) Line of Circumvallation
(3) Mound, or Earthworks
(4) Battering-Rams
(5) Storming of Walls and Rushing of Breach
5. Siege Operations: Defense
6. Raising of Siege
7. Horrors of Siege and Capture
8. Siege in the New Testament
LITERATURE
In early Hebrew history, siege operations are not described and can have been little known. Although the Israelites had acquired a certain degree of military discipline in the wilderness, when they entered Canaan they had no experience of the operations of a siege and were without the engines of war necessary for the purpose. Jericho, with its strongly fortified wall, was indeed formally invested--it "was straitly shut up because of the children of Israel: none went out, and none came in" (Josh 6:1)--but it fell into their hands without a siege. Other cities seem to have yielded after pitched battles, or to have been taken by assault. Many of the Canaanite fortresses, like Gezer (2 Sam 5:25; Josh 16:10), Taanach and Megiddo (Jdg 1:27), remained unreduced. Jerusalem was captured by the men of Judah (Jdg 1:8), but the fort of Jebus remained unconquered till the time of David (2 Sam 5:6).
In the days of the monarchy more is heard of siege operations. At the siege of Rabbath-Ammon Joab seems to have deprived the city of its water-supply and rendered it untenable (2 Sam 11:1; 12:27). At Abel of Beth-maacah siege operations are described in which Joab distinguished himself (2 Sam 20:15). David and Solomon, and, after the disruption of the kingdom, Rehoboam and Jeroboam built fortresses which ere long became the scene of siege operations. The war between Judah and Israel in the days of Nadab, Baasha, and Elah was, for the most part, a war of sieges. It was while besieging Gibbethon that Nadab, the son of Jeroboam, was slain by Baasha (1 Ki 15:27), and, 27 years after, while the army of Israel was still investing the same place, the soldiery chose their commander Omri to be king over Israel (1 Ki 16:16). From the Egyptians, the Syrians, the Assyrians, and the Chaldeans, with whom they came into relations in later times as allies or as enemies, the people of the Southern and of the Northern Kingdoms learned much regarding the art, both of attack and of defense of fortified places.
It was an instruction of the Deuteronomic Law that before a city was invested for a long siege, it should be summoned to capitulate (Dt 20:10; compare 2 Sam 20:18; 2 Ki 18:17 ff). If the offer of peace be declined, then the siege is to be proceeded with, and if the city be captured, all the male population is to be put to death, and the women and children reserved as a prey for the captors. To this humane reservation the cities of the Canaanites were to be an exception: their inhabitants were to be wholly exterminated (Dt 20:16-18).
The same law prescribed that there should be no unnecessary destruction of fruit trees in the prosecution of a long siege. Trees not yielding fruit for human sustenance might be cut down: "And thou shalt build bulwarks (matsor, "siegeworks") against the city that maketh war with thee, until it fall" (Dt 20:19,20). This instruction to have regard to the fruit trees around a hostile city seems to have been more honored in the breach than in the observance, even in Israel. When the allied kings of Israel, Judah, and Edom were invading Moab and had instruction to "smite every fortified city," the prophet Elisha bade them also "fell every good tree, and stop all fountains of water, and mar every good piece of land with stones" (2 Ki 3:19,25). When the assault of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans was imminent, Yahweh commanded the cutting down of the trees (Jer 6:6). In Arabian warfare, we are told, the destruction of the enemy's palm groves was a favorite exploit (Robertson Smith, OTJC2, 369), and the Assyrians when they captured a city had no compunction in destroying its plantations (Inscription of Shalmaneser II on Black Obelisk).
From passages in the Prophets, upon which much light has been thrown by the ancient monuments of Assyria and Chaldea, we gain a very clear idea of the siege works directed against a city by Assyrian or Chaldean invaders. The siege of Lachish (2 Ki 18:13,14; Isa 36:1,2) by Sennacherib is the subject of a series of magnificent reliefs from the mound of Koyunjik (Layard, Monuments of Nineveh, lI, plates 20, 21, 22). The downfall of Nineveh as predicted in Nahum s prophecy lets us see the siege operations proceeding with striking realism (see Der Untergang Ninivehs by A. Jeremias and Colonel Billerbeck). Nowhere, however, are the incidents of a siege--the gathering of hostile forces, the slaughter of peaceful inhabitants in the country around, the raising of siegeworks, the setting of engines of war against the walls, the demolition of the towers, the breach in the principal wall, the rush of men and the clatter of horses' hoofs through the streets, the slaughter, the pillage, the destruction of walls and houses--more fully and faithfully recorded than by Ezekiel when predicting the capture of Tyre by Nebuchadrezzar (Ezek 26:7-12). The siege of Tyre lasted 13 years, and Ezekiel tells how every head was made bald and every shoulder worn by the hard service of the besiegers (Ezek 29:18). There were various ways in which an invading army might deal with a fortified city so as to secure its possession. Terms might be offered to secure a capitulation (1 Ki 20:1 ff; 2 Ki 18:14 ff). An attempt might be made to reduce the city by starvation (2 Ki 6:24 ff; 2 Ki 17:5 ff). The city might be invested and captured by assault and storm, as Lachish was by Sennacherib (2 Ki 18:13; 19:8; see Layard, op cit., II, plates 20-24). The chief operations of the besiegers were as follows:
There was the investment of the city by the besieging army. It was sometimes necessary to establish a fortified camp, like that of Sennacherib at Lachish to guard against sorties by the defenders. Of the siege of Jerusalem we read that Nebuchadrezzar came, "he and all his army, against Jerusalem, and encamped against it" (Jer 52:4; compare 2 Ki 25:1). From the commencement of the siege, slingers and archers were posted where they could keep the defenders engaged; and it is to this that reference is made when Jeremiah says: "Call together the archers against Babylon, all them that bend the bow; encamp against her round about; let none thereof escape" (Jer 50:29).
There was next the drawing of a line of circumvallation (day'eq) with detached forts round about the walls. These forts were towers manned by archers, or they were used as stations from which to discharge missiles (Jer 52:4; Ezek 17:17). In this connection the word "munition" in the King James Version and the English Revised Version (matsor) in Nah 1:1 disappears in the American Standard Revised Version and is replaced by "fortress."
Following upon this was the mound (colelah), or earthworks, built up to the height of the walls, so as to command the streets of the city, and strike terror into the besieged. From the mound thus erected the besiegers were able to batter the upper and weaker part of the city wall (2 Sam 20:15; Isa 37:33; Jer 6:6; Ezek 4:2; Dan 11:15; Lam 4:18). If, however, the town, or fortress, was built upon an eminence, an inclined plane reaching to the height of the eminence might be formed of earth or stones, or trees, and the besiegers would be able to bring their engines to the foot of the walls. This road was even covered with bricks, forming a kind of paved way, up which the ponderous machines could be drawn without difficulty. To such roads there are references in Scripture (Job 19:12; Isa 29:3, "siege works"; compare Layard, Nineveh and Its Remains,II , 366 f). In the case of Tyre this mound, or way of approach, was a dam thrown across the narrow strait to obtain access to the walls (Ezek 26:8). Very often, too, there was a trench, sometimes filled with water, at the foot of the wall, which had to be dealt with previous to an assault.
The earthworks having been thrown up, and approaches to the walls secured, it was possible to set and to work the battering-rams (karim) which were to be employed in breaching the walls (Ezek 4:2), or in bursting open the gates (Ezek 21:22). The battering-rams were of different kinds. On Assyrian monuments they are found joined to movable towers holding warriors and armed men, or, in other cases, joined to a stationary tower constructed on the spot. When the men who are detailed to work the ram get it into play, with its heavy beams of planks fastened together and the great mass of metal forming its head, they can hardly fail to make an impression, and gradually, by the constantly repeated shocks, a breach is opened and the besiegers are able to rush in and bear down the defenders. It is to the shelter furnished by these towers that the prophet Nahum refers (2:5) when he says,"The mantelet is prepared," and that Isaiah points when he declares that the king of Assyria "shall not come unto this city, nor shoot an arrow there, neither shall he come before it with shield (maghen), nor cast up a mound against it" (Isa 37:33). Ezekiel has the same figure when, describing the siege of Tyre by Nebuchadrezzar, he declares that he shall "cast up a mound" against her, and "raise up the buckler," the buckler (qinnah) being like the Roman testudo, or roof of shields, under cover of which the besiegers carried on operations (Ezek 26:8; Colonel Billerbeck (op. cit., 178) is doubtful whether this device was known to the Assyrians). Under the shelter of their movable towers the besiegers could push forward mines, an operation known as part of siegecraft from a high antiquity (See 2 Sam 20:15, where the American Revised Version margin and the English Revised Version margin give "undermined" as an alternative to "battered"; tunneling was well known in antiquity, as the Siloam tunnel shows).
(5) Storming of Walls and Rushing of Breach:
The culminating operation would be the storming of the walls, the rushing of the breach. Scaling-ladders were employed to cross the encircling trench or ditch (Prov 21:22); and Joel in his powerful description of the army of locusts which had devastated the land says that they "climb the wall like men of war" (Joel 2:7). Attempts were made to set fire to the gates and to break them open with axes (Jdg 9:52; compare Neh 1:3; 2:3; Ezek 26:9). Jeremiah tells of the breach that was made in the city when Jerusalem was captured (Jer 39:2). The breaches in the wall of Samaria are referred to by Amos (4:3), who pictures the women rushing forth headlong like a herd of kine with hooks and fishhooks in their nostrils.
While the besiegers employed this variety of means of attack, the besieged were equally ingenious and active in maintaining the defense. All sorts of obstructions were placed in the way of the besieging army. Springs and cisterns likely to afford supplies of water to the invaders were carefully covered up, or drained off into the city. Where possible, trenches were filled with water to make them impassable. As the siege-works of the enemy approached the main wall, it was usual to build inner fortifications, and for this purpose houses were pulled down to provide the needful space and also to supply building materials (Isa 22:10). Slingers placed upon the walls hurled stones upon the advancing enemy, and archers from loopholes and protected battlements discharged arrows against the warriors in their movable towers. Sorties were made to damage the siege-works of the enemy and to prevent the battering-rams from being placed in position. To counteract the assaults of the battering-rams, sacks of chaff were let down like a ship's fender in front of the place where the engine operated--a contrivance countered again by poles with scythes upon them which cut off the sacks (Josephus, BJ, III, vii, 20). So, too, the defenders, by dropping a doubled chain or rope from the battlements, caught the ram and broke the force of its blows. Attempts were made to destroy the ram also by fire. In the great bas-relief of the siege of Lachish an inhabitant is seen hurling a lighted torch from the wall; and it was a common device to pour boiling water or oil from the wall upon the assailants. Missiles, too, were thrown with deadly effect from the battlements by the defenders, and it was by a piece of a millstone thrown by a woman that Abimelech met his death at Thebez (Jdg 9:53). While Uzziah of Judah furnished his soldiers with shields and spears and helmets and coats of mail and bows and slingstones, he also "made in Jerusalem engines, invented by skillful men, to be on the towers and upon the battlements, wherewith to shoot arrows and great stones" (2 Ch 26:15). The Jews had, for the defense of Jerusalem against the army of Titus, engines which they had taken from the Twelfth Legion at Beth-horon which seem to have had a range of 1,200 ft. Many ingenious devices are described by Josephus as employed by himself when conducting the defense of Jotapata in Galilee against Vespasian and the forces of Rome (BJ, III, vii).
When Nahash king of the Ammonites laid siege to Jabesh-gilead in the opening days of the reign of Saul, the terms of peace offered to the inhabitants were so humiliating and cruel that they sought a respite of seven days and appealed to Saul in their distress. When the newly chosen king heard of their desperate condition he assembled a great army, scattered the Ammonites, and raised the siege of Jabesh-gilead, thus earning the lasting gratitude of the inhabitants (1 Sam 11; compare 1 Sam 31:12,13). When Zedekiah of Judah found himself besieged in Jerusalem by the Chaldean army under Nebuzaradan, he sent intelligence to Pharaoh Hophra who crossed the frontier with his army to attack the Chaldeans and obliged them to desist from the siege. The Chaldeans withdrew for the moment from the walls of Jerusalem and offered battle to Pharaoh Hophra and his host, but the courage of the Egyptian king failed him and he retired in haste without encountering the Chaldeans in a pitched battle. The siege was prosecuted to the bitter end, and Jerusalem was captured and completely overthrown (2 Ki 25:1; Jer 37:3-10; Ezek 17:17).
7. Horrors of Siege and Capture:
In the ancient law of Israel "siege" is classed with drought and pestilence and exile as punishments with which Yahweh would visit His people for their disobedience (Dt 28:49-57). Of the horrors there described they had again and again bitter experience. At the siege of Samaria by Ben-hadad II, so terrible were the straits to which the besieged were reduced that they cooked and ate their own children (2 Ki 6:28). In the siege of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans, which ended in the overthrow of the city and the destruction of the Temple, the sufferings of the inhabitants from hunger and disease were incredible (2 Ki 25:3; Jer 32:24; Lam 2:20; 4:8-10). The horrors of siege have, perhaps, reached their climax in the account given by Josephus of the tragedy of Masada. To escape capture by the Romans, ten men were chosen by lot from among the occupants of the fortress, 960 in number, including combatants and non-combatants, men, women and children, to slay the rest. From these ten one was similarly chosen to slay the survivors, and he, having accomplished his awful task, ran his sword into his own body (Josephus, BJ, VII, ix, 1). While all the inhabitants of a city under siege suffered the famine of bread and the thirst for water, the combatants ran the risk of impalement and other forms of torture to which prisoners in Assyrian and Chaldean and Roman warfare were subjected.
The horrors attending the siege of a city were only surpassed by the barbarities perpetrated at its capture. The emptying of a city by its capture is likened to the hurling of a stone from a sling (Jer 10:17,18). Deportation of the whole of the inhabitants often followed (2 Ki 17:6; 24:14). Not only were the inhabitants of the captured city deported, but their gods were carried off with them and the idols broken in pieces. This is predicted or recorded of Babylon (Isa 21:9; 46:1; Jer 50:2), of Egypt (Jer 43:12), of Samaria (Hos 10:6). Indiscriminate slaughter followed the entrance of the assailants, and the city was usually given over to the flames (Jer 39:8,9; Lam 4:18). "Cities without number," says Shalmaneser II in one of his inscriptions, "I wrecked, razed, burned with fire." Houses were destroyed and women dishonored (Zec 14:2). When Darius took Babylon, he impaled three thousand prisoners (Herodotus iii.159). The Scythians scalped and flayed their enemies and used their skins for horse trappings (ibid., iv.64). The Assyrian sculptures show prisoners subjected to horrible tortures, or carried away into slavery. The captured Zedekiah had his eyes put out after he had seen his own sons cruelly put to death (2 Ki 25:7). It is only employing the imagery familiar to Assyrian warfare when Isaiah represents Yahweh as saying to Sennacherib: "Therefore will I put my hook in thy nose, and my bridle in thy lips, and I will turn thee back by the way by which thou camest" (Isa 37:29). Anticipating the savage barbarities that would follow the capture of Samaria by the Assyrians, Hosea foresees the infants being dashed to pieces and the women with child being ripped up (Hos 10:14; 13:16; compare Am 1:13). The prophet Nahum predicting the overthrow of Nineveh recalls how at the capture of No-amon (Egyptian Thebes) by the Assyrian conqueror, Ashurbanipal, "her young children also were dashed in pieces at the head of all the streets; and they cast lots for her honorable men, and all her great men were bound in chains" (Nah 3:10).
8. Siege in the New Testament:
The only. explicit reference to siege operations in the New Testament is our Lord's prediction of the complete destruction of Jerusalem when He wept over its coming doom: "For the days shall come upon thee, when thine enemies shall cast up a bank (charax, the King James Version, quite incorrectly, "trench") about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, and shall dash thee to the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another" (Lk 19:43,44). The order and particulars of the siege are in accordance with the accounts of siege operations in the Old Testament. How completely the prediction was fulfilled we see from Josephus ( BJ , V, vi, 10).
Figurative:
In Paul's Epistles there are figures taken from siege operations. In 2 Cor 10:4 we have "the casting down of strongholds," where the Greek word kathairesis, from kathairein, is the regular word used in Septuagint for the reduction of a fortress (Prov 21:22; Lam 2:2; 1 Macc 5:65). In Eph 6:16 there is allusion to siege-works, for the subtle temptations of Satan are set forth as the flaming darts hurled by the besiegers of a fortress which the Christian soldier is to quench with the shield of faith.
LITERATURE.
Nowack, Hebraische Archaeologie, 71; Benzinger, "Kriegswesen" in Herzog3; Billerbeck and A. Jeremias, Der Untergang Ninivehs; Billerbeck, Der Festungsbau im alten Orient.
T. Nicol
siv.
See AGRICULTURE ;THRESHING .
sig'-los (siglos): A Persian silver coin, twenty of which went to the gold DARIC (which see).
sin ('oth "a sign" "mark" mopheth, "wonder"' semeion, "a sign," "signal," "mark"): A mark by which persons or things are distinguished and made known. In Scripture used generally of an address to the senses to attest the existence of supersensible and therefore divine power. Thus the plagues of Egypt were "signs" of divine displeasure against the Egyptians (Ex 4:8 ff; Josh 24:17, and often); and the miracles of Jesus were "signs" to attest His unique relationship with God (Mt 12:38; Jn 2:18; Acts 2:22). Naturally, therefore, both in the Old Testament and the New Testament, "signs" are assimilated to the miraculous, and prevailingly associated with immediate divine interference. The popular belief in this manner of communication between the visible and the invisible worlds has always been, and is now, widespread. So-called "natural" explanations, however ingenious or cogent, fail with the great majority of people to explain anything. Wesley and Spurgeon were as firm believers in the validity of such methods of intercourse between man and God as were Moses and Gideon, Peter and John.
The faith that walks by signs is not by any means to be lightly esteemed. It has been allied with the highest nobility of character and with the most signal achievement. Moses accepted the leadership of his people in response to a succession of signs: e.g. the burning bush, the rod which became a serpent, the leprous hand, etc. (Ex 3 and 4); so, too, did Gideon, who was not above making proof of God in the sign of the fleece of wool (Jdg 6:36-40). In the training of the Twelve, Jesus did not disdain the use of signs (Lk 5:1-11, and often); and the visions by which Peter and Paul were led to the evangelization of the Gentiles were interpreted by them as signs of the divine purpose (Acts 10 and 16).
The sacramental use of the sign dates from the earliest period, and the character of the sign is as diverse as the occasion. The rainbow furnishes radiant suggestion of God's overarching love and assurance that the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy the earth (Gen 9:13; compare 4:15); the Feast of Unleavened Bread is a reminder of God's care in bringing His people out of bondage (Ex 13:3); the Sabbath is an oft-recurring proclamation of God's gracious thought for the well-being of man (Ex 31:13; Ezek 20:12); the brazen serpent, an early foreshadowing of the cross, perpetuates the imperishable promise of forgiveness and redemption (Nu 21:9); circumcision is made the seal of the special covenant under which Israel became a people set apart (Gen 17:11); baptism, the Christian equivalent of circumcision, becomes the sign and seal of the dedicated life and the mark of those avowedly seeking to share in the blessedness of the Kingdom of God (Lk 3:12-14; Acts 2:41, and often); bread and wine, a symbol of the spiritual manna by which soul and body are preserved unto everlasting life, is the hallowed memorial of the Lord's death until His coming again (Lk 22:14-20; 1 Cor 11:23-28). Most common of all were the local altars and mounds consecrated in simple and sincere fashion to a belief in God's ruling and overruling providence (Josh 4:1-10).
Signs were offered in proof of the divine commission of prophet (Isa 20:3) and apostle (2 Cor 12:12), and of the Messiah Himself (Jn 20:30; Acts 2:22); and they were submitted in demonstration of the divine character of their message (2 Ki 20:9; Isa 38:1; Acts 3:1-16). By anticipation the child to be born of a young woman (Isa 7:10-16; compare Lk 2:12) is to certify the prophet's pledge of a deliverer for a captive people.
See IMMANUEL .
With increase of faith the necessity for signs will gradually decrease. Jesus hints at this (Jn 4:48), as does also Paul (1 Cor 1:22). Nevertheless "signs," in the sense of displays of miraculous powers, are to accompany the faith of believers (Mk 16:17 f), usher in and forthwith characterize the dispensation of the Holy Spirit, and mark the consummation of the ages (Rev 15:1).
See also MIRACLE .
For "sign" of a ship (parasemos, "ensign," Acts 28:11).
See DIOSCURI ;SHIPS AND BOATS ,III , 2.
Charles M. Stuart
sig'-net.
See SEAL .
See ASTRONOMY , sec. I, 4.
nu-mer'-i-kal.
See NUMBER .
si'-hon (cichon): King of the Amorites, who vainly opposed Israel on their journey from Egypt to Palestine, and who is frequently mentioned in the historical books and in the Psalms because of his prominence and as a warning for those who rise against Yahweh and His people (Nu 21:21, and often; Dt 1:4; 31:4; Josh 2:10; Jdg 11:19,20,21; 1 Ki 4:19; Neh 9:22; Ps 135:11; 136:19; Jer 48:45).
si'-hor.
See SHIHOR .
si'-hor-lib'-nath.
See SHIHOR-LIBNATH .
si'-las (Silas, probably contraction for Silouanos; the Hebrew equivalents suggested are shalish, "Tertius," or shelach (Gen 10:24) (Knowling), or sha'ul = "asked" (Zahn)): The Silas of Acts is generally identified with the Silvaus of the Epistles. His identification with Titus has also been suggested, based on 2 Cor 1:19; 8:23, but this is very improbable (compare Knowling, Expositor's Greek Test., II, 326). Silas, who was probably a Roman citizen (compare Acts 16:37), accompanied Paul during the greater part of his 2nd missionary journey (Acts 15 through 18). At the meeting of the Christian community under James at Jerusalem, which decided that circumcision should not be obligatory in the case of Gentile believers, Silas and Judas Barsabas were appointed along with Paul and Barnabas to convey to the churches in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia the epistle informing them of this decision. As "leading men among the brethren" at Jerusalem, and therefore more officially representative of the Jerusalem church than Paul and Barnabas, Silas and Judas were further commissioned to confirm the contents of the letter by "word of mouth." On arrival at Antioch, the epistle was delivered, and Judas and Silas, "being themselves also prophets, exhorted the brethren with many words, and confirmed them." Their mission being thus completed, the four were "dismissed in peace from the brethren unto those that had sent them forth" (Revised Version), or "unto the apostles" (the King James Version) (Acts 15:22-33).
Different readings now render the immediate movements of Silas somewhat obscure; Acts 15:33 would imply that he returned to Jerusalem. But some texts proceed in 15:34, "Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still," and others add "and Judas alone proceeded." Of this, the first half is accepted by the King James Version. The principal texts however reject the whole verse and are followed in this by the Revised Version (British and American). It is held by some that he remained in Antioch till chosen by Paul (Acts 15:40). Others maintain that he returned to Jerusalem where John Mark then was (compare Acts 13:13); and that either during the interval of "some days" (Acts 15:36), when the events described in Gal 2:11 ff took place (Wendt), he returned to Antioch along with Peter, or that he and John Mark were summoned thither by Paul and Barnabas, subsequent to their dispute regarding Mark. (For fuller discussion, see Knowling, Expositor's Greek Test., II, 330, 332-35.)
Upon Barnabas' separation from Paul, Silas was chosen by Paul in his place, and the two missionaries, "after being commended by the brethren (at Antioch) to the grace of the Lord," proceeded on their journey (Acts 15:33 margin through 40). Passing through Syria, Cilicia, Galatia, Phrygia and Mysia, where they delivered the decree of the Jerusalem council and strengthened the churches, and were joined by Timothy, they eventually reached Troas (Acts 15:41 through 16:8). Indications are given that at this city Luke also became one of their party (compare also the apocryphal "Acts of Paul," where this is definitely stated; Budge, Contendings of the Apostles,II , 544).
Upon the call of the Macedonian, the missionary band set sail for Greece, and after touching at Samothrace, they landed at Neapolis (Acts 16:9-11). At Philippi, Lydia, a seller of purple, was converted, and with her they made their abode; but the exorcism of an evil spirit from a sorceress brought upon Silas and Paul the enmity of her masters, whose source of gain was thus destroyed. On being charged before the magistrates with causing a breach of the peace and preaching false doctrine, their garments were rent off them and they were scourged and imprisoned. In no way dismayed, they prayed and sang hymns to God, and an earthquake in the middle of the night secured them a miraculous release. The magistrates, on learning that the two prisoners whom they had so maltreated were Roman citizens, came in person and besought them to depart out of the city (Acts 16:12-39). After a short visit to the house of Lydia, where they held an interview with the brethren, they departed for Thessalonica, leaving Luke behind (compare Knowling, op. cit., 354-55). There they made many converts, especially among the Greeks, but upon the house of Jason, their host, being attacked by hostile Jews, they were compelled to escape by night to Berea (Acts 16:40 through 17:10). There they received a better hearing from the Jews, but the enmity of the Thessalonian Jews still pursued them, and Paul was conducted for safety to Athens, Silas and Timothy being left behind. On his arrival, he dispatched an urgent message back to Bercea for Silas and Timothy to rejoin him at that city (Acts 17:11-15). The narrative of Acts implies, however, that Paul had left Athens and had reached Corinth before he was overtaken by his two followers (18:5). Knowling (op. cit., 363-64) suggests that they may have actually met at Athens, and that Timothy was then sent to Thessalonica (compare 1 Thess 3:1,2), and Silas to Philippi (compare Phil 4:15), and that the three came together again at Corinth. The arrival of Silas and Timothy at that city is probably referred to in 2 Cor 11:9. It is implied in Acts 18:18 that Silas did not leave Corinth at the same time as Paul, but no further definite reference is made to him in the narrative of the 2nd missionary journey.
Assuming his identity with Silvanus, he is mentioned along with Paul and Timothy in 2 Cor 1:19 as having preached Christ among the Corinthians (compare Acts 18:5). In 1 Thess 1:1, and 2 Thess 1:1, the same three send greetings to the church at Thessalonica (compare Acts 17:1-9). In 1 Pet 5:12 he is mentioned as a "faithful brother" and the bearer of that letter to the churches of the Dispersion (compare on this last Knowling, op. cit., 331-32). The theory which assigns He to the authorship of Silas is untenable.
C. M. Kerr
si'-lens: Five Hebrew roots, with various derivatives, and two Greek words are thus translated. The word is used literally for dumbness, interrupted speech, as in Lam 2:10; Ps 32:3; Eccl 3:7; Am 5:13; Acts 15:12; 1 Cor 14:28; 1 Tim 2:11,12 the King James Version (the American Standard Revised Version "quietness"); Rev 8:1, or figuratively of the unanswered prayers of the believer (Ps 83:1; 35:22; Jer 8:14); of awe in the presence of the Divine Majesty (Isa 41:1; Zec 2:13), or of death (1 Sam 2:9; Ps 94:17; 115:17).
silk'-wurm ((1) meshi (Ezek 16:10,13), perhaps from mashah, "to draw" "to extract" compare Arabic masa' of same meaning; Septuagint trichapton, "woven of hair"; (2) serikon (Rev 18:12); (31 shesh; compare Arabic shash, a thin cotton material; (4) buts; compare Arabic 'abyad, "white," from bad; (5) bussos, "fine linen," later used of cotton and silk): The only undoubted reference to silk in the Bible is the passage cited from Revelation, where it is mentioned among the merchandise of Babylon. Serikon, "silk," is from Ser, the Greek name of China, whence silk was first obtained. The equivalent Latin sericum occurs frequently in classical authors, and is found in the Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) (Est 8:15) for buts, "fine linen." For buts, bussos, and shesh English Versions of the Bible has nearly always "fine linen," but for shesh in Prov 31:22, the King James Version has "silk," and in Gen 41:42 and Ex 25:4, the King James Version margin has "silk" and the Revised Version margin has "cotton."
There can be little doubt of the correctness of English Versions of the Bible "silk" for meshi in Ezek 16:10, "I girded thee about with fine linen (shesh), and' covered thee with silk (meshi)," and in the similar passage, Ezek 16:13.
Silk is produced by all Lepidoptera, butterflies and moths, but it is of great economic importance only in the Chinese silkworm, Bombyx mori, whose larva, a yellowish-white caterpillar from 2 to 3 in. long, feeds on the leaves of the mulberry (Morus). A pair of large glands on the two sides of the stomach secrete a viscous fluid, which is conveyed by ducts to an orifice under the mouth. On issuing into the air, the fine stream is hardened into the silk fiber, which the caterpillar spins into a cocoon. Within the cocoon the caterpillar is presently transformed into the chrysalis or pupa. The cocoons from which silk is to be spun are subjected to heat which kills the pupae and prevents them from being transformed into the perfect insects or moths, which would otherwise damage the cocoons as they made their exit.
The raising of silkworms, and the spinning and weaving of silk are now important industries in Syria, though the insect was unknown in Bible times. It was introduced to the Mediterranean region from China a few centuries after Christ. Coarse silk is produced from the Chinese oak silk-moth, Saturnia pernyi, and from the Japanese oak silk-moth, Saturnia yama-mai. The largest moth of Syria and Palestine is Saturnia pyri, from which silk has also been spun, but not commercially.
See, further, WEAVING.
Alfred Ely Day
sil'-a (cilla'; Codex Vaticanus Galla; Codex Alexandrinus Gaallad): Joash was assassinated by his servants "at the house of Millo, on the way that goeth down to Silla" (2 Ki 12:20). Wherever Beth-millo stood, Silla was evidently in the valley below it; but nothing is known of what it was or where it stood.
SILOAM; SILOAH; SHELAH; SHILOAH
si-lo'-am, si-lo'-am, si-lo'-a, she'-la, shi-lo'-a: (1) me ha-shiloach (shiloach or shilloach is a passive form and means "sent" or "conducted") "the waters of (the) Shiloah" (Isa 8:6). (2) berekhath ha-shelach, "the pool of (the) Shelah" (the King James Version "Siloah") (Neh 3:15). (3) ten kolumbethran tou (or ton) Siloam, "the pool of Siloam" (Jn 9:7). (4) ho purgos en to Siloam, "the tower in Siloam" (Lk 13:4).
Although the name is chiefly used in the Old Testament and Josephus as the name of certain "waters," the surviving name today, Silwan, is that of a fairly prosperous village which extends along the steep east side of the Kidron valley from a little North of the "Virgin's Fountain" as far as Bir Eyyub. The greater part of the village, the older and better built section, belongs to Moslem fellahin who cultivate the well-watered gardens in the valley and on the hill slopes opposite, but a southern part has recently been built in an extremely primitive manner by Yemen Jews, immigrants from South Arabia, and still farther South, in the commencement of the Wady en Nar, is the wretched settlement of the lepers. How long the site of Silwan has been occupied it is impossible to say. The village is mentioned in the 10th century by the Arab writer Muqaddasi. The numerous rock cuttings, steps, houses, caves, etc., some of which have at times served as chapels, show that the site has been much inhabited in the past, and at one period at least by hermits. The mention of "those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and killed them" (Lk 13:4) certainly suggests that there was a settlement there in New Testament times, although some writers consider that this may have reference to some tower on the city walls near the Pool of Siloam.
Opposite to the main part of Silwan is the "Virgin's Fount," ancient GIHON (which see), whose waters are practically monopolized by the villagers. It is the waters of this spring which are referred to in Isa 8:5,6: "Forasmuch as this people have refused the waters of Shiloah that go softly, .... now therefore, behold, the Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of the River."
The contrast between the little stream flowing from the Gihon and the great Euphrates is used as a figure of the vast difference between the apparent strength of the little kingdom of Judah and the House of David on the one hand, and the might of "Rezin and Remaliah's son" and "all his glory." Although it is quite probable that in those days there was an open streamlet in the valley, yet the meaning of Shiloah, "sent" or "conducted," rather implies some kind of artificial channel, and there is also archaeological evidence that some at least of the waters of Gihon were even at that time conducted by a rock-cut aqueduct along the side of the Kidron valley (See JERUSALEM ,VII , 5). It was not, however, till the days of Hezekiah that the great tunnel aqueduct, Siloam's most famous work, was made (2 Ki 20:20): "Hezekiah also stopped the upper spring of the waters of Gihon, and brought them, straight down on the west side of the City of David" (2 Ch 32:30); "They stopped all the fountains, and the brook (nachal) that flowed through the midst of the land, saying, Why should the kings of Assyria come, and find much water?" (2 Ch 32:4; Ecclesiasticus 48:17). Probably the exit of the water at Gihon was entirely covered up and the water flowed through the 1,700 ft. of tunnel and merged in the pool made for it (now known as the Birket Silwan) near the mouth of the Tyropceon valley. This extraordinary winding aqueduct along which the waters of the "Virgin's Fount" still flow is described in JERUSALEM, VII, 4 (which see). The lower end of this tunnel which now emerges under a modern arch has long been known as `Ain Silwan, the "Fountain of Siloam," and indeed, until the rediscovery of the tunnel connecting this with the Virgin's Fount (a fact known to some in the 13th century, but by no means generally known until the last century), it was thought this was simply a spring. So many springs all over Palestine issue from artificial tunnels--it is indeed the rule in Judea--that the mistake is natural. Josephus gives no hint that he knew of so great a work as this of Hezekiah's, and in the 5th century a church was erected, probably by the empress Eudoxia, at this spot, with the high altar over the sacred "spring." The only pilgrim who mentions this church is Antonius Martyr (circa 570), and after its destruction, probably by the Persians in 614, it was entirely lost sight of until excavated by Messrs. Bliss and Dickie. It is a church of extraordinary architectural features; the floor of the center aisle is still visible.
The water from the Siloam aqueduct, emerging at `Ain Silwan, flows today into a narrow shallow pool, approached by a steep flight of modern steps; from the southern extremity of this pool the water crosses under the modern road by means of an aqueduct, and after traversing a deeply cut rock channel below the scarped cliffs on the north side of el-Wad, it crosses under the main road up the Kidron and enters a number of channels of irrigation distributed among the gardens of the people of Silwan. The water here, as at its origin, is brackish and impregnated with sewage.
The modern Birket es-Silwan is but a poor survivor of the fine pool which once was here. Bliss showed by his excavations at the site that once there was a great rock-cut pool, 71 ft. North and South, by 75 ft. East and West, which may, in part at least, have been the work of Hezekiah (2 Ki 20:20), approached by a splendid flight of steps along its west side. The pool was surrounded by an arcade 12 ft. wide and 22 1/2 ft. high, and was divided by a central arcade, to make in all probability a pool for men and another for women. These buildings were probably Herodian, if not earlier, and therefore this, we may reasonably picture, was the condition of the pool at the time of the incident in Jn 9:7, when Jesus sent the blind man to "wash in the pool of Siloam."
This pool is also probably the Pool of Shelah described in Neh 3:15 as lying between the Fountain Gate and the King's Garden. It may also be the "king's pool" of Neh 2:14. If we were in any doubt regarding the position of the pool of Siloam, the explicit statement of Josephus (BJ, V, iv, 1) that the fountain of Siloam, which he says was a plentiful spring of sweet water, was at the mouth of the Tyropoeon would make us sure.
A little below this pool, at the very mouth of el-Wad, is a dry pool, now a vegetable garden, known as Birket el Chamra ("the red pool"). For many years the sewage of Jerusalem found its way to this spot, but when in 1904 an ancient city sewer was rediscovered (See PEFS , 1904, 392-94), the sewage was diverted and the site was sold to the Greek convent which surrounded it with a wall. Although this is no longer a pool, there is no doubt but that hereabouts there existed a pool because the great and massive dam which Bliss excavated here (See JERUSALEM ,VI , 5) had clearly been made originally to support a large body of water. It is commonly supposed that the original pool here was older than the Birket Silwan, having been fed by an aqueduct which was constructed from Gihon along the side of the Kidron valley before Hezekiah's great tunnel. If this is correct (and excavations are needed here to confirm this theory), then this may be the "lower pool" referred to in Isa 22:9, the waters of which Hezekiah "stopped," and perhaps, too, that described in the same passage as the "old pool."
The earliest known Hebrew inscription of any length was accidentally discovered near the lower end of the Siloam aqueduct in 1880, and reported by Dr. Schick. It was inscribed upon a rock-smoothed surface about 27 in. square, some 15 ft. from the mouth of the aqueduct; it was about 3 ft. above the bottom of the channel on the east side. The inscription consisted of six lines in archaic Hebrew, and has been translated by Professor Sayce as follows:
(1) Behold the excavation. Now this (is) the history of the tunnel: while the excavators were still lifting up
(2) The pick toward each other, and while there were yet three cubits (to be broken through) .... the voice of the one called
(3) To his neighbor, for there was an (?) excess in the rock on the right. They rose up .... they struck on the west of the
(4) Excavation; the excavators struck, each to meet the other, pick to pick. And there flowed
(5) The waters from their outlet to the pool for a thousand, two hundred cubits; and (?)
(6) Of a cubit, was the height of the rock over the head of the excavators ....
It is only a roughly scratched inscription of the nature of a graffito; the flowing nature of the writing is fully explained by Dr. Reissner's recent discovery of ostraca at Samaria written with pen and ink. It is not an official inscription, and consequently there is no kingly name and no date, but the prevalent view that it was made by the work people who carried out Hezekiah's great work (2 Ki 20:20) is now further confirmed by the character of the Hebrew in the ostraca which Reissner dates as of the time of Ahab.
Unfortunately this priceless monument of antiquity was violently removed from its place by some miscreants. The fragments have been collected and are now pieced together in the Constantinople museum. Fortunately several excellent "squeezes" as well as transcriptions were made before the inscription was broken up, so that the damage done is to be regretted rather on sentimental than on literary grounds.
E. W. G. Masterman
sil-va'-nus (Silouanos (2 Cor 1:19)).
See SILAS .
sil'-ver (keceph; argurion, arguros): Silver was known in the earliest historic times. Specimens of early Egyptian and Babylonian silver work testify to the skill of the ancient silversmiths. In Palestine, silver objects have been found antedating the occupation of the land by the Hebrews. This metal was used for making all kinds of ornamental objects. In the mound of Gezer were found bowls, vases, ladles, hairpins, rings and bracelets of silver. The rings and settings for scarabs or seals were commonly of this metal. The first mention of silver in the Bible is in Gen 13:2, where it says that Abraham was rich in cattle, in silver and gold. At that time it was commonly used in exchange in the form of bars or other shapes. Coins of that metal were of a much later date (Gen 20:16; 23:15; 24:53; 37:28, etc.). Booty was collected in silver (Josh 6:19); tribute was paid in the same (1 Ki 15:19). It was also used for jewelry (Gen 44:2). The Children of Israel systematically despoiled the Egyptians of their silver before the exodus (Ex 3:22; 11:2; 12:35, etc.). Ex 20:23 implies that idols were made of it. It was largely used in the fittings of the tabernacle (Ex 26 ff) and later of the temple (2 Ch 2 ff).
It is likely that the ancient supply of silver came from the mountains of Asia Minor where it is still found in abundance associated with lead as argentiferous galena, and with copper sulfide. The Turkish government mines this silver on shares with the natives. The Sinaitic peninsula probably also furnished some silver. Later Phoenician ships brought quantities of it from Greece and Spain. The Arabian sources are doubtful (2 Ch 9:14). Although silver does not tarnish readily in the air, it does corrode badly in the limestone soil of Palestine and Syria. This probably partly accounts for the small number of objects of this metal found. On the site of the ancient jewelers' shops of Tyre the writer found objects of gold, bronze, lead, iron, but none of silver.
Figurative:
Silver to be as stones in Jerusalem (1 Ki 10:27) typified great abundance (compare Job 3:15; 22:25; 27:16; also Isa 60:17; Zec 9:3). The trying of men's hearts was compared to the refining of silver (Ps 66:10; Isa 48:10). Yahweh's words were as pure as silver refined seven times (Ps 12:6). The gaining of understanding is better than the gaining of silver (Prov 3:14; compare 8:19; 10:20; 16:16; 22:1; 25:11). Silver become dross denoted deterioration (Isa 1:22; Jer 6:30). Breast and arms of silver was interpreted by Daniel to mean the inferior kingdom to follow Nebuchadnezzar's (Dan 2:32,39).
In the New Testament, reference should be made especially to Acts 19:24; Jas 5:3; Rev 18:12.
James A. Patch
sil'-ver-ling ('eleph kecheph (Isa 7:23)): `A thousand of silver' means a thousand shekels.
See PIECE OF SILVER .
sil'-ver-smith (argurokopos): Mentioned only once (Acts 19:24), where reference is made to Demetrius, a leading member of the silversmiths' guild of Ephesus.
si-mal-ku'-e: the King James Version = the Revised Version (British and American) IMALCUE (which see).
sim'-e-on (shim`on; Sumeon; the Hebrew root is from shama`, "to hear" (Gen 29:33); some modern scholars (Hitzig, W. R. Smith, Stade, etc.) derive it from Arabic sima`, "the offspring of the hyena and female wolf"): In Gen 29:33; 30:18-21; 35:23, Simeon is given as full brother to Reuben, Levi, Judah, Issachar and Zebulun, the son of Leah; and in Gen 34:25; 49:5 as the brother of Levi and Dinah. He was left as a hostage in Egypt by orders of Joseph (Gen 42:24; 43:23).
1. The Patriarch: Biblical Data:
In the "blessing" of the dying Jacob, Simeon and Levi are linked together:
"Simeon and Levi are brethren;
Weapons of violence are their swords.
O my soul, come not thou into their council;
Unto their assembly, my glory, be not thou united;
For in their anger they slew a man,
And in their self-will they hocked an ox.
Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce;
And their wrath, for it was cruel:
I will divide them in Jacob,
And scatter them in Israel" (Gen 49:5-7).
Whatever view may be taken of the events of Gen 34:25 (and some would see in it "a tradition of the settlement of Jacob which belongs to a cycle quite independent of the descent into Egypt and the Exodus" (see S. A. Cook, Encyclopedia Brit, article "Simeon")), it is clear that we have here a reference to it and the suggestion that the subsequent history of the tribe, and its eventual absorption in Judah, was the result of violence. In the same way the priestly Levites became distributed throughout the other tribes without any tribal inheritance of their own (Dt 18:1; Josh 13:14). From the mention (Gen 46:10; Ex 6:15) of Shaul as being the son of a Canaanite woman, it may be supposed that the tribe was a mixed one.
In the "blessing of Moses" (Dt 33) Simeon is not mentioned at all in the Hebrew text, although in some manuscripts of the Septuagint the latter half of Dt 33:6 is made to apply to him: "Let Simeon be a small company." The history of the tribe is scanty and raises many problems. Of the many theories advanced to meet them it cannot be said that any one answers all difficulties.
In the wilderness of Sinai the Simeonites camped beside the Reubenites (Nu 2:12; 10:19); it was Zimri, a member of one of the leading families of this tribe, who was slain by Phinehas in the affair of Baal-peor (Nu 25:14). The statistics in Nu 1:22 f, where the Simeonites are given as 59,300, compared with the 2nd census (Nu 26:14), where the numbers are 22,200, indicate a diminishing tribe. Some have connected this with the sin of Zimri.
At the recital of the law at Mt. Gerizim, Simeon is mentioned first among those that were to respond to the blessings (Dt 27:12). In the conquest of Canaan "Judah said unto Simeon his brother, Come up with me into my lot, that we may fight against the Canaanites; and I likewise will go with thee into thy lot. So Simeon went with him" (Jdg 1:3; compare 1:17). (Many scholars find in Gen 34 a tribal attempt on the part of the Simeonites to gain possession of Shechem; if this is so, Judah did not assist, and the utter failure may have been a cause of Simeon's subsequent dependence upon, and final absorption in, Judah.) In Jdg 4 and 5 Simeon is never mentioned. In the settlement of the land there is no account of how Simeon established himself in his territory (except the scanty reference in Jdg 1:3), but "their inheritance was in the midst of the inheritance of the children of Judah" (Josh 19:1); this is accounted for (Josh 19:9), "for the portion of the children of Judah was too much for them." Nevertheless we find there the very cities which are apportioned to Simeon, allotted to Judah (Josh 15:21-32; compare Neh 11:26-29). It is suggested (in 1 Ch 4:31) that the independent possession of these cities ceased in the time of David. David sent spoil to several Simeonite towns (1 Sam 30:26 f), and in 1 Ch 12:25 it is recorded that 7,100 Simeonite warriors came to David in Hebron. In 1 Ch 27:16 we have mention of a ruler of the Simeonites, Shephatiah, son of Maacah.
In 1 Ch 4:39 f mention is made of certain isolated exploits of Simeonites at GEDOR (which see), against the MEUNIM (which see), and at Mt. SEIR (which see). Later references associate certain Simeonites with the Northern Kingdom (2 Ch 15:9; 34:6), and tradition has come to view them as one of the ten tribes (compare Ezek 48:24,25,33; Rev 7:7), although all the history of them we have is bound up with Judah and the Southern Kingdom. There is no mention of the return of any Simeonites after the captivity; their cities fall to Judah (Neh 11:26 f).
3. References in Egyptian and Assyrian Inscriptions:
It has been supposed by many authorities that the name Shim`an occurs in the list of places plundered by Thothmes III (see Petrie, Hist,II , 104; also Hommel, Ancient Hebrew Tradition, 268; Sayce, Early Hebrew Traditions, 392). In the 7th century we have a doubtful reference in an inscription of Esar-haddon relating his Egyptian campaign when a city Ap-ku is mentioned as in the country of Sa-me-n(a), which may possibly be a reference to Simeon. The survival of the name so late, if true, is strange, in the light of what we gather from the Bible about the tribe. (For discussion of both of these inscriptions, with references to the lit., See EB , coll. 4528-30.)
The cities of Simeon as given in Josh 19:2-6 and 1 Ch 4:28,31 are (the names in parentheses are variations in the latter reference): Beer-sheba, Moladah, Hazar-shual, Balah (Bilhah), Azem (the King James Version) (Ezem), Eltolad (Tolad), Bethuel, Hormah, Ziklag, Beth-marcaboth, Hazar-susah (Hazar Susim), Beth-lebaoth (Beth-biri), Sharuhen (Shaaraim) (Etam), Ain Rimmon, Ether (Tochen), Ashan--in all, 16 cities in Joshua and 17 cities in 1 Chronicles. Ashan (1 Ch 6:59) is the only one assigned to the priests. It is written wrongly as "Ain" in Josh 21:16. All the above cities, with certain variations in form, and with the exception of Etam in 1 Ch 4:32, which is probably a mistake, occur in the list of the cities of Judah (Josh 15:26-32,42). Ziklag is mentioned (1 Sam 27:6) as being the private property of the kings of Judah from the days of David, who received it from Achish, king of Gath.
For the situation of these cities, so far as is known, see separate articles under their names. It is clear that they were all situated in the southwestern part of Palestine, and that Simeon had no definite territorial boundaries, but isolated cities, with their villages, among those of the people of Judah.
E. W. G. Masterman
(shim`on; Sumeon):
(1) The 2nd son of Jacob by Leah (see separate article).
(2) Great-grandfather of Judas Maccabeus (1 Macc 2:1).
(3) A man in Jerusalem described as "righteous and devout, looking for the consolation of Israel." When the infant Jesus was brought into the Temple, he took Him into his arms and blessed God in words which are famous as the Nunc dimittis. Simeon bestowed his blessing on the wondering father and mother (Lk 2:25,34). Legend has made him the son of Hillel and father of Gamaliel I, but this has no historical basis.
(4) An ancestor of Jesus (Lk 3:30); the Revised Version (British and American) "Symeon."
(5) The Revised Version (British and American) "Symeon": one of the prophets and teachers in the Christian community at Antioch. He is also called Niger, which was the Gentile name he had assumed, Symeon being Hebrew. He was among those who set apart Paul and Barnabas for their missionary work (Acts 13:1,2). Nothing more is known of him.
(6) The Revised Version (British and American) "Symeon": the Hebrew name of Simon Peter (Acts 15:14).
S. F. Hunter
ni'-jer): The King James Version in Acts 13:1, the Revised Version (British and American) "Symeon" (which see).
sim'-e-on-its.
See SIMEON .
si-mil'-i-tud: In the King James Version means either "an exact facsimile" (Ps 106:20 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "likeness"; Rom 5:14, etc.), or else "the form itself" (Nu 12:8; Dt 4:12,15,16 for temunah, "form" (so the Revised Version (British and American))); compare LIKENESS . the English Revised Version has retained the word in 2 Ch 4:3; Dan 10:16 (the American Standard Revised Version "likeness"), while the English Revised Version and the American Standard Revised Version have used "similitudes" in Hos 12:10 (damah, "be like"). The meaning is "I have inspired the prophets to speak parables."
(Simon, Greek form of SIMEON (which see)): The persons of the name of Simon mentioned in the Apocrypha are:
(1) Simon the Maccabean (Hasmonean), surnamed THASSI (which see), the 2nd son of Mattathias and elder brother of Judas Maccabeus. On his deathbed, Mattathias commended Simon as a "man of counsel" to be a "father" to his brethren (1 Macc 2:65), and a "man of counsel" he proved himself. But it was not till after the death of Judas and the capture of Jonathan that he played the chief role. Dispatched by Judas with a force to the relief of the Jews in Galilee he fought with great success (1 Macc 5:17 ff; Josephus, Ant, XII, viii, 1 f). We find him next taking revenge along with Jonathan on the "children of Jambri" (1 Macc 9:33 ff), and cooperating in the successful campaign around Bethbasi against Bacchides (circa 156 BC) (1 Macc 9:62 ff), and in the campaign against Apollonius (1 Macc 10:74 ff). In the conflict between Tryphon and Demetrius II, Simon was appointed by Antiochus VI "captain from the Ladder of Tyre unto the borders of Egypt" (1 Macc 11:59). After the capture of Jonathan at Ptolemais by Tryphon, Simon became acknowledged leader of his party. He thwarted Tryphon in his attempts upon Jerusalem, in revenge for which the latter murdered Jonathan (1 Macc 13:23). Simon then took the side of Demetrius on condition of immunity for Judea, and so `in the 170th year' (143-142 BC) `the yoke of the heathen was taken away from Israel' (1 Macc 13:41). Simon applied himself to rebuild the strongholds of Judea, reduced Gazara, captured the Acra (citadel) and made Joppa a seaport. He showed his wisdom most of all in his internal administration: "He sought the good of his country"; commerce and agriculture revived; lawlessness was suppressed and "the land had rest all the days of Simon (1 Macc 14:4 ff). His power was acknowledged by Sparta and Rome (1 Macc 14:16 ff). In 141 BC he was appointed by the nation leader, high priest and captain "for ever, until there should arise a faithful prophet" (1 Macc 14:41 ff), and thus the Hasmonean dynasty was founded. A new chronological era began with the first year of his administration, and he minted his own coins. A few years later Simon again meddled in Syrian politics (139 BC), this time at the entreaty of Antiochus VII (Sidetes) in his contest against Tryphon; when, however, Antiochus was assured of success, he refused the help of Simon and sent Cendebaeus against Judea. Judas and John, sons of Simon, defeated the invaders near Modin (137-136 BC). In 135 BC Simon met his death by treachery. Ptolemy the son of Abubus, Simon's own son-in-law, determined to secure supreme power for himself and, in order to accomplish this, to assassinate the whole family of Simon. He accordingly invited Simon and his sons to a banquet in the stronghold of Dok near Jericho, where he treacherously murdered Simon with his two sons Mattathias and Judas. The other son, John Hyrcanus, governor of Gazara, received intimation of the plot and saved himself to become the head of the Hasmonean dynasty. "The significance of Simon's administration consists in this, that he completed the work of Jonathan and left the Jewish people absolutely independent of Syria" (Schurer).
See MACCABAEUS ,II , 4.
(2) Simon I, the high priest, son of Onias I, whom he succeeded circa 300 BC. He was one of the last of the Great Synagogue, and to him is attributed the saying, "On three things the world depends--the Law, Worship and the showing of kindness." According to Josephus (Ant., XII, ii, 5) this Simon was called "the Just" (ho dikaios), "on account of his piety and his benevolent disposition toward his countrymen."
Many authorities (Herzfeld, Derenbourg, Stanley, Cheyne) assert that Josephus is wrong in attaching this epithet to Simon I instead of Simon II, and Schurer is not certain on this question. But the Talmud passage which Derenbourg cites means the opposite of what he takes it, namely, it is intended to show how splendid and holy were the days of Simeon (ha-tsaddiq) compared with the later days. Besides, Josephus is more likely to have known the truth on this matter than these later authorities. The same uncertainty obtains as to whether the eulogium in Sirach 50:1 ff of "the great priest" refers to Simon I or Simon II. Schurer and others refer it to Simon II. It is more likely to refer to the Simon who was famous as "the Just," and consequently to Simon I. Besides we know of no achievements of Simon II to entitle him to such praise. The building operations mentioned would suit the time of Simon I better, as Ptolemy captured Jerusalem and probably caused considerable destruction. The Talmud states that this Simon (and not Jaddua) met Alexander the Great.
(3) Simon II, high priest, son of Onias II and grandson of Simon I and father of Onias III, flourished about the end of the 3rd century BC, and was succeeded by his son Onias III circa 198 BC. Josephus says that this Simon in the conflict of the sons of Joseph sided with the elder sons against Hyrcanus the younger. Schurer (probably incorrectly) thinks he is the Simon praised in Sirach 50:1 ff. See (2) above (3 Macc 2:1; Josephus, Ant, XII , iv, 10).
(4) Simon, a Benjamite, guardian of the temple, who, having quarreled with the high priest Onias III, informed Apollonius of the untold sums of money in the temple treasury. Apollonius laid the matter before the king Seleucus IV, who sent Heliodorus to remove the money. An apparition prevented Heliodorus from accomplishing his task (2 Macc 3:4 ff). It is further recorded, that Simon continued his opposition to Onias. He is spoken of as brother of the renegade Menelaus (2 Macc 4:23). Of his end we know nothing.
(5) Simon Chosameus (Codex Vaticanus (and Swete) Chosamaos; Codex Alexandrinus Chosomaios), one of the sons of Annas who had married "strange wives" (1 Esdras 9:32). Simon apparently = "Shimeon" (shim`on) of the sons of Harim (Ezr 10:31); Chosameus is probably a corruption standing in the place of, but not resembling, any of the three names: Benjamin, Malluch, Shemaraiah, which Esdras omits from the Ezra list.
S. Angus
si'-mon (Simon):
(1) Simon Peter.
(2) Another of the Twelve, Simon "the Cananean" (Mt 10:4; Mk 3:18), "the Zealot" (Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13).
See CANANAEAN .
(3) One of the brethren of Jesus (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).
See BRETHREN OF THE LORD .
(4) "The leper" in Bethany, in whose house a woman poured a cruse of precious ointment over the head of Jesus (Mt 26:6; Mk 14:3). He had perhaps been healed by Jesus; in that case his ungracious behavior was not consistent with due gratitude. However he was healed, the title referred to his condition in the past, as lepers were ostracized by law.
(5) A Pharisee in whose house a woman, "a sinner," wet the feet of Jesus with her tears, and anointed them with ointment (Lk 7:36 ff). By some he is identified with (4), this being regarded as Luke's version of the incident recorded in Mt 26 and Mk 14. Others as strongly deny this view.
For discussion See MARY ,IV .
(6) A man of Cyrene, who was compelled to carry the cross of Jesus (Mt 27:32; Mk 15:21; Lk 23:26). Mark calls him "the father of Alexander and Rufus," well-known members of the church at (probably) Rome (compare Acts 19:33; Rom 16:13).
See CYRENIAN .
The father of Judas Iscariot (Jn 6:71; 12:4 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) omits; Jn 13:2,26).
(8) Simon Magus (Acts 8:9 ff). See separate article.
(9) Simon, the tanner, with whom Peter lodged at Joppa. His house was by the seaside outside the city wall, because of its ceremonial uncleanness to a Jew, and also for reasons of sanitation (Acts 9:43).
S. F. Hunter
ma'-gus (Simon, Greek form of Hebrew shim`on; Gesenius gives the meaning of the Hebrew word as "hearing with acceptance"; it is formed from [?] shama`, "to hear"):
1. Simon, a Magician
2. Simon and the Apostles
(1) Simon and Philip
(2) Simon and Peter John
3. The Magicians and the Gospel
4. Testimony of Early Christian Writers
5. Sources of Legendary History
6. Traditions of His Death
7. The Simoniani
8. Was Simon the Originator of Gnosticism?
The name or term "Magus" is not given to him in the New Testament, but is justly used to designate or particularize him on account of the incident recorded in Acts 8:9-24, for though the word "Magus" does not occur, yet in 8:9 the present participle mageuon is used, and is translated, both in the King James Version and in the Revised Version (British and American), "used sorcery." Simon accordingly was a sorcerer, he "bewitched the people of Samaria" (the King James Version). In Acts 8:11 it is also said that "of long time he had amazed" them "with his sorceries" (magiais). The claim, given out by himself, was that he "was some great one"; and this claim was acknowledged by the Samaritans, for previous to the introduction of the gospel into Samaria, "they all gave heed (to him), from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is that power of God which is called Great" (8:10).
It so happened, however, that Philip the deacon and evangelist went down from Jerusalem to Samaria, and "proclaimed unto them the Christ" (Acts 8:5); and as the result of the proclamation of the gospel, many were gathered into the Christian church. Many miracles also were performed by Philip, sick persons cured, and demons cast out; and Simon fell under the influence of all these things, both of the preaching and of "the signs." So great was the impression now made upon Simon that he "believed" (Acts 8:13). This means, at least, that he saw that Philip was able in the name of Jesus Christ to display powers greater than anything he himself was acquainted with: Philip's power was greater by far than Simon's. He therefore came forward as one of the new converts, and was baptized. After his baptism he continued with Philip. The signs which accompanied the introduction of the gospel into this city did not cease, and Simon seeing them "was amazed." The word denoting Simon's amazement at the "signs" wrought by Philip is the same as that used to express how the people of Samaria had been amazed at Simon's sorceries. It is an indication of the nature of the faith which he possessed in the gospel--wondering amazement at a new phenomenon not yet understood, not repentance or trust in Christ.
News having reached Jerusalem of the events which had occurred in Samaria, the apostles sent Peter and John to establish the work there. These two apostles prayed for the converts that they might receive the Holy Ghost, which they had not yet received. And when they had laid their hands upon the converts, the Spirit was given to them. At this early period in the history of the church the Holy Ghost was bestowed in a visible manner which showed itself in such miraculous gifts as are described in Acts 2. Simon saw what had taken place, and then, instead of joining the company of those who had truly repented and trusted Christ, he came forward with the same amazement as he had previously shown, and offered money to Peter and John, if they would impart to him the power of giving the Holy Spirit to others. Peter instantly rebuked this bold and ungodly request, and did so with such sterness as to cause Simon to ask that the judgment threatened by the apostle might not fall upon him.
Such is the unenviable history of Simon Magus, as it is recorded in the New Testament. Later centuries have shown their estimation of the heinousness of Simon's sin by employing his name to indicate the crime of buying or selling price a spiritual office for a price in money--"simony."
3. The Magicians and the Gospel:
It is not strange to find the gospel brought into direct conflict with magicians, for in the 1st and 2nd centuries there were a multitude of such persons who pretended to possess supernatural powers by which they endeavored to deceive men. They flattered the sinful inclinations of the human heart, and fell in with men's current ways of thinking, and required no self-renunciation at all. For these reasons the magicians found a ready belief on the part of many. The emperor Tiberius, in his later years, had a host of magicians in constant attendance upon him. Elymas, with whom Paul came in contact in Cyprus "was with the deputy of the country, Sergius Paulus, a prudent man" (Acts 13:7 the King James Version). Elymas was one of those magicians, and he endeavored to turn away the deputy from the faith. Luke expressly calls this man "magus", Elymas the magus (Acts 13:6,8 margin).
The influence of such persons presented an obstacle to the progress of the Christian faith, which had to force its way through the delusions with which these sorcerers had surrounded the hearts of those whom they deceived. When the gospel came in contact with these magicians and with their works, it was necessary that there should be striking facts, works of supernatural power strongly appealing to men's outward senses, in order to bring them out of the bewilderment and deception in which they were involved, and to make them able to receive the impression of spiritual truth. Such miracles were wrought both in Cyprus and in Samaria, the spheres of influence of the magicians Elymas and Simon. These divine works first arrested men's attention, and then dispelled the delusive influence of the sorcerers.
4. Testimony of Early Christian Writers:
(1) The history of Simon Magus does not close with what is narrated in the Acts, for the early Christian writers have much to say in regard to him.
Justin Martyr, himself a Samaritan, states that Simon Magus was a "Samaritan from the village called Gitton." Justin also relates that, in the time of Claudius Caesar, Simon was worshipped as a god at Rome on account of his magical powers, and that a statue had been erected to him, on the island in the river Tiber, with the inscription Simoni Deo Sancto, that is, "To Simon the sacred god." Curiously enough, in the year 1574, a stone which appears to have served as a pedestal of a statue, was dug up in the Tiber at the spot described by Justin; and on it were inscribed the words Semoni Sanco Deo Fidio Sacrum, that is, the stone then discovered was dedicated to the god Semo Sancus, the Sabine Hercules. This antiquarian find makes it probable that Jstin was mistaken in what he said about a statue having been erected in honor of Simon Magus. "It is incredible that the folly should ever be carried to such an extent as that a statue should be erected, and the senate should pass a decree enrolling Simon Magus among the deos Romanos" (Neander, Church History, II, 123). The inscription found in 1574 shows the source of the error into which Justin had fallen.
There are many stories told by some of the early Christian writers regarding Simon Magus, but they are full of legend and fable: some of them are improbable in the extreme and border on the impossible.
(2) Jerome, who professes to quote from writings of Simon, represents him as employing these words in reference to himself, "I am the Word of God, I am the Comforter, I am Almighty, I am all there is of God" (Mansel, The Gnostic Heresies, 82). Irenaeus (Mansel, ibid., 82) writes regarding him: "Simon, having purchased a certain woman named Helena, who had been a prostitute in the city of Tyre, carried her about with him, and said that she was the first conception of his mind, the mother of all things, by whom, in the beginning, he conceived the thought of making the angels and archangels; for that this conception proceeded forth from him, and knowing her father's wishes, she descended to the lower world, and produced the angels and powers; by whom also he said that this world was made. But after she had produced them, she was detained by them through envy, since they were unwilling to be considered the offspring of any other being; for he himself was entirely unknown by them; but his conception was detained by those powers and angels which were put forth from her, and suffered every insult from them that she might not return upward to her father; and this went so far that she was even confined within a human body, and for ages passed into other female bodies, as if from one vessel into another. He said also that she was that Helen, on whose account the Trojan war was fought .... and that after passing from one body to another, and constantly meeting with insult, at last she became a public prostitute, and that this was the lost sheep. On this account he himself came, that he might first of all reclaim her and free her from her chains, and then give salvation to men through the knowledge of himself. For since the angels ruled the world badly, because one of them desired the chief place, he had come down for the restoration of all things, and had descended, being changed in figure, and made like to principalities and powers and angels, so that he appeared among men as a man, and was thought to have suffered in Judea, though he did not suffer. .... Furthermore he said that the prophets uttered their prophecies under the inspiration of those angels who framed the world; for which reason they who rest their hope on him and his Helena no longer cared for them, but as free men could act as they pleased, for that men are saved by his (i.e. Simon's) grace, and not according to their own just works, for that no acts were just by nature, but by accident, according to the rules established by the angels, who made the world, and who attempt by these precepts to bring men into bondage. For this reason he promised that the world should be released, and those who are his set at liberty from the government of those who made the world."
5. Sources of Legendary History:
The chief sources of the legendary history of Simon Magus are the collection of writings known as The Clementines (See LITERATURE ,SUB-APOSTOLIC ;PETER ,THE FIRST EPISTLE OF ;PETER ,THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ). What is there said of him is, that he studied at Alexandria, and that he had been, along with the heresiarch Dositheus, a disciple of John the Baptist. He became also a disciple of Dositheus, and afterward his successor. The Clementines comprise (1) The Homilies, (2) The Recognitions, and (3) The Epitome. These three are cognate works, and in part are identical. The date of The Homilies may be placed about 160 AD. The contents comprise a supposed letter from the apostle Peter to the apostle James, along with other matter. Then follow the homilies, of which there are twenty. These record the supposed travels of Clement, a Roman citizen. Clement meets with Barnabas and with Peter. Then there is narrated a discussion between Peter and Simon Magus. This disputation lasts for three days, Simon maintaining that there are two gods, and that the God of the Old Testament is an imperfect being. Simon Magus withdraws to Tyre and then to Sidon. Peter follows Simon from place to place, counteracting his sorceries, and instructing the people. At Laodicea a second disputation takes place between the apostle and Simon on the same subjects.
The Homilies are not a Christian protest against Gnosticism, but merely that of one Gnostic school or sect against another, the Ebionite against the Marcionite. The Deity of Christ is denied, and He is regarded as one of the Jewish prophets.
In the legends Simon is represented as constantly opposing Peter, who ultimately discredits and vanquishes him. These legends occur in more forms than one, the earlier form selecting Antioch as the place where Simon was discomfited by the apostle and where he also died, while the later tradition chooses Rome for these events.
One tradition tells how the magician ordered his followers to bury him in a grave, promising that if this were done, he would rise again on the third day. They did as he wished and buried him; but this was the end of him, for he did not rise again.
Simon is said to have met his death at Rome, after an encounter with the apostle Peter. During this his final controversy with the apostle, Simon had raised himself in the air by the help of evil spirits, and in answer to the prayer of Peter and Paul he was dashed to the ground and killed.
According to another form of this tradition, Simon proposed to give the Roman emperor a proof of his power by flying off to God. He succeeded, it is said, in flying for a certain distance over Rome, but in answer to the prayer of Peter he fell and broke one of his legs. This tradition accounts for his end by saying that the people stoned him to death.
The Simoniani, the Simonians or followers of Simon, were an eclectic sect, who seem, at one time, to have adopted tenets and opinions derived from paganism, at another, from Judaism and the beliefs of the Samaritans, and at another still, from Christianity. Sometimes they seem to have been ascetics; at others they are wild scoffers at moral law. They regarded Simon Magus as their Christ, or at least as a form of manifestation of the redeeming Christ, who had manifested Himself also in Jesus. The Simonians were one of the minor Gnostic sects and were carried far away both from the doctrine and from the ethical spirit of the Christian faith.
Origen denies that the followers of Simon were Christians in any sense. The words of Origen are, "It escapes the notice of Celsus that the Simonians do not in any way acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God, but they call Simon the Power of God." In the time of Origen the followers of Simon had dwindled in number to such a degree that he writes, "I do not think it possible to find that all the followers of Simon in the whole world are more than thirty: and perhaps I have said more than there really are" (Contra Celsus, i.57, quoted by Alford, Greek New Testament, Acts 8:9).
8. Was Simon the Originator of Gnosticism?:
Irenaeus also has much to say regarding Simon and his followers. He makes the legendary Simon identical with the magician of Acts 8, makes him also the first in the list which he gives of heretics, and also says that it was from him that Gnosticism sprang. The account which he gives of the Simonians shows that by the time when Irenaeus lived, their system had developed into Gnosticism; but this fact does not justify Irenaeus in the assertion that Simon of Acts 8 is the originator of the Gnostic system. The early Christian writers took this view, and regarded Simon Magus as the founder of Gnosticism. Perhaps they were right, "but from the very little authentic information we possess, it is impossible to ascertain how far he was identified with their tenets" (Alford, New Testament, II, 86). In the midst of the various legends regarding Simon, it may be that there is a substratum of fact, of such a nature that future investigation and discovery will justify these early Christian writers in their judgment, and will show that Simon Magus is not to be overlooked as one of the sources from which Gnosticism sprang. The exact origin of Gnosticism is certainly difficult to trace, but there is little or no indication that it arose from the incidents narrated in Acts 8. It cannot be denied that a connection is possible, and may have existed between the two, that is between Simon Magus and some of the Gnostic heresies; but the facts of history show widespread tendencies at work, during and even before the Apostolic age, which amply account for the rise of Gnosticism. These are found e.g. in the Alexandrian philosophy, and in the tenets of the false teachers at Colosse and in other places. These philosophical and theosophical ideas commingled with the influences of Zoroastrianism from Persia, and of Buddhism from India, and these tendencies and influences, taken in conjunction, were the sources of the various heresies known by the name of Gnosticism.
See GNOSTICISM .
John Rutherfurd
SIMON THE CANAANITE; SIMON THE CANANAEAN; SIMON THE ZEALOT
(Simon Kananaios; kanna'i, "the Jealous (or Zealous) One"): One of the Twelve Apostles. This Simon was also named "the Canaanite" (Mt 10:4; Mk 3:18 the King James Version) or "the Cananean" (Mt 10:4; Mk 3:18 the Revised Version (British and American)) or "Zelotes" (Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13 the King James Version) or "the Zealot" (Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13 the Revised Version (British and American)).
According to the "Gospel of the Ebionites" or" Gospel of the Twelve Apostles" (of the 2nd century and mentioned by Origen) Simon received his call to the apostleship along with Andrew and Peter, the sons of Zebedee, Thaddaeus and Judas Iscariot at the Sea of Tiberias (compare Mt 4:18-22; see also Hennecke, Neutestamentliche Apokryphen, 24-27).
Although Simon, like the majority of the apostles, was probably a Galilean, the designation "Cananaean" is regarded as of political rather than of geographical significance (compare Luke's rendering). The Zealots were a faction, headed by Judas of Galilee, who "in the days of the enrollment" (compare Acts 5:37; Lk 2:1,2) bitterly opposed the threatened increase of taxation at the census of Quirinius, and would have hastened by the sword the fulfillment of Messianic prophecy.
Simon has been identified with Simon the brother of Jesus (Mk 6:3; Mt 13:55), but there also are reasons in favor of identifying him with Nathanael.
Thus (1) all the arguments adduced in favor of the Bartholomew-Nathanael identification (See NATHANAEL ) can equally be applied to that of Simon-Nathanael, except the second. But the second is of no account, since the Philip-Bartholomew connection in the Synoptists occurs merely in the apostolic lists, while in John it is narrative. Further, in the Synoptists, Philip is connected in the narrative, not with Bartholomew but with Andrew.
(2) The identity is definitely stated in the Genealogies of the Twelve Apostles (See NATHANAEL ). Further, the "Preaching of Simon, son of Cleopas" (compare Budge,II , 70 ff) has the heading "The preaching of the blessed Simon, the son of Cleopas, who was surnamed Judas, which is interpreted Nathanael, who became bishop of Jerusalem after James the brother of our Lord." Eusebius (Historia Ecclesiastica, III, xi, 32; IV, xxii) also refers to a Simon who succeeded James as bishop of Jerusalem and suffered martyrdom under Trajan; and Hegesippus, whom Eusebius professes to quote, calls this Simon a son of Cleopas.
(3) The invitation of Philip to Nathanael (compare Jn 1:45) was one which would naturally be addressed to a follower of the Zealots, who based their cause on the fulfillment of Messianic prophecy.
(4) As Alpheus, the father of James, is generally regarded as the same as Clopas or Cleopas (See JAMES ), this identification of the above Simon Nathanael, son of Cleopas, with Simon Zelotes would shed light on the reason of the juxtaposition of James son of Alpheus and Simon Zelotes in the apostolic lists of Luke and Acts, i.e. they were brothers.
C. M. Kerr
sim'-p'l: In the Old Testament the uniform tranlation of the Hebrew word pethi (root pathah, "be open"). Like the English word "simple" (etymologically "of one fold"), the Hebrew pethi is used sometimes in a good sense, i.e. "open-minded" (Ps 19:7; 116:6; 119:130, possibly in all three cases the sense is neutral rather than positively good), and sometimes in a bad sense (Prov 7:7, parallel to "destitute of understanding"; 8:5, parallel to "fools" (blockheads); 14:15, opposed to prudent). The fundamental idea of pethi seems to be open to influence, i.e. easily influenced. That one open to influence should as a rule be classed with the irreligious is one of many instances in which language is an unwilling witness to the miasmatic moral atmosphere in which we live. The line between moral weakness and moral turpitude, between negative goodness (if indeed such a thing be conceivable) and positive badness, is soon passed.
In the New Testament the word "simple" is found only in Rom 16:18,19 the King James Version. In the first of these passages it is used to translate akakos (the Revised Version (British and American) "innocent"). In Heb 7:26 the King James Version the same word is rendered "harmless," the rendering of the Revised Version (British and American) in this instance being "guileless." This would suit Rom 16:18 better than "innocent." Guilelessness is not a synonym for gullibility; but the guileless are frequently the prey of designing men. In Rom 16:19 the word translated "simple" is akeraios, literally, "unmixed," "sincere" (Trench and Godet; Young, erroneously "hornless" and so "harmless"). "Uncontaminated" seems to be the idea of the apostle. He would have those to whom he wrote "wise as regards good" and not ignorant as regards evil--for that would be impossible, even if desirable--but without that kind of knowledge of evil that comes from engaging in it, as we say, mixing themselves up with it, unalloyed with evil.
W. M. McPheeters
sim-plis'-i-ti (pethayyuth; haplotes): The words in the Old Testament commonly translated "simplicity" are pethi, "simple" (Prov 1:22), pethayyuth, "simplicity" (9:13 margin), tom, "completeness," "integrity" (2 Sam 15:11), "They went in their simplicity." In the New Testament, haplotes, "singleness of mind," "simplicity," occurs in Rom 12:8, "He that giveth let him do it with simplicity," the Revised Version (British and American) "liberality," margin "Greek: `singleness'"; 2 Cor 1:12, "in simplicit and godly sincerity," the Revised Version (British and American) (with corrected text) "in holiness and sincerity of God"; 2 Cor 11:3, "the simplicity that is in Christ," the Revised Version (British and American) (with corrected text) "the simplicity and the purity that is toward Christ"; compare Eph 6:5; Col 3:22, where the translation is "singleness" In The Wisdom of Solomon 1:1 we have, "Think ye of the Lord with a good mind (the King James Version "heart"), and in singleness (the King James Version "simplicity") of heart seek ye him" (haplotes). our Lord also speaks (Mt 6:22; Lk 11:34) of the "single eye" (haplous), and James (1:5) applies haplos, "simply," "directly," without after-thought (the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) "liberally") to God, who had been described by Plato (Rep. ii.382 E) as being perfectly simple (haplous) and true, both in word and deed. In such "simplicity"--openness, sincerity, freedom from double-mindedness--man most resembles God and is most open to His visitation and blessing.
W. L. Walker
sim'-ri.
See SHIMRI .
(chaTTa'th, "a missing," `awon, "perversity]" pesha`, "transgression," ra`, "evil," etc.; hamartano, "miss the mark," parabasis, "transgression" with a suggestion of violence, adikia, "injustice," "unrighteousness"):
1. Sin as Disobedience
2. Affects the Inner Life
3. Involves All Men
4. The Story of the Fall
5. The Freedom of Man
6. A Transgression against Light
7. Inwardness of the Moral Law
(1) Prophets
(2) Paul
(3) Jesus
8. Sin a Positive Force
9. Heredity
10. Environment
11. Redemption
12. Life in Christ
13. Repentance
14. Forgiveness
LITERATURE
A fairly exact definition of sin based on Biblical data would be that sin is the transgression of the law of God (1 Jn 3:4). Ordinarily, sin is defined simply as "the transgression of the law," but the idea of God is so completely the essential conception of the entire Biblical revelation that we can best define sin as disobedience to the law of God. It will be seen that primarily sin is an act, but from the very beginning it has been known that acts have effects, not only in the outward world of things and persons, but also upon him who commits the act.
Hence, we find throughout the Scriptures a growing emphasis on the idea of the sinful act as not only a fact in itself, but also as a revelation of an evil disposition on the part of him who commits the act (Gen 6:5).
Then also there is the further idea that deeds which so profoundly affect the inner life of an individual in some way have an effect in transmitting evil tendencies to the descendants of a sinful individual (Ps 51:5,6; Eph 2:3). See HEREDITY ;TRADITION . Hence, we reach shortly the conception, not only that sin is profoundly inner in its consequences, but that its effects reach outward also to an extent which practically involves the race. Around these various items of doctrine differing systems of theology have sprung up.
Students of all schools are agreed that we have in the Old Testament story of the fall of Adam an eternally true account of the way sin comes into the world (Gen 3:1-6). The question is not so much as to the literal historic matter-of-factness of the narrative, as to its essentially psychological truthfulness. The essential thought of the narrative is that both Adam and Eve disobeyed an express command of God. The seductiveness of temptation is nowhere more forcefully stated than in this narrative. The fruit of the tree is pleasant to look upon; it is good to eat; it is to be desired to make one wise; moreover, the tempter moves upon the woman by the method of the half truth (See ADAM IN THE OLD TESTAMENT ). God had said that disobedience to the command would bring death; the tempter urged that disobedience would not bring death, implying that the command of God had meant that death would immediately follow the eating of the forbidden fruit. In the story the various avenues of approach of sin to the human heart are graphically suggested, but after the seductiveness of evil has thus been set forth, the fact remains that both transgressors knew they were transgressing (Gen 3:2 f). Of course, the story is told in simple, naive fashion, but its perennial spiritual truth is at once apparent. There has been much progress in religious thinking concerning sin during the Christian ages, but the progress has not been away from this central conception of willful disobedience to the law of God.
In this early Biblical account there is implicit the thought of the freedom of man. The idea of transgression has sometimes been interpreted in such wise as to do away with this freedom. An unbiased reading of the Scriptures would, with the possible exception of some passages which designedly lay stress on the power of God (Rom 8:29,30), produce on the mind the impression that freedom is essential to sin. Certainly there is nothing in the account of the Old Testament or New Testament narratives to warrant the conception that men are born into sin by forces over which they have no control. The argument of the tempter with the woman is an argument aimed at her will. By easy steps, indeed, she moves toward the transgression, but the transgression is a transgression and nothing else. Of course, the evil deed is at once followed by attempts on the part of the transgressors to explain themselves, but the futility of the explanations is part of the point of the narrative. In all discussion of the problem of freedom as relating to sin, we must remember that the Biblical revelation is from first to last busy with the thought of the righteousness and justice and love of God (Gen 6:9 tells us that because of justice or righteousness, Noah walked with God). Unless we accept the doctrine that God is Himself not free, a doctrine which is nowhere implied in the Scripture, we must insist that the condemnation of men as sinful, when they have not had freedom to be otherwise than sinful, is out of harmony with the Biblical revelation of the character of God. Of course this does not mean that a man is free in all things. Freedom is limited in various ways, but we must retain enough of freedom in our thought of the constitution of men to make possible our holding fast to the Biblical idea of sin as transgression. Some who take the Biblical narrative as literal historical fact maintain that all men sinned in Adam (See IMPUTATION ,III , 1). Adam may have been free to sin or not to sin, but, "in his fall we sinned all." We shall mention the hereditary influences of sin in a later paragraph; here it is sufficient to say that even if the first man had not sinned, there is nothing in our thought of the nature of man to make it impossible to believe that the sinful course of human history could have been initiated by some descendant of the first man far down the line.