Magog – Manasseh

Magog

The name of a people, enumerated in Genesis 10:2 among the ‘sons’ of Japheth, between Gomer (the Cimmerians) and Madai (the Medes), and mentioned in Ezekiel 38:2 (gf. 39:6) as under the rule of Gog, prince of ‘Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal,’ who is to lead in the future a great expedition against the restored Israel, from ‘the uttermost parts of the north,’ and who has among his allies Oomer and Togarmah, — the nations whose names are itaUclzed being also mentioned in Gu 10:2, 3 as closely connected with ‘Magog.’ From these notices it is evident that Magog must have been the name of a people living far N. of Palestine, not far from Meshech and Tubal, whose home is shown by Assyrian notices to have been N.E. of Cilicia. Following Josephus, Magog has commonly been understood of the Scythians, — a wild and rough people, whose proper home (Hdt. iv. 17-20, 47-58) was on the N. of the Crimea, but who often organized predatory incursions into Asia and elsewhere: about B.C. 630 there was in particular a great irruption of Scythians into Asia (Hdt. i. 104-6), which seems to have supplied Ezekiel with the model for his imagined attack of nations from the N. upon the restored Israel (chs. 38. 39). Why, however, supposing this identification to be correct, the Scythians should be called ‘Magog’ is still unexplained. The name has not as yet been found in the Assyr. inscriptions. In Revelation 20:8 ‘Gog and Magog’ are applied figuratively to denote the nations who are pictured as brought by Satan, at the end of the millennium, to attack Jerusalem, and as destroyed before it (see, further, Gog). S. R. Dhiveh.

Magor-missabib

A nickname given (Jeremiah 20) by Jeremiah to Pashhur, chief officer in the Temple, who had caused Jeremiah to be beaten and put in the stocks as a false prophet. The name is an etymological play on the word Pashhur, and denotes ‘fear-roundabout’; but whether Pashhur (wh. see) was to be that to his surroundings, or vice versa, does not appear.

W. F. Cobb.

Magpiash

See Magbish.

Magus

See Bab- Jesus, Magi, Magic, and Simon Magus.

Mahalaleel

See Mahalalel.

Mahalalel

1 . Son of Kenan and great-grandson of Seth (Genesis 5:12, 13, 15 i»- " [P] = 1 Chronicles 1:2. Luke 3:37 Mahalaleel) ; = Mehuiael in J’s list (Genesis 4:18). 2. The son of Perez, who dwelt at Jerusalem’ after the Captivity (Nehemiah 11:4).

Mahalath

1. See Basemath, No. 1.— 2. Wife of MAHOL.— The father of Ethan the Ezrahite, Heman,

Rehoboam, 2 Chronicles 11:18. 3. See Psalms, p. 772«.

Mahalath Leannoth

See Psalms, p. 772».

Mahakaim

Mahakaim (‘two camps’ or ‘two hosts’ [if the Heb. word is really a dual, which is very doubtful]). — An important city E. of Jordan on the frontier of Gad and Manasseh (Joshua 13:26, 30) it was a Levltical city within the territory of Gad (Joshua 21:38, 40). It was clearly N. of the Jabbok, as Jacob travelling S. reached it first (Gu 32). Here Abner made Ish-bosheth, son of Saul, king (2 Samuel 2:8), and here David took refuge from his rebel son Absalom (2 Samuel 17:24–27 ig’^i). Solomon put Abinadab in authority in this city (1 Kings 4:14). There is apparently a reference to Mahanaim in Song of Songs 6 (see RV and AVm). The site of Mahanaim is quite uncertain. A trace of the name appears to linger in Mahneh, the name of a mass of ruins in the Jebd Ajlttn N.W. of the village AjlUn. Merrill suggests a ruin called SuleikJiat in the Wady AjlUn, near its entrance to the Jordan valley; others consider- the site of Jerash, which is first mentioned, as Gerasa, in the time of Alexander Jannseus, as a likely spot for so prominent and, apparently, so attractive a city.

E. W. G. Masterman.

Mahaneh-dan

(Judges 13:25 IS"). The locality of this spot is given in these two passages as ‘behind Kiriath-jearim,’ and as ‘between Zorah and Eshtaol.’ In the former passage we are told that ‘the Spirit of Jehovah began to move Samson in the camp of Dan between Zorah and Eshtaol’; in the latter passage the derivation of the name is given as the place where the last encampment of the band of 600 Danite warriors took place, before they set out on their expedition to Laish. ‘The exact position of the spot has not been identified, as the site of Eshtaol (wh. see) is not known with certainty. T. A. Moxon.

Maharai

One of David’s thirty heroes (2 Samuel 23:28, 1 Chronicles 11:30) according to 1 Chronicles 27:13. of the family of Zerah, and captain of the Temple guard for the tenth monthly course.

Mahath

1. The eponym of a Kohathite family (1 Chronicles 6:35. 2 Chronicles 29:12) perhaps to be identified with Ahimoth of 1 Chronicles 6:25. 2. A Levite in the time of Hezekiah (2 Chronicles 31:13).

Mahavite, the

The EV designationin I Ch 11 of Eliel, one of David’s heroes. The MT should prob. be emended to read ‘the Mahanaimite.’

Mahazioth

The Hemanite chief of the 23rd course of singers (1 Chronicles 25:4, 30).

Maher-shalal-hash-baz

Maher-shalal-hash-baz ( ‘spoil speedeth, prey hasteth’). Isaiah 8. — A symbolical name given to one of Isaiah’s sons to signify the speedy destruction of the power of the allied kings Rezin and Pekah by the king of Assyria.

Mahlah

1. One of the daughters of Zelophehad (wh. see), Numbers 26:33 27:1 36:11, Joshua 17:3. 2. One of the sons of Hammolecheth, 1 Chronicles 7:18.

Mahli

In Exodus 6:19, Numbers 3:20, 1 Chronicles 24, it is the name of a son of Merari, Levi’s youngest son. In 1 Chronicles 23:23 24:30 a son of Mushi, Mahli’s brother, bears the same name. Ezra 8:18 speaks of ‘a man of discretion(see Ish-sechel), of the sons of Mahli . . . and Sherebiah,’ etc. 1 Esdras 8:47 [Mooli] drops ‘and,’ thus identifying this son of Mahli with Sherebiah. In Numbers 3:33 26:58 Mahli’s descendants are called ‘the family of the Mahlites.’ According to 1 Chronicles 23:22, these Mahlltes were descended from the daughters of Eleazar, the elder son of the MahU mentioned in Exodus 6:19. Eleazar left no male offspring. Their cousins, the sons of Kish, therefore took them in marriage, and prevented the extinction of their father’s name.

Mahlon

See Chilion. Chalcol, and Darda (1 Kings 4:31), who are mentioned as famous for their wisdom , though surpassed in this respect ‘by Solomon. Apparently, then, Mahol is a proper name, but it is also found in Psalms 149:3 ISO" (EV tr.’ dance’) amongst instruments of music, so that the four wise men mentioned above may really be described as ‘sons of music’ in which case their wisdom may have consisted chiefly in their skill in the composition of hymns.

T. A. MoxoN.

Mahseiah

Grandfather of Baruch and Seraiah (Jeremiah 32:12 Sl’s); called in Baruch 1:1 Maaseas.

Maiannas

Maiannas (1 Esdras 9:48) =Maaseiah, Nehemiah 8:7.

Mail

See ARMOtin, 2 (c).

Mainsail

See Ships and Boats.

Makaz

A town on the W. slopes of Judah (1 Kings 4:9). The LXX reading, Michmash, is impossible. The site has not been recovered. W. Ewinq.

Make

In Judges 18 ‘to make’ means ‘to do’— ‘What raakest thou in this place?’ In John 8:53 ‘Whom makest thou thyself?’, and John 19:7 ‘He made himself the Son of God,’ ‘make’ means ‘pretend to be’; cf. Joshua 8:15 ‘Joshua and all Israel made as if they were beaten.’ This is the meaning also in 2 Samuel 13 ‘Lay thee down on thy bed, and make thyself sick.’ In Ezekiel 17:17 ‘Neither shall Pharaoh with his mighty army and great company make for him in the war,’ ‘make for’ means ‘assist.’

Maked

A ‘strong and great’ city in Gilead (1 Mao 5^8. 36). The site is unknown.

Makheloth

Makheloth (Numbers 33:25, 26).. One of the twelve ‘stations’ of the children of Israel (Numbers 33:25 f.) unknown.

Makkedah

A Canaanite royal city in the ShephBlah, where the five kings of the Canaanites, defeated by Joshua at Gibeon, and chased by Israel down the valley by way of Beth-horon and Azekah, took refuge in a cave (Joshua 10:10, 16 ff.) whence, later, by Joshua’s orders, they were brought forth and slain. The city was taken and the inhabitants put to the sword. Azekah has not been identified, but in Jos 15:41 it is named with Gederoth, Beth-dagon, and Naamah, which may be identified with the modern Katrah, Dajun, and Na’ aneh. In this district the name Makkedah has not been found, but Warren and Conder agree in suggesting d-Mughar, ‘the cave,’ as the most likely spot. The rock-quarrjring and tombs mark an ancient site, and caves are found in no other place where Makkedah might be located. It Ues on the N. of wady Surar, about 15 miles S. of Jaffa. The Onomaslicon places it about 7 miles E. of Eleutheropolis (Belt Jibrln), a position hardly to be reckoned within the Shephelah. W. Ewing.

Maktesh

The name of a locality mentioned only in Zephaniah 1:11 as ‘the Phoenician quarter’ (?) of Jerusalem. The word denotes a mortar, and presumably was given to the place because it was basin-shaped. If so, a part of the Tyropceon valley has as good a claim as any other locality to be regarded as what is referred to. Certainly the Mt. of Olives is but a precarious conjecture. W. F. Cobb.

Malachi

1. Author.— The Book of Malachi raises a question of authorship which cannot be answered with certainty. Who was the author? Was his name Malachi? A priori, it might be supposed that the author of the last book of prophecy in the OT Canon would be sufficiently well known to have his name attached to his work. If the name appeared with the book (especially if the name was Ezra, as the Targum asserts), it could scarcely have been lost or forgotten before the ‘Minor Prophets’ were collected, and the Canon of the Prophets was closed.

It is, however, doubtful whether Malachiis the personal name of the prophet.^ The word, as it appears in the superscription, means ‘my messenger,’ and in this sense it is used in 3’. It is argued that the word ought to have the same signification in both places. But, while in 3’ it can scarcely mean anything else than ‘my messenger,’ this meaning does not suit the superscription, which would run, ‘Oracle of the word of Jahweh through my messenger.’ The oblique case of Jahweh with the direct reference of the suffix in ‘my messenger,’ is more than awkward. The LXX renders the superscription ‘by the hand of his messenger.’ The change of text is very slight. Whether there was MS authority for it cannot be determined.

The termination of the word Ualachi may be adjectival. It would thus be equivalent to the Latin Angdicus, and would signify ‘one charged with a message or mission’ (a missionary). The term would thus be an official title, and the thought is not unsuitable to one whose message closed the Prophetical Canon of the OT, and whose mission in behalf of the Church was of so sacred a character. If this were the explanation, it is probable that greater definiteness would be attached to the words. It should be noted that, while the LXX render the word Malachi by ‘his messenger’ in the superscription, they prefix, as the title of the book, Malachias, as if the Hebrew should read Malachiyah, i.e. ‘messenger of Jahweh.’ Some such form must be adopted if the Malachi of the superscription is taken as a proper noun. The form would thus correspond to Zacharias^ and many other proper nouns (so Vulg. both in the title and in the superscription). This is a possible grammatical explanation, and the name ‘messenger of Jahweh’ is suitable to the condition of Judah at the time. The Jews had little experience of prophets when the message of this book was delivered. It is significant that Haggai, the earliest prophet of the post-exilic period, is expressly designated ‘messenger of Jahweh’ (Haggai 1:13). He had already received the official title of prophet (.naW), (v. 1). But there were prophets and prophets. False prophets had done much to bring about the Exile. If there were to be prophets after the Exile, it was important that the new community should be in no doubt as to their character. This was secured in the case of the first of the post-exilic prophets by the express statement that he was the messenger of Jahweh, and that what he spoke was the message of Jahweh. In the case of the last of the prophets of the OT Canon, an assurance of a similar character would be furnished symbolically by the name Malachiyah (‘messenger of Jahweh’). This, pro tanto, favours the form of the word as it appears in the title of the LXX and the Vulgate.

But 3 remains. If Malachi is a proper noun — the name of the author — in 1:1. should the word not have the same significance in 3 The answer is, that there is no insuperable objection to the twofold explanation. The form admits of the twofold reference. The question is one of probability. At this point, however, reference should be made to the Targum, according to which Ezra was the author of the Book of Malachi; and this opinion continued to prevail among the Jews. Jerome accepted it, and it was favourably regarded by Calvin and others. No doubt the Targum expressed the Jewish opinion of the time. But that does not settle the question. In the four or five centuries between the appearance of the Book of Malachi and the birth of Christ, the life of the OT Church centred in the Law of Moses. That law was given, mainly, by Ezra to the post-exilic Church. As years passed, and the traditions of the scribes began to gather about the Law, the figure of Ezra stood out as the prominent one in post-exilic times. Everything of importance connected with the Law was wont to be assigned to him. Take along with that the fact that Malachi occurs as a common noun in 3. and the additional fact that the prophecy closes with a solemn warning to remember the Law of Moses, and it may appear not improbable that Ezra should have been claimed as the author of this closing passage, and of the prophecy in which it is found.

In these circumstances the authority of the Targum is not of very great weight. But in one respect the Targum is of importance. If the name of Ezra was the only one associated with the Book of Malachi when the Targum was prepared, it is probable that the book originally appeared anonymously — at least, that it bore no name when the volume of the Minor Prophets was made up, and that the compiler either regarded the term Malachi in 3 as the name of the author, or attached it to the book in the superscription as an official title. It is scarcely necessary to observe that the name of the author is not required for the authentication of the message. The terms of the superscription are amply sufficient for the purpose of authentication. It is the ‘Oracle of the Word of Jahweh’ that the prophet delivers. Tills is equivalent to ‘The word of Jahweh came — or was — to ... (so and so)’ in other books of prophecy, and implies the familiar ‘Thus saith Jahweh’ of prophetic address.

2. Date. — Opinion is greatly divided regarding the date of the book. That it belonged to the Persian period appears from the name (.pechah) given to the governor (cf. Hag !’■ " etc., Nehemiah 5:14 etc.). Further, it is obvious that the statutory services of the Temple had been in operation for some time before the message of Malachi was delivered. Abuses had crept in which could not be associated with those who had returned from Babylon and rebuilt the Temple. The dedication of the Second Temple took place in b.c. 516, and the condition of religious life depicted in Malachi must have been a good many years later than that date. This is very generally admitted.

Two dates are most worthy of consideration — the first shortly before Ezra’s arrival in Jerusalem, and the second during Nehemiah’s second visit to the holy city. Certain expressions occurring in the book are held to favour the former (cf. 2:2, 4, 5 3 [EV 4:4)). These, breathing the spirit of Deut., are supposed to show that the author was under the influence of the Deuteronomic Code. If his activity was later than 445, the influence of P would have been expected to show itself. But the expression ‘the law of Moses’ (3:22 [EV 4:4)) finds a natural explanation in connexion with the whole Pentateuchal legislation read before the people in 445 (Nehemiah 8 ft.). The covenant with Levi (2) seems to presuppose Numbers 25:10–13 (P). And the reference to the tithes (3:10) appears to rest on Leviticus 27:30–33 and Numbers 18:21–32 (both belonging to P"). Deuteronomlc expressions of an ethical character are suitable to any earnest prophet after Amos, and are not determinative of date as are the passages which presuppose P, — on the assumption that P was first promulgated in b.c. 446. The language, upon the whole, favours a date later than the appearance of P. The contents of the book point in the same direction. Ezra’s reformation appears to have been limited to the banishing of the foreign wives, and the effort to effect a complete separation of the Chosen People from the idolatrous tribes round about. The author of Malachi brings three main charges against the Church of his day: (1) against the priests for the profanation of the services of the Temple; (2) against the community (priests included) for marrying heathen wives; (3) against the people generally for immorality, indifference, and infidelity. All this agrees very closely with the state of affairs with which Nehemiah had to deal on his second visit to Jerusalem (Nehemiah 13:7 ff.). And upon the whole (the conclusion can only be a matter of comparative probability), the period of that visit may be accepted for the prophetic activity of the author of Malachi. The date would be somewhere about B.C. 430.

3. Contents. — The book may be divided into the following sections:

I. 1:1. The superscription.

II. 1:2–5. Jahweh’s love to Israel. This love proved by the history of His dealings with Israel from the days of their great ancestor Jacob, as contrasted with the history of Jacob’s brother Esau and of his descendants.

III. 1:6. Israel’s forgetfulness of Jahweh, — neglect and contempt of His offerings, through illegal proceedings on the part of the priests.

IV. 2:10–16. Denunciation of divorce and of foreign marriages.

V. 2. Day of Jahweh (i.e. His coming to judgment) against unbelievers, scoffera, etc., especially with the view of purifying the priests in order that acceptable offerings may be presented unto Him.

VI. 3. Drought and locusts sent on those who neglected to bring the tithes for the service of the Temple and the support of the priests.

VII. 3:13–24 [EV 3:13]. The punishment of the wicked, and the triumph of the righteous, on the day of Jahweh, with a concluding exhortation to obey the Law of Moses, and a promise of the coming of Elijah to lead the people to repentance.

4. Doctrine. — Malaohl, in its doctrinal contents, is in entire harmony with the Prophetic books that preceded it, and adds its testimony to the fact that, while Divine revelation is progressive, and the circumstances of the time add a special character and colour to the different Prophetic books, the fundamental doctrines are the same in all. The keynote of Malachi’s message is found in the opening words of 1:2. Israel’s position as the Chosen People is founded in the electing love of Jahweh. The divorcing of Jewish and the marrying of heathen wives is a crime against the love of Jahweh. Further, Jahweh — as in all the prophets from Amos downwards — is a God of righteousness. He rewards the righteous and punishes the wicked. The day of Jahweh, on which the wicked are punished and the righteous rewarded, is the same as in Amos and his successors; and the closing words of the prophecy, dealing with this day of Jahweh, connect the OT with the NT, in which the day of the Lord occupies a position of equal importance with that assigned to it in the Cr. The special circumstances of the time, which serve so far to determine the date, appear in the importance assigned to ritual, and the severity with which neglect or irregularity in this part of religious observance is treated.

6. Style, — As might be expected, the style and diction of a book belonging to the last half of the 5th cent, are inferior to those of the pre-exilic prophets. The language is mostly plain, homely prose. There are, however, poetic passages, some of considerable merit (cf. 1 3’^- I™- "ff- [EV 4:1 ff.)). The most striking feature of the style is the discussion of an important subject by means of question and answer, — a dialectic method which became common afterwards, and which about the same time was well known in Athens through the labours of Socrates. G. G. Cameron.

Malachy

2 Esdras 1:40 (AV and RV) for Malachi.

Malchuh

1. A priest, the father of Pashhur (Jeremiah 21:1 38:1). same as Malchijah of 1 Chronicles 9:12. Nehemiah 11:12. 2. A member of the royal family, to whom belonged the pit-prison into which Jeremiah was let down (Jeremiah 38:6).

Malchiel

The eponym of an Asherite family (Genesis 46:17. Numbers 26:45. 1 Chronicles 7:31). The gentilic name Ualctaielites occurs in Numbers 26.

Malchijah

1. A descendant of Gershom (1 Ch 6" [Heb. 25]). 2. A priest, the father of Pashhur (1 Chronicles 9:12. Nehemiah 11:12), same as Malchiah of Jeremiah 21:1 38:1. 3. Head of the 5th course of priests (1 Chronicles 24:9). perhaps the same as the preceding. 4. 5. ‘Two of the sons of Parosh, who had married foreign wives (Ezra 10:25 i^*); called in 1 Esdras 9:26 Melchias and Asibias respectively. 6. One of the sons of Harim who had married a foreign wife (Ezra 10:31). In Nehemiah 3:11 he is mentioned as taking part in the repairing of the wall. He is called in 1 Esdras 9:32 Melchias. 7. Malchijah the son of Rechab repaired the dung-gate (Nehemiah 3:14). 8. One of the guild of the goldsmiths who helped to repair the wall (Nehemiah 3:31). 9. One of those who stood at Ezra’s left hand at the reading of the Law (Nehemiah 8:4). 10. One of those who sealed the covenant (Nehemiah 10:3). probably the same as No. 2. 11. A priest who took part in the ceremony of dedicating the wall (Nehemiah 12:42).

3HAL0HIRAM.— Son of Jeconiah (1 Chronicles 3:18).

Malchi-shua

The third son of Saul (1 Samuel 14:49) slain by the Philistines at Mt. Gilboa (1 Samuel 31:2, 1 Chronicles 10:2).

Malchus

The name of the high priest’s servant whose ear Peter cut off in the Garden of Gethsemane at the arrest of our Lord. St. John is the only Evangelist who mentions his name (John 18:10). thereby substantiating the fact that he was intimately acquainted with the high priest and his household (John 18:15). The Incident is related in the other three Gospels (Matthew 26:51. Mark 14:47. Luke 22:50). On a comparison of the four accounts, it seems that Malchus pressed forward eagerly to seize Jesus, whereupon Peter struck at him with his sword. The blow, missing its main object, almost severed the ear, but not quite, as Jesus touched it and healed it.

Luke, the physician, is the only Evangelist who mentions the healing of the ear.

MoHLEY Stevenson.

Malice

1. (i) OT.— AH in Pr.-Bk. version: Psalms 94:23 ngiso and 10:17 (adj.) 59 (adj.) and 55:3 (adv.).

(ii.) Apocr.— AU in AV: Wisdom 12:10, 20, 16:14 (and RVm), Sirach 27:30 and 28:7. 1 Maccabees 9:51 and 13:6. 2 Mao 4:50.

(iii) NT.— In RV: 1 Corinthians 5:8 14:20. Ephesians 4:31. Colossians 3:8. Titus 3:3. James 1:21 mg.. 1 Peter 2:1 (AV and RVm); ‘maliciousness’ Ro 1», 1 2:16 (AV and RVm ‘malice’); ‘malicious’ 3 Jn ‘" AV.

2. Discussion is needless as to (i.), for the Heb. is clear. (See RV.) All the other instances, however, except those marked represent a Gr. word (.kakia) which has a much wider meaning than ‘malice’ as now used. It may be ‘wickedness,’ as Acts 8:22. James 1:21; or ‘evil’ = ‘trouble,’ Matthew 6:34.

3. Thepoint isimportant, because’ malice’ hasacquired its exclusive meaning ‘spitefulness’ only since the 17th century. It indicated evil of any sort (cf. Pr.-Bk. as cited above, and tor some striking examples see art. in Hastings’ DB). This change accounts for RV renderings of Apocr., and would perhaps have justified further emendation of AV.

<4. The modern usage is a return to the classical malitia. Its relation to kakia was discussed by Cicero, who coined vitiositas as the nearest rendering; for whereas’ malice’ indicated a particular fault, ‘vitiosity’ stood for all [Tusc. Disp. iv. 34).

H. F. B. COMPSTON.

Mallothi

A son of Heman (1 Chronicles 25:4, 26).

Mallows

Mallows (mallUach, connected with mdach’ salt’), Job 30:4. RV salt-wort. — Almost certainly the sea orache {Atriplex halimus), a perennial shrub with leaves somewhat like the olive, common in saltish marshes, especially near the Dead Sea, where it is associated with the retem (see Juniper). The sourtasting leaves can be eaten, but only in dire necessity. E. W. G. Mastekman.

Malluch

1. A Merarite, ancestor of Ethan (1 Chronicles 6:44). 2. One of the sons of Bani who had married a foreign wife (Ezra 168) called in 1 Esdras 9:30 Mamuchus. 3. One of the sons of Harim who had married a foreign wife (Ezra 10:32). 4. 5. Two of those who sealed the covenant (Nehemiah 10:4, 27). No. 4 is probably identical with Malluch of Nehemiah 12:2. called in 12:14 Malluchi.

WAT.T.TTP.TTT — The eponym of a priestly family who returned with Zerub. (Nehemiah 12:14) probably the same as Malluch of Nehemiah 10:4 12:2.

Mallus

A city of Cilicia which joined Tarsus in a rebellion against Antiochus Epiphanes about B.C. 171 (2 Maccabees 4:30). Tradition said that it was founded at the time of the Trojan War. Its coinage shows that it was an important town. Its site is doubtful, but as ancient statements make it near the river Pyramus, near the sea, and also on a hill. Professor Ramsay identifies it with Kara-Tash, on a coast line of hills E. of Magarsa, which served as its port. The W. branch of the Pyramus has become almost completely dried up. A. E. Hillaed.

Malobathron

RVm of Song of Songs 2:17 for EV Bether (wh. see). It is argued by Post, against this rendering, that the malobathron plant (Laurus malabathrum) did not grow wild on any of the mountains of Palestine. Others would render (by a slight textual emendation) ‘mountains of cypresses.’

Maltanneus

Maltanneus (1 Es 9’«)=Mattenai, Ezra 10:33.

SIA]iIDAI (1 Esdras 9:34) Ezra 10:35.

Mammon

This is a Semitic word, but of doubtful derivation. It has been referred to Heb. aman, ‘a reliable (store),’ and to taman (i being elided), ‘hidden treasure.* Augustine (.Serm. on Mount) says it was the name for’ riches’ among the Hebrews, and that the Phoenician agrees, for ‘gain’ in Phoenician is called mammon. Phoenician and Hebrew were near akin, and the ancients often included Aramaic in Hebrew. ‘Mammon’ is not found in OT Hebrew, but occurs in Rabbinical, in Syriac (Western Aramaic), and is used in the Aramaic Targums as the equivalent of Heb. terms for ‘gain’ or ‘wealth.’ Being a well-known Phoen. trade word, it is introduced without translation(unlike corban, etc.) into NT Greek, where the right spelling is mamSnas (Matthew 6:24. Luke 16); with this agrees the Syriac form momUna. A Phoen. deity, Mamon, has been supposed. Though not improbable, the idea seems due to Milton (P.i. i. 679 B.). ‘Serve God and mammon’ suggests personification, but compare the phraseology of Philippians 3:19. G. H. Gwilliam.

Mamnitanemus

Mamnitanemus (1 Esdras 9:34) corresponds to the two names Mattaniah, Mattenai in Ezra 10:37. of which it is a corruption.

Mamre

A name found several times in connexion with the history of Abraham. It occurs (o) in the expression ‘terebinths of Mamre’ in Genesis 13:18 18:1 (both J), and 14:13 (from an independent source) with the addition of ‘the Amorite’; (6) in the expression ‘which is before Mamre,’ in descriptions of the cave of Machpelah, or of the field in which it was (Genesis 23:17, 19 25:9 49:30 50:13). and in 35:27, where Mamre is mentioned as the place of Isaac’s death; (c) in Genesis 14:24 as the name of one of Abraham’s allies, in his expedition for the recovery of Lot. In (6) Mamre is an old name, either of Hebron or of a part of Hebron (cf. 23:19 35:27) in Genesis 14:13 it is the name of a local sheik or chief (cf. v. 24). the owner of the terebinths called after him; in Genesis 13:18 18:1 it is not clear whether it is the name of a person or of a place. The ‘terebinths of Mamre’ are the spot at which Abraham pitched his tent in Hebron. The site is uncertain, though, if the present mosque, on the N.E. edge of Hebron, is really built over the cave of Machpelah, and if ‘before’ has its usual topographical sense of ‘east of,’ it will have been to the W. of this, and at no great distance from it (for the terebinths are described as being ‘in’ Hebron, Genesis 13:18). From Josephus’ time (BJ, iv. Ix. 7) to the present day, terebinths or oaks called by the name of Abraham have been shown at different spots near Hebron; but none has any real claim to mark the authentic site of the ancient ‘Mamre.’ The oak mentioned by Josephus was 6 stadia from the city; but he does not indicate in which direction it lay. Sozomen (HE 11. 4), in speaking of the ‘Abraham’s Oak’ of Oonstantine’s day (2 miles N. of Hebron), states that it was regarded as sacred, and that an annual fair and feast was held beside it, at which sacrifices were offered, and libations and other offerings cast into a well close by. Cf. Oak. S. R. Driver.

Mamuchus

Mamuchus (1 Esdras 9:30) = Malluch, Ezra 10:29.

Mak

The Bible is concerned with man only from the religious standpoint, with his relation to God. This article will deal only with the religious estimate of man, as other matters which might have been included will be found in other articles (Creation, Eschatology, Fall, Sin, Pstchology). Man’s dignity, as made by special resolve and distinct act of God in God’s image and likeness (synonymous terms) , with dominion over the other creatures, and for communion with God, as asserted in the double account of his Creation in Genesis 1 and 2, and man’s degradation by his own choice of evil, as presented figuratively in the story of his Fall in Genesis 3, are the two aspects of man that are everywhere met with. The first is explicitly aflSrmed in Psalms 8, an echo of Genesis 1; the second, without any explicit reference to the story in Genesis 3, is taken for granted in the OT (see esp. Psalms 51), and is still more emphasized in the NT, with distinct allusion to the Fall and its consequences (see esp. Romans 5:12–21 and 7:7–25). While the OT recognizes man’s relation to the world around him, his materiality and frailty as ‘flesh’ (wh. see), and describes him as ‘dust and ashes’ in comparison with God (Genesis 2:7 3:19 18:27). yet as made in God’s image it endows him with reason, conscience, affection, free will. Adam is capable of recognizing the qualities of, and so of naming, the living creatures (2:19). cannot find a help meet among them (v. 20). is innocent (v. 25), and capable of moral obedience (v. 16, 17) and religious communion (3:9, 10). The Spirit of God is in man not only as life, but also as wisdom and understanding, counsel and might, skill and courage (see Inspiration). The Divine immanence in man as the Divine providence for man is affirmed (Proverbs 20:27).

In the NT man’s dignity is represented as Divine sonship. In St. Luke’s Gospel Adam is described as ‘son of God’ (3). St. Paul speaks of man as ‘the image and glory of God’ (1 Corinthians 11:7). approves the poet’s words, ‘we also are his offspring,’ asserts the unity of the race, and God’s guidance in its history (Acts 17:26–28). In his argument in Romans regarding universal sinfulness, he assumes that even the Gentiles have the law of God written in their hearts, and thus can exercise moral judgment on themselves and others (2:15). Jesus’ testimony to the Fatherhood of God, including the care and bounty in Providence as well as the grace in Redemption, has as its counterpart His estimate of the absolute worth of the human soul (see Matthew 10:30 16:26. Luke 10:20 15). While God’s care and bounty are unlimited, yet Jesus does seem to limit the title ‘child or son of God’ to those who have religious fellowship and seek moral kinship with God (see Matthew 5:9, 45; cf. Jn I12). St. Paul’s doctrihe of man’s adoption by faith in God’s grace does not contradict the teaching of Jesus. The writer of Hebrews sees the promise of man’s dominion in Psalms 8 fulfilled only in Christ (2:8, 9). Man’s history, according to the Fourth Evangelist, is consummated in the Incarnation (John 1:14).

The Bible estimate of man’s value is shown in it-i^ anticipation of his destiny — not merely continued existence, but a future life of weal or woe according to the moral quality, the relation to God, of the present life (see Eschatology). The Biblical analysis of the nature of man is discussed in detail in art. Psychology. Alfred E. Gakvie.

Man of Sin

(or ‘lawlessness’). Probably the equivalent in 2 Thessalonians 2:3–10 Antichrist (wh. see). According to the Pauline view, the Farousia would be preceded by an apostasy of believers and the appearance of the ‘man of lawlessness,’ ‘who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God’ (v.). The appearance of this evil one and his oppression of the believers were prevented by some force or person. In course of time, however, this restraint was to be removed. The wicked one would exercise his power until the Christ should come to destroy him (w.^-*).

The precise references of this statement are beyond final discovery. It is, however, commonly beheved that the reference is to some historical person, possibly the god-emperor of Rome. Such a reference is, however, very difficult if 2 Thess. was written by St. Paul, for at the time of its composition the Roman State had not become a persecutor. The ‘one who restrains’ is also difficult to identify if the ‘man of lawlessness’ be the Roman emperor. For that reason it may be best to refer the ‘man of lawlessness’ to the Jewish people or their expected Messiah, and ‘he that restraineth’ to the Roman power. This interpretation is supported by the fact that in his letters to the Thessalonians, St. Paul regards the Jews as persecutors, while throughout Acts the Roman State is presented as a protector of the Christians. This identification, however, does not satisfactorily explain the reference to ‘sitting in the temple.’ It is, therefore, probably better not to attempt a precise historical interpretation of either the ‘man of lawlessness’ or ‘him that restraineth,’ but to regard the former as a reference to the expected Antichrist, and the latter to some unidentified personal influence that led to the postponement of his appearance.

Shailer Mathews.

Manaen

(=Menahem). One of the Christian prophets and teachers at Antioch, and ‘foster-brother’ of Herod Antipas (Acts 13:1). Although individual nonofflcial Christians prophesied (Acts 2:17 f. 21:9. 1 Corinthians 14:31). yet there was in NT a class of official prophets (Ephesians 2:20 3:5, Revelation 18:20, perhaps 1 Thessalonians 2:15) and so in the Didache (c. A.D. 120?) the prophets formed an official class above the local ministry. Manaen was clearly an official at Antioch. The phrase ‘foster-brother of Herod’ is thought by Deissmann to be a mere title of honour, like " the king’s friend’ in 1 Chronicles 27:33, but more probably represents a literal fact. An older Manaen had been befriended by Herod the Great as having foretold his advancement; this one might be his grandson, brought up with Antipas. Another instance of the circle of Herod being reached by Christianity is Joanna, wife of Chuza, Herod’s steward (Luke 8:3) and Antipas himself was touched by the Baptist’s preaching (Mark 6:20).

A. J. Maclean.

Manahath

1. Mentioned only in 1 Chronicles 8:6 as the place to which certain Benjamite clans were carried captive. The town is probably identical with that implied in Manahathites (wh. see), with the ManochB of the Gr. text of Joshua 15:59. and if the text in Jg. is correct, with the Menuhah of Judges 20:43 RVm. 2. Genesis 36:23 (P), 1 Chronicles 1:40 ‘son of Shobal, son of Seir, the Horite,’ i.e. eponymous ancestor of a clan of Edom, or of the earlier population conquered and absorbed by Edom.

Manahathites

Manahathites (RV Menuhoth in 1 Chronicles 2). 1 Chronicles 2:54. — The genealogy in these two passages is to be interpreted as meaning that the city Manahath, occupied by portions of two sections of the Edomite clan Caleb, came to be reckoned to Judah.

Manasseas

Manasseas (1 Esdras 9:31) ^Manasseh, Ezra 10.

Manasseh

1. In MT and AV of Judges 18:30 Manasseh Is a scribal change for dogmatic purposes, the original being Moses (see Gershom, 1). 2. A son of Pahath-moab (Ezra 10:30) [1 Esdras 9:31 Manasseas]) . 3. Son of Hashum (Ezra 10). 4. 5. See next two articles.