Corn – Cbatss

Corn

This term may be taken to include — (1) Barley, (2) Wheat, (3) Fitches, (4) Lentils, (5) Beans, (6) Millet, (7) Rye, wrong translation for ‘Vetches,’ (8) Pulse — for most of which see separate articles. Rye and oats are not cultivated in Palestine.

E. W. G. Mabtehman.

Cornelius

A ‘proselyte of the gate’ or ‘devout man’ (Acts 10:1, see art. Acts op the Apostles, § 6), whose baptism was a step forward towards admitting the Gentiles into the Church. He was a Roman centurion of the Italic cohort (see art. Band). An inscription recently discovered near Vienna shows that an Italic cohort was stationed in Syria c. a.d. 69, and this makes St. Luke’s statement (once said to be an anachronism) quite probable. It the presence of such an officer in Csesarea was not possible during the semi-independent rule of Agrippa (a.d. 41-44), we must date the episode before that; but we cannot assert such an impossibility. A. J. Maclean.

Corner, Corner-stone

1. The special sanctity which in the Hebrew mind attached to corners is to be regarded as an inheritance from certain primitive and widely-spread animistic conceptions. Several of these were taken up and, so to say, ‘regularized’ in the later legislation (cf. the remarks on Azazel under Atonement[Day of]). Examples will be found in the ideas associated with the corners of the altar (Zee 9"), usually termed the ‘horns’ (Altar, § 7), the unreaped corners of the field (Leviticus 19:9; Agriculture, § 3), the corners of the beard and head-hair (v. 27) and of the upper garment or cloak (Fringes).

2. Another illustration is found in the importance attached among many peoples to the corner-stone in the foundation course of every important building, which was laid with religious rites, including, in early times, the burial beneath it of a human victim (see House, § 3). The corrected text of Isaiah 28 speaks of ‘a precious foundation corner-stone,’ which is neither Zion (as usually interpreted), nor the future Messiah, but a calm trust in J"; hence the prophet adds ‘he that trusts shall not be moved’ or ‘put to shame’ (LXX, ct. 1 Peter 2:6 and Kittel, Bib. Heb.). Jeremiah 51:26 and Job 38 both associate the corner-stone with the foundations. Hence the figurative use of the word for the chief men of the State, as its ‘corners,’ i.e. supports and defences (Judges 20:2. 1 Samuel 14:38 [cf. marg.l. Isaiah 19:13 RV, Zee 10:4). On the other hand, the stone of Psalms 118:22 which became ‘the head of the corner’ (RV) — the reference is to Zion — is understood by many to be the corner-stone of the topmost course.(cf. the head stone of Zee 4:7. which is different from the ‘foundation’ of v. 9). In NT this passage and Isaiah 28:16 receive a Messianic application, Jesus Christ being both the foundation and the head of His Church (Matthew 21:42)). Acts 4:11. 1 Peter 2:6 f.).

A. R. S. Kennedy.

Cornet

See Music and Musical Instrumenih.

Corruption

Jewish anthropology conceived of man as composed of two elements, the physical body and the soul. At death the soul went to Sbeol, and the body decayed. The term ‘corruption’ came, therefore, to stand for the physical aspects of that state which followed death and preceded the resurrection. In this sense it is used in Acts 2:27, 31 IS^i-", 1 Corinthians 15:42, 50; cf. also 1 Corinthians 15. There is no evidence that it had a moral force, although some have found such an implication in Galatians 6:8, where the reference is rather to a belief that the wicked will not share in the glories of the resurrection. Neither is it a term to indicate annihilation, which idea does not seem to have been held by the Palestinian Jews. Jesus through His resurrection is represented (2 Timothy 1:10) as having brought life and incorruption to light. The resurrection as a part of salvation is thus placed in sharpest contrast with the condition of the personality following physical death, since, as St. Paul says (2 Co S"), for a man who is saved, the decomposition of the physical body is but an occasion for the assumption of an Incorruptible heavenly body.

Shailer Mathews.

Cos

An island oft the coast of Caria, S.W. of Asia Minor, famous for its fertihty and beauty. It was a Dorian colony, and a great seat of the worship of iS^sculapius and of the study of medicine. Its position made it also an important place from a trade point of view, as it lay on the cross Unes of traffic between Greece, Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt. It is uncertain whether Cos, which had been a faithful ally of the Romans, was incorporated in the province of Asia in B.C. 139 (see Caria), but it certainly was a part of it in the time of Augustus. Its trade connexion made it one of the Jewish centres of the ^gaean. The Jews there were favoured by the Romans in B.C. 139- 138 (1 Maccabees 15). It was a place on the route of the Jewish pilgrims to Jerusalem (cf. Acts 21:1). Herod the Great was a benefactor of the people of Cos.

A. SOUTER.

Cosam

An ancestor of Jesus (Luke 3:28).

Cosmogony

See Creation.

COSS^ANS. — A name adapted from the Greek form of Bab. KasshS, a semi-barbarous people inhabiting the mountain region between Elam and Media proper. They answer to Cush (wh. see) in Genesis 10:8 (and 2:13) as distinguished from the African Cush. They were a powerful people between the 18th and the 12th centuries B.C., during which time Babylonia was ruled by a Cossaean dynasty. J. F. McCurdy.

Cotton

Cotton is the better tr. (so RVm) of karpae, which in AV and RV is tr. ‘green,’ Esther 1:6. It was either muslin or calico. E. W. G. Masterman.

Couch

See House, § 8 . The verb ‘to couch’ occurs in Deuteronomy 33:13 ‘the deep that coucheth beneath.’ The word means simply to lie down, but it is used almost exclusively of animals, as is the Heb. word also. The subterranean deep, says Driver, is perhaps pictured as a gigantic monster.

Coulter

Only 1 Samuel 13:20 f., for the word elsewhere rendered ‘plow-share,’ and so it should be here, as the Hebrew plough, like its Syrian representative to-day, had no coulter. See Agriculture, § 1.

Council

See Sanhedrin. For the Council of Ac is, Galatians 2, see Paul, Galatians [Ep. to], § 3.

Counsellor

This is the spelling in modern editions of the AV. In the ed. of 1611 it is ‘counseller,’ except in Ezra 8:25. Proverbs 12:20 15:22. where the spelling is ‘counsellour.’ The word is used mostly of a king’s counsellor, or more generally of one who gives counsel. But in Daniel 3 it means a justice; and in Mark 15:43. Luke 23:50. it is used of Joseph of Arimathsea as a member of the Sanhedrin. In Daniel 3:24, 27 4:36 6:7 the peculiar word rendered ‘counsellor’ in AV is hesitatingly translated by Driver ‘minister’; RV retains ‘counsellor.’

Countervail

To countervail (Esther 7:4. Sirach 6:15) is to make up for, give an equivalent, as in More’s Utopia: ‘All the goodes in the worlde are not liable to countervayle man’s life.’

Courage

In Daniel 11:25 ‘courage’ is the rendering of the Heb. word for ‘heart’; in Amos 2:16 ‘courageous’ is literally ‘stoutest of heart.’ Elsewhere in the OT the root-ideas of the words generally used are ‘to be firm’ Cdmets) and ‘to be strong’ (,chazaq). Courage, being a quality of mind, has manifold manifestations, as, e.g. in the sufferer’s endurance, the reformer’s boldness, and the saint’s ‘wrestling’ (Ephesians 6:12). as well as in the soldier’s valour. Professor Sorley says that moral courage is ‘the control of the fear of social evils (disgrace or ridicule from those who determine the opinion of the community), whereas the ordinary application of courage is to the fear of physical evils’ (Baldwin, Diet, of Philosophy, i. 239).

In the NT the Gr. noun for ‘courage’ is found only in Acts 28:15. xhe corresponding verb is rendered uniformly in the RV ‘be of good cheer’; but a later form of the same verb occurs six times, and is tr. in KV ‘be of good courage.’ The comparative rarity of the word ‘courage’ implies no disparagement of the virtue, for exhortations to ‘be strong,’ and to ‘fear not’ are frequent. T. H. Green, comparing Greek and Christian ideals of virtue (.Prolegomena to Ethics, p. 277 ff.), shows how greatly the conception of moral heroism has been widened. Courage or fortitude is defined as ‘the will to endure even unto death for a worthy end’ ; therefore the Christian may be courageous ‘in obscure labours of love as well as in the splendid heroism at which a world might wonder.’

J. G. Taseer.

Course

See Priests and Levites, III. 2 (6).

Court

See House, § 2; Justice; Tabernacle; Temple.

Cousin

Elisabeth is called Mary’s ‘cousin’ in Luke 1. and the relationship is often understood in the modern sense of that word. But ‘cousin’ in the English of 1611 meant no more than kinsman or kinswoman. The relationship between Mary and Elisabeth is not known.

Covenant

The term is of frequent occurrence in the Bible, and is used in the general sense of a compact or agreement between parties, and also in the more technical and legal sense of an arrangement entered Into by God, and confirmed or sealed with the due formalities. The Hebrew word (fierlth) has a similarly wide signification; whilst the Greek {dialKlki) is used alike in the classics and on the papyri in the further sense of ‘testament’ or ‘will,’ though Aristophanes {Av. 439) is a good witness for the meaning of mutual agreement. The rendering ‘testament’ is retained by the EV in two places only (Hebrews 9:16, 17; cf. margin of Galatians 3:15). and is perpetuated in the titles given to the two main parts of the Bible (see Testament).

As for the formalities in concluding a covenant, the primitive way seems to have been for the two parties to swallow each a drop of the other’s blood, thus becoming covenant-brothers. This actual mingling of blood soon became distasteful, and substitutes were found, such as the cutting of sacrificial animals into two parts, between which the contracting parties passed (On IS’"- ", Jeremiah 34:18 f.). the meat probably being eaten afterwards in a joint meal. This ritual appears to have been inherited from the nomadic period, and it afterwards generally gave way to a solemn oath or invocation of God, combining a pledge to observe the covenant (Genesis 26. Hebrews 6:17) and the imprecation of a curse on non-observance (Deuteronomy 27). Sometimes a handshake took the place of the oath (Ezra 10:19. Proverbs 6:1 7:18 22:26. 1 Chronicles 29:24 marg., 1 Maccabees 6:58). or was added to it (Ezekiel 17:18). In very early times an agreement between two men was sometimes confirmed by setting up a pillar or a heap of stones (Genesis 31:44–48). the religious sanction being added (Genesis 31). When God was Himself directly one of the parties, and an obligation was thought to be assumed by Him rather than by both, a token was substituted (Genesis 9:12) but in these cases the transaction takes the form chiefly of a pledge or assurance, though the idea of some obligation upon the other party is often implicit. Compacts would often be made or confirmed at a shrine; and the god was invoked as a witness (Genesis 31: Joshua 24:27. 2 Kings 11:4 23:3), or a sacrificial meal accompanied the act (Genesis 26:30 31:54. 2 Samuel 3:20). Sprinkling of sacrificial blood (Exodus 24:8. Zee 9:11. Hebrews 9:20) was a specially solemn indication of God’s approving presence and of the obligations undertaken; and its significance survives and is deepened in the death of Christ (Hebrews 10:29 13:20) and in the Eucharist (Matthew 26:28. Mark 14:24. Luke 22:20. 1 Corinthians 11:25).

Of the covenants referred to in Scripture, there are two classes. 1. Covermnts between men. — These, again, are of several kinds, the most frequent being international alliances (c.ff. Genesis 21:27. Joshua 9:6. Psalms 83:5, Amos 1:9). judicial decisions and codes (Sirach 38:33, possibly Exodus 24:7). agreements between a ruler and the people (2 Samuel 5:3. Daniel 9:27). and civil and domestic compacts of every variety. The word was used for alliances of friendship (1 Samuel 18:3. Psalms 55:20). and of marriage (Proverbs 2:17. Mai 2:14). By an easy metaphor, a covenant in the sense of an imposed will may be made with the eyes (Job 31:1)) or, in the other sense of agreement, with the stones (Job 5:23). but not with Leviathan (Job 41:4), because of his greatness and intractability, nor wisely with death either in scorn of God (Isaiah 28:15, 18) or in yearning (Wisdom 1:16). In Daniel 11:22 ‘the prince of the covenant’ is sometimes rendered ‘a prince in league with him’; but if the other translation stands, ‘covenant’ will represent the nation as a religious community (cf. Daniel 11:28, 30. Psalms 74:20). and the prince will be the high priest, Onias in., who was deposed by Antiochus about B.C. 174. Similarly in Mai 3:1 ‘the messenger of the covenant’ may be the attendant of God, His instrument in dealing with the nation (cf. RVm).

2. Covenants between God and men. — The idea of a covenant with Adam, beyond the siiiiple injunction of Genesis 2:16, 17. has been found by some writers in Sirach 17:12, which is more easily interpreted of the transactions on Horeb (Deuteronomy 5:3). In P« 25:14. as in 55. the word has its fundamental meaning of an alliance of friendship, with a specific allusion in the former case to the Deuteronomic covenant of the tenth verse. In other cases the technical meaning of an agreement with signs and pledges is more conspicuous. The Noachian covenant (Genesis 6:18 9:8–17, Isaiah 54:9 f.: Jeremiah 33:20, 25) guarantees the stability of natural law. The covenant with Abraham (Genesis 15:18 l?^-^‘) was confirmed in its promise to Isaac and Jacob (Exodus 2:24, Leviticus 26:42. Psalms 105:9 f.). and ensured a blessing through their seed to all nations, circumcision being adopted as the token (cf. Acts 7:8. 1 Maccabees 1:15). Of still greater significance was the covenant at Horeb or Sinai (Exodus 19:5 34:10, 27 f. et al.), which was renewed in the plains of Moab (Deuteronomy 29:1). and is frequently referred to in the OT. It was really a constitution given to Israel by God, with appointed promise and penalty, duly inscribed on the tables of the covenant (Deuteronomy 9:9, 11, 15), which were deposited in the ark (Deuteronomy 10, 1 Kings 8:9, 21. 2 Chronicles 5:10. Hebrews 9:4). Elsewhere the covenant is described as set forth in words (Exodus 34:28, Deuteronomy 29:9) and written in a book (Exodus 24:7, 2 Kings 23:2). Amongst other covenants of minor importance are that with Phinehas establishing an everlasting priesthood in his line (Numbers 25:12 f.). and that with David establishing an everiasting kingdom (Psalms 89:3 f.: Jeremiah 33:21; cf. 2 Samuel 7). Joshua and the people covenant to serve Jehovah only (Joshua 24:25) so Jehoiada and the people (2 Kings 11:17). Hezekiah- and the people solemnly agree to reform the worship (2 Chronicles 29:10) Josiah (2 Kings 23:3) and Ezra (10:3) lead the people into a covenant to observe the Law.

Whilst the Sinaitic covenant is rightly regarded as the charter of the Jewish dispensation, the establishment by God of a new constitution was contemplated by a series of prophets (Jeremiah 31:31, 33 32:40 60. Isaiah 55:3 59:21 61:8, Ezekiel 16 20:37 34:25). Some of the pledges were new, and not confined in their range to Israel, whilst the Messianic Servant becomes ‘for a covenant of the people’ (Isaiah 42:6 f. 49:8; cf. ‘messenger of the covenant,’ Mai 3:1). The Sinaitic covenant is thus transformed, and, whilst continuing as a note of racial separation until the period for the Incarnation was come, gave way then to a new dispensation with increased emphasis on personal religion and the provision of means adequate to ensure it (Hebrews 8:6–13). Yet the ancient covenant, even that with Abraham, was everlasting(Gn 17). and still stands in its supreme purpose (Leviticus 26:44 f.: Acts 3:25, Romans 11:26 f.) of making men the people of God, the new elements consisting mainly in the adoption of more effective influences and inspiration. The Exile is sometimes thought of as marking the dissolution of the Old Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31 ff.), though the new one was not fully introduced until some centuries later. The act of making the New Covenant is compared with the transactions in the wilderness (Ezekiel 20:36 ff.). On God’s part there is forgiveness with the quickening of the inner life of man (Ezekiel 36:24 ff.). And both the activity and the blessedness are associated with the Messianic expectations (Jeremiah 33:15 f.; Ezekiel 37:21–28, Luke 1:20).

In the later OT writings the word ‘covenant,’ as appears from the previous citations, has lost much of its technical signification, and does not always denote even a formal act of agreement, but becomes almost a synonym, and that without much precision, for the conditions of religion (Psalms 103:18). St. Paul recognizes a series of covenants (Romans 9:4, Ephesians 2:12) on an ascending scale of adequacy (2 Corinthians 3:6, Galatians 4:24 ff., cf. Hebrews 7:22 8:6 ff.) and Sinai is but a stage (Galatians 3:15 ff.) in the course from Abraham to Christ.

Of special phrases, two or three’may present some difficulty.’ A covenant of salt’ (Numbers 18:19, 2 Chronicles 13:5) is a perpetual covenant, the eating of salt together being a token of friendship as sealed by sacred hospitality. The salt of the covenant’ (Leviticus 2:13) has probably the same primary suggestion, as a natural accompaniment of the sacrificial meEil, and with it constituting an inviolable bond. Sometimes the two great divisions of Scripture are called the boolcs of the Ola and of the New Covenant respectively. The name’ Book of the Covenant ‘(see next article) is given to Exodus 20:22; that of’ Little Book of the Covenant’ to Exodus 34:11–26. A distinction is often drawn between the Covenant of Works, assumed to have been made by God with Adam (Genesis 2:17). and that of Grace or Redemption (2 Timothy 1:9). whereby Christ becomes to man the medium of all spiritual blessings. R. W. Moss.

Covenant, Book of the

The oldest code of Hebrew law which has come down to us is contained in Exodus 20:22. It receives its name from the expression in Exodus 24:7. while its character as a covenant is demonstrated by the promises attached to the keeping of it (23). Owing to the confused form in which the Book of Exodus has been transmitted, doubt has been expressed as to the limits of the Book of the Covenant. Some maintain that the words in 24:7 refer only to ch. 23; others would make them include 21-23; Driver holds with the generally accepted opinion that the code begins with 20:22. The close proximity of the Decalogue (20:1–17) might lead to the inference that both codes were given at the same time. But the Book of the Covenant is certainly not a law that was ‘delivered’; it Is a series of decisions gradually gathered together. It has been incorporated by the compiler at this particular place in the Book of Exodus, with the intention of bringing the ancient codes together.

1. Contents. — These fall into two broad divisions: —

(1) mishpatim, or ‘judicial decisions.’ In early Semitic life justice was administered according to a series of Wroth, or judicial and priestly decisions, originally transmitted orally, but gradually written down for more exact use as precedents. The Book of the Covenant was such a series, and was probably committed to writing, in the first instance, to serve as a hand-book for those who had to administer the law. Hypothetical cases are put in the regular form, ‘If . . . then . . .’ : e.g. 21:26 ‘If a man smite the eye of his servant or the eye of his maid that it perish; (then) he shall let him go free for his eye’s sake.’ Sometimes the form changes slightly; the crime and the punishment attached to it are stated in the briefest possible way: e.g. 21:12 ‘He that smiteth a man so that he die shall be surely put to death.’ This collection of mishpatim reflects an extremely simple state of society. It deals with the rights of the male and female slave (21:1–11) murder and homicide (vv. 12–15) injuries to the body, not resulting in death (w.’«-32); injuries to cattle (vv.) theft (22:1–5) arson (v. 6) breach of trust (vv. 7–13) loans (yv.i4. IS. 25-27); scduction (vv. 16, 17). The injunctions put in the shorter form cover murder, abduction, the cursing of parents, bestiality (21 " 22:19). The prominence given In this code to the ox, ass, and sheep (21:28) shows that It was originally drawn up for a society that was predominantly agricultural. In several respects, however, the code indicates a considerable measure of progress. A limitation is imposed on the 2ex talionis, in the drawing of a distinction between premeditated murder and accidental homicide. The service of a slave carmot last beyond six years unless with his own consent, and then his determination to remain in slavery is sealed by a solemn act. Apart from retaliation there is no punishment, except a pecuniary compensation. The thief who will not make restitution is the only wrong-doer who loses his liberty. The position of women is that the daughter is the property of her father, who receives money for her when he gives her in marriage, and also exacts from any who should dishonour her the price she would have brought as a bride; the injury is thought of as being done not to the daughter, who is only a chattel, but to the father.

(2) debarim, or ‘commands.’ In form, these are akin to the commands of the Decalogue, being introduced with ‘Thou Shalt,’ or ‘Thou shalt not.’ In substance, they are concerned with religious observances to a much greater extent than the mishpatim, and do not give the same prominence to agricultural life. 20:24–26 deals with the construction of an altar. (Stade, Bibl. Theol. § 57, thinks that this command is the product of a period of reaction in the time of the later monarchy, and that it was aimed at the brazen altar which Solomon had made, and at the centralization of worship in Jerusalem.) Other matters dealt with are witchcraft (22:18) ; the treatment of strangers (v. 21)) the reviling of God (or judges) and rulers (vv.); the offering of the first fruits and firstlings (vv. 29, 30) ; the eating of animals found torn in the field (v. 31) just judgment (23:1–3, 6–8) the year of rest, and the Sabbath (vv. 10–12) feasts (vv. 14–16) The three feasts mark points in the agricultural year, the beginning and the end of harvest and the end of the vintage. Leaven is not to be eaten in connexion with the blood of the sacrifice, and the fat of the sacrifice is to be burned the same night (23:16–19) ; but apart from these there are no matters of sacrificial ritual insisted on. Whoever sacrifices to any other god than Jehovah is to be placed under the ban (22:20). 23:20–33 seems to be the work of the compiler. The familiar style of Deut. appears in v. 23; but in this section there would appear to be vestiges of an older text (23:28–31). 2, Date. — As to the date of the Book of the Covenant, there is no evidence save what the document Itself affords us. But the state of society refiected in it is primitive. Agriculture is the industry of the people. The law of blood-revenge is just beginning to be modified; woman has as yet no property in herself; sacrifice is emerging from its primitive domestic character; there is as yet no clear conception of a State. The code would thus seem to date from the days of the desert wandering, and to be older than the Decalogue itself. See, further, artt. Exodus and Hexatbuch.

R. Beucb Tatloe.

Covetousness

In the Bible, covetousness is a crime. In the Ten Commandments it is put under the ban along with murder, adultery, theft, and slander (Exodus 20:17. Dt S2’). Achan was guilty of this crime, and was stoned to death (Joshua 7:16–26). Every occurrence of the word or the thing in the OT is connected with a prohibition or a curse (Psalms 10:3 119:36. Proverbs 21 28:16, Isaiah 57:17. Habakkuk 2:9). In the NT adultery and covetousness «re usually classed together (1 Corinthians 6:11 &‘■ Colossians 3:5. 2 Peter 21). This conjunction of sensual sin and love of moiiey probably rests upon the authority of Jesus (Mark 7:21, 22). Jesus and the Apostles declared that the worshipper of Bacchus and the worshipper of Venus and the worshipper of Mammon belong to one and the same class. Grasping avarice is as incompatible with the spirit of self-sacrifice taught in the NT as is the selfish indulgence in drink or the grosser indulgence in vice. The Bible puts the covetous man in the same category with the murderer and the thief. The Christian Church needs to study anew the Bible teaching concerning covetousness, as found in Jeremiah 22:17. Micah 2:2. Luke 12:15. Ro V, Ephesians 5. 1 Timothy 6:10, Hebrews 13:5. and other passages. No covetous man has any inheritance in the Kingdom of God. D. A. Hayes.

Cozbi

The Midianitess slain by Fhinehas (Nu 25"- ").

COZEBA, 1 Ch 4»=Achzib, No. 2.

Cracknels

See Bread.

CRAFT, in the sense of ‘trade,’ survives In RV only in Revelation 18 ‘no craftsman of whatever craft.’ In Acts 18 19:25, 27 ‘trade’ or ‘business’ has been substituted for AV ‘craft.’ ‘Craftsman’ and ‘craftsmen,’ however, are retained. See list under Abts and Cbafts.

Crane

In Isaiah 38:14 and Jeremiah 8:7 sUs or is rendered in AV ‘crane,’ RV correctly ‘swallow’ [wh. see]. In the same passages ‘agUr is rendered in AV’ swallow,’ RV ‘crane.’ The crane {Orus communis) is the largest bird which visits W. Palestine; its length is four feet. They arrive in large flocks in the winter (Jeremiah 8:7). Its trumpet-

1§3 ing note is strangely described (in Isaiah 38:14 EV) as ‘chattering,’ and this makes the translation somewhat doubtful. E. W. G. Masteeman.

Cbatss

A deputy left in charge of the citadel at Jerusalem (Acra) when the regular governor, Sostratus, was summoned to Antioch by Antiochus Epiphanes, in consequence of a dispute with the high priest Menelaus (2 Maccabees 4:29). Crates was ‘over the Cyprians’: probably he was sent to Cyprus shortly afterwards, when, in B.C. 168, Antiochus obtained possession of the island.