Cockle – Confection

Cockle

Cockle (bo’shah, Job 31:40). AVm ‘stinking weeds’ or RVm ‘noisome weeds’ are both more correct. Sir J. Hooper has suggested ‘stinking arums,’ which are common Palestine plants, but the more general rendering is safer. E. W. G. Masterman.

0(ELE-SYRIA, ‘Hollow Syria,’ is property the great hollow running N. and S. between the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon ranges (1 Esdras 4:48; Strabo, xvi. 2). It corresponds to the Big’ath ha-LebanSn of Joshua 11:17 etc.; possibly also to Biq’ath Aven of Amos 1. The first element of the name persists in the modern name of the valley S. of Baalbek, el-BugH’ . The Orontes drains the valley northward, and the Litani southward, both rivers rtsing near Baalbek. The soil is rich, producing splendid crops of wheat, etc., while some of the finest vineyards in Syria clothe the adjoining slopes.

‘Coele-Syria’ came to have a wider significance, covering indeed, with Phoenicia, all the Seleucid territory S. of the River Eleutherus (2 Maccabees 3:5 etc.; Strabo, xvi. 763). In 1 Esdras 2:17 etc., Ccele-Syria and Phoenicia denote the whole Persian province, stretching from the Euphrates to the borders of Egypt. Josephus reckons the country E. of Jordan to Ccele-Syria (Ant. i. xi. 5, xiii. xiii. 2 f ., etc.), including in it Scythopolis, the only member of the DecapoUs west of the river. W. Ewinq.

Coffer

Coffer occurs only in 1 Samuel 6:8, 11, 1 f., and the Heb. term ‘argHz, of which it is the tr., is also found nowhere else. It appears to have been a small chest which contained (?) the golden Cgures sent by the Philistines as a guilt-offering.

Coffin

Genesis 50 only (of the disposal of Joseph’s body in Egypt). Israelitish burial rites (see Mourning Customs, Tomb) did not include the use of cofBns.

Cohort

See Band, Legion.

Coins

See Money.

C0L-H0ZEH;(‘seeing all’).— A Judahite (Nehemiah 3 11).

Colius

Colius (1 Esdras 9:23). See Calitas, Kelaiah.

Collar

See Ornaments, § 2.

College

This stands in AV (2 Kings 22:14. 2 Chronicles 34:22) for the Heb. mishneh, which RV correctly renders ‘second quarter,’-jia quarter of the city lying to the north (Zephaniah 1:10). and possibly referred to in Nehemiah 11:9. where our versions have ‘second over the city.’ The idea of a ‘college’ came from the Targ. on 2 Kings 22:14. ‘house of instruction.’ J. Taylor.

Colony

The word colonia is a pure Latin word, which is written in Greek letters in the only place where it occurs in the Bible (Acts 16:12). and expresses a purely Roman institution. It is a piece of Rome transported bodily out of Rome itself and planted somewhere in the Roman Empire. lA other words, it is a collection of Roman citizen-soldiers settled on a mihtary road to keep the enemies of the Empire in check. These retained their citizenship of Rome and constituted the aristocracy of every town in which they were situated. Their constitution was on the model of Rome and Ihe Italian States. A number of places are mentioned in the NT which were really coloni(B, but only one, Philippi, is so named, and the reason for this naming is no doubt that the author of Acts was proud of this city, with which he had some connexion. Pisidian Antioch, Lystra, Corinth, and Ptolemais, not to mention others, were colonial. Sometimes these colonice were merely settlements of veterans for whom their generals had to find a home.

A. SOUTER.

Colossi

Colossi was an ancient city of Phrygia (Roman province Asia), at one time of great importance, but dwindling later as its neighbour Laodicea prospered. It was situated in the upper part of the valley of the Lycus, a tributary of the Maeander, about 10 miles from Laodicea, and 13 from Hierapolis. The three cities naturally formed a sphere of missionary labour for Epaphras (Epaphroditus), an inhabitant of Colosss (Colossians 4:12, 13). Timothy (Colossians 1:1). and others. St. Paul himself never visited any of them (Colossians 2:1). It has been suggested with great probability that in Revelation 1:11 3:14 the single church of Laodicea must represent the other churches of the Lycus valley also. The church in Colossi had developed Judaizing tendencies which St. Paul found it necessary to combat in the Epistle which has come down to us. If, as seems certain, ‘the epistle from Laodicea’ (Colossians 4:16) is our ‘Epistle to the Ephesians,’ it also was read in the church at Colossae. Both letters were carried from Rome by Tychicus, who was accompanied by Onesimus, whose master Philemon was an inhabitant of Colossse. See also following article.

A. SOUTBR.

Colossians, Epistle to the

1 . Authenticity.— This Epistle is one of the ten Epistles of St. Paul included in Marcion’s collection (a.d. 140). It appears to have been accepted without question as genuine both by Churchmen and by heretics, and is referred to by the Muratorian Fragment, by Irenaus, and by Clement of Alexandria. Its authenticity remained undisputed till the early part of last century, and was then contested only on internal grounds of style and subject-matter.

As to the first objection, the Epistle ia marked, to a greater degree than St. Paul’s earlier writinra, by ‘a certain ruggedness of expression, a want of finish that borders on obscurity.’ The vocabulary also differs in some respects from that of the earlier writings, but this is amply accounted for by the difference of subject. As a matter of fact, the resemblances in style to St. Paul’s other writings are as marked as the differences; and in any case arguments from style in disproof of authenticity are very unreliable. The later plays of Shakespeare, as compared with those of his midd^ period, show just the same condensation of thought and want of fluency and finish.

The argument from subject-matter is more important. The Epistle was regarded by earlier German critics as presupposing a fully developed system of Gnostic teaching, such as belongs to the middle of the 2nd cent., and a correspondingly developed Christology. But a more careful study of the Epistle has showu that what St. Paul has in view is not a system of teaching, but rather a tendency. Words like pleroma, to which later Gnosticism^ gave a technical sense, are used in this Epistle with their usual non-technical signification. And our study of early Christian and Jewish thought has shown that Gnostic tendencies date from a much earlier time than the great Gnostic teachers of the 2nd cent., and are, indeed, older than Christianity. The Christology of the Epistle certainly shows an advance on that of St. Paul’s earlier Epistles, especially in the emphasis laid on the cosmical activity of the pre-incarnate Christ. This may be accounted for in part by the special purpose of the Epistle (see below), and m part by a development in St. Paul’s own Christological ideas . It is irrational to deny the authenticity of an Epistle claiming to be St. Paul’s, merely because it shows that the mind of the Apostle had not remained stagnant during a period of impnsonment that must have given him special opportunities for thought. (See Ephesians.)

Many German critics, such as Harnack and JOlicher, are now in agreement with the leading British scholars in accepting the Epistle as St. Paul’s. The authenticity of the Epistle is sustained by its close relation to the Epistle to Philemon, the Pauline authorship of which is hardly seriously disputed. (On the relation of our Epistle to the Epistle to the Ephesians see Ephesians.)

2. Integrity and Text.— The integrity of the Epistle is now generally admitted, though certain obscurities in the text have given rise to some conjectural emendations. Holtzmann attempted to prove that this Epistle and the Epistle to the Ephesians are recensions of one original Epistle of St. Paul’s, which he tried to reconstruct by extracting a Pauline nucleus of about forty verses; but his conclusions have not been accepted by later scholars. More recently, von Soden has proposed the rejection of about nine verses, but not on any adequate grounds. It would have been no easy task to interpolate a genuine Epistle of St. Paul’s, jealously guarded as it would have been by the Church to which it was sent.

3. Time and Place of Writing. — The Epistle to the Colossians belongs to the group of four Epistles written by St. Paul in captivity (i’- "). Of this group three — the Epistles to ‘the Ephesians,’ to the Colossians, and to -Philemon — were written at the same time and sent by the same messenger, Tychicus. The remaining Epistle of the group — that to the Philippians — was almost certainly written from Rome towards the end of St. Paul’s two years’ imprisonment there. The other three Epistles were most probably written from Rome, though some critics have dated them from the period of St. Paul’s imprisonment at Caesarea.

4. Occasion and Purpose. — IVJost of St. Paul’s Epistles were written under some definite external stimulus. In the case of this Epistle two events seem to have led to its composition. (1) Epaphras, who had been the first evangelist of the Colossians, and who seems to have held at Colossse a position somewhat similar to that which Timothy is represented in the Pastoral Epistles as holding in Ephesus, had come to Rome bringing information as to the special needs and dangers of the Colossian Church. As he elected to remain at Rome, and apparently shared for a time the Apostle’s imprisonment(Philem ^3), Tychicus was sent to Asia, taking with him this letter. (2) Onesimus, a runaway slave from Colossae, had found his way to Rome and had there come under the influence of St. Paul. The Apostle took advantage of Tychicus’ journey to send Onesimus back to his master at Colossae, with a letter of commendation(see Philemon).

The special purpose of the Epistle, as distinct from its general purpose as a message of goodwill, was to warn the Colossian Christians against a danger of which Epaphras had no doubt informed St. Paul. The exact nature of the so-called Colossian heresy is a matter of some uncertainty. On its doctrinal side it was probably a blend of Jewish KabbaUstic ideas with floating Oriental speculations. It appears to have denied the direct agency of God in the work of creation, and to have inculcated the worship of angels and other mysterious powers of the unseen world (2"). On its practical side it combined rigorous asceticism (2^) and strict observance of Jewish ceremonial (2") with an arrogant claim to special enlightenment in spiritual things (2"). Its special danger lay in the fact that it tended to obscure, or even to deny, the unique grandeur of the ascended Lord, the one Mediator, through faith in whom the life of the Christian was lifted into the new atmosphere of Uberty. On one side, therefore, this Epistle may be compared with Hebrews 1, where the supremacy of the Son over all angels is strongly insisted on, while on the other side it takes up the line of thought of the Epistle to the Galatians — the relation of the Christian life to external ordinances. The way in which St. Paul deals with the question can best be seen by a short summary of the Epistle.

5. Summary. — After the usual salutation, thanksgiving, and prayer, in which St. Paul associates Timothy with himself (perhaps because he was known personally to the Colossian Church), he plunges at once into a doctrinal statement (V^2’) of the Person and Work of Christ, who is the image of the invisible God, the origin and goal of all created things, in whom all the fulness (pl9rBma) of the Godhead abides. After a personal reference to his own commission and to his sufferings for the Church, he passes to the directly controversial part of the Epistle (2:4), warning the Colossians against being led astray by strange philosophies. The fulness of the Godhead is in Christ; He is over all principalities and powers; the life of externally imposed ordinances — ‘Touch not, taste not, handle not’ — is a life to which the Christian has died in Christ. He has risen to a new life whose centre and secret are in heaven. He must still mortify the deeds of the flesh, but from a new motive and in the power of a new life. The third section of the Epistle (3:5) applies this principle to various relations of lite — the mutual relation of Christians, husbands and wives, children and fathers, slaves and masters; and lastly, to the relation of St. Paul to them, and to their relation with the world. The closing section (4) deals with personal matters — with the mission of Tychicus, with whom St. Paul tactfully associates Onesimus; with St. Mark’s proposed visit, in connexion with which St. Paul writes a word of special commendation, showing how completely the former discord has been healed. Then follow a warm commendation of Tychicus, greetings from Luke and Demas, instructions for exchanging letters with the neighbouring Church of Laodicea, and a final message for Archippus, who had apparently succeeded, in Epaphras’ absence, to the supervision of the Colossian Church. J. HOWAHD B. Masteeman. COLOURS.— The colours named in OT and NT, as in other ancient literatures, are few in number, and of these several are used with considerable latitude.

1. White as the colour of snow in Isaiah 1:18, of the teeth described as milk-white (Genesis 49:12), and of horses (Zee 1:8 6:3, 6) also of wool (Revelation 1:14) — the prevailing colour of the Palestinian sheep being white (see Song of Songs 4:2 6) — and of garments (Ecclesiastes 9:8, Mark 9:3). Gray (and grey) occurs only in the expression ‘gray hairs,’ while grisled (lit. ‘grey,’ from French gris) apparently means black with white spots (Gu 31. Zee 6:3, 6; cf. 6 below). Green is not a colour adjective (in Esther 1:6 read as RVm), but a noun signifying green plants and herbs, as e.g. in Genesis 1:30 and Mark 6:39. A kindred word rendered greenish (Leviticus 13:49 14:37) is probably a greenish yellow, since it is also used in Psalms 68:13 of ‘yellow gold.’

2. The darker colours likewise merge into each other, black and brown, for example, not being clearly distinguished. Black is the colour of hair (Song of Songs 5:11 ‘black as a raven’), of horses (Zee 6:2, 6. Revelation 6:5). and of ink (2 Go 3:3). In Song of Songs 1:5 the same Heb. word signifies darkcomplexioned (AV ‘black’). Laban’s black sheep (Genesis 30:32 ff. RV) were probably dark brown (AV brown).

3. Red is the colour of blood (2 Kings 3:22), and of grape juice (Isaiah 63:2). The same word is used of the reddish-brown colour of the ‘red heifer’ of Numbers 19, and of the chestnut horse of Zechariah’s vision (1:8, AV ‘red’), although the precise colour distinction between the latter and his companion, the sorrel (AVm bay; in Zee 6:3 EV ‘bay’ should prob. be ‘strong,’ and in v. 7 [by a slight change of text] perh. ‘red’) horse, is not clear. ‘Red’ is used also of the sky (Matthew 16:2 f. — lit. ‘of the colour of fire’).

4. Crimson and scarlet are shades of the same colour, and were both derived from the same insect, the coccus ilicis or cochineal, which ‘attaches itself to the leaves and twigs of the guercus coccifera’ (Post), and is termed in Hebrew ‘the scarlet worm.’ Scarlet-coloured garments were regarded as a mark of distinction and prosperity(2 S 1:24. Proverbs 31:21), but in OT scarlet is most frequently mentioned as one of the four liturgical, or, as we should say, ecclesiastical colours (see below). Vermilion is mentioned as a pigment (Jeremiah 22:14. Ezekiel 23:14).

5. Associated with scarlet in the Priests’ Code of the Pentateuch are found two colours, ‘argHmdn rendered purple, and tekliMeth rendered blue. In reality these are two shades of purple, the red tone predominating in the former, the blue tone in the latter. Since blue predominates in our modem purple, it would be well to drop the cumbrous terms red-purple or purple-red, and blue-purple or purple-blue, in favour of the simpler names purple and violet, as in the margin of Esther 1:6 8:15 (AV). Both shades were obtained by the use, as a dye, of a colourless fiuid secreted by the gland of a shell-fish, the murex trunculus, which was found in great quantities on the Phoenician coast. Hence Tyre became the chief seat of the manufacture of the purple cloth for which Phoenicia was famous throughout the ancient world (cf. Ezekiel 27). Purple raiment is repeatedly mentioned in Scripture as worn by kings and nobles. It was as’ King of the Jews ‘that our Lord was derisively robed in purple (Mark 16:17. John 19:2).

In the Priests’ Code, as has been noted, from Exodus 25 onwards, ‘violet’ (AV ‘blue’), ‘purple,’ and ‘scarlet’ are used — and always in this order — to denote the fine linen thread, spun from yarn that had been dyed these colours (see esp. Exodus 35:25), which, with the natural white thread, was employed in weaving the rich material for the various hangings of the Tabernacle, and for certain parts of the priests’ dress.

6. Jacob’s small cattle, ‘iring-straked, speckled, and spotted’ (Genesis 30:39 etc.), showed white mixed with black or brown in the case of the sheep, and black mixed with white in the case of the goats. For Joseph’s ‘coat of many colours’ see Dress, 2 (d).

It may be added that the art of dyeing was one in which the Jews of later times excelled. According to tradition, as we have just seen, purple and scarlet — also red (Exodus 26:14) — dyes were known as early as the Exodus time (cf. Judges 5:30 RVm). In NT times, as may be seen from the Mishna, dyeing was a fiourishing branch of native industry. The true Tyrian purple was always a monopoly, and consequently imported ; but many less costly dyes were known, such as the cochineal insect tor scarlet, dyer’s woad (.isatis) for true blue, madder (Heb. pUah, cf . Tola ben-Puah, i.e. ‘Cochineal, son of Madder,’ Judges 10:1), and others. A. R. S. Kennedy.

Colt

Colt is applied in the Bible not to the young horse, but to the young ass, and once (Genesis 32:15) to the young camel. Outside the Bible it is not applied to the young of any animal but the horse.

COMFORT, from late Lat. confortare, ‘to strengthen,’ ‘reinforce,’ denoted in old Eng. (a) physical, or (6) mental refreshment of an active kind (invigaration, encouragement) — obsolete meanings. In modern use it denotes (c) mental refreshment of the softer kind (consolalicm). Sense (o) appears in Genesis 18:5. Judges 19:5, 8. Song of Songs 2:5; (c) elsewhere in O’T. In NT, ‘comfort’ usually represents a Gr. verb and noun, common in Paul, which include any kind of animating address; in this connexion the sense (6) prevails, as in Acts 9:31 16:40. Romans 1:12 15:4, 2 Corinthians 13:11 etc.; the tenderer signification (c) appears in Matthew 5:4. 2 Corinthians 1 etc. For the above Gr. noun, however, AV fourteen times writes ‘consolation’ (interchanging ‘comfort’ and ‘consolation’ in 2 Corinthians 1), alike in senses (6) and (c): this RV replaces seven times (in Paul) by ‘comfort.’ ‘Comfort’ is also in AV the rendering of a second and rarer group of Gr. words denoting consolation (in sorrow): so in John 11, 1 Corinthians 14:3. and Philippians 2:1 (cf. AV and RV), 1 Thessalonians 2:11 6; the original of ‘comfort’(soothing) in Colossians 4:11 is an isolated expression kindred to the last.’ Of good comfort’ in Philippians 2:19 renders a fourth Gr. word = ire good heart, cheerful; while ‘of good comfort’ in Matthew 9:22 11= of good cheer in v. 2 and elsewhere (so RV here, and in Mark 10:49).

For OT and NT, comfort has its source in the tender love of God for His people, and for the individual soul; it is mediated (in the NT) by the sympathy of Christ, the visitings of the Holy Spirit, the help of brethren, and the hope of glory; it counteracts the troubles of life, and the discouragement of work tor God: see esp. John 16:33. Romans 5:2–5. 2 Corinthians 1:3–7. G. G. Findlay.

Comforter

See Advocate.

Coming of Christ

See Parousia.

Commandments

See Ten Commandments.

Commentary

(2 Chronicles 13:22 24:27 RV). The Heb. (midrash) has been adopted into English. But the Midrash is not exactly what we understand by a commentary; it is ‘an imaginative development of a thought or theme suggested by Scripture, especially a didactic or homiletic exposition, or an edifying religious story’ (Driver).

Commerce

See Trade and Commeece.

Common

In Acts 10:14 f. synonymous with ‘ceremonially unclean’ (cf. Mark 7:2. and see Clean and Unclean).

Communication

While ‘conversation’ in AV means manner of life, conduct, ‘communication’ means conversation, talk. So Colossians 3:6 ‘filthy communication’ (RV ‘shameful speaking’) and elsewhere. The verb ‘to communicate’ is now used in a restricted sense, so that its occurrences in AV, where it has the general meaning of making common cause with one, may be misunderstood. Cf. the Rheraish tr. of John 4:9: ‘For the Jewes do not communicate with the Samaritanes’ (AV ‘have no dealings with’).

Communion

(Gr. koindnia). In EV koinSnia is tr. ‘communion’ in only 3 passages (1 Corinthians 10:16. 2 Corinthians 6:14 13:14). while it is frequently rendered ‘fellowship’ (AV 12, RV 15 times), and twice ‘contribution’ or ‘distribution’ (Romans 15:26. 2 Corinthians 9:13 [E,v has ‘contrib.’ in both cases; AV ‘contrib.’ in the first passage, ‘distrib.’ in the second]). But it is ‘communion’ that brings us nearest to the original, and sets us in the path of the right interpretation of the word on every occasion when it is used in the NT.

Kdnonia comes from an adj. which means ‘common,’ and, like ‘communion,’ its literal meaning is a common participation or sharing in anything. Similarly, in the NT the concrete noun koinDnos is used of a partner in the ownership of a fishing-boat (Luke 5:10) the verb koindnein of sharing something with another, whether by way of giving (Romans 12:13. Galatians 6:6) or of receiving (Romans 15:27. 1 Timothy 5:22) and the adj. koinSnikos (1 Timothy 6:18) is rendered ‘willing to communicate.’

1. KoinSnia meets us first in Acts 2:42. where RV as well as AV obscures the meaning not only by using the word ‘fellowship,’ but by omitting the det. article. The verse ought to read, ‘And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ teaching and the communion, in the breaking of bread and the prayers.’ And the meaning of ‘communion’ in this case can hardly be doubtful. The reference evidently is to that ‘having all things common’ which is referred to immediately after (v. 44 f.), and the nature and extent of which St. Luke explains more fully at a later stage (4:32). It appears that ‘the communion’ was the regular expression for that ‘community of goods’ which was so marked a feature of the Christianity of the first days, and which owed its origin not only to the unselfish enthusiasm of that Pentecostal period and the expectation of the Lord’s immediate return, but to the actual needs of the poorer Christians in Jerusalem, cut off from the means of self-support by the social ostracism attendant on excommunication from the synagogue (John 9:22, 34 12:42 16:2).

2. The type of koinSnia in Jerusalem described in Acts 2 seems to have disappeared very soon, but its place was taken by an organized diakonia, a daily ‘ministration’ to the poor (6:1, 2). And when the Church spread into a larger world free from the hostile influences of the synagogue, those social conditions were absent which in Jerusalem had seemed to make it necessary that Christ’s followers should have all things common. But it was a special feature of St. Paul’s teaching that Christians everywhere were members one of another, sharers in each other’s wealth whether material or spiritual. And in particular he pressed constantly upon the wealthier Gentile churches the duty of taking part in the diakonia carried on in Jerusalem on behalf of the poor saints. In this connexion we find him in 2 Corinthians 8:4 using the striking expression ‘the koinSnia of the diakonia [‘the communion of the ministration’] to the saints.’ The Christiana of Corinth might have communion with their brethren in Jerusalem by imparting to them out of their own abundance. Hence, by a natural process in the development of speech, the koinSnia, from meaning a common participation, came to be applied to the gifts which enabled that participation to be realized. In Romans 15:26 and 2 Corinthians 9:13. accordingly, the word is properly enough rendered ‘contribution.’ And yet in the Apostolic Church it could never be forgotten that a contribution or collection for the poor brethren was a form of Christian communion.

3. From the first, however, ‘communion’ undoubtedly had a larger and deeper sense than those technical ones on which we have been dwelling. It was out of the consciousness of a common participation in certain great spiritual blessings that Christians were impelled to manifest their partnership in these specific ways. According to St. Paul’s teaching, those who believed in Christ enjoyed a common participation in Christ Himself which bound them to one another in a holy unity (1 Corinthians 1:9. cf. v. 10 ff.). In the great central rite of their faith this common participation in Christ, and above all in His death and its fruits, was visibly set forth: the cup of blessing was a communion of the blood of Christ; the broken bread a communion of the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 10:16). Flowing again from this common participation in Christ there was a common participation in the Holy Spirit, for it is from the love of God as manifested In the grace of Christ that there results that ‘communion of the Holy Ghost’ which is the^ strongest bond of unity and peace (2 Corinthians 13:14; ct. v. 11, Philippians 2:1 f.). Thus the communion of the Christian Church came to mean a fund of spiritual privilege which was common to all the members but also peculiar to them, so that the admission of a man to the communion or his exclusion from it was his admission to, or exclusion from, the Church of Christ itself. When the Jerusalem Apostles gave ‘the right hands of communion’ to Paul and Barnabas (Galatians 2:9). that was a symbolic recognition on their part that these missionaries to the uncircumcision were true disciples and Apostles of Christ, sharers with themselves in all the blessings of the Christian faith.

4. We have seen that in its root-meaning koinSnia is a partnership either in giving or in receiving. Hence it was applied to Christian duties and obligations as well as to Christian privileges. The right bands of communion given to Paul and Barnabas were not only a recognition of grace received in common, but mutual pledges of an Apostolic service to the circumcision on the one hand and the heathen on the other (Galatians 2:9). . St. Paul thanks God tor the ‘communion’ of the Philippians in the furtherance of the gospel (Philippians 1:5), and prays on behalf of Philemon that the ‘communion’ of his faith may become effectual (Philem "), i.e. that the Christian sympathies and charities inspired by his faith may come into full operation. It is the same use of koinSnia that we find in Hebrews 13:16, where the proper rendering is ‘torget not the welldoing and the communion.’ Here also the communion means the acts of charity that spring from Christian faith, with a special reference perhaps to the technical sense of koinSnia referred to above, as a sharing of one’s materialjwealth with the poorer brethren.

5. In all the foregoing passages the koinSnia seems to denote a mutual sharing, whether in privilege or in duty, of Christians with one another. But there are some cases where the communion evidently denotes a more exalted partnership, the partnership of a Christian with Christ or with God. This is what meets us when St. Paul speaks in Philippians 3:10 of the communion of Christ’s sufferings. He means a drinking of the cup of which Christ drank (cf. Matthew 20:22 f.), a moral partnership with the Redeemer in His pains and tears (ct. Romans 8:17). But it is St. John who brings this higher koinSnia before us in the most absolute way when he writes, ‘Our communion is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ’ (1 John 1:3. ct. v. 6), and makes our communion one with another depend upon this previous communion with God Himself (v. 7. cf. v. 6). Yet, though the koindnia or communion is now raised to a higher power, it has still the same meaning as before. It is a mutual sharing, a reciprocal giving and receiving. And in his Gospel St. John sets the law of this communion clearly before us when he records the words of the Lord Himself, ‘Abide in me, and I in you’ (John 15:4). The communion of the human and the Divine is a mutual activity, which may be summed up in the two words grace and faith. For grace is the spontaneous and unstinted Divine giving as revealed aifd mediated by Jesus Christ, while faith in its ideal form is the action of a soul which, receiving the Divine grace, surrenders itself without any reserve unto the Lord. J. C. Lambert.

Community of Goods

See CoMMnNioN.

Compass

A ‘compass’ is the space occupied by a circle, or the circle itself: Proverbs 8:27 ‘he set a compass upon the face of the deep’ (AVm and RV ‘a circle’) usually explained of the horizon, which seems to be a circle resting on the ocean. To ‘fetch a compass’ (Numbers 34:5, Joshua 15. 2 Samuel 5:23. 2 Kings 3:9) is to make a circuit or simply ‘go round.’ The tool for making a circle is a compass (Isaiah 44:13). — See Arts and Crafts, § 1.

Compassion

See Pity.

Conaniah

1. A Levite who had charge of the tithes and offerings in the time of Hezekiah (2 Ch 3112. 1!). 2. A chief of the Levites in Josiah’s reign (2 Chronicles 35:9) called in 1 Esdras 1:9 Jeconias.

Concision

A name applied contemptuously by S. Paul (Philippians 3:2) to the merely fleshly circumcision (Gr. katatomS; the ordinary word for ‘circumcision’ is peritomS).

Concordances

The Latin word cancordantim, for an alphabetical list of the words of Scripture drawn up for purposes of reference to the places where they occur, was first used by Hugo de Sancto Caro, who compiled a Concordance to the Vulgate in 1244. This was revised by Arbottus (1290), and became the basis of a Hebrew Concordance by Isaac Nathan (1437- 45). Nathan’s work was revised and enlarged by John Buxtorf, the elder, whose Concwdantice BiUiarum Hebraiax (1632) held the place of standard Concordance for two centuries, and served as the model for many others. John Taylor’s Hebrew Concordance adapted to the English Bible, disposed alter the manner of Buxtorf (2 vols, folio, Norwich, 1754-57), is another link in the succession. The first Concordance to the English Bible is that of John Marbeck (folio, London, 1S50). The earliest Concordance to the Septuagint is Conrad Kircher’s (1607). The first Greek NT Concordance was published at Basle anonymously in 1546. In the use of the following lists it will be understood that, while the most recent works, other things being equal, are to be preferred, there is so much common material that many of the older works are by no means obsolete.

1. Hebrew. — Fuerst, Libr. Sacrorum Vet. Test. ConcordanticB Heb. alque Chald. (1840); The Englishman’s Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance of OT (2 vols., Bagster) ; B. Davidson, A Concordance of the Heb. and Chaldee Scriptures (Bagster, 1876); Bagster’s Handy Hebrew Concordance [an invaluable work]; Mandelkern, Vet. Test. Concardantiee (folio, Leipzig, 1896), and a smaller edition without quotations (Leipzig, 1897).

2. Greek. — (o) The Septuagint. — Bagster’s Handy Concordance of the Septuagint; Hatch-Redpath’s Concordance of the Septuagint and other Greek Versions of the OT, with two supplemental fasciculi (Clarendon Press, 1892-97). This is the standard work, replacing - Trommius’ Concardantiee Groecoe Versionis vulgo dictce LXX Interpretum (2 vols. Amst. 1718).

(b) The NT. — The Englishman’s Greek Concordance of the NT (Bagster) ; C. F. Hudson, Greek Concordance to NT, revised by Ezra Abbot (do.); SchmoUer, Concardantiee manuales NT grceci (1890); Bruder, ConcordantiiB omnium vocum NT grwci* (1888). All these works are now superseded by Moulton-Geden’s Concordance to the Greek Testament (Edinburgh, T. & T. Clark, 1897).

3, English, — Until recent times the standard work was Cruden’s Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures (1st ed. 1738. Cruden’s is truly a marvellous work, and was frequently copied, without acknowledgment, in subsequent productions. It was even issued in abridgment — the most useless and provoking of all literary products). More recent works are Eadie’s Analytical Concordance; Young’s Analytical Bible Concordance(Edin. 1879-84), with supplem. vol. by W. B. Stevenson; Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance (Hodder & Stoughton, 1894); Thorns’s Concordance to B V of NT (1882). W. F. Adeney and J. S. Banks.

Concubine

See Family, Marriage, § 6.

Concupiscence

Concupiscence is intense desire, always in a bad sense, so that it is unnecessary to say ‘evil concupiscence’ as in Colossians 3. The reference is nearly always to sexual lust.

Conduit

See Jerusalem.

Coney

(EV tr. of shaphan, RVm rock badger). The Hyrax syriacus, called by the Arabs wabr, also the ghanam beni Israel (the sheep of the children of Israel). The coney is a small rabbit-like animal, with short ears and a mere stump of a tail. It has stiff greyish-brown hair, with softer, lighter-coloured hair on the belly; it Is nocturnal in its habits, and lives in holes in the rocks. Conies are very plentiful along the rocky shores of the Dead Sea, and also in the Lebanon, especially above Sidon; they can, however, be seen as a rule only between sunset and sunrise. They are gregarious in their habits, and disappear into their rocky fastnesses (Psalms 104:18. Proverbs 30) with the greatest rapidity on the slightest approach of danger. The Bedouin, when hunting them, lie hidden for many hours during the night close to their holes. They feed on grass and sweet-smelling herbs, and their flesh is esteemed for eating by the Bedouin; they do not actually ‘chew the cud’ (Leviticus 11. Deuteronomy 14:7). though they work their jaws in a way that resembles a ruminant. Structurally the coney is so peculiar as to have an order, the Hyracoidea, to itself. E. W. G. Masterman.

Confection

This word in AV means perfume (Exodus 30:35), and ‘confectionary’ (1 Samuel 8:13). means perfumer.