Sepharvadb – Shame

Sepharvadb

1. A city mentioned hi 2 Kings 18:34 (Isaiah 36:19) and 19:13 (Isaiah 37) as among those captured by the Assyrians, all apparently in Syria. Probably it answers to the Shabara’in named in the Babylonian Chronicle as faken just before the fall of Samaria. Sibraim of Ezekiel 47:16 may then be the same city. 2. A word of exactly the same form as the above occurs in 2 K l7"-!» as the name of a place whose inhabitants were deported to Samaria. The context favours the supposition that the famous city Sippar in North Babylonia is intended. Probably the similarity between the words led some early copyist to write Sepharvaim by mistake. J. F. McCnRoy.

Septuagint

See Greek Versions of OT, § 1.

Sepulchre

See Tomb.

SERAH, — A daughter of Asher (Genesis 46:17, Numbers 26:46 (">). 1 Chronicles 7:30).

Seraiah

1. (2 Samuel 8:17) See Shavsha. 2. High priest in the reign of Zedekiah. Hebrews 9 to death, with other distinguished captives, by order of Nebuchadnezzar at Riblah, 2 Kings 25:18, 21, Jeremiah 52:24, 27. He is mentioned in the list of high priests, 1 Chronicles 6:14. Ezra claimed descent from him, Ezra 7:1 (1 Esdras 8:1 Azarias, 2 Esdras 1:1 Saraiaa). His name occurs also in 1 Esdras 5:5 Saraias. 3. One of ‘the captains of the forces’ who joined Gedaliah at Mizpah (2 Kings 25:23, Jeremiah 40:8). 4. Second son of Kenaz father of Joab, and brother of Othniel (1 Chronicles 4:13, 14) 6. Grandfather of Jehu, a prince of Simeon (1 Chronicles 4:35) 6. One of the twelve leaders who returned with Zerub babel, Ezra 2:2 7:7 Azariah, 1 Esdras 5:8 Zaraias 7. A priestly clan (Nehemiah 10:2 11:11 12:2, 12, 1 Esdras 5:8 = 1 Chronicles 9:11 Azariah). 8. One of those sent to apprehend Jeremiah and Baruoh (Jeremiah 36:26). 9. Son of Neriah and brother of Baruch (Jeremiah 51:59–64). He held the office of sar menOchSh (AV ‘a quiet prince,’ mg. ‘or prince of Menucha or chief chamberlain’; RV ‘chief chamberlain,’ mg. ‘or quartermaster’).

Seraphim

The seraphim are mentioned only in a single passage of Scripture (Is &"■). In his inaugural vision, Isaiah sees these supernatural creatures grouped about Jehovah’s throne in His heavenly palace. The prophet furnishes no elaborate description of the form of these beings, and apparently assumes that his readers will be able to fill in what he omits; but he does make clear that they are six-winged creatures. With one pair of wings they hover around Jehovah’s throne; and with the other two they cover their faces and their feet, — actions symbolical of hmnillty and adoration. The seraphim are arranged in an antiphonal choir, singing the Trisagion, and their chorus is of such volume that the sound shakes the foundations of the palace. In the prophet’s vision they have human voices and hands (v."), but it cannot be asserted with equal certainty that they possess human bodies. The prophet leaves us in no doubt about the function of these creatures. They are ministers of Jehovah, occupied in singing the praises of their Sovereign, and in protecting Him from the approach of sin and evil. The seraphim may be traced in the imagery and symbolism of the NT Apocalypse, where the four living creatures, in both their function and their form, are a combination of the seraphim with the cheruljim of Ezekiel’s vision (cf. Isaiah 6:2 ff.; Ezekiel 1. 2, and Revelation 4:8).

It was customary with the prophets to transform and purify popular conceptions, by bringing them into relation with their ethical idea of God. The seraphim are an illustration of this process. The popular mythical seraphim were a personification of the serpent-like flash of lightning. The usage and meaning of the singular sdrdph (= ‘fiery serpent,’ Numbers 21:6. Isaiah 14:29), as well as the etymology of the word, suggest this view of the origin of the seraphim. The later Jewish tradition, according to which they are serpents, points in the same direction (Enoch 20 61:10 et al.). The brazen serpent, Nehushtan, which was removed from the Temple by Hezekiah, was a relic probably coimected with the popular mythical conception, and it may have suggested the seraphim of the heavenly palace to Isaiah’s mind. _ Two other theories of the origin of the prophetic conception have been advanced, but there is little that can be said in their favour. , Some woul d derive the name from the Babylonian Sharrapu, a name for Nergal the &re-god, and consequentlj^ would regard the seraphim as the flames that enveloped this deity. Others have endeavoured to associate them with the Egyptian griffins (seref), half-lion and halfeagle, which are represented as guardians of graves. According to the latter view, the duty of guarding the threshold of the Temple would be the function that must be^ assigned to the seraphim of Isaiah’s vision. In criticism, it maybe remarked that the Egyptian griffin is more alcin to the Hebrew cherub, and the latter should be sharply distinguished from the seraph (cf. art. Cherdb). James A. Kblso.

Serar

Serar (1 Esdras 5:32) =Sisera, Ezra 2, Nehemiah 7.

Sered

A son of Zebulun (Genesis 46:14, Numbers 26:26 W [gentilic name Seredites]).

Sergius Paulus

See Paulus (Sebqius).

Serjeants

EV tr. in Acts 16 of Gr. rhabdouchoi ( = ‘rod-bearers’), which represents the Lat. lictores (RVm lictors), officials whose duty it was to attend the Roman magistrates, to execute their orders, and especially to administer the punishments of scourging or beheading. For this purpose they carried, as their mark of office, the fasces, a bundle of rods with an axe inserted. Ct. art. Philippi.

Seron

A Syrian commander defeated by Judas Maccabaeus at Beth-horon (1 Maccabees 3)

1. nachash, generic name (cf. Arab, chanash), 3.; the most^commonly used word, occurs frequently.

2. ‘eph’eh (root to ‘groan’ or ‘hiss,’ of. Arab, af’a) is applied to the vjper (Job 20:16. Is 30« 59). .

3. ‘o*;8Ata), Ps 1468. The root meaning (cf. Arab. ‘akasa) seems to be’ bending back,’ as a serpent does before striking.

4. pethen, tr. ‘asp,’ Deuteronomy 32:33, Job 20:14, Isaiah 11:8; tr. ‘adder,’ Psalms 58:4, where it is referred to as the favourite of the serpentcharmer.

5. sMphlphon Genesis 49:17. tr. ‘adder,’ AVm ‘arrowsnake,’ RVm ‘horned snake* (cf. Arab, aheffnn).

6. tsepha’. Isaiah 14, AV ‘cockatrice,’ E.V ‘basilisk,’ EVm

7. Uipho’nl, Proverbs 23:32 ‘adder’; Isaiah 11:8 59:5, Jeremiah 8:17, ‘cockatrice,’ RV ‘basilisk,* mg. ‘or adder.’

8. qippoz. Isaiah 34:15, AV ‘great owl,’ RV ‘arrowsnake.’ See Owl.

9. saraph, Isaiah 14:29 30* ‘fiery serpent,’ coupled with nachash in Numbers 21:6, Deuteronomy 8:15.

10. zochtile ‘aphar, Deuteronomy 32:24; zochile ‘erets Mio 7:17; some creature that gildes on or into the earth, probably therefore a serpent. Cf . Worm, 5.

11. tannin, tr. ‘serpent,’ Exodus 7, RVm ‘any large reptile’; Psalms 91:13. AV and EV ‘dragon.’ See Dhagon.

12. (Gr.) echidTia — ^any poisonous serpent (Matthew 3:7 12:34 23:33, Luke 3:7. Acts 28:3).

Serpents are very common in the Holy Land and in the wilderness to the south. Over 30 species are known. Though the great majority are really harmless, all are dreaded by the natives, and several kinds are most deadly. Fatal snake bites are by no means uncommon; the writer knows of seven cases at first hand. The Egyptian cobra (.Naja haji) is found, but fortunately is not common. It is the favourite with snake-charmers, and is very probably the pethen, tr. ‘asp’ in OT. It was held in much veneration by the ancient Egyptians, and a little bronze serpent recently found in the excavations of ancient Gezer — probably an object of worship in pre-Israelite times — was of this form. Another very dangerous snake is the horned sandsnake (Cerastes hasselguistii), supposed to be the ‘asp of Cleopatra.’ It lies in ambush (Genesis 49:17) in depressions of the road and bites the passer-by. It is called by the Arabs shiffUn, which corresponds to the Heb. shephlphdn. Other poisonous Palestine snakes belonging, like the last mentioned, to the viper family are Vipera euphratica, V. ammodytes, Ddboia xanthina — a large, nocturnal species — and the small Echis arenicola which haunts sandy deserts. These vipers are all included under the Heb. ‘eph’eh (Arab. af’a). The viper of Acts 28:3 ^as probably Vipera aspis, which is common on most of the larger isles of the Mediterranean, though extinct in Malta. The expression’ fiery serpent’ probably refers to the burning sensation produced by the bite; in Psalms 140:3 their poison is supposed to reside in their tongues.

Some of the references to serpents do not apparently refer to any natural object. This view is taken in the translation in Isaiah 14:29 of tsepha’, and in Isaiah 11:8 59:5. Jeremiah 8:17 of tsiph’BM, where ‘cockatrice’ occurs in AV and ‘basilisk’ in RV. The former was, among early English writers, a creature with a head and body like a cock, but the tail of a serpent, with a sting at its extremity. The basUiskos of the LXX was probably the golden urosus, the ornament of the royal headdress among the Egyptians. There is no clear reason why in the passages quoted the references should not be to an actual species of snake. The reference in Amos 9:3 to the serpent (nachash) at the bottom of the sea may have some reference to the Babylonian myth of Tiamat. See also Dragon and Leviathan. For the serpent of Genesis 3 see Fall (4), and Satan, p. 829 f.

E. W. G. Mastebman.

Serpent, Brazen

Numbers 21:4–9 relates that Moses was commanded by God to make a serpent of brass (or rather, of bronze) and to set it upon a standard (RV), that those who had been bitten by the serpents might look on it and be healed. This was in harmony with a wide-spread belief that the image of a hurtful thing drives the evil away. In the absence of a direct statement we cannot say whether it was Jahweh who was worshipped under the form of the bronze serpent of 2 Kings 18:4 — tiie Nehushtan, or piece of bronze, as it was called. Some think it represented the Celestial Dragon, others the spirit of an ancestor, others a chthonic deity: Robertson Smith believed that it was the totem of David’s house. There are traces of serpent-*orship in Israel (1 Kings 1:9 Zoheleth=‘snake’; Nehemiah 2:13). The two points of comparison present to our Lord’s mind in John 3:14 are — (1) the lifting up of the serpent on the pole and Himself on the Cross, and (2) the voluntary looking of the Hebrews to the serpent — for the verb employed means more than simply seeing — and the faith of believers (see Sirach 16). J. Tatlob.

Serug

Son of Eeu (Genesis 11, Luke 3:35).

Servant

See next art. and Slave.

Servant of the Lord

In this phrase, as repeatedly in the EV of the OT, ‘Lord’ is substituted for ‘Jahweh,’ the proper name of the God of Israel, which stands in the Hebrew text.

1. Originally the term ‘servant’ in this phrase is simply correlative to such terms as ‘lord,’ ‘master,’ which the ancient Hebrews, in common with their Semitic kinsmen, applied to their god. In the first instance, the phrase ‘the servant of Jahweh’ merely defines a man as one who acknowledges Jahweh as his god ; it corresponds closely to what we might rather call a worshipper of Jahweh. Naturally, therefore, it may stand in antithesis to a similar phrase in which the name of another deity takes the place of that of Jahweh. Thus the ‘servants of Jahweh’ and ‘the servants of the (Tyrian) Baal’ are contrasted in 2 Kings 10:23. though the fact that the same word is used in both phrases is obscured by the RV, which exaggerates a distinction capriciously introduced by the punctuators into the Hebrew text.

2. Thus it will be readily understood that any Israelite might be called ‘the servant of Jahweh,’ and as a matter of fact a large number of individuals received this phrase as their name; it is familiar to English readers in the form Obadiah, which was originally pronounced, as the LXX indicates, Abdiyah (cf. the parallel name Abdiel — ‘servant of God’). Adherents of other gods received similar proper names, such as Bbed-melech (wh. see) = ‘servant of the god Melech,’ or Abd-Melkarth, Abd- Eshmun, and Abd-Majidt, typical PhcEnician and Nabataean names meaning respectively servant of the gods Melkarth, Eshmun, and Manat.

3. But just as modern terms denoting religious attachment, like ‘Christian’ or ‘believer,’ may, according to the connexion in which they occur, differ greatly in the fulness of their meaning, so ‘the servant of Jahweh’ might imply a higher degree, or more special form, of service than is necessarily involved in the proper name Obadiah, or in the distinction between ‘servants of Jahweh’ and ‘servants of Baal.’ Such fuller significance attaches to the phrase when prophets (Amos 3:7. 2 Kings 9:7, Jeremiah 7:25. and often) or priests and Levites (Psalms 134:1) are specified as ‘the servant of Jahweh’; so also when particular individuals are thus described. Among the individuals specifically termed ‘the servant of Jahweh’ (which in speeches of Jahweh of course becomes ‘my servant’) are Abraham (Gu 26). Moses (Exodus 14:31. Numbers 12:7 f.: and often), Joshua (Joshua 24:29), Caleb (Numbers 14:24). Job (Job 1:8). David (2 Samuel 3:18 and often), Eliakim (Isaiah 22:20). Zerubbabel (Haggai 2:23). and the person who is termed ‘the Shoot’ (EV text ‘the Branch,’ Zee S*).

4. The use of the term in Deutero-Isaiah (Is 40-55) is peculiar. In certain passages this writer clearly uses the term to describe the nation: the entire people is personified, spoken of as an individual, and called by Jahweh ‘my servant,’ or, by the prophet speaking in his own name, ‘the servant of Jahweh.’ These passages are 41 44 49 44 45. The same use of the term is found in Psalms 136:22, which was written much later; but it does not occur in any extant literature that is unquestionably earlier than the Deutero-Isaiah, for Jeremiah 30:10 (not found in the Greek text) =46"‘- is probably not a saying of the prophet Jeremiah’s, and in Ezekiel 37:25 28:25, sometimes cited as parallel, the phrase is used of an individual of the past, the patriarch Jacob, not of the nation of the present.

5. But though the particular character of ‘the servant of Jahweh’ in which the nation is personified may be peculiar to the Deutero-Isaiah, and one or two writers influenced by him, similar personifications are common enough with Hebrew writers, and are sometimes so remote from our habits of thought and expression that the RV has sacrificed the figure to gain intelligibility, as, e.g., in Joshua 9:7, which, literally rendered, runs, ‘and the man of Israel said unto the Hivite, perhaps thou art dwelling in my midst’ (for further examples see G. B. Gray, Divine Discipline of Israel, 79 f., or ‘Numbers," in ICC p. 265 f.). Other notable instances of personification retained even in RV are Hosea 11:1’ When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt ‘(where son =the Hebrew nation), and Psalms 129:1 ff.; where Israel is to say,’ Many a time have they afflicted me from my youth up, yet have they not prevailed against me. The plowers plowed upon my back; they made long their furrows.’

6. But while the personification of the nation as the ‘servant of Jahweh’ is certain in the passages cited in § 4, there are other passages in which most scholars in the past, and many of the present, have concluded that the title has another application — that it refers prophetically to Jesus Christ, or to some individual known historically to the writer, such as Jeremiah, Jehoiachin, Zerubbabel, or the Eleazar of 2 Maccabees 6, or to the pious section of Israel. In so far as this conclusion rests on the individualizing traits in the description of the servant in such passages as Isaiah 50:4–9 52:13, it is unconvincing; for the facts can be equally well, and, so far as the death, burial, and resurrection (cf. Ezekiel 37) of the servant are concerned, far better, explained by the analogy of the personifications referred to in the last paragraph, as figurative descriptions of the history of the nation in the past, and of the prophet’s hopes for it in the future.

7. In one passage (Isaiah 50:10 f.), indeed, ‘the servant of Jahweh’ is probably not the nation Israel; for the audience addressed appears to consist of Jews; if so, the servant here is either an individual or a comparatively small class — not the whole of the pious Israelites, for he is distinguished from ‘those that fear Jahweh.’ This passage is commonly considered to be the work of a later writer than the Deutero-Isaiah.

8. The most important differences of interpretation are concerned with four passages, 42:1–4 49:1–6 50:4–9 52 53:12. These are commonly, though not unanimously, held to be the work of one writer, but several scholars hold that this writer was not the Deutero-Isaiah. The critical question is largely an exegetical one; if there really is the wide difference, which some claim to discover, between the use of the term ‘servant of Jahweh’ in, and the religious standpoints of, these passages and the Deutero-Isaiah, differences of authorship may not unnaturally be interred; otherwise the grounds for disintegration are slight. Unfortunately the interpretation of the passages is rendered difficult and ambiguous by the state of the text; that the text is to some extent corrupt, especially in 52, is now generally admitted; but as to the exact extent, and the nature of the corruption, differences of judgment prevail. No consistent interpretation of ‘the servant of Jahweh’ given in these four passages is possible on the basis of the present text; for in 49:3 the servant is identified with the nation, but in 53:8 he is distinguished 838 from the nation, for ‘my people’ (if the text be sound) cannot be made to mean anything but Israel except by very forced exegesis. Consequently, in the interests of consistency some scholars have struck out the word ‘Israel’ in 49:3, others have corrected ‘the transgression of my people’ In 53:8 to ‘our transgressions,’ or ‘their transgression,’ or ‘the transgression of peoples’ (all comparatively slight changes in the Hebrew text). It may be observed that 3:8 is in other respects admittedly obscure, it not also corrupt.

It must suffice to refer briefly here to one or two of the chief points tor or against the two main alternatives — that in these passages, as elsewhere in Deutero-Isaiah, the servant is Israel, or something less than Israel (whether a section of the nation or an individual). We shall consider the latter alternative first.

(1) Two passages have been considered to demand a distinction between the servant and Israel. One of these, 53:8, as already stated, certainly does demand it, it the text be sound; but this is doubtful. The other passage is 49, which follows the statement in the present text that the servant is Israel (49:3). These verses as translated in RV imply that the servant and Israel are distinct. But though the translation of RV in V.’ is grammatically correct, it is not necessary; other grammatically correct translations are: ‘and now Jahweh that formed me to be his servant hath determined to bring back Jacob again to himself, and that Israel should be gathered to him,’ or ‘and now saith Jahweh that formed me from the womb to be his servant in that he brought Jacob again to him, and drew Israel unto him.’ Either of these translations allows of the identity of Israel and the servant. In ■V.’ KV is incorrect. The Hebrew is extremely awkward and questionable, but literally translated v. runs: ‘(a) lighter (thing) than thy being my servant is the raising up of the tribes of Jacob and the restoring of the preserved of Israel, and I will give thee for a light of the nations,’ etc. ‘The’ also’ in ‘I will also give’ of RV, which suggests that the illumination of the nations is a second function of the servant, in addition to one already described, is absolutely unrepresented in and unsuggested by the Hebrew text. Thus v. is ambiguous as to the point at issue; it may mean (if it means anything) either, You do not exhaust your service by restoring Israel, you have also to illumine the nations ; or. The fact that you are my servant means more than that I shall rescue you, it means that I shall make use of you for carrying put my purpose of illumining the nations.

(2) Apart from the passages just discussed, which are either textually open to suspicion or ambiguous in meaning, there is nothing that directly forbids identifying the servant with Israel in 42:1–4 49:1–6 50:4–9 52:13, as he is unmistakably identified with Israel by the Deutero- Isaiah in many passages (see § 4). In the present text of 49 the identification is actually made. But the strongest argument for the correctness of this identification is to be found in the fact that it does fuller justice to the general tenor of the passages: this is perfectly clear in 42:1–4) here the Divine speech and the writer’s mind are alike filled with two subjects — the Servant and the Nations of the world; the servant is to instruct the nations in the religion of Jahweh: granted that the servant is Israel, we have here a constantly recurring contrast, Israel and the nations; otherwise Israel is totally disregarded. In 49:1–6 the servant ad-‘dresses the nations of the world, and the function of the servant, which on some interpretations (see above) alone is mentioned, and on any interpretation alone receives prominence, is that of spiritually illumining the nations; in 52 Jahweh states that, as the past humiliation of the servant by its very extent attracted far-spread attention, so his coming exaltation will impress nations and kings. Here again, nothing is said of Israel, unless the servant is Israel. In SS"*‘certain speakers make a confession that they had misjudged the servant of Jahweh, terming him not the righteous one but a sinner, and regarding the unparalleled sufferings which they now perceive had been borne for them, as due to the fact that he was abandoned by Jahweh. Again, the least difficult view as to the speakers who make this confession is that they are the nations referred to in 52, and that the servant is the Hebrew nation. That Israel suffered for the nations is certainly a remarkable idea, but that all the sufferings of Israel were not due to its own sins appears to be the thought of Deutero-Isaiah in 40:2. Again, the relative righteousness of Israel, which is all that need be implied if we see in ch. 63 a confession of the nations, is implied elsewhere, e.g. in 40:27. It is impassible even to indicate here all the difficulties that beset, or the points that favour, the several theories of interpretation. The case for identifying the servant with Israel throughout la 40-65 has been ably presented in English by K. Budde in AJTh, iii. pp. 499 ft., and by A. S. Peake m the Problem of Suffering in the OT, pp. 34-72 and 180-193, who gives on pp. 44-59 a valuable critical translation of the chief passages. With equal ability the identification of the servant with the ideal Israel is maintained by J. Skinner m the Cambridge Bible for Schools,’ Isaiah xl.-lxvi . , ‘pp.xxx.- xxxvii. and 233-238, together with the notes on the relevant passages. The case for interpreting the servant in some passages as an individual has not been fully re-stated in English over against the recent thorough arguments for other interpretations; the student may best turn to Delitzsch’s Com. (Eng. tr. 1890), or G. A. Smith’s ‘Isaiah,’ vol. ii. (Expositor’s Bible). T. K. Cheyne, in EBi 4398-4410, offera a very valuable and penetrating criticism of all these theories, as a prelude to his own Jerahmeelite theory, for which he has hitherto found no supporters.

9. In NT some of the passages in the Deutero-Isaiah are frequently cited or referred to: and in most cases, though not in all (see Acts 13:47, cf. 2 Timothy 2:24), the servant is identified with Jesus (.e.g. Matthew 8:17 12:18–21, Luke 22:37, Acts 8:32 f.). This, of course, proves nothing with regard to the original meaning; for Christian, like Jewish, exegesis was capable of individualizing terras that originally had a wider application; for an instance of this, see Hebrews 2:6–8, where what is stated in Psalms 8 of man in general is referred specifically to our Lord. G. B. Gray.

Sesis

Sesis (1 Esdras 9:34) =Shashai, Ezra 10:40.

Sesthel

Sesthel (1 Esdras 9:31) =BezaIeI, Ezra 10:30.

Set

‘Set at’ is valued at, as 2 Kings 12:4 ‘The money that every man is set at.’ ‘Set at nought’ means treat with contempt, as Luke 23:11 ‘Herod with his men of war set him at nought.’ ‘Set by’ is to value, esteem, as 1 Samuel 18:30 ‘His name was much set by.’ ‘Set to’ means to affix, as John 3:33 ‘He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true.’

Seth

The third son of Adam, Genesis 4 (j) 5:3 (p)_ 1 Chronicles 1:1, Luke 3:38. In the first of these passages J assigns a characteristic etymology for the name. Eve being made to say, ‘God hath set (shath) for me another seed instead of Abel,’ for which reason she called him Shsth (i.e. ‘setting’ or ‘slip’). In Sirach 49 Seth is coupled with Shem as ‘glorified among men.’

Sethur

The Asherite spy (Numbers 13 (").

Settle

(RVm ‘ledge’). Ezekiel 43:14 (only) as tr. of ‘azdrah, which is used of the two ledges between the base and the hearth of the altar.

Seven

See Number, § 7.

Seveneh

(Syene). A town at the First Cataract, the southern extremity of Egypt proper: Egyp. Swn, now Asman (Aswan). It lies on the east bank, opposite the island of Elephantine, where lay the capital of the first nome of Upper Egypt, and behind it are the celebrated granite quarries. ‘From Migdol to Syene’ is the correct tr. ui Ezekiel 29:10 30, as LXX and RVm. At Syene-Elephantine there was a colony of Jews with a sumptuous temple of Yahu (Jehovah; cf. Isaiah 19:19) earlier than Cambyses’ conquest InB.c. 525, and throughout the Persian occupation. For this we have the evidence of papyri written there in the Aramaic language. The dates of the documents hitherto found range from 471 to 410, in the reigns of Xerxes, Artaxerxes, and Darius ii. One of these is a petition to Bagoas, the governor of Judaea, for the re-building of the temple, which had been destroyed by the nations in 411. To this a favourable reply was given. But the temple was probably swept away in the final revolt of Egypt against the Persians about 405. Since the seventh century the frontier garrison against the Ethiopians had been posted there, and the military element predominated. F. Ll. Ghiffith.

Seventy

See Number, § 7. SHAALABBIN. — See next article. SHAALBIM. — A town mentioned with Mt. Heres and Aijalon as being occupied by the Amorites (Judges 1:35). It was, with Makaz and Beth-shemesh, in the district of one of Solomon’s commissariat officers (1 Kings 4:9) and if it be the same place as Shaalabbin, it is mentioned with Aijalon and Beth-shemesh in Joshua 19:42. It is probably identical with Shaalbon, the home of one of David’s heroes, who is called ‘the Shaalbonite’ (2 Samuel 23:32, 1 Chronicles 11:33). It may perhaps be identified with SelbU, about 8 miles N. of Beth-shemesh. Possibly Shaalbim should be read for Shaalim in 1 Samuel 9:4. SHAALBON, SHAALBONITE.— See Shaalbim. SHAALIM, LAND OF. — See Shaalbim. SHAAPH.— 1. The son of Jahdal (1 Chronicles 2:47). 2. A son of Caleb by his concubine Maacah (1 Chronicles 2:49).

Shaaraim

1. A town of Jadah, in the ShephSIah, mentioned in Joshua 15:36. Some identify it with Khurbet S’alreh, west of Beit ‘Aiab; others with Zakarlya. Shaaraim is perhaps mentioned again in the pursuit of the Philistines after the death of Goliath (1 Samuel 17:52. RVm ‘the two gates’). 2. A town of Simeon (1 Chronicles 4:31)) called Sharuhen in Joshua 19:6, and Shilhim in Joshua 15:32. SHAASHGAZ. — A chamberlain of Ahasuerus(Est 2:14). . SHABBETHAI. — A Levite who opposed Ezra in the matter of the foreign marriages (Ezra 10:15) =Sabbateus of 1 Esdras 9:14. Cf. Nehemiah 8:7 [1 Esdras 9:48 Sabateus] 11:16. SHACHIA.— A Benjamite (1 Chronicles 8:10). SHADDAI. — See art. God, 2 (c). SHADRACH. — The name given to Hananiah (Daniel 1:7). . SHAFTS.— See Abmotje Ahms, 1 (d). SHAGE.— See Shammah, 3. SHAHARAm.— A Benjamite (1 Chronicles 8:8). SHAHAZX7MAH. — A town allotted to Issachar (Joshua 19:22). Its gite has not been identified.

Shalem

In Genesis 33:18 we read ‘Jacob (on his return from Haran) came to Shalem a city of Shechem’ (RV reads ‘in peace to the city of Shechem’; so Luther in his German translation). The word shalem means ‘peace,’ and the preposition & ‘in’ may have fallen out owing to the final letter of Jacob. Otherwise we must suppose Shalem to be a small town (in the neighbourhood of Shechem), which has been identified with a village called Salim. W. F. Boyd.

Shalishah

A region through which Saul travelled with his servant in search of the lost asses (1 Samuel 9:4). The route as given probably describes a circuitous journey, to the N.W., the E., and finally S. through Benjamin. This would place the ‘land of Shalishah’ somewhere on the hills W. of Shiloh. Baal-shalishah (2 Kings 4:42) was doubtless a place in the same district. H. L. Willett.

Shallecheth

See Jerusalem, II. 4.

SHALLUH, an inhabitant of Jabesh, was nominally king of Israel for one month in the period of anarchy which preceded the extinction of the nation. As he assassinated his predecessor Zechariah, so in turn he was ‘removed’ by his successor Menahein (2 Kings 15:10 ff.).

H. P. Smith.

Shallum

1 . See preced. article, 2 . See Jehoahaz, 2. 3. The husband (or son, LXX in 2 Kings) of Huldah (2 Kings 22:14, 2 Chronicles 34:22). 4. A Judahite (1 Chronicles 2:40 f.). 5. A descendant of Simeon (1 Chronicles 4). 6. A high priest (1 Chronicles 6:12, 13; Ezra 7:2 of 1 Esdras 8:1 and Salemas of 2 Esdras 1:1). 7. A son of Naphtali (1 Chronicles 7:13), called in Genesis 46:24 and Numbers 26:49 Shillem, with the gentilio name Shillemltes (Numbers 26:49). 8. The eponym of a family of gatekeepers (1 Chronicles 9:17 Ezra 2:42 = Nehemiah 7:45) called in 1 Esdras 6 Salum, and (possibly) in Nehemiah 12:25 Meshullam. 9. A Korahite gatekeeper (1 Chronicles 9), called in 26 ‘■ ‘■’ Meshelemiah, and in 26:14 Shelemiah. It is not at all unlikely that this name should be identified with the preceding. 10. Father of Jehizkiah, an Ephraimite chief (2 Chronicles 28:12). 11. One of the porters who had married a foreign wife (Ezra 10:24 [1 Esdras 9:25 Sallumus]). 12. One of the sons of Bani who had committed the same offence (Ezra 10:42 [1 Esdras 9:24 Samatus]). 13. The son of HaUohesh (Nehemiah 3:12). 14. The uncle of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 32:7). 15. Father of Maaseiah (Jeremiah 35:4).

Shallun

The son of Col-hozeh (Nehemiah 3:15).

Shalman

This name occurs only in the clause ‘as Shalman spoiled Beth-arbel in the day of battle’ (Hosea 10:14). The person and place referred to are both unknown. Shalman may be a contraction for Shalmaneser, but it is impossible to say which, if any, of the four kings of Assyria bearing that name suits the connexion. It has been suggested that the Moabite king Salmanu (mentioned in Tiglath-pileser’s triumphal inscription, 11 Rawl. 67, line 60) may be the person referred to by the prophet. The Vulg. version seems to think of the slaughter of Zalmunna by Gideon (Judges 9). See also art. Beth-arbel. W. F. Botd.

Shalmaneser

Shalmaneser (Assyr.Sft«jTOara-asAan(i«, i.e: Shulmanu [a god] is chief ‘).— In 2 Kings 17 18:9–11 the Shalmaneser is obviously a king of Assyria who succeeded Tiglath-pileser (wh. see) and preceded Sargon. This was Shalmaneser iv., who reigned over Assyria b.c. 727-^ 722. He ruled Babylonia as Ululai. No monuments of his are preserved. The Eponym Canons give campaigns for his last three years. The siege of Samaria was probably begun in his reign and finished under Sargon. The name Shalmaneser appears in 2 Esdras 13:40 as Salmanasar. C. H. W. Johns.

Shama

One of David’s heroes (1 Chronicles 11:44).

Shambles

See Arts ani} Crafts, § 7; Food, § 11.

Shame

1. In the first Biblical reference to this emotion (Genesis 2:25, cf. 3:7) ‘shame’ appears as ‘the correlative of sin and guilt’; it is ‘the overpowering feeling that inward harmony and satisfaction with oneself are disturbed’ (Delitzsch, Com., in loc). From the OT point of view the crowning shame is idolatry: ‘As the thief is ashamed when he is found, so is the house of Israel ashamed; they say to a stock, Thou art my father’ (Jeremiah 2:26; cf. Isaiah 41:11 42:17). The all-inclusive promise to those who trust in God is ‘none that wait on thee shall be ashamed’ (Psalms 25 RV; cf. 119:6, 80. Isaiah 45:16 f. 49:23 54:4 f.; Jeremiah 17, Joel 2:26 f.; Romans 5 10:11). The absence of shame is always regarded as an aggravation of sinful conduct: Job 19:3) reproaches his friends because they are ‘not ashamed’ of dealing hardly with him; the climax of Jeremiah’s complaint (6:15) against those who had ‘committed abomination’ is that ‘they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush’ (cf. 8:12, Zephaniah 3). The culmination of shamelessness is seen in those ‘whose glory is in their shame’ (Philippians 3:19) but in this passage, as elsewhere (Isaiah 50:6; cf. Proverbs 10:5 25:8), ‘shame’ is, by a natural transference of ideas, applied not to the inward feeling, but to its outward cause. The degradation of those ‘whose god is their belly’ is seen in their boasting of conduct which ought to have made them ashamed of their perversion of gospel liberty into shiful licence The return of shame Isaiah 8 of true repentance: ‘then Shalt thou remember thy ways and be ashamed’ (£zk 16, cf. Ezra 9:6).

2. The consciousness of shame varies with the conventional standards adopted in any society. For example, poverty (Proverbs 13:18), leprosy (Numbers 12:14), widowhood(Is 54) may be viewed as involving ‘shame,’ though there is no blame. In the sense of violation of propriety St. Paul applies the word to men who wear their hair long and to women who wear it short (1 Corinthians 11, cf. 6:5 14:35)) Dy i^n analogous adaptation of its meaning he describes God’s ideal ‘workman’ as one ‘that needeth not to be ashamed’ (2 Timothy 2:15).

3. In the NT sin is pre-eminently the shameful thing (Romans 6:21, Philippians 3:19, Ephesians 5:12. Jude ", 1 John 2:28; cf. 3). But the distinguishing characteristic of the early Christian use of the word is ‘the trans valuation of values.’ ‘Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, . . . endured the cross, despising shame’ (He 12^. When St. Paul says ‘I am not ashamed of the gospel’ (Romans 1:16), by a well-known figure of speech his negative statement emphatically asserts his positive glorying (Galatians 6:14). To ‘suffer as a Christian’ and ‘not (to) be ashamed’ is to ‘glorify God’ (1 Peter 4:16; cf. 2 Timothy 1). The same heightening of the contrast is implied when, on the one hand, the Son of Man declares that in the day of judgment He will be ashamed of all who are now ashamed of Him and of His words (Mark 8, Luke 9)) and on the other hand, St. John’s assurance is that those who abide in Christ ‘may have boldness and not be ashamed before him at his coming’ (1 John 2:28). Of them who desire a heavenly country ‘God is not ashamed ... to be called their God’; tor the city He has prepared, they are being prepared by the sanctifying grace of Him ‘who is not ashamed to call them brethren’ (Hebrews 11:16 2:11).

J. G. Tasker.