Proselyte – Provoke

Proselyte

1 . The character and the history of the proselyte. — The character and the history of the proselyte are somewhat obscured by the fact that the name ‘proselyte’ occurs only in the NT, and there in the final meaning of a convert to Judaism, as if he were a product of NT times alone. But the same Greek word that stands for ‘proselyte’ in the NT is very largely used in the LXX, where EV has ‘stranger.’ Even the Hebrews themselves are described by the LXX as ‘proselytes’ in Egypt (Exodus 22:21 23:9, Leviticus 19:34, Deuteronomy 10:19). The ‘stranger’ of the OT becomes the ‘proselyte’ of the NT. For the history that lies behind the use of the word see art. Stranger. By the 4th cent. B.C. the ‘stranger’ had become a member of the Jewish Church — a proselyte in the technical sense (Bertholet, SteUung der Israelitm, p. 178).

Other expressions are used in the NT to indicate a more or less close sympathy with Jewish religious thought and life without implying absolute identity with and inclusion in Judaism. These are ‘fearers of God’ (phoboumenoi ton Them, Acts 10:2, 22 13 etc.), and ‘worshippers of God’ (sebomenoi ton Theon, Ac 16:14 17:4, 17 etc.). They were such as were drawn from heathenism by the higher ideals and purer life of Judaism. They were dissatisfied with the religious teaching of their nation, and found in Judaism an intellectual home and a religious power they sought in vain elsewhere. But a study of Acts 10. 11, esp. 11:3. shows that these were not proselytes; they refused to take the final step that carried them into Judaism — viz. circumcision (JEGT vol. ii. p. 250 f.; Ramsay, Expositor, 1896, p. 200; Harnack, Expansion of Christianity, i. p. 11). They lived on the fringe of Judaism, and were, it seems (Luke 7:5. Acts 10:2). often generous benefactors to the cause that had lifted them nearer to God and truth.

2. Proselytizing activity of the Jews. — Up to the time of the Exile and for some time after, the attitude of the Hebrews towards ‘strangers’ was passive: they did not invite their presence into their community, and did not encourage them to be sharers of their faith. But before the 3rd cent. B.C. a change of outlook and national purpose had taken place, which had converted them into active propagandists. There appear to have been three reasons for this change. (1) The Hebrews were no longer concentrated in one narrow land where a homogeneous life was followed, but were scattered over all parts of the civilized world, and found themselves in contact with peoples who were religiously far inferior to themselves, however otherwise they might be placed, and who excited, it may be, their disdain, but also their pity. — (2) Many of those in the Gentile world who were dissatisfied with the intellectual results and the religious conditions of their time saw in Judaism, as lived and taught before their eyes, something finer and nobler than they had found elsewhere; and were drawn to its practical teaching and life without committing themselves to the ritual that offended their sense of fitness and decency (cf. Harnack, op. cit. i. 10 f.). — (3) The Hebrews themselves seem to have responded to their opportunity with a quickened enthusiasm for humanity and a higher ideal of their national existence, in the providence of God, among the nations of the earth. It does not appear that the Hebrews have ever been so powerfully moved towards the peoples lying in darkness as in this time subsequent to the Exile (Harnack, op. cit. i. 11, 12). They were convinced of the claim of God to the homage of men everywhere, the universalism of their revelation of truth and duty, and their own fitness to bring the world to God. The needs of the world moved them powerfully, and the thoughts that found expression in such passages as Psalms 33:8 (‘Let all the earth fear the Lord, let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him’) 36:7–9 64:10 65:8 etc., filled them with a burning zeal to make the world their offering to God. (Bertholet, op. cit. p. 191 f.). Perhaps we may not be wrong in regarding the Septuagint as a product of, as it certainly was an aid to, this missionary effort.

This spiritual enthusiasm for God’s honour and man’s salvation continued till about the time of the Maccabees, when the tenderer springs of the Jewish spirit were dried up, and the sword became the instrument of national idealism, and whole cities and tribes were given the option of circumcision or exile, if not slaughter (1 Maccabees 2:46 13:48 14:14, 36; Jos. Ant. xni. ix. 1, xi. 3, xv. 4). Of course, this was a means that was not available outside their hereditary home. This propaganda went on till the 1st cent, of our era, when the dissatisfaction of the Jews with the Roman supremacy culminated in insurrection. In their confiict with Rome their numbers were greatly reduced by slaughter, and their power of religious expansion was checked by the decree of Hadrian, modified later by Antoninus, in forbidding circumcision. By this time, however, Judaism had won a large following in every town of size and importance(cf. Acts 2:9–11; Jos. BJ vir. iii. 3, c. Apion. ii. 11, 40; Seneca, ap. August, de Civitate Dei, vi. 11; cf. ‘victi victoribus leges dederunf; Harnack, op. cit. i. 14; Scharer, HJP ir. ii. 304 ff.). But now bloodshed and persecution produced the twofold result of closing and steeling the heart of Judaism to the outside world, so that proselytes were no longer sought by the Jews, and the tenets and the practices of Judaism became crystallized and less amenable to Hellenistic influences, and so less fitted to win the Gentile spirit.

3. Admission of the proselyte. — The ritual conditions imposed on the proselyte on entering Judaism were three: (1) circumcision, (2) cleansing or baptism, (3) sacrifice. Baptism took place after the healing of the wound caused by circumcision. Some have sought to discover in it an imitation of Christian ritual. But there is no foundation for such a claim. Cleansing or baptism lay in the very nature of Judaism, — the heathen was unclean and so had to be cleansed by washing in water before admission into Judaism. Sacrifice was both an expression of thanksgiving and an individual participation in Jewish worship. With the fall of the Temple sacrifice lapsed, though at first it was made a burden on the proselyte to lay aside enough to pay for the sacrifice, should the Temple again be restored; but even this demand was in course of time allowed to lapse, as the prospect of restoration vanished. These three conditions seem of early origin, though we may not have specific reference to them till the 2nd cent. a.d.

Among individual Jewish teachers there was difference of opinion as to the necessity of circumcision and baptism, but all early usage seems to confirm their actual observance. It is true that Izates, king of Adiabene, for a time refrained from circumcision under the guidance of his first Jewish teacher, Ananias, but this counsel was given, not because it was at the time deemed unnecessary for a proselyte to be circumcised, but because circumcision might alienate the sympathies of his people from Izates and endanger his throne. And Ananias wisely laid greater stress upon the moral than upon the ritual side of conversion. All through the Dispersion we find the same disposition to conciliate the Gentiles who were willing to share in the Jewish faith in any measure, by relaxing the ritual demands. And we cannot withhold our appreciation of the action of the Jews, for they wisely discriminated between the real and the formal side of their religion. They never did anything, however, to lower or compromise the moral demands of their faith. They rigorously Insisted on the recognition of God from all their proselytes with all His claims upon their service (Harnack, op. cit. i. 72). It does not appear that conversion enhanced the reputation of the proselytes; for although they could not but win the esteem of the finer minds of their nation by their higher moral life, yet they seemed to the people to display a type of daily life lacking in domestic reverence and civic and national patriotism (Tac. Hist. v. 5. 8; Juv. Sat. xiv. 103-4).

4. Place of the proselyte in the growth of the Christian Church. — Those proselytes who had embraced Judaism in its entirety seem to have accepted the attitude of the Jews generally towards Christianity. Most of them would oppose It, and .those who accepted it would make the Law the necessary avenue to it, and so they acted rather as a hindrance than as a help to the progress of the gospei. It the experience of Justin be any indication of the general attitude of the proselytes to the Church, they must have deemed it a duty to their adopted faith to manifest a violence of speech and an aggressiveness of action unsurpassed by the Jews themselves; for he says, ‘the proselytes not only do not believe, but twofold more than yourselves blaspheme His name, and wish to torture and put to death us who believe in Him’ (.Dial. 122).

But the proselytes must always have formed a very small minority of those amongst the Gentiles who had lent an ear to Jewish teaching. There were many who were attracted to the synagogue by the helpfulness of its worship and the purity of its teaching, who had no sympathy with its ritual. Amongst these the gospel had a different reception; it was readily accepted and eagerly followed. They found in it all that drew them to the synagogue, and a great deal more. With historical Judaism they had nothing to do, and loyalty and nationality did not appeal to them as motives to maintain it against Christianity. Amongst the Jews both the proselyte and the devout worshipper occupied an inferior place, but here was a faith that made no distinction between Jew or Gentile, a faith whose conception of God was tenderer and whose ethical standards were higher, that made love and not law the interpreter of duty and the inspiration of service, that lived not in an evening twilight of anticipation of a glorious Messianic morning, but in warm fellowship with a Personality that was the evidence of its power and truth. It Is easy to understand how quickly the gospel would be adopted by these adherents of Judaism. Every synagogue would become the seed-plot of a Christian church. And so it was specially to these that St. Paul addressed himself on his missionary journeys, and from them he formed the beginnings of many of his churches and received so much kindness (Acts 13 16:14, 15 etc.). One can easily understand with what feelings of combined jealousy and hate the Jews would see these worshippers detached from the synagogue and formed into a church. But Judaism had nothing to offer the Gentile that was not better provided by the Christian Church, and so it recoiled from the attack on Christianity like the spent waves from the rock-bound coast, angry but baffled. Failure drove the Jews in sullenness upon themselves. They left the field to Christianity, restricted their vision to their own people, and left the outer world alone. J. Gilboy.

Prostitution

See Crimes and Punishments, 3.

Provender

1. mispB’ (Genesis 24:25, 32 42:27 43:24, Jg 1919. 2i)_ a general name for cattle food. 2. belli, Job 6:5 ‘fodder’; belli chamlts, Isaiah 30:24 ‘clean (AVm and RV’ savoury,’ RVm ‘salted’) provender,’ i.e. fodder mixed with salt or aromatic herbs. The ordinary food of cattle in Palestine — besides pasturage — is tibn (broken straw), kursenneh (the vetch, Vicia ervilia), bran (for fattening especially), ,and sometimes hay made from the flowering herbs of spring.

E. W. G. Masterman.

Proverb

1. Ueaning. — In the Bible there Is no essential difference between the proverb and the parable (wh. see). The Heb. mSsftaJ and the Gr. paraboB, meaning ‘resemblance,’ were applied indiscriminately to both. The value arising from this likeness was twofold. In the first place, as the moral truth seemed to emerge from the observed habits of animals, objects in nature, familiar utensils, or occurrences in daily life, such juxtaposition gave to the ethical precept or fact of conduct the surprise and challenge of a discovery. Thus the whole influence of example and environment is compressed into the proverb, ‘As is the mother, so is her daughter’ (Ezekiel 16:44). The surprise was Intensified when the parable product contradicted ordinary experience, as In the statement, ‘One soweth and another reapeth’ (John 4:37). Definite labour deserves a definite reward, yet the unexpected happens, and, while man proposes, there remains an area in which God disposes. Out of such corroboration grew the second value of the proverb, namely, authority. The truth became a rule entitled to general acceptance. The proverb usually has the advantage of putting the concrete for the abstract. Among the modem inhabitants of Palestine, when a letter of recommendation is asked, it is customary to quote the proverb, ‘You cannot clap with one hand.’ Of a dull workman without interest or resource in his work it is said, ‘He is like a sieve, he can do only one thing.’

2. Literaryform. — (1) Next to the fact of resemblance was the essential feature of brevity. Such a combination at once secured currency to the unpremeditated exclama^ tion, ‘Is Saul also among the prophets?’ (1 Samuel 10:11, 12). When the proverb consisted of two parts, rhetorical emphasis was secured either by repeating the same thought in different words (Proverbs 3:17) or by the introduction of contrasting particulars (3). (2) Rhythmic measure was also studied, and there was often an untranslatable felicity of balance and repeated sound. The final mark of literary publicity was conferred by a rhetorical touch of picturesque hyperbole, as in the reference to a camel passing through the eye of a needle (Matthew 19:24). (3) The fact that a wise saying was meant for the wise encouraged the use of elliptical form. This carried the complimentary suggestion that the hearer was able to understand a reference that was confessedly obscure. On this account proverbs were called ‘the words of the wise’ (Proverbs 22:17). Hence the note of surprise and unexpectedness in Christ’s words, when He said that the mysteries of the Kingdom had been hidden from the wise and understanding and revealed unto babes (Mt lli", Luke 10:21). (4) The obscurity referred to was sometimes made the leading feature and motive of the proverb, and it was then called an ‘enigma’ or ‘dark saying’ (Psalms 49:4, Proverbs 1:6 30:15–31). Its solution then became a challenge to the ingenuity of the interpreter. Both the prophets and Christ Himself were charged with speaking in this problematical manner (Ezekiel 20:49. Jn 16:29). Riddles were introduced at festive gatherings as contributing an element of competitive acuteness and facetious exhilaration. Instances resembling Proverbs 30:15–31 are common among the modern Arabs and Jews in Syria, as when it is said: ‘There are three chief voices in the world, that of running water, of the Torah, and of money.’ An enigma for the study of books is: ‘Black seeds on white ground, and he who eats of the iruit becomes wise.’

3. Subject-matter. — This is summarized in Proverbs 1:1–6. The reference is generally to types of character, the emotions and the desires of the heart, and the joys and sorrows, the losses and gains, the dyjie^‘and the relationships of human life. Amid these the proverb casts a searching light upon different classes of men, and points out the path of wisdom. H^jjoa the name’ words of truth’ (Proverbs 22:21).

4. Authority. — Proverbial literature is more highly esteemed in the East than in the West. While the popularity of proverbs is partly due to literary charm and intellectual force, and the distinction conferred by the power of quoting and understanding them, the principal cause of their acceptance lies in their harmony with Oriental life. The proverb is patriarchal government in the region of ethics. It is an order from the governing class that admits of no discussion. The proverb is not the pleading of the lawyer in favour of a certain view and claim, but the decision of a judge who hM heard both sides and adjudicates on behalf of general citizenship. Such authority is at its maximum when it not only is generally current but has been handed down from previous generations. It is then ‘a parable of the ancients’ (1 8 24:13). The quotation of an appropriate proverb in a controversy always carries weight, unless the opponent can quote another in support of his claims. Thus, to the careless and inattentive man in business who says ‘Prosperity is from God,’ it may be retorted ‘He that seeketh findeth.’ Beneath some commendable social qualities belonging to this attitude there is a mental passivity that seeks to attain to results without the trouble of personal inquiry, and prefers the benefits conferred by truth to any sacrifice or service that might be rendered to it. G. M. Mackie.

Proverbs, Book of

The second book among the ‘Writings’ is the most characteristic example of the Wisdom literature in the OT. 1. We may adopt the division of the book made by the headings in the Hebrew text as follows: — I. 1-9, The proverbs of Solomon, son of David, Idng of Israel (heading for more than this section) . See below.

II. 10-2216, The proverbs of Solomon. III. 22i’-2422, ... the words of the wise (22"-h forma an introductory poem) .

IV. 2423-M, These also are the sayings of the wise. V. 25-29, "These also are the proverbs of Solomon which the men of Hezekiah copied out.

VI. 30, The words of Agur, etc. VII. 311-^, The words of idng Lemuel, etc. VIII. Sli’i-^i, Without heading, but clearly distinct from VII.

Sections I., II., and III. form the body of the book; sections IV. and V. are additions to the earlier portion, and VI., VII., and VIII. are still later additions.

We consider section II. first, because here the typical Hebrew proverb is best seen, especially if chs. 10-15 are taken by themselves as IIo. These chapters consist of aphorisms in the form of couplets showing antithetic parallelism (see Poethy). The couplets are wholly detached, and little order is observable in their arrangement. In content they come nearest being popular, even if they are not so actually. In general they show a contented and cheerful view of life. The wise are mentioned, and with admiration, but not as a class or as forming a school of thought or instruction. They are the successful, upright, prosperous men, safe examples in affairs of common life. In II& the lines are still arranged in distiches, but the antithetic parallelism has largely given way to the synonymous or synthetic variety. This form gives a little more opportunity for classifying and developing the sentiment of the proverb. " My son’ is addressed a few times, but not regularly. Section III. again marks an advance over Ila and 116. The verses 22"-2> are a hortatory introduction. There follows a collection of quatrains, instead of couplets. They are maxims with proverbs among them. Consecutive thought has developed. The truths stated are still the simple every-day ones, but they show meditation as well as observation. Section IV. is an appendix to the third, both coming from ‘the Wise.’ It is very defective in rhythm, and seemingly the text has suffered corruption. In the few verses three themes are treated, chiefly the sluggard. Section V. is easily subdivided. Chs. 25-27^2 contain proverbs in the form of comparisons. Chs. 28-29 are in the style of section II. Between the two a little piece (27^-2’) praises the life of a farmer. Section VI. consists of several independent discourses. The heading (30’) separates the chapter from the preceding, but otherwise adds little to our knowledge of the origin, for it is wellnigh unintelligible, Even if it consists of proper names, as is most likely, there is no gain from knowing them and nothing more. In vv.""- are several stanzas of peculiar ‘numerical’ style: ‘there are three things that . . . and four . . . namely . . .’ Section VII. is a brief manual for a king or judge. though the maxims are rather rudimentary and homely. If there is a temperance lesson, it is only for the king; the advice to the poor and oppressed is very different (see vv.’ and ‘). The remainder of the chapter, section VIII., is noticeable for two things: its alphabetical structure, each couplet beginning with a new letter in regular order, and the unusual subject, the capable housewife. A most delicate tribute is in the omission of any reference to her virtue, which Is tacitly assumed, and not even mentioned.

There remains the important section chs. 1-9. Its position at the head of the book does not show that it was first in point of time. It is clearly a preface, or hortatory introduction. It does not so much give wise counsel of a concrete kind, as praise the wisdom illustrated in the concrete counsels of the following sections. It is studied, philosophical, flowing in style. It addresses ‘My son’ at the beginning of a new paragraph, exactly as a teacher addresses ‘My hearers’ as he begins a lecture. In one chapter at least, the eighth, the adoration of wisdom is carried to the limit, and in spite of the fine personification one feels, regretfully, far removed from the plain practical precepts of sections II. and III. In this ‘cosmogonic hymn’ wisdom is assigned a dignity in the universe hardly inferior to that of the Creator.

Among the various attempts to explain the form in which the book comes to us, perhaps the following will be found as simple as any. We may suppose that the proverbs ‘of Solomon’ in Ila and 116 were collected separately and then combined in II.; that ‘the words of the wise’ in III. at first stood by themselves, and were supplemented by IV.; that the two groups, II. and III.-IV., were then joined together, becoming known as the proverbs ‘of Solomon ‘; that the collection in V. was attached; that to this book section I. was then prefixed as an introduction, which was thus stamped as the literature of the school of Wisdom. The few remaining chapters, sections VI., VII., and VIII., were added later from the mass of Wisdom literature which must have been in existence, or later came into existence.

2 . As for the date of the book, the traditional ascription of parts of it to king Solomon must, of course, be discarded. And with this rejection there disappears any reason for seeking an early date for it. The time when, all things considered, the compilation is best explained, is between B.C. 350 and ISO. From the nature of the case it is impossible to fix even approximately the date of the origin of individual couplets. Many of the arguments valid against an early date of compilation are valueless so far as the single proverbs are concerned.

3. The authors of the Wisdom literature do not claim revealed wisdom; their teachings are only practical common sense. They are humanists, basing their morality upon the universal principles underlying all human nature. From this practical interest the view broadens to the wide sweep of ch. 8. ‘Proverbs may be regarded as a manual of conduct, or, as Bruch calls it, an " anthology of gnomes." Its observations relate to a number of forms of life, to affairs domestic, agricultural, urban (the temptations of city life) , commercial, political, and military’ (Toy, Proverbs, p. x.). O. H. Gates.

Providence

1. The word is not found in the OT. In the NT it is used only once; in the exordium of his address to Felix, the orator Tertullus says: ‘By thy providence evils are corrected for this nation’ (Acts 24:2). Here ‘providence’ simply means ‘foresight,’ as In 2 Maccabees 4:6 ‘the king’s providence.’

2. The first appearance of the word ‘providence’ (Gr. pronoia) in Jewish literature is in Wisdom 14:3, where God is represented as making for a ship ‘a way in the sea’; the Jewish author, borrowing the expression from the Stoic philosophers, says: ‘Thy providence, O Father, guideth it along.’ In a later passage, recognizing the sterner aspect of the truth to which the OT also bears witness, he contrasts the destinies of the Israelites and Egyptians and describes the latter, when they were ‘prisoners of darkness,’ as ‘exiled from the eternal providence’ (17:2).

3. Although the OT does not contain the word ‘providence,’ it is a continuous and progressive revelation of Him ‘whose never-failing providence orderetli all things both in heaven and earth.’ Historians narrate the gradual accomplishment of His redemptive purpose concerning the Chosen People and the world at large (Genesis 50:20. Exodus 8:22. Deuteronomy 32:8 ff.; cf. Psalms 74:12 ff.) poets delight to extol Him ‘whose tender mercies are over all his works’ (Psalms 145:9; cf. 29:3 ff. 104. 136); prophets point to the proofs of God’s guidance in the past in order that the people may gain wisdom for the present and courage for the future (Deuteronomy 32:7 ff.; Haggai 2:9. Isaiah 51:2, Mai 4:4 ff.). The Book of Job has been called ‘the book of Providence,’ because it not only gives the author’s solution of perplexing problems, but also ‘furnishes reasons for believing in the righteous providence of God from the consideration of His character and His dominion over nature’ (Oehler, Theology of OT, ii. 474; cf. Job 27. 34:10 36:22 37:21).

4. Belief in Providence stands or fails with belief in a personal God. It is incompatible with mechanical or pantheistic theories of Creation. Ancient problems which perplexed Greek philosophers and Hebrew sages press heavily upon the modern mind as it strives to reconcile its trust in Divine providence with the reign of law in the universe and with the existence of pain and evil. Jesus Christ taught that the laws of nature are the established methods of His Heavenly Father’s working, and that they fulfil as well as reveal His will (Matthew 6:25 ff. 10:29 ff.: jn 5:17). Belief in Providence means to the Christian, trust in the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has so clearly revealed His will in His Son as to make it plain to His children that natural laws may not only subserve moral and spiritual ends in this present time, but may also further His unerring purposes which are not bounded by this mortal life (Romans 8:28, 2 Corinthians 4:11 ff.: 1 Peter 1:6 ff.). J. G. Taskeb.

Provoke

‘To provoke’ is now ‘to try to call forth evil passions,’ but in AV it is used in the sense of inciting to any action, good or evil, as 2 Corinthians 9:2 ‘Your zeal hath provoked very many.’ ‘Provocation,’ however, always occurs in a bad sense. It is used in Psalms 95:8 of the conduct of the children of Israel towards God in the wilderness.