T
Targums – Tempest
Page 234 of 259
Targums
Originally the word ‘targum meant "translation’ in reference to any language; but it acquired a restricted meaning, and came to be used only of translation from Hebrew into Aramaic. As early as the time of Ezra we find the verb used in reference to a document written in Aramaic (), though in this passage the addition ‘in Aramaic’ is made, showing that the restricted meaning had not yet come into vogue. As early as the time of the Second Temple the language of the Holy Scriptures, Hebrew, was not understood by the bulk of the Jewish people, for it had been supplanted by Aramaic. When, therefore, the Scriptures were read in synagogues, it became necessary to translate them, in order that they might be understood by the congregation. The official translator who performed this duty was called the methwrgeman or targeman, which is equivalent to the modern dragoman (‘interpreter’). The way in which it was done was as follows: — In the case of the Pentateuch (the ‘Law’) a verse was read in Hebrew, and then translated into Aramaic, and so on to the end of the appointed portion; but in the case of the prophetical writings three verses were read and then translated. Whether this system was the custom originally may be doubted; it was probably done in a less formal way at first. By degrees the translation became stereotyped, and weis ultimately reduced to writing; and thus the Targums, the Aramaic translations of the Hebrew Bible, came into existence. The various Targums which are still extant will be enumerated below. As literary products they are of late date, but they occupy a highly important place in post-Biblical Jewish religious literature, because they embody the traditional exegesis of the Scriptures. They have for many centuries ceased to be used in the synagogue; from the 9th cent, onwards their use has been discontinued. It is, however, interesting to note an exception in the case of Southern Arabia, where the custom still survives; and in Bokhara the Persian Jews read the Targum, with the Persian paraphrase of it, to the lesson from the Prophets for the last day of the Passover Feast, namely, . There are Targums to all the books of the Bible, with the exception of Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah; as these are to a large extent written in Aramaic, one can understand why Targums to these books should be wanting. Most of the Targums are mainly paraphrases; the only one which is in the form of a translation in the modern sense of the word is the Targum of Onkelos to the, Pentateuch; this is, on the whole, a fairly literal translation. Isolated passages in the Bible which are written in Aramaic, as in Genesis and Jeremiah, are also called Targums. The following is a list of the Targums which are in existence:
1. Targum of Onkelos to the Pentateuch, called also Targum Babli, i.e. the Babylonian Targum.
2. The Palestinian Targum to the Pentateuch, called also Targum Jerushalmi, i.e. the Jerusalem Targum.
3. The ‘Fragment Targum’ to the Pentateuch.
4. The Targum of Jonathan to the proptietical books (these include what we call the historical books).
5. The Targum Jerushalmi to the prophetical books.
6. The Targum to the Psalms.
7. The Targum to Job.
8. The Targum to Proverbs.
9-13.The Targums to the Five JWe^‘MoiAC Rolls’), namely: Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther; the Book of Esther has three Targums to it.
14. The Targum to Chronicles.
For printed editions of these, reference may be made to the bibliographies given in Schurer, HJP i. i. pp. 160-163, and in the JE xii. 63.
To come now to a brief description of these Targums: The Targum of Onkelos is the oldest of all the Targums that have come down to us; it is for the most part a literal translation of the Pentateuch, only here and there assuming the form of a paraphrase. The name of this Targum owes its origin to a passage in the Babylonian Talmud (Megillah, 3a), in which it is said: ‘The Targum to the Pentateuch was composed by the proselyte Onkelos at the dictation of Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Joshua’; and in the Jerusalem Talmud (.Megillah, 71c) it is said: ‘Aquila the proselyte translated the Pentateuch in the presence of Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Joshua. That Aquila is the same as Onkelos can scarcely admit of doubt. In the tractate Abodah zara, 11a, we are told that this Onkelos was the pupil of Rabbi Gamaliel the Elder, who lived in the second half of the 1st cent. a.d. Seeing that this Targum rests on tradition, it will be clear that we have in it an ancient witness to Jewish exegesis; indeed, it is the earliest example of Midrashio tradition that we possess; and not only so, but as this Targum is mainly a translation, it is a most important authority for the pre-Massoretic text of the Pentateuch. This shows of what high value the Targum of Onkelos is, and that it is not without reason that it has always been regarded with great veneration. It is characteristic of the Targum of Onkelos that, unlike the other Targums, the Midrashio element is greatly subordinated to simple translation; when it does appear it is mainly in poetic passages, though not exclusively(cf. , , . 33, which are prophetic in character. The idea apparently was that greater licence was permitted in dealing with passages of this kind than with those in which the legal element predominated. As with the Targums generally, so with that of Onkelos, there is a marked tendency to avoid anthropomorphisms and expressions which might appear derogatory to the dignity of God; this may be seen, for example, in , where the words’ The Lord came down," which seemed anthropomorphic, are rendered in this Targum, ‘the Lord revealed Himself.’ Then again, the transcendent character of the Almighty is emphasized by substituting for the Divine Person intermediate agencies like the Memra, or ‘Word’ of God, the Shekinah, or ‘Glory’ of God, to which a more or less distinct personality is imputed; in this way it was sought to avoid ascribing to God Himself actions or words which were deemed uniitting to the inexpressible majesty and transcendence of the Almighty. A good example of this, and one which will also illustrate the general character of this Targum, is the following; it is the rendering of ff. ‘And they heard the voice of the Word (.Memra) of the Lord God walking in the garden in the evening of the day; and Adam and his wife hid themselves from before the Lord God among the trees of the garden. And the Lord God called to Adam and said: " Where art thou?" And he said: " The voice of Thy Word (Memra) I heard In the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked. and I would hide."‘
The other Targum to the Pentateuch, the Targum Jerushalmi, has come down to us in two forms: one in a complete form, the other only in fragments, hence the name of the latter which is generally used, the ‘Fragment Targum.’ The fragments have been gathered from a variety of sources, from manuscripts and from quotations found in the writings of ancient authors. But owing to its fragmentary character this Targum is of much less value than the ‘Targum Jerushalmi.’ This latter is sometimes erroneously called the ‘Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel on the Pentateuch’; but though this Jonathan was believed to be the author of the Targum to the Prophets which bears his name (see below), there was not the slightest ground for ascribing to him the authorship of the Targum to the Pentateuch (‘Targum Jerushalmi’). The mistake arose in an interesting way. In its abbreviated form this Targum was referred to as ‘Targum J’; this ‘J,’ which of course stood for ‘Jerushalmi,’ was taken to refer to ‘Jonathan,’ the generally acknowledged author of the Targum to the Prophets; thus it came about that this Targum to the Pentateuch, as well as the Targum to the Prophets, was called the Targum of Jonathan. So tenaciously has the wrong name clung to this Targum, that a kind of compromise is made as to its title, and it is now usually known as the ‘Targum of pseudo-Jonathan.’ In one important respect this Targum is quite similar to that of Onkelos, namely, in its avoidance of anthropomorphisms, and in its desire not to bring God into too close contact with man; for example, in we have these words: ‘And the Lord descended in a cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the Lord.’ But this Targum paraphrases the verse in a roundabout way, and says that ‘Jehovah revealed Himself in the clouds of the glory of His Shekinah,’ thus avoiding what in the original text appeared to detract from the dignity of the Almighty. This kind of thing occurs with great frequency, and it is both interesting and important, as showing the evolution of the idea of God among the Jews (see Oesterley and Box, The Religion and Worship of the Synagogue, ch. viii. [1907]). But in other respects the ‘Targum Jerushalmi’ (or ‘Targum of pseudo-Jonathan’) differs from that of Onkelos, especially in its being far less a translation than a free paraphrase. The following extract will give a good idea of the character of this Targum; it is the paraphrase of ff.: ‘And the glory of the Lord wa,s revealed to him in the valley of Mamre; and he, being ill from the pain of circumcision, sat at the door of the tabernacle in the heat of the day. And he lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, three angels in the resemblance of men were standing before him; angels who had been sent from the necessity of three things — because it is not possible for a ministering angel to be sent for more than one purpose at a time — one, then, had come to make known to him that Sarah should bear a man-child; one had come to deliver Lot; and one to overthrow Sodom and Gomorrah. And when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the door of the tent, and bowed himself to the earth.’
The Targum of Jonathan to the Prophets owes its name to an ancient tradition, according to which Jonathan ben Uzziel composed it ‘from the mouths of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi’ {MegiUah, 3a); this is merely a figurative way of saying that the traditional interpretation, as supposed to have been handed down by these prophets, was embodied in written form by Jonathan. The latter was a pupil of Hillel, and wrote a Targum (according to the passage just referred to) for the purpose of removing ‘all impediments to the understanding of the Scriptures’ {JE viii. 238). It is said of this Jonathan that when he sat down and occupied himself with the study of the Law, every bird that happened to fly over his head was burned; the reason of this was that so many angels gathered around him in order to hear the words of the Law from his mouth (Succah, 28a [Weber, Jud. Theol.\ p. xviii.]). That Jonathan had the Targum of Onkelos before him when he wrote is proved by the fact that whole passages from Onkelos are incorporated verbatim in his Targum. As a pupil of Hillel, Jonathan lived during the middle and end of the 1st cent, a.d., so that the date of his Targum may safely be stated to be the end of the first century. An interesting example of this Targum is the following paraphrase of : • Behold, my servant the Messiah shall prosper, he shall be exalted and extolled, and he shall be very strong. Like as the house of Israel anxiously hoped for him many days, (the house of Israel) which was poor among the nations, their appearance and their brightness being worse than that of the sons of men, thus shall he scatter many nations; before him kings shall keep silence; they shall put their hands upon their mouths, for that which had not been told them shall they see, and that which they had not heard they shall consider.’ In the whole of the following chapter 53 ‘it is curious to notice that the passages which refer to the humiliation of the Servant are interpreted of the people of Israel, while those which speak of the glory of the Servant are referred to the Messiah’ (Oesterley and Box, op. cit. p. 49).
Of much later date, and also of less importance than the Targums of Onkelos, pseudo-Jonathan, or Jonathan, is the Targum Jerushalmi to the Prophets. According to JE xii. 61, ‘Most of the quotations given in the Targum Jerushalmi are Haggadic additions, frequently traceable to the Babylonian Talmud, so that this Palestinian Targum to the Prophets belongs to a later period, when the Babylonian Talmud had begun to exert an infiuence upon Palestinian literature." There are not many remains extant of this Targum; most of the extracts in existence are citations in the writings of Rashi and David Kimchi; the largest number of extracts found together are those in the eleventh century Codex Reuchlinianus, edited by Lagarde, ProphetcB Chaldaice.
Ot the remaining Targums not much need be said; those to the Psalms, Proverbs, and Job show a close relationship and are usually assigned to the same author; they belong to the latter half of the seventh century. They are to a large extent translations, though a considerable Haggadic element is to be found in them, especially in the Targum to Job. The Targums to the five Megilloth are likewise post-Talmudic; in all five translation plays a subordinate part, the prevailing element being Midrashic; this reaches its height in the Song of Songs. Of the three Targums to Esther, the second, known as Targum Sherd, has always been extremely popular. The latest of all the Targums is that to Chronicles; it is strongly Haggadic, and is of but little importance.
‘The Targums are important not only for the light they throw on Jewish theology, but also, especially, as a thesaurus of ancient Jewish exegesis; in this way they often throw much interesting light on the use of the OT by the NT writers; in particular, it can be shown that the NT often agrees with the ancient Synagogue in interpreting certain passages Messianically which later were expounded differently in ortiiodox Jewish circles’ (Oesterley and Box, op. cil. p. 60).
W. O. E. Oesterley.
Tarpelites
One of the peoples settled in the cities of Samaria () text doubtful.
Tarshish
1. See following article. 2. A Benjamite family (). 3. One of the seven princes who had the right of access to the royal presence (). 4. The name of a precious stone ( , , , ). See Jewels and Precious Stones.
Tarshish
Tarshish is frequently mentioned in the OT, but its position is never definitely indicated. From we may infer that it was far from Palestine, probably in the extreme west of the Mediterranean. If Sheba and Dedan stand for the commerce of the East, Tarshish may stand for that of the West (). The Greeks were in touch with Tartessus in the 7th and 6th cents. B.C. (Herod, i. 163, iv. 162). The inclusion of Tarshish among the ‘sons’ of Javan (, ) may refer to this. The Onomaslicon speaks of Tharseis ftS BaitikS. Bochart (Phaleg, iii. 7) identifies this with the Andalusian plain in S.W. Spain, watered by the BmHs (mod. Guadalquivir). The Greek name TarUsaos may possibly come through an Aram, form Tartlsh, from the Phoen. TarshUh. It may have denoted a city (Strabo, iii. 147 £[.). The name TarsSion occurs in a commercial treaty (Polyb. iii. 24) referring to a city of the Carthaginians in Spain.
Max Mtlller (Hastings’ DB, s.v.) favours a suggestion of Cheyne, that Tarshish may be identical with Tiras (). Vocalizing Twshush with Josephus (Ant. i. vi. 1; he identifies with Cilician Tarsus, which to the present writer appears impossible) , we get the Tyrsenians, Tyrrenians, or Etruscans — intrepid, piratical people, called Tursim by the ancient Egyptians.
In either case Tarshish would be fitly named with "the isles,’ a term covering not only islands in our sense, but also land bordering on the sea (, ). The wealth of Tarshish consisted of silver, iron, tin, and lead (, ).
• Ships of Tarshish’ did not necessarily belong to or trade with Tarshish. The name is used of the ships of Jehoshaphat and Abaziah, which sailed for Ophir from Ezion-geber (. ). The Chronicler’s explanatory phrase (v.) is erroneous. The cargo brought by Solomon’s ‘navy of Tarshish’ shows that its voyages must have been eastward, not westward (, ). The name probably denoted specially large merchant vessels, designed for distant voyages (, , ). W. Ewing.
TARSUS, the capital of the Roman province of Cilicia () in the S.E. of Asia Minor, and the birthplace of St. Paul, is a place about which much more might be known than is known if only the necessary money were forthcoming to excavate the ancient city in the way that Pompeii, Olympia, Pergamum, and other cities have been excavated. It would be impossible to exaggerate the value which would accrue to the study of St. Paul’s life and vfritings and of Christian origins, if such a work were satisfactorily carried out. It may be commended to the whole Christian Church as a pressing duty of the utmost importance. Tarsus, as a city whose institutions combined Oriental and Western characteristics, was signally fitted to be the birthplace and training ground of him who was to make known to the Gentile world the ripest development of Hebrew religion.
Tarsus (modern Tersous) is situated in the plain of Cilicia, about 70 to 80 feet above sea level, and about 10 miles from the S. coast. The level plain stretches to the north of it for about 2 miles, and then begins to rise gradually till it merges in the lofty Taurus range, about 30 miles north. The climate of the low-lying city must always have been oppressive and unfavourable to energetic action, but the undulating country to the north was utilized to counteract its effects. About 9 to 12 miles north of the city proper there was a second Tarsus, within the territory of the main Tarsus, in theory a summer residence merely, but in reality a fortified town of importance, permanently inhabited. It was to periodical residence in this second city among the hills that the population owed their vigour. In Roman times the combined cities of Tarsus contained a large population, probably not much less than a million.
The history of the Maritime Plain of Cilicia was determined by the mutual rivalries of the three cities, Mallus on the Pyraraus, Adana on the Sarus, and Tarsus on the Cydnus. The plain Is mainly a deposit of the second of those rivers, and contains about 800 square miles of arable land, with a strip of useless land along the coast varying from 2 to 3 miles in breadth. The site of Mallus is now unknown, as it has ceased to have any importance; but the other two cities retain their names and some of their importance to the present day. In ancient times Mallus was a serious rival of Tarsus, and was at first the great harbour and the principal Greek colony in Cilicia. The struggle for superiority lasted till after the time of Christ, but the supremacy was eventually resigned to Tarsus. The river Cydnus flowed through the middle of the city. This river, of which the inhabitants were very proud, was liable to rise very considerably when there had been heavy rains in the mountains, but inundation in the city was in the best period very carefully guarded against. Between A.D. 527 and 563 a new channel was cut to relieve the principal bed, which had for some time previously been insufiiciently dredged, and it is in this new channel that the Cydnus now flows, the original channel having become completely choked. About five or six miles below the modern tovm the Cydnus flowed into a lake; this lake was the ancient harbour of ‘Tarsus, where were the docks and arsenal. At the harbour town, which was called Aulai, ail the larger/Ships discharged, and in ancient times buildings were continuous between the north of this lake and the city of Tarsus. Much engineering skill must have been employed in ancient times to make a harbour out of what had been a lagoon, and to improve the charmel of the river. A great deal was done to conquer nature for the common benefit, and it was not only in this direction that the inhabitants showed their perseverance. This city also cut one of the greatest passes of ancient times, the’ Cilician Gates.’ Cilicia is divided from Cappadocia and Lycaonia by the Taurus range of mountains, which is pierced from N.W. to S.E. by a glen along which flows the Tchakut Su. This glen offers a natural road tor much of its course, but there are serious difficulties to overcome in its southern part. The Tarsians built a waggon road over the hills there, and cut with the chisel a level path out of the solid rock on the western bank of the stream. The probable date of this engineering feat was some time between B.C. 1000 and 500.
It is possible (but see Tarshish) that Tarsus is meant by the Tarshish of , and that it is there indicated c. B.C. 2000 as a place where Greeks settled. The difference in the form of the name need cause no diiflculty in accepting this identification. The name is originally Anatolian, and would quite easily be transliterated differently in Greek and Hebrew. All the evidence is in harmony with the view that at an early date Greeks settled there among an originally Oriental community. Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, captured Tarsus about the middle of the 9th cent, b.c; afterwards kings ruled over Cilicia, with the Persian kings as overlords. In B.C. 401 there was still a king, but not in b.c. 334, when Alexander the Great entered the country. He found a Persian ofliicer directly governing the country. Of the character of the kingdom we know nothing. Thus for about five centuries Tarsus was really an Oriental city. Greek influence began again with Alexander the Great, but made very slow progress. During the fourth century Tarsus was subject to the Greek kings of Syria of the Seleucid dynasty. It continued during the third century in abject submission to them. The peace of B.C. 189 changed the position of Cilicia. Previous to that date it had been in the middle of the Seleucid territory. Now it became a frontier country. About B.C. 175-164 Tarsus was re-organized by Antiochus iv Epiphanes as an autonomous city under the name Antioch-on-the-Cydnus (cf. 2 Maccabees 4). it is extremely probable that the exact date of this re-foundation was B.C. 171-170; the new name lasted only a few years. Not only Tarsus, but a number of other Cilician cities also were re-organized at this time, but Tarsus received the most honourable treatment.
Ttie population of this re-constituted Tarsus, in addition to what remained of the earlier population, consisted of Dorian Greeks from Argos. That the Greek element in the population was mainly Dorian is proved by the fact that the chief magistrates bore the Dorian title damiourgos. A mythology was invented to prove that this Dorian element was much earlier. It is almost certain that, in accordance with the regular Seleucid practice, a large body of Jews also was added to the population by Antiochus. These would be incorporated as citizens in a new tribe by themselves, to enable them to practise their own religion unhindered. There may have been some Jews resident in Tarsus as strangers, but the majority must have been citizens with full burghers’ rights. St. Paul, and probably the ‘kinsmen’ of , , , were citizens of Tarsus enrolled in the Jewish tribe. The later hostility of Antiochus to the ultra-Jewish party in Palestine cannot be alleged as an adequate reason against the view that he constituted, in b.o. 171-170, a large body of Jews citizens of Tarsus in a tribe by themselves. At that earlier date he regarded himself as the best friend of the Jews, and was so regarded by the more educated among themselves. As the Seleucid empire decayed, the Greek element in Tarsus became weaker, and the Asiatic spirit revived. About B.C. 83 its influence swept over Cflicia with the armies of Tigranes, king of Armenia, under whose power Tarsus fell. For about twenty years it continued under Oriental domination, till the re-organization of the East by Pompey the Great in B.C. 65-4. The Roman province Cilicia had been instituted about B.C. 104 or 102, but Tarsus was not then included in it. It was established mainly to control piracy in the Levant, and included the south and east of Asia Minor, but was not sharply defined in extent. In B.C. 25 the province Galatia (wh. see) was established by Augustus, and Cilicia in the narrow sense became a mere adjunct of Syria. Tarsus was the capital even of the large province Cilicia, and remained that of the smaller under the Empire, which brought many blessings to the provinces and their cities. Experience of the barbarian Tigranes caused a revulsion in favour of Hellenism, and the Tarsians were enthusiastic for the Empire, which carried on the work of Hellenism. Cassius forced them, in b.c. 43, to take his and Brutus’ side against Octavian and Antony, but they returned to their former loyalty on the earliest opportunity. Tarsus was made a free city (that is, it was governed by its own laws) by Antony, who met Cleopatra here. This privilege was confirmed by Octavian in or after B.C. 31. It is likely that Pompey, Julius Cfesar, Antony, and Augustus all conferred Roman citizenship on some Tarsians, and these would take new names from their benefactors: Gnseus Pompeius from Pompey, Gains lulius from Julius Csesar or Augustus, Marcus Antonius from Antony. The Roman administration probably trusted more to the Jewish than to the Greek element. The latter was capricious, and was restrained by the Stoic Athenodorus, a Tarsian, who had the influence of Augustus behind him. The Oriental element seems to have thus become more assertive, and about a.d. 100 it was predominant. This Athenodorus lived from about b.c 74 till a.d. 7. He was a Stoic philosopher, distinguished for his lectures and writings. He gained a great and noble influence over Augustus, who was his pupil, and he remained in Rome from b.c. 45 till b.c. 15 as his adviser; in the latter year he retired to Tarsus. There he attempted by persuasion to reform local politics; but, being unsuccessful, he used the authority granted him by Augustus, and banished the more corrupt of the politicians. A property qualification was now required for possession of the citizenship. (Among these citizens the Roman citizens formed an aristocracy.) Athenodorus was succeeded by Nestor, an Academic philosopher (still living a.d. 19). These men had influence also in the university, which was more closely connected with the city than in modern times. A new lecturer had to be recognized by some competent body. There was a great enthusiasm in Tarsus and neighbourhood for learning and philosophy, and in this respect the city was unequalled in Greece. It was here that St. Paul learned sympathy with athletics, and tolerance for the good elements in pagan religion. The principal deity of Tarsus corresponded to the Greek Zeus: he is the old Anatolian deity, giver of corn and wine. There was also a working Anatolian divinity, who was identified with Heracles, subordinate to the other. The former is represented as sitting on a chair, with left hand resting on a sceptre, and the right holding corn or grapes. The other stands on a lion, wears bow-case and sword, and holds a branch or flower in his right hand, a battleaxe in his left. Sometimes he Is represented within a portable shrine. A. SoniEE.
Tartak
An idol introduced by the Avvites into Samaria when Sargon of Assyria transported them thither (). This deity is mentioned along with another called Nibhaz, and, according to the Babylonian Talmud, was worshipped in the form of an ass. In Assyro-Babylonian mythology no such deity is -at present provable; moreover, the geographical position of the Avvites is uncertain, and their city may have been in one of the western States of Asia. The Greek text ‘A’ replaces Tartak by Naibas, but this may be merely a corruption of Nibhaz.
T. G. Pinches.
Tartan
The title borne by two Assyr. officers, one of whom was sent by Sargon to Ashdod (). while the other, with the Rab-saris and the Rab-shakeh, was sent by Sennacherib to demand from Hezekiah the surrender of Jerusalem (). The word is a transcription in Heb. of the Assyr. tartanu or turtanu, the title borne by the commander-in-chief of the army.
L. W. Kino.
Tassel
See Fringes.
Tattenai
The name of the governor of Ccele- Syria and Phoenicia under Darius Hystaspis ( , ). He is called in 1 Esdras 6 7:1 Sisinnea, which is simply a reproduction in Greek of a Persian name Thithinaia (orig. ThaChanaia l) , with aspirated t.
Taverneb's Bible
See English Versions, § 21.
Taverns, Three
(Latin Tres Tabernw). A. name of uncertain origin, which might be translated ‘three shops’ or ‘three huts.’ It was a station on the Appian Road (built b.c. 321) which went from Rome to the S. along the west coast. This was the principal road for all travellers to or from the S. and E., except those who embarked at Ostia at the mouth of the Tiber. The village was about 33 Roman miles from Rome, and to this point many Christians walked, or drove, to meet St. Paul on his arrival in Italy from the E. ().
A. SOUTEE.
Taw
The twenty-second letter of the Heb. alphabet, and as such employed in the 119th Psalm to designate the 22nd part, each verse of which begins with this letter.
Taxes, Taxing
See Kiua, 2 (5), Publican, TBiBnTE, QuiRiNius; of. also p. 559’‘.
Teacher, Teaching
See Education.
Tebah
A ‘son’ of Nahor (). See Tibhath.
Tebaliah
A Merarite gatekeeper ().
Tebeth
See Time.
Tehaphnehes
Tehaphnehes (). See Tahpanhbs.
Tehinnah
The ‘father’ of Ir-nahash ().
Teiltree
, AV mistranslationof ‘terebinth’ (wh. see, and cf. art. Oak (1)).
Tekel
See Mene Menb Tekel Upharsin.
Tekoa
Tekoa ( etc.); Tekoah, , , [AV], 1 Maccabees 9:33 [RV; AV Tliecoe]).—A fortress city on the edge of the wilderness to which it gave its name (). From here came the ‘wise woman’ sent by Joab to plead for Absalom (2 S , , ) Rehoboamfortified it(2 Ch ll*), and apparently it continued to be a fortress ()) Amos ‘was among the herdmen of Tekoa’ (). Tekoa is mentioned also in LXX in . and in the genealogies in . The site is now Khurbet Teqa’a, an extended but shapeless mass of ruins crowning the summit of a hill (2790 ft. above sea level), 5 miles S. of Bethlehem. It is on the extreme edge of the cultivated lands. Bethlehem, the Mt. of Olives, and Nebi SamvM (Mizpah) are all visible from it.
E. W. G. Masterman.
Tel-abib
(perh. ‘hill of corn’). A place on the Chebar () ; site unknown.
Telah
An Ephraimite ().
Teladb
(‘the lambs’). The place at which Saul concentrated his forces, and numbered his fighting men before his campaign against the Amalekites (). The LXX reads Gilgal for Telaim, and Josephus {Ant. VI. vii. 2) also makes Gilgal the place of assembly. A more suitable locality for the place of assembly would, however, be in the Negeb, or South; and here lay Telem (). with which Telaim is probably identical.
Telassar
(‘Asshur’s hill or mound’). This city is mentioned with Gozan, Haran, and Rezeph, and is spoken of as a place inhabited by ‘the children of Eden’ (. ). The Assyrian inscriptions apparently mention two places so called, one being TU-ashshuri, mentioned by Tiglath-pileser ni., which had a renowned temple dedicated to Merodach, and is stated to have been a Babylonian foundation. The other, written TU-aslmrri, is referred to by Esarhaddon as having been conquered by him (the people of Mihranu, he seems to say, called it Pitanu). It was inhabited by the people of Barnaku or Parnaku — a name which Delitzsch points out as similar to the Parnach of . This TU-aahurri is supposed to have lain near the land of Mitanni (Upper Mesopotamia), which would find support If Mihranu be connected with the Mehru mentioned by Tukulti-Ninib (-Nirig) 1. T. G. Pinches.
Telem
1. A gatekeeper who had married a foreign wife () called in 1 Esdras 9:25 Tolbanes; perhaps the same as Talmon of . 2. See Telaim.
Tel-habsha
A Babylonian town of unknown site (. ) called in 1 Esdras 5 Thelersas.
Tell
See Tale.
Telmelah
(‘hill of salt’). A Babylonian town of unknown site (. ) called in 1 Esdras 6:36 Thermeleth.
Tema
In (), a son of Ishmael. The country and people meant are still represented by the same name — the modern Taima, a large oasis about 200 miles S.E. of the head of the Gulf of ‘Akabah, and the same distance due N. of Medina in W. Arabia. It was an important community in ancient times, mentioned in Assyr, annals of the 8th cent. B.C., and later inhabited In part by Aramaeans, who have left inscriptions. It was noted for its caravan traffic (, ), as might be expected from its position on the great trade routes. J. F. McCurdy.
Temah
A family of Nethlnim (, ) = 1 Esdras 5:32 Thomei.
Teman
A tribe (and district) of Edom, whose importance is indicated by its eponym being the eldest sou of the eldest son (Eliphaz) of Esau (; cf. v. and by its being taken along with Bozrah (wh. see) to represent the whole land of Edom (; cf. Ob implies that Edom stretches from Teman to Dedan, from which we infer that the former lay in the north-east of the territory claimed by Edom, that is, to the S.E. of Moab. Its inhabitants were renowned for wisdom (). and the chief of Job’s counsellors was Eliphaz ‘the Temanite’ ().
J. F. McCURDY.
Temeni
The ‘sou’ of Ashhur ().
Temperance
1. In the RV ‘temperance’ is the tr. of the Gr. word enkrateia, the root-meaning of which is ‘power over oneself,’ ‘self-mastery.’ It is a comprehensive virtue, and on this account ‘self-control,’ the tr. of RVm, is to be preferred (. . ). The corresponding adjective is found only in . and the verb only in . The negative form of the adjective is translated ‘without self-control’ (), and of the noun ‘excess’ (), and ‘incontinency’ (). The RV tr. another Gr. word (mphalios) ‘temperate’ in , , ; its root-meaning points to the avoidance of intemperance in the form of drunkenness, but in actual usage it condemns all forms of self-indulgence. This extension of its significance must be remembered in expounding the passages in which the corresponding verb is found, for the RV always tr. it (nephein) ‘to be sober’ (, . , 1 P I’s 5).
2. From the philosophical point of view, ‘self-control’ is mastery over the passions; it is the virtue which holds the appetites in check ; the rational will has power to regulate conduct without being unduly swayed by sensuous appetites. From the NT point of view the grace of ‘self-control’ is the result of the Holy Spirit’s indwelling; it is the Spirit-controlled personality alone that is ‘strengthened with power’ (. cf. ) to control rebellious desires and to resist the allurements of tempting pleasures.
3. The N’T passages in which reference Is made to this virtue form an instructive study. To Felix, with an adulteress by his side, St. Paul discoursed of ‘self-control,’ directing his stern condemnation against the vice of unchastity (cf. , ). But to every form of ‘excess’ () it is directly opposed. In ‘not given over to wine’ (paroinos, AV ‘brawler,’ cf. RVm) balances ‘temperate’ (. cf. ). and from this chapter it is plain that the Apostle regards violent quarrelling’ (). false and reckless speech (). self-conceit (). greed of filthy lucre (), as well as fondness for much wine (), as manifold forms of intemperance by whose means men ‘fall into reproach and the snare of the devil’ (v. ‘).
4. ‘Self-control,’ in its widest sense, as including mastery over all tempers, appetites, and passions, has a prominent place In two NT lists of the Christian graces. In . faith is regarded as the germ of every virtue; it lays hold of the ‘divine power’ which makes possible the life of godliness (). The evolution of faith in ‘manliness, knowledge, self-control’ is the reward of its ‘diligent’ culture (). This ‘self-control,’ as Principal Iverach says, ‘grows out of knowledge, it is using Christian knowledge for the guidance of life’ (The Other Side of Greatness, p. 110). In . ‘self-control’ closes the list of the graces which are all ‘the fruit of the Spirit,’ just as ‘drunkenness and revellings’ close the list of ‘the works of the flesh’ (). The flesh and the SpiritI — these, indeed, are ‘contrary the one to the other’ (). ‘The flesh triumphs when the Spirit is quenched; but the Spirit’s victory is gained, not by suppressing, but by controlling, the flesh. Those who are’ led by the Spirit’ (). who ‘live by the Spirit’ and ‘by the Spirit also walk’ () attain, in its perfection, the grace of complete ‘self-control.’ J. G. Taskeb.
Tempest
See Galilee [Sea of], 3; Whirlwind.
James Hastings (ed.), with John A. Selbie and John C. Lambert, Dictionary of the Bible (Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1909). Public domain. Scan of Cornell University Library’s copy from the Internet Archive; text from its OCR, with the Bible references read again from the page images.