Preaching – Press, Pressfat

Preaching

In the OT ‘preaching’ is referred to explicitly in the case of Jonah’s preaching in Nineveh (Jonah 3:2). The word here used means strictly ‘proclamation,’ and corresponds to the NT word used with reference to our Lord ‘proclaiming’ (as a herald) the advent of the Kingdom of God (.e.g. Matthew 4:17), which, in its initial stages, was closely associated with the preaching of John the Baptist (cf . Matthew 3:1, 2). Christian preaching is often described in the NT as a declaration of ‘glad tidings’ (‘evangel,’ ‘gospel’). Strictly, the ‘proclamation’ ought to be distinguished from the ‘teaching’ that followed on it. But in its more extended application’ preaching’ covers all instruction in religious matters of a homiletical character, and especially such as is associated with public worship.

The prophetic preaching hardly falls within this category. The prophets undoubtedly as a rule spoke their discourses (before writing them down). But these allocutions were special in character, and formed no regular part of the public worship.

The preaching of John the Baptist and of Jesus was largely prophetic in character — the gospel may be described as a ‘revival of the spirit of prophecy’ — but nevertheless it possessed some affinities with the synagogue preaching, which had become an institution of worship, though in many respects in marked contrast with and independent of it (our Lord constantly addressed the multitudes in the open air).

Preaching as a regular part of the service of public worship was a comparatively late development. Its real beginning can be traced back to the custom inaugurated by Ezra of reading a part of the ‘Law’ or ‘Torah’ at the Sabbath-day assemblages of the people, and on other holy days. On these occasions the lesson from the Law was read in the original Hebrew, and explained in the form of a paraphrase in the Aramaic vernacular by a methurgemiln (dragoman) or interpreter. Such translations were called Targums. It was from this practice that preaching in the synagogue was developed — probably as early as the 4th cent. b.c. (cf. Acts 15:21). Thus originally the sermon was essentially an exposition (of a legal kind) of some part of Scripture. Two famous teachers of the Law of the 1st cent. B.C. are styled darshanim (‘preachers,’ Pes. 706) , though they were primarily expounders of the Law on its strictly legalistic side. But in process of time the sermon assumed to a large extent a purely edifying character; it utilized the tale, parable, allegory, in enforcing the lessons of morality and religion, and developed truly homiletical features, without, however, losing its Scriptural colouring.

By NT times preaching had evidently become an integral part of the ordinary synagogue service, and in this way it became one of the chief instruments in the propagation of the ‘new teaching.’ Our Lord constantly ‘taught in the synagogues’ (cf. Matthew 4:23, Mark 1:21 6:2, John 6:59 18:20). gt. Luke (4) has preserved a compressed account of one such sermon, while in Acts (13) a fuller report of an exhortation by the great missionary Apostle, delivered in a synagogue, is set forth.

Our Lord’s teaching, and that of the Apostles which He Inspired, were marked by a freshness, a spontaneity and power which filled their hearers, accustomed as they were to the more set and laborious exhortations of the scribes, with the utmost surprise. But original as they were in substance, these addresses were still Semitic in form, and we must guard against importing Eastern homilies. The differences between the two are fundamental. While the Western develops a main and principal thought or theme through its logical subdivisions, and usually in a more or less abstract way, the Eastern adds point to point, theme to theme, often in striking antithesis, and strives to employ concrete illustrations and embodiments either figurative or parabolic of the thought. The ‘Sermon on the Mount’ (though its form in the First Gospel is doubtless an extended one) is an excellent illustration of Eastern method in some of these respects. The following example of an old Rabbinic address, based on the words ‘He hath clothed me with garments of salvation,’ which come from the chapter in Isaiah (61) from which Jesus took His text in His address in the synagogue at Nazareth, will illustrate the character of contemporary Jewish sermons:

‘Seven ^annenta the Holy One — blessed be He — has put on, and will put on from the time the world was created until the hour when He will punish the whole of wicked Edom ( = the Roman Empire). When He created the world, He clothed Himself in honour and majesty, as it is said (Psalms 104:1) "Thou art clothed in honour and majesty." Whenever He forgave Israel’s sins He clothed Himself in white; for we read (Daniel 7:9) : " His garment was white as snow." When He punishes the people of the world. He puts on the garment of vengeance, as it is said (Isaiah 69)’ He put on garments of vengeance for clothing, and was clad with zeal as a cloak." The sixth garment He will put on when the Messiah comes; then He will clothe Himself in a. garment of righteousness, for it is said: " And he puts on righteousness as a breastplate, and an helmet of salvation upon his head." The seventh garment He will put on when He punishes Edom; then He will clothe Himself in Adorn — i.e. red; for it is said (Isaiah 63:2) " Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel?". But the garment which He will put upon the Messiah, this will shine far, from one end of the earth to the other; for it is said (Isaiah 61:10) " As a bridegroom deoketh himself with a garland." And the Israelites will partake of His light, and will speak: ‘-Blessed is the hour when the Messiah shall come! Blessed the womb out of which He shall come I Blessed His contemporaries who are eye-witnesses I Blessed the eye that is honoured with a sight of HimI For the opening of His lips is blessing and peace; His speech is a moving of the spirits; The thoughts of His heart are confidence and cheerfulness; The speech of His tongue is pardon and forgiveness; His prayer is the sweet incense of offerings; His petitions are holiness and purity. Oh, how blessed is Israel forwhom such has been prepared!" Forit ia said (Ps Sl"*): " How great is thy goodness which thou hast laid up for them that fear thee!" ‘

Several specimens of the Apostolic preaching are given in the Acts (cf. chs. 2. 7. 8 etc.). To the Jews the Apostles preached the Messiahship of Jesus, basing their appeal mainly on two arguments, viz. (1) the resurrection, and (2) OT prophecy. On this depended the forgiveness of sins, and salvation through Christ. These reports, abbreviated as they obviously are, reveal their essential genuineness by their undeveloped theology (.e.g. of the Atonement).

Preaching long continued free and spontaneous among the Christian societies, being exercised in the assembly by private members who possessed the gift of prophecy (cf. e.g. 1 Corinthians 14:31), though, of course, the Apostles, while they were alive, would naturally assume, and be accorded, the chief place in this, as in other respects. G. H. Box.

Precious Stones

See Jewels and Precious Stones.

Predestination

The English word ‘predestinate’ in the AV is, in the few cases in which it occurs (Romans 8:29, 30, Ephesians 1:5, 11), exchanged in the RV for ‘foreordain,’ a return to the usage of the older Versions. The Gr. word (.proorizo) conveys the simple idea of defining or determining beforehand (thus, in addition to above, in Acts 4:28, j co 2:7). The change in rendering brings the word into closer relation with a number of others expressing the same, or related, meanings, as ‘foreknow’ (in pregnant sense, Acts 2:23. Eo 8:29 11:2. 1 Peter 1:2, 20), ‘determine’ (Acts 17). ‘appoint’ (1 Peter 2:8). ‘purpose’ (Ephesians 1:9), in the case of believers, ‘choose’ or ‘elect’ (Ephesians 1:4 etc.). In the OT the idea is expressed by the various words denoting to purpose, determine, choose (e.g. Isaiah 14:24–27 46:10, 11). with the abundance of phrases extolling the sovereignty and immutability of God’s counsel in all the spheres of His operation (see below; so in NT). The best clue to the Scripture conception will be found in tracing it as it appears in these different spheres of the Divine action.

1. In its most general aspect, foreordination is co-extensive with the sphere of God’s universal providence, is, in fact, but another name for the^eternal plan, design, purpose, counsel of God, which executes itself in providence. The election of believers, to which ‘predestination’ is sometimes narrowed, is but a specific case of the ‘purpose’ of Him ‘who worketh all things after the counsel of his will’ (Ephesians 1:11). It is in this wider regard, accordingly, that foreordination must be studied first. It cannot be reasonably doubted that all Scripture — OT and NT — represents God as exercising in and over the world a providence that is absolutely universal. Nothing, great or small — operations of nature or actions of men — is left outside its scope. This does not happen blindly, but in accordance with a plan or purpose, equally all-embracing, which has existed from eternity. As Plato says in his Parmenides that nothing, not even the meanest object, is unpenetrated by the idea, so even the minutest details, and seemingly most casual happenings, of life (the numbering of hairs, the fall of a sparrow, Matthew 10) are included in the Divine providence. Free agency is not annulled; on the contrary, human freedom and responsibility are everywhere insisted on. But even free volitions, otherwise mere possibilities, are taken up in their place into this plan of God, and are made subservient to the accomplishment of His purposes. The Bible does not trouble itself with solving difBculties as to the relation of the Divine purpose to human freedom, but, in accordance with its fundamental doctrine of God as the free personal Creator of the world and absolutely sovereign Euler in the realms both of matter and of mind, working through all causes, and directing everything to the wisest and holiest ends, it unhesitatingly sees His ‘hand’ and His ‘counsel’ in whatever is permitted to happen, good or bad (Acts 2:28). It need not be said that there is nothing arbitrary or unjust in this ‘counsel’ of God; it can be conceived of only as the eternal expression of His wisdom, righteousness, and love.

Texts are almost superfluous in the case of a doctrine pervading the whole of Scripture, — history, prophecy, psalm, epistle, — but an instance or two may be given. The history is a continual demonstration of a Divine teleology {e.g. Genesis 45:8 50:20). God’s counsel stands, and cannot be defeated (Psalms 33:1 46:10, 11)) all that God vrills He does (Psalms 115:3 135:6, Daniel 4:35) it is because God purposed it, that it comes to pass (Isaiah 14:24, 27 37:26) God is the disposer of all events (2 Samuel 17:11, 12, Job 1:21, Proverbs 16:33) man may devise his way, but it is the Lord who directs his steps (16:9) even the hearts of men are under His control (21:1) God sends to man good and evil alike (Amos 3:6, Isaiah 45:7). It has already been pointed out that the same doctrine is implied in the NT (e.g. Acts 4:28 IS" 28 [story of Paul’s shipwreck], Ephesians 1:11. Revelation 4:11 etc.).

2. A universal, all-pervading purpose of God in creation, providence, and human life, is thus everywhere assumed. The end of God’s purpose, as regards humanity, may be thought of as the establishing of a moral and spiritual kingdom, or Kingdom of God, in which God’s will should be done on earth, as it is done in heaven (cf. Matthew 6:10). But this end, now that sin has entered, can be attained only through a redemption. The centre of God’s purpose in our world, therefore, — that which gives its meaning and direction to the whole Biblical history, and constitutes almost its sole concern, — is the fact of redemption through Jesus Christ, and the salvation of men by Him. To this everything preceding — the call of Abraham, the Covenant with Israel, the discipline and growing revelation of Law and Prophets — leads up (on predestination here, cf. Genesis 18:18, 19. Leviticus 20:24, 26. Isaiah 43:1, 7 etc.); with this begins (or, more strictly, continues) the ingathering of a people to God from all nations and races of mankind, who, in their completeness, constitute the true Church of God, redeemed from among men (Ephesians 5:25–27, 1 Peter 2:9, 10. Rev !’• 8 14 etc.). The peculiar interest of the doctrine of foreordination, accordingly, in the NT, concentrates itself in the calling and salvation of those described as the ‘chosen’ or ‘elect’ of God to this great destiny (Ephesians 1:4 etc.). The doctrine of foreordination(predestination) here coalesces practically with that of election (wh. see). Yet certain distinctions arise from a difference in the point of view from which the subject is contemplated.

Election, in the NT, as seen in the article referred to, relates to the eternal choice of the individual to salvation. As little as any other fact or event in life is the salvation of the believer regarded as lying outside the purpose or pre-determination of God; rather, an eternal thought of love on God’s part is seen coming to light in the saved one being brought into the Kingdom (2 Thessalonians 2:13, 15). There is the yet deeper reason for seeing in the believer’s calling and salvation the manifestation of a Divine purpose, that, as lost in sin, he is totally incapable of effecting this saving change in himself. He owes his renewal, his quickening from spiritual death, to the gratuitous mercy of God (Ephesians 2:1–8; see Regeneration). Every soul born into the Kingdom is conscious in its deepest moments that it is only of God’s grace it is there, and is ready to ascribe the whole glory of its salvation to God (Revelation 7:10), and to trace back that salvation to its fountainhead in the everlasting counsel of God. Thus regarded, ‘election’ and ‘foreordination’ to salvation seem to have much the same meaning. Yet in usage a certain distinction is made. It may perhaps be stated thus, that ‘election’ denotes the Divine choice simply, while ‘foreordain’ has generally(in sense of ‘predestinate ‘) a reference to the end which the foreordination has in view. Thus, in Eph !•■ ’ Even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world . . . having foreordained us unto adoption as sons ‘(where’ having foreordained,’ as Meyer rightly says, is not to be taken as prior to, but as coincident in point of time with, ‘he chose’); and in v. 11 ‘having been foreordained,’ i.e. to be ‘made a heritage,’ and this ‘to the end that we should be unto the praise of his glory’ (v. 12). In Romans 8:29, again, where ‘foreknew’— which seems to take the place of ‘chose’ (it can hardly be foreknowledge of the faith which is the result of the later ‘calling’) — comes before ‘foreordained,’ the latter has the end defined: ‘to be conformed to the image of his Son.’ Those ‘foreknown’ are afterwards described as God’s ‘elect’ (v. 33). This striking passage further shows how, in foreordaining the end, God likewise foreordains all the steps that lead to it (‘foreknew’ — ‘foreordained’ — ‘called’ — ‘justified’ — ‘glorified’). In 1 Peter 1:1. on the other hand, ‘foreknowledge’ is distinguished from election — still, however, in sense of pre-designation.

3. God’s foreordination, or predestination, whether in its providential, historical, or personal saving aspects, is ever represented as a great mystery, the depths of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of which (for this is the character of its mystery) man can never hope to fathom (Romans 11:33, 34). when the Apostle, m Romans 9, is dealing with objectors, he does not attempt a rationale of that which he admits to lie beyond his ken, but falls back on the unchallengeable sovereignty of God in acting as He wills (vv. 14–16 i»-2s). The assumed throughout that God’s is a will in which there can be no taint of unrighteousness, and that there is nothing in His action which does not admit of vindication to a perfect wisdom and goodness. If God shows His mercy on whom He wills, His right to do so cannot be assailed; if He hardens — not arbitrarily, but through the fixed operation of ethical laws — and glorifies His wrath in the destruction of the hardened, it is not without suflScient cause, and only after much long-suffering (v. 22). As little does the Apostle attempt to show the compatibility of the Divine foreordination with human freedom, but habitually assumes that the one is not, and cannot be, in violation of the other. The material with which the potter works (v. ") is not, in this case, after all, mere inanimate clay, but beings who can ‘reply against God’ (v. 20), and are the objects of His long-suffering endurance (v. 22). Sovereignty is seen in this, that even those who refuse to be moulded to higher uses do not escape the hands of God, but are made to subserve His glory, even if it be in their destruction. Doubtless even here a purpose of God is to be recognized. Godet, who is not a rigid predestinarian, says of the instance in v. 17 —

‘God might have caused Fliaraoh to be bom in a cabin, where his proudobstinacy would have been displayed with no less self-will, but without any historical consequence; on the other hand, he might have placed on the throne of Egypt at that time a weali, easy-going man, who would have yielded at the first shock. What would have happened? Pharaoh in his obscure position would not have been less arrogant and perverse, but Israel would Iiave gone forth from Egypt without iclat’ (on Romans 9:17, 18). Only in this sense, of those wilfully hardened and persistently obdurate, is it permissible to speak — if the language should be employed at all — of a decree of leprobation. Scripture itself, with all its emphasis on foreordination, never speaks of a foreordination to death, or of a reprobation of human beings apart from their own sins. See Reprobate. Its foreordination is reserved for life, blessing, sonship, inheritance. James Okr. PRE-EXISTENCE OF SOULS — ‘Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting: The soul that rises with us, our life’s star.

Hath had elsewhere its setting,

And Cometh from afar.’ — Wordsworth, Intimations of Immortality The idea expressed in these lines has been prominent in many religions — cultured and crude alike. That it had Jewish adherents is clear from (a) Wisdom 8:19, 20, written by some Jewish thinker influenced (as, e.g., Philo, a believer in the same doctrine, was conspicuously) by Platonist study; (6) the reference of Josephus to Essene doctrines; (c) the Talmud. That traces occur in the OT is doubtful. The idea can be more easily read into, than gathered out of, such passages as Job 1:21 (cf. Sirach 40:1), Ecclesiastes 12:7. Psalms 139:15. Cf. also Rev 4. But something very like it occurs John 9:2. Had the man been bom blind because of his ovm sint In His reply Christ finds no fault with the question as such. The objection that such an idea would be unfamiliar to the disciples is weakened by considerations as to the advanced thought of the Fourth Gospel; moreover, the Book of Wisdom (see above) is clearly re-echoed in NT. Some think that the question rose from Jewish ideas as to pre-natal consciousness. See Genesis 25:22 (strife), Luke 1:41–44 (joy). Non liquet must be the verdict. The subject re-appears in Origen’s speculative teaching and, indirectly, in related controversies. H. F. B. COMPSTON.

Preparation

(Gr. varaskevS). A term applied by ■the Jews to the day preceding the Sabbath, or any of the sacred festivals, especially the Passover.

Presbyter

(Gr. presbyteros, ‘elder’). The word occurs only once in EV, viz. as a RV marginal alternative for ‘elders’ in Acts 20:17) the Gr. presbyteros, which is of frequent occurrence, being otherwise invariably rendered ‘elder.’ In this case the Revisers doubtless put ‘presbyters’ in the margin because the passage furnishes one of the leading proofs for the identity of the presbyter or elder with the bishop or overseer (cf. V." with V.28). For treatment of the subject of the presbyter, see art. Bishop. J. C. Lambert.

Presbytery

(Gr. presbytenon). In EV of NT the word occurs only in 1 Timothy 4:14, where it denotes the body of Christian presbyters or elders (no doubt those belonging to the church at Lystra; cf. Acts 16:1–4) who laid their hands upon Timothy before he set out on his labours as St. Paul’s missionary companion. In the Gr. text, however, the word presbyterion is found in two other passages, viz. Luke 22:66 (AV ‘elders,’ RV ‘assembly of the elders’) and Acts 22:5 (AV and RV ‘estate of the elders’), as an expression for the body of Jewish elders who with the ‘chief priests’ and the scribes composed the Sanhedrin. This twofold use of the word (like the corresponding twofold use of ‘elder’) affords a strong confirmation of the view, which is otherwise most probable, that the presbytery of the Christian Church finds its roots in the eldership of the Jewish ecclesia.

The presbytery was at first a purely local body (cf. the Letters of Ignatius, passim), corresponding not to the modern presbytery of the Presbyterian Churches, which is a district court composed of ministers and elders drawn from a number of separate congregations, but to the kirk-session or body of elders by which in those churches a single congregation is ruled. Originally the presbytery had no fixed president. The presbyters or elders, otherwise Isnown as bishops (see art. Bishop), whom we meet in the NT seem ofScially to have all stood upon the same footing. But early in the post- Apostolic age one of the congregational presbyter-bishops rose, by what was probably a process of natural evolution (cf. 1 Timothy 5:17, ‘Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially those who labour in the word and in teaching’), to a position of predominance, and was now known as the ‘bishop’ par excellence, in distinction from the other presbyters (cf. in the Presbyterian and Congregational Churches the precedence of the minister over the elders and deacons respectively, although, properly speaking, a ‘minister’ is simply a diakonos or deacon). ‘The bishop as we meet him in the Letters of Ignatius (e.g. Ephes. 4) is a congregational bishop, the president of a body of congregational presbyters. The monarchical bishop is a later creation.

What was involved in the laying on of the hands of the presbytery in the case of Timothy it is impossible to say with certainty. Probably it was an act corresponding to ordination to office (see Laying on op Hands), St. Paul himself being associated with the presbytery in the matter (cf. 2 Timothy 1:6). On the other hand, it may have been no more than a commendation of Timothy to the grace of God for strength and guidance in his new work as a missionary, analogous thus to the action of the prophets and teachers of Antioch in the case of Barnabas and Saul (Acts 13). The laying on of St. Paul’s hands (2 Timothy 1:6) may really have been a separate incident, comparable again to the laying on of the hands of Ananias on himself (Acts 9:17) — not an official act but a gracious benediction (cf. Lindsay, Church and Ministry, p. 143n.). St. Paul without doubt received a consecrating grace from the hands both of Ananias and of those prophets and teachers of the Church at Antioch, but he claimed to be an Apostle ‘not from men, neither through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised him from the dead’ (Galatians 1:1). J. C. Lambert.

Press, Pressfat

The former occurs in the OT for the usual ‘winepress’ in Pr3’» (RV ‘fats’ ; in modern English, ‘vats’), Isaiah 16:10, where alone it is retained in RV, and Joel 3:13 RV ‘winepress.’ Also Haggai 2:16 AV, along with the only instance of ‘pressfat’ (RV ‘winefat’), as the rendering of a rare word, which RV wrongly tr. ‘vessels.’ The passage in question should run: ‘When one came to the winepress (expecting) to draw off fifty (measures [probably’ baths’ are intended]) from the wine-trough, there were but twenty.’ For the ancient winepresses, see Wine and Stkonq Drink, § 2.

A. R. S. Kennedy. PREVENT.— Tobit 1 in the Eng. of AV is to " be before,’ ‘anticipate,’ ‘forestall,’ as Psalms 119:147 ‘I prevented the dawning of the morning and cried’ ( Amer. Revision has ‘anticipated’ here, but the Eng. Revisers retain ‘prevented’). Sometimes it is to forestall for one’s good, as Psalms 59:10 ‘The God of my mercy shall prevent me’; and sometimes for one’s hurt, as Psalms 18:5 ‘The snares of death prevented me’; but the mod. idea of merely ‘hindering’ never occurs in AV.