Sabeans–Salu

[Sheba]

(striking), (Genesis 10:7) or Sab’ta, (1 Chronicles 1:9) the third in order of the sons of Cush. (B.C. 2218.)

(striking), (Genesis 10:7; 1 Chronicles 1:9) the fifth in order of the sons of Cush. (B.C. 2218.)

(wages).

(Daniel 3:5,7,10,15) the rendering in the Authorized Version of the Chaldee sacbbeca . If this music instrument be the same as the Greek and Latin sabbeca, the English translation is entirely wrong. The sackbut was a wind instrument [see Music]; the sambuca was a triangular instrument, with strings, and played with the hand.

cloth used in making sacks or bags, a coarse fabric, of a dark color, made of goat’s hair, (Isaiah 50:3; Revelation 6:12) end resembling the eilicium of the Romans. It, was used also for making the rough garments used by mourners, which were in extreme cases worn next the skin. (1 Kings 21:27; 2 Kings 6:30; Job 16:15; Isaiah 32:11)

The peculiar features of each kind of sacrifice are referred to under their respective heads. I. (A) ORIGIN OF SACRIFICE.—The universal prevalence of sacrifice shows it to have been primeval, and deeply rooted in the instincts of humanity. Whether it was first enjoined by an external command, or whether it was based on that sense of sin and lost communion with God which is stamped by his hand on the heart of man, is a historical question which cannot be determined. (B) ANTE-MOSAIC HISTORY OF SACRIFICE.—In examining the various sacrifices recorded in Scripture before the establishment of the law, we find that the words specially denoting expiatory sacrifice are not applied to them. This fact does not at all show that they were not actually expiatory, but it justified the inference that this idea was not then the prominent one in the doctrine of sacrifice. The sacrifices of Cain and Abel are called minehah, tend appear to have been eucharistic. Noah’s, (Genesis 8:20) and Jacob’s at Mizpah, were at the institution of a covenant; and may be called federative. In the burnt offerings of Job for his children (Job 1:5) and for his three friends ch. (Job 42:8) we for the first time find the expression of the desire of expiation for sin. The same is the case in the words of Moses to Pharaoh. (Exodus 10:26) Here the main idea is at least deprecatory. (C) THE SACRIFICES OF THE MOSAIC PERIOD.—These are inaugurated by the offering of the Passover and the sacrifice of (Exodus 24:1) ... The Passover indeed is unique in its character but it is clear that the idea of salvation from death by means of sacrifice is brought out in it with a distinctness before unknown. The law of Leviticus now unfolds distinctly the various forms of sacrifice: (a) The burnt offering : Self-dedicatory. (b) The meat offering : (unbloody): Eucharistic. (c) The sin offering ; the trespass offering: Expiatory. To these may be added, (d) The incense offered after sacrifice in the holy place and (on the Day of Atonement) in the holy of holies, the symbol of the intercession of the priest (as a type of the great High Priest) accompanying and making efficacious the prayer of the people. In the consecration of Aaron and his sons, (Leviticus 8:1) ... we find these offered in what became ever afterward their appointed order. First came the sin offering, to prepare access to God; next the burnt offering, to mark their dedication to his service; and third the meat offering of thanksgiving. Henceforth the sacrificial system was fixed in all its parts until he should come whom it typified. (D) POST-MOSAIC SACRIFICES.—It will not be necessary to pursue, in detail the history of the Poet Mosaic sacrifice, for its main principles were now fixed forever. The regular sacrifices in the temple service were— (a) Burnt offerings. 1, The daily burnt offerings, (Exodus 29:38-42) 2, The double burnt offerings on the Sabbath, (Numbers 28:9,10) 3, The burnt offerings at the great festivals; (Numbers 26:11; Numbers 29:39) (b) Meat offerings . 1, The daily meat offerings accompanying the daily burnt offerings, (Exodus 29:40,41) 2, The shewbread, renewed every Sabbath, (Leviticus 24:6,9) 3, The special meat offerings at the Sabbath and the great festivals, (Numbers 28:1; Numbers 29:1) ... 4, The first-fruits, at the Passover, (Leviticus 23:10-14) at Pentecost, (Leviticus 23:17-20) the firstfruits of the dough and threshing-floor at the harvest time. (Numbers 15:20,21; 26:1-11) (c) Sin offerings . 1, Sin offering each new moon (Numbers 28:15) 2, Sin offerings at the passover, Pentecost, Feast of Trumpets and Tabernacles, (Numbers 28:22,30; 29:5,16,19,22,25,28,31,34,38) 3, The offering of the two goats for the people and of the bullock for the priest himself, on the Great Day of Atonement. (Leviticus 16:1) ... (d) Incense . 1, The morning and evening incense (Exodus 30:7,8) 2, The incense on the Great Day of Atonement. (Leviticus 16:12) Besides these public sacrifices, there were offerings of the people for themselves individually. II. By the order of sacrifice in its perfect form, as in (Leviticus 8:1) ... it is clear that the sin offering occupies the most important: place; the burnt offering comes next, and the meat offering or peace offering last of all. The second could only be offered after the first had been accepted; the third was only a subsidiary part of the second. Yet, in actual order of time it has been seen that the patriarchal sacrifices partook much more of the nature of the peace offering and burnt offering, and that under the raw, by which was “the knowledge of sin,” (Romans 3:20) the sin offering was for the first time explicitly set forth. This is but natural that the deepest ideas should be the last in order of development. The essential difference between heathen views of sacrifice and the scriptural doctrine of the Old. Testament is not to be found in its denial of any of these views. In fact, it brings out clearly and distinctly the ideas which in heathenism were uncertain, vague and perverted. But the essential points of distinction are two. First, that whereas the heathen conceived of their gods as alienated in jealousy or anger, to be sought after and to be appeased by the unaided action of man, Scripture represents God himself as approaching man, as pointing out and sanctioning the way by which the broken covenant should be restored. The second mark of distinction is closely connected with this, inasmuch as it shows sacrifice to he a scheme proceeding from God, and in his foreknowledge, connected with the one central fact of all human history. From the prophets and the Epistle to the Hebrews we learn that the sin offering represented that covenant as broken by man, and as knit together again, by God’s appointment through the shedding of the blood, the symbol of life, signified that the death of the offender was deserved for sin, but that the death of the victim was accepted for his death by the ordinance of God’s mercy. Beyond all doubt the sin offering distinctly witnessed that sin existed in man. that the “wages of that sin was death,” and that God had provided an atonement by the vicarious suffering of an appointed victim. The ceremonial and meaning of the burnt offering were very different. The idea of expiation seems not to have been absent from it, for the blood was sprinkled round about the altar of sacrifice; but the main idea is the offering of the whole victim to God, representing as the laying of the hand on its head shows, the devotion of the sacrificer, body and soul. to him. (Romans 12:1) The death of the victim was, so to speak, an incidental feature. The meat offering, the peace or thank offering, the firstfruits, etc., were simply offerings to God of his own best gifts, as a sign of thankful homage, and as a means of maintaining his service and his servants. The characteristic ceremony in the peace offering was the eating of the flesh by the sacrificer. It betokened the enjoyment of communion with God. It is clear from this that the idea of sacrifice is a complex idea, involving the propitiatory, the dedicatory and the eucharistic elements. Any one of these, taken by itself, would lead to error and superstition. All three probably were more or less implied in each sacrifice. each element predominating in its turn. The Epistle to the Hebrews contains the key of the whole sacrificial doctrine. The object of the epistle is to show the typical and probationary character of sacrifices, and to assert that in virtue of it alone they had a spiritual meaning. Our Lord is declared (see) (1 Peter 1:20) “to have been foreordained” as a sacrifice “before the foundation of the world,” or as it is more strikingly expressed in (Revelation 13:8) “slain from the foundation of the world.” The material sacrifices represented this great atonement as already made and accepted in God’s foreknowledge; and to those who grasped the ideas of sin, pardon and self-dedication symbolized in them, they were means of entering into the blessings which the one true sacrifice alone procured. They could convey nothing in themselves yet as types they might, if accepted by a true though necessarily imperfect faith be means of conveying in some degree the blessings of the antitype. It is clear that the atonement in the Epistle to the Hebrews as in the New Testament generally, is viewed in a twofold light. On the one hand it is set forth distinctly as a vicarious sacrifice, which was rendered necessary by the sin of man and in which the Lord “bare the sins of many.” It is its essential characteristic that in it he stands absolutely alone offering his sacrifice without any reference to the faith or the conversion of men. In it he stands out alone as the mediator between God and man; and his sacrifice is offered once for all, never to be imitated or repeated. Now, this view of the atonement is set forth in the epistle as typified by the sin offering. On the other hand the sacrifice of Christ is set forth to us as the completion of that perfect obedience to the will of the Father which is the natural duty of sinless man. The main idea of this view of the atonement is representative rather than vicarious. It is typified by the burnt offering. As without the sin offering of the cross this our burnt offering would be impossible, so also without the burnt offering the sin offering will to us be unavailing. With these views of our Lord’s sacrifice oil earth, as typified in the Levitical sacrifices on the outer alter, is also to be connected the offering of his intercession for us in heaven, which was represented by the incense. The typical sense of the meat offering or peace offering is less connected the sacrifice of Christ himself than with those sacrifices of praise, thanksgiving, charity and devotion which we, as Christians, offer to God, and “with which he is well pleased,” (Hebrews 13:15,16) as with an odor of sweet smell, a sacrifice acceptable to God.” (Philemon 4:28)

(followers of Zadok), (Matthew 3:7; 16:1,6,11,12; 22:23,31; Mark 12:18; Luke 20:27; Acts 4:1; 5:17; 23:6,7,8) a religious party or school among the Jews at the time of Christ, who denied that the oral law was a revelation of God to the Israelites. and who deemed the written law alone to be obligatory on the nation, as of divine authority. Except on one occasion. (Matthew 16:1,4,6) Christ never assailed the Sadducees with the same bitter denunciations which he uttered against the Pharisees. The origin of their name is involved in great difficulties, but the most satisfactory conjecture is that the Sadducees or Zadokites were originally identical with the sons of Zadok, and constituted what may be termed a kind of sacerdotal aristocracy, this Zadok being the priest who declared in favor of Solomon when Abiathar took the part of Adonijah. (1 Kings 1:32-45) To these sons of Zadok were afterward attached all who for any reason reckoned themselves as belonging to the aristocrats; such, for example, as the families of the high priest, who had obtained consideration under the dynasty of Herod. These were for the most part judges, and individuals of the official and governing class. This explanation elucidates at once (Acts 5:17) The leading tenet of the Sadducees was the negation of the leading tenet of their opponents. As the Pharisees asserted so the Sadducees denied, that the Israelites were in possession of an oral law transmitted to them by Moses, [Pharisees] In opposition to the Pharisees, they maintained that the written law alone was obligatory on the nation, as of divine authority. The second distinguishing doctrine of the Sadducees was the denial of man’s resurrection after death . In connection with the disbelief of a resurrection by the Sadducees, they likewise denied there was “angel or spirit,” (Acts 23:8) and also the doctrines of future punishment and future rewards. Josephus states that the Sadducees believed in the freedom of the will, which the Pharisees denied. They pushed this doctrine so far as almost to exclude God from the government of the world. Some of the early Christian writers attribute to the Sadducees the rejection of all the sacred Scriptures except the Pentateuch ; a statement, however, that is now generally admitted to have been founded on a misconception of the truth, and it seems to have arisen from a confusion of the Sadducees with the Samaritans. An important fact in the history of the Sadducees is their rapid disappearance from history after the first century, and the subsequent predominance among the Jews of the opinions of the Pharisees. Two circumstances contributed, indirectly but powerfully, to produce this result: 1st. The state of the Jews after the capture of Jerusalem by Titus; and 2d. The growth of the Christian religion. As to the first point, it is difficult to overestimate the consternation and dismay which the destruction of Jerusalem occasioned in the minds of sincerely-religious Jews. In their hour of darkness and anguish they naturally turned to the consolations and hopes of a future state; and the doctrine of the Sadducees, that there was nothing beyond the present life, would have appeared to them cold, heartless and hateful. Again, while they were sunk in the lowest depths of depression, a new religion, which they despised as a heresy and a superstition, was gradually making its way among the subjects of their detested conquerors, the Romans. One of the causes of its success was undoubtedly the vivid belief in the resurrection of Jesus and a consequent resurrection of all mankind, which was accepted by its heathen converts with a passionate earnestness of which those who at the present day are familiar from infancy with the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead call form only a faint idea. To attempt to chock the progress of this new religion among the Jews by an appeal to the temporary rewards and punishments of the Pentateuch would have been as idle as an endeavor to check an explosive power by ordinary mechanical restraints. Consciously, therefore, or unconsciously, many circumstances combined to induce the Jews who were not Pharisees, but who resisted the new heresy, to rally round the standard of the oral law, and to assert that their holy legislator, Moses, had transmitted to his faithful people by word of mouth, although not in writing, the revelation of a future state of rewards and punishments.

(Greek form of Zadok, just).

(yellow). (Song of Solomon 4:14) Saffron has front the earliest times been in high esteem as a perfume. “It was used,” says Rosenmuller, “for the same purposes as the modern pot-pourri.” The word saffron is derived from the Arabic zafran, “yellow.” (The saffron (Crocus sativus) is a kind of crocus of the iris family. It is used its a medicine, as a flavoring and as a yellow dye. Homer, Virgil and Milton refer to its beauty in the landscape. It abounds in Palestine name saffron is usually applied only to the stigmas and part of the style, which are plucked out and dried.—ED.)

(sprout), the son of Arphaxad, and father of Eber. (Genesis 10:24; 11:18-14; Luke 3:35) (B.C. 2307.)

(suit), a city at the east end of the island of Cyprus, and the first place visited by Paul and Barnabas, on the first missionary journey, after leaving the mainland at Seleucia. Here alone, among all the Greek cities visited by St. Paul, we read expressly of “synagogues” in the plural, (Acts 13:5) hence we conclude that there were many Jews in Cyprus. And this is in harmony with what we read elsewhere. Salamis was not far from the modern Famagousta, it was situated near a river called the Pediaeus, on low ground, which is in fact a continuation of the plain running up into the interior toward the place where Nicosia, the present capital of Cyprus, stands.

(I have asked of God). (1 Chronicles 3:17) The Authorized Version has Salathiel in (1 Chronicles 3:17) but everywhere else in the Old Testament Shealtiel.

(migration), a city named in the early records of Israel as the extreme limit of Bashan, (3:10; Joshua 13:11) and of the tribe of Gad. (1 Chronicles 5:71) On another occasion the name seems to denote a district rather than a town. (Joshua 12:5) It is identical with the town of Sulkhad (56 miles east of the Jordan, at the southern extremity of the Hauran range of mountains. The place is nearly deserted, though it contains 800 stone houses, many of them in a good state of preservation.-ED.)

(peace).

(peace), a place named (John 3:23) to denote the situation of AEnon, the scene of St. John’s last baptisms; Salim being the well-known town, and AEnon a place of fountains or other waters near it. [Salem] The name of Salim has been discovered by Mr. Van Deuteronomy Velde in a position exactly in accordance with the notice of Eusebius, viz., six English miles south of Beisan (Scythopolis), end two miles west of the Jordan. Near here is an abundant supply of water.

(garment), (Ruth 4:20,21; 1 Chronicles 2:11,51,54; Matthew 1:4,5; Luke 3:32) son of Nahshon. the prince of the children of Judah, and father of Boat, the husband of Ruth. (B.C. 1296.) Bethlehem-ephratah, which was Salmon’s inheritance, was part of the territory of Caleb, the grandson of Ephratah; and this caused him to be reckoned among the sons of Caleb.

the father of Boar. [Salma, Or Salmon]

a hill near Shechem, on which Abimelech and his followers cut down the boughs with which they set the tower of Shechem on fire. (Judges 9:48) Its exact position is not known. Referred to in (Psalms 68:14)

(clothed), the east point of the island of Crete. (Acts 27:7) It is a bold promontory, and is visible for a long distance.

(peaceful).

Indispensable as salt is to ourselves, it was even more so to the Hebrews, being to them not only an appetizing condiment in the food both of man, (Job 11:6) and beset, (Isaiah 30:24) see margin, and a valuable antidote to the effects of the heat of the climate on animal food, but also entering largely into the religious services of the Jews as an accompaniment to the various offerings presented on the altar. (Leviticus 2:13) They possessed an inexhaustible and ready supply of it on the southern shores of the Dead Sea. [Sea, The Salt, THE SALT] There is one mountain here called Jebel Usdum, seven miles long and several hundred feet high, which is composed almost entirely of salt. The Jews appear to have distinguished between rock-salt and that which was gained by evaporation as the Talmudists particularize one species (probably the latter) as the “salt of Sodom.” The salt-pits formed an important source of revenue to the rulers of the country, and Antiochus conferred a valuable boon on Jerusalem by presenting the city with 375 bushels of salt for the temple service. As one of the most essential articles of diet, salt symbolized hospitality; as an antiseptic, durability, fidelity and purity. Hence the expression “covenant of salt,” (Leviticus 2:13; Numbers 18:19; 2 Chronicles 13:5) as betokening an indissoluble alliance between friends; and again the expression “salted with the salt of the palace.” (Ezra 4:14) not necessarily meaning that they had “maintenance from the palace,” as Authorized Version has it, but that they were bound by sacred obligations fidelity to the king. So in the present day, “to eat bread and salt together” is an expression for a league of mutual amity. It was probably with a view to keep this idea prominently before the minds of the Jews that the use of salt was enjoined on the Israelites in their offerings to God.

[Sea, The Salt, THE SALT]

the fifth of the six cities of Judah which lay in the “wilderness.” (Joshua 15:62) Mr. Robinson expresses his belief that it lay somewhere near the plain at the south end of the Salt Sea.

a valley in which occurred two memorable victories of the Israelite arms:

(weighed), the father of Zimri the prince of the Simeonites who was slain by Phinehas. (Numbers 25:14) Called also Salom. (B.C.1452.)