Devil – Dishon

Devil

The word came into English from Greek either directly or through its Latin transliteration. Used with the definite article, its original meaning was that of the accuser or traducer of men (see Satan), whence it soon came to denote the supreme spirit of evil, the personal tempter of man and enemy of God. With the indefinite article it stands for a malignant being of superhuman nature and powers, and represents the conception expressed by the Greeks in the original of our term ‘demon.’ At first the idea of malignancy was not necessarily associated with these beings, some being regarded as harmless and others as wielding even benign influence; but gradually they were considered as operating exclusively in the sphere of mischief, and as needing to be guarded against by magic rites or religious observances.

1. Earlier conceptions. — Jewish demonology must be traced back to primitive and pre-Mosaic times, when both a form of animism was present in a belief in the ill-disposed activity of the spirits of the dead, and a variety of places and objects were supposed to be rendered sacred by the occupation, permanent or temporary, of some superhuman power. Of these views only traces are to be found in the earliest parts of Scripture, and the riper development of later ages may fairly be ascribed to foreign, and especially Bab. and Greek, influences. That certain animals were believed to be endowed with demonic power appears from Genesis 3:1–15. though here the serpent itself is represented as demonic, and not yet as possessed by an evil spirit (Wisdom 2:24. Ro !&"). So with the ‘he-goats’ or satyrs (Leviticus 17:7. 2 Chronicles 11:15. Isaiah 13:21 34:14), which were evidently regarded as a kind of demon, though without the rich accompaniments of the Greek conception. Their home was the open field or wilderness, where Azazel was supposed to dwell (Leviticus 16). and whither one of the birds used in cleansing cases of leprosy was let go to carry back the disease (Leviticus 14:7, 53). On the contrary, the roes and the hinds of the field (Song of Songs 2:7 3) seem to have been thought of as faun-like spirits, for whose aid a lover might hopefully plead. Under Bab. influence the spirit was conceived as abstracted from any visible form, and as still capable of inflicting injury; hence the need of protection against ‘the destroyer’ of Exodus 12:23. In Greek thought there took place a development partly parallel. The word used by Hesiod for the blessed soul of a hero becomes with Plato an abstract influence sometimes beneficent and helpful, but emerges in the orators and tragedians as descriptive of baleful genii, who bring misfortune and even revel in cruelty.

2, Later Judaism. — Under these various influences the demonology of later Judaism became somewhat elaborate. The conception of demon or devil was used to embrace three species of existences. (1) It included the national deities, conceived as fallen, but not always as stripped of all power (Exodus 12:12. Isaiah 19:1 24:21. cf. 14:12). (2) It covered such of the angels as were thought to have been once attendants upon the true God, but to have fallen (2 Peter 2:4. Jude Ethiop. Enoch chs. 6. 7). For a variety of personal spirits were interposed between God as mediating agencies according to Bab. and Persian views, or, accordingto the strict Jewish view, as ministers of His will. (3) To these were added — a survival with modification of the primitive animism — the spirits of the wicked dead (Josephus, Ant. vin. ii. 5, BJ vii. vi. 3), who were supposed to haunt the tombs, or at least to cause the men they possessed to do so (Matthew 8:28). The devils of later Judaism accordingly are thought of as invisible spirits, to whom every ill, physical or moral, was attributed. Their relation to God , was one of gwosi-independence. At times they do His bidding and are the ministers of His wrath, but in this sense are not classed in Scripture as devils; e.g., the demon of pestilence is the destroying angel or even ‘the angel of the Lord’ (2 Samuel 24:16. 2 Kings 19:35. Isaiah 37:36, Psalms 78:49). Yet they were thought to reside in the lower world in an organized kingdom of their own (Job 18:14; cf. Revelation 9:11. Ethiop. Enoch 4:6. Matthew 12:24–27) though the kingdom is not entirely outside the sovereign rule of Jehovah, who is the Lord of all spirits and of the abyss in which they dwell (Enoch 40, Deuteronomy 32:22. job hs, pg 139. Luke 16:24).

3. In the NT.— In the period of the NT the belief in devils as spirits, evil and innumerable, was general amongst the nations, whether Jewish or Gentile; but in Jesus and His disciples the cruder features of the belief, such as the grotesqueness of the functions assigned to these spirits in the literature of the second century, do not appear. The writers of the Gospels were in this respect not much in advance of their contemporaries, and for Jesus Himself no theory of accommodation to current beliefs can be sustained. The Fourth Gospel is comparatively free from the demonic element. Possession is thrice alluded to (7:20 8:40 l(fi’) as a suggested explanation of Christ’s work and influence; but evil generally is traced back rather to the activity of the devil (6. where ‘a devil’ is not a demon, but the word is used metaphorically much as ‘Satan’ in Matthew 16. John 13:2, 27). whose subordinates fall into the background. The Synoptics, especially Lk., abound in references to demons, who are conceived, not as evil influences resting upon or working within a man, but as personal spirits besetting or even possessing him. The demon was said to enter into a man (Luke 8:30) or certain animals (Matthew 8:32). and to pass out (Matthew 17:18. Luke 11:14) or be cast out (Matthew 9:34). This demoniacal possession is referred to as the cause of various diseases, the cases being preponderantly such as exhibit symptoms of psychical disease in association with physical (see Possession). St. Paul and the other writers in the NT evidently shared the views underlying the Synoptics. Possession so called is a familiar phenomenon to them, as it continued to be in the early years of the Church, though there is a marked disposition towards the Johannine view of a central source of evil. St. Paul speaks of doctrines emanating from devils (1 Timothy 4:1. where the word should not be taken metaphorically). The devils of 1 Corinthians 10:20 were demi-gods or deposed idols. St. James recognizes the existence of a number of devils (2). whose independence ^f God is not complete. The Apocalypse (9:20 16:14 18) similarly speaks of a diverse and manifold activity, though again its derivation from a common source is frequent. In all these books the conception of devils seems to be giving way to that of the devil ; the former gradually lose any power of initiative or free action, and become the agents of a great spirit of evil behind them.

In the OT this process has advanced so far that the personal name Satan (wh. see) is used in the later books with some freedom, Asmodaeus occurring in the same sense in Tobit 3:8, 17. But in the NT the process is complete, and in every part the devil appears as a personal and almost sovereign spirit of evil, capable of such actions as cannot be explained away by the application of any theory of poetic or dramatic personification. It is he who tempted Christ (Matthew 4:1 ff.: Luke 4:2 ff.), ), and in the parables sowed the tares (Matthew 13:39) or snatched up the good seed (Luke 8:12; cf. ‘the evil one’ of Matthew 13:19) ; and for him and his angels an appropriate destiny is prepared (Matthew 25:41). According to Jn., the devil prompted the treason of Judas (13:2). ^j^^ j^ vicious in his lusts, a liar and a murderer (8). a sinner in both nature and act (1 John 3:8, 10). He prolongs the tribulation of the faithful who do not yield to him (Revelation 2:18) after his great fall (12:9) he is goaded by defeat into more venomous activity (v. 12). but eventually meets his doom (20:10). Jude preserves the tradition of a personal encounter with Michael; and St. Peter represents the devil as prowling about in search of prey (1 Peter 5:8). the standing adversary of man, baffled by Jesus (Acts 10). To St. James (4:7) the devil is an antagonist who upon resistance takes to flight. If ‘son of the devil’ (Acts 13:10) is metaphorical, St. Paul considers his snare (1 Timothy 3:7, 2 Timothy 2:26) and his wiles (Ephesians 6:11) real enough. To give opportunity to the devil (Eph 4:27) may lead to a share in his condemnation (1 Timothy 3:6). Death is his realm (Hebrews 2:14. Wisdom 2:24). and not a part of the original Divine order; though not inflicted at his pleasure, he makes it subservient to his purposes, and in its spiritual sense it becomes the fate of those who accept his rule. Such language, common to all the writers, and pervading the whole NT, allows no other conclusion than that the forces and spirits of evil were conceived as gathered up into a personal head and centre, whose authority they recognized and at whose bidding they moved.

This opinion is confirmed by the representation of the devil’s relation to men and to God, and by many phrases in which he is referred to under other names. He is the moral adversary of man (Matthew 13:39, Luke 10:19. Ephesians 4:27. 1 Peter 5:8). acting, according to the OT, with the permission of God (cf. Job l°-i2), though with an assiduity that shows the function to be congenial; but in the NT with a power of origination that is recognized, if watched and restrained. Hence he is called the ‘tempter’ (Matthew 4:3, 1 Thessalonians 3:5). and the ‘accuser’ of those who listen to his solicitation (Revelation 12:10). In hindering and harming men he stands in antithesis to Christ (2 Corinthians 6:15). and hence is fittingly termed the evil and injurious one (Matthew 6 13:19. John 17:15. Ephesians 6:16. 2 Thessalonians 3:3. 1 John 2 3:12 5:18 f. but in some of these passages it is open to contend that the word is not personal). Bent upon maintaining and spreading evil, he begins with the seduction of Eve (2 Corinthians 11:3) and the luring of men to doom (John 8:44). Death being thus brought by him into the world (Romans 5:12. Wisdom 2:24). by the fear 01" it he keeps men in bondage (Hebrews 2:14). He entices men to sin (1 Corinthians 7:5). as he enticed Jesus, though with better success, places every woful obstacle in the way of their trust in Christ (2 Corinthians 4:4). and thus seeks to multiply ‘the sons of disobedience’ (Ephesians 2:2). who may be rightly called his children (1 John 3:10). In the final apostasy his methods are unchanged, and his hostility to everything good in man becomes embittered and insatiable (2 Thessalonians 2:9 f.: Revelation 20:7 f.).

In regard to the devil’s relation to God, the degree of independence and personal initiative is less in the OT than in the NT, but nowhere is there anything like the exact co-ordination of the two. The representation is not that of a dualism, but of the revolt of a subordinate though superhuman power, patiently permitted for a time for wise purposes and then peremptorily put down. In Job 1 the devil associates himself with ‘the sons of God,’ and yet is represented as not strictly classed with them; he has the right of access to heaven, but his activity is subject to Divine consent. Another stage is marked in 1 Chronicles 21:1. where the statement of 2 Samuel 24:1 is modified as though the devil worked in complete and unshackled opposition to God. In the Book of Enoch he is the ruler of a kingdom of evil, over which kingdom, however, the Divine sovereignty, or at least suzerainty, stands. The NT preserves the conception in most of its parts. God and the devil are placed in antithesis (James 4:7) so ‘the power of darkness’ and ‘the kingdom of the Son of his love’ (Colossians 1:13). as though the two were entirely distinct. The devil is the prince and personal head of the demons (Mark 3:22). According to Jn., he is ‘the prince of this world’ (12:31). and Jesus is contrasted with him (8 18). and outside the sphere of his influence (14:30). St. Paul expresses similar views; the devil is ‘the god of this world’ or age (2 Co 4:4). ‘the prince of the power of the air’ (Ephesians 2:2). ruling over the evil spirits who are located in the sky or air (Luke 10:18. Eev 12:9; cf. ‘heavenly places,’ Ephesians 6:12). and who are graded in orders and communities much like the spirits of good (Ephesians 1:21). The dualism is so imperfect that Christ has but to speak and the demons recognize His superior authority. He is the stronger (Luke 11:22). and can even now, under the limitations of the moral probation of men, frustrate the devil’s designs (Luke 22:32). and destroy his works (1 John 3:8), and will eventually bring him to nought (Hebrews 2:14). Already the triumph is assured and partially achieved (John 16:11. 1 John 4:4). and Christians share in it (Ko 16). It becomes complete and final at the Parousia (1 Corinthians 15.

Psalms 110:1).

The personality of the devil must consequently be regarded as taught by Scripture. He is not conceived as the original or only source of evil, but as its supreme personal representative. His existence, like that of evil itself, may be ascribed to the permissive will of God, with analogous limitations in each case. The psychical researches of recent years have tended to confirm the belief in spiritual existences, good and bad, and thereby to reduce a fundamental difficulty, which would otherwise attach also in a degree to the belief in the Holy Spirit. And the tradition of a revolt and fall of angels has this in its favour, that it fits in with the belief in devils and the devil, and provides a partially intelligible account of circumstances under which such a belief might take shape. It supplies the preceding chapters in the history, and enables the career to be traced from the first stage of moral choice through the process of hardening of purpose and increasing separation from God to the appropriate abyss at the close. The devil thus becomes a type of every confirmed evil-doer: and the patience and the righteousness of God are alike exemplified. E. W. Moss.

Devoted

See Ban.

Dew

The process whereby dew is formed is enhanced in Eastern countries like Palestine, where the surface of the ground and the air in contact therewith are highly heated during the daytime, but where at night, and particularly under a cloudless sky, the heat of the ground is radiated into space and the air becomes rapidly cooled down. The excess of moisture in the air then gently ‘falls as dew on the tender herb,’ and sometimes so copiously as to sustain the life of many plants which would otherwise perish during the rainless season; or even, as in the case of Gideon, to saturate a fleece of wool (Judges 6). Deprivation of dew, as well as of rain, becomes a terrible calamity in the East. On this account ‘dew and rain’ are associated in the imprecation called down by David on the mountains of Gilboa (2 Samuel 1:21) and in the curse pronounced on Ahab and his kingdom by Elijah (1 Kings 17:1). as also by the prophet Haggai on the Jews after the Restoration (Haggai 1:10) owing to their unwillingness to rebviild the Temple. In the Book of Job the formation of dew is pointed to as one of the mysteries of nature insoluble by man (Job 38:28) but in Pr. it is ascribed to the omniscience and power of the Lord (Proverbs 3:20). Dew is a favourite emblem in Scripture: (a) richness and fertility (Genesis 27:28. Deuteronomy 33:13) (b) refreshing and vivifying effects (Deuteronomy 32:2. Isaiah 18:4) (c) stealth (2 Samuel 17:12) (d) inconstancy (Hosea 6:4 13:3) (e) the young warriors of the Messianic king (Psalms 110).

Diadem

See Crown, and Dkess, § 5.

Dial

Dial (2 Kings 20:11. Isaiah 38:8). The Heb. word commonly denotes ‘steps’ (see Exodus 20:26. 1 Kings 10:20). and is so rendered elsewhere in this narrative (2 Kings 20:9–11. Isaiah 38:8; AV ‘degrees’). The ‘steps’ referred to doubtless formed part of some kind of sun-clock. According to Herod, ii. 109, the Babylonians were the inventors of the -polos or concave dial, the gnomon, and the division of the day into 12 hours. The introduction by Ahaz of a device for measuring the time may be regarded as a result of his intercourse with the Assyrians (2 Kings 16:10 ff.). but it is uncertain what kind of clock is intended. See also art. Time.

Diamond

See Adamakt, and Jewels and Precious Stones.

Diana of the Ephesians

This name is really erroneous, and it is unfortunate that it has become popularized beyond possibility of correction. The goddess meant is Artemis. There were two conceptions of Artemis In ancient times: (1) the Greek maiden huntress, sister of Apollo; to this conception corresponds the Italian Diana; (2) the mother-goddess, the emblem of fertility, the fountain of nourishment, an Anatolian divinity, who was Grecized under the name of Artemis: this is the goddess referred to in Acts, and she has nothing to do with Diana, representing in fact a contrary idea. While Artemis (Diana) was represented in art attired as a huntress, with the bow and arrows, the Anatolian Artemis was represented with many breasts {muUimammia), and sometimes in company with two stags. In this form she was worshipped over the whole of Lydia, before Greeks ever settled there, and the same divine power of reproduction was worshipped under other names over most of the peninsula of Asia Minor. The rude idol preserved in her chief temple at Ephesus was said to have fallen from heaven (this is the real meaning of Acts 19:35). a not uncommon idea in ancient times, which suggests that such images were sometimes meteoric stones. The chief priest, who bore a Persian title, had under him a large company of priestesses. There was also a large body of priests, each appointed for a year, who seem to have been city ofBcials at the same time, and other bodies of ministers. The ritual was of the abominable character which it might be expected to have. The epithet ‘great’ (Acts 19:34) is proved by inscriptions to have been characteristically applied to the goddess, and the exclamation in Acts may have been really an invocation. The silver shrines (Acts 19:24) were small representations of the goddess within her shrine purchased by the rich. The poor bought them in terra-cotta or marble. Both classes dedicated them as offerings to the goddess, in whose temple they would be hung up. When the accumulation became too great, the priests cleared them away, throwing the terra-cotta or marble ones onto the rubbish heap, or into a hole, but securing the others>for the melting-pot. All those which survive are naturally in terra-cotta or marble. The goddess had so many worshippers (Acts 19:27) that the manufacture of such silver shrines was very profitable.

Diaspora

See Dispersion.

Diblah

An unknown place mentioned by Ezelciel (6"). A variant (prob. correct) reading is Biblah (wh. see). R. A. S. Macalistek.

Diblaim

The father of Gomer, Hosea’s wife (Hos 15). See HosEA.

Dibon

1 . A city east of the Dead Sea and north of the Arnon, in the land which, before the coming of the Israelites, Sihon, Idng of the Amorites, had talcen from a former king of Moab (Numbers 21:26, 30). The Israelites dispossessed Sihon, and the territory was assigned to Reuben (Joshua 13:9, 17). but the city Dibon is mentioned among those built (or rebuilt) by Gad (Numbers 32). hence the name Dibon-gab by which it is once called (Numbers 33:45). The children of Israel were not able to retain possession of the land, and in the time of Isaiah Dibon is reckoned among the cities of Moab (Isaiah 15). In Isaiah 15:9 DimoiL is supposed to be a modified form of Dibon, adopted in order to resemble more closely the Heb. word for blood (dam), and support the play on words in that verse. The modern name of the town is Dhiban, about half an hour N. of ‘Ara’ ir, which is on the edge of the Arnon Valley. It is a dreary and featureless ruin on two adjacent knolls, but has acquired notoriety in consequence of the discovery there of the Moabite Stone.

2. A town in Judah inhabited in Nehemiah’s time by some of the children of Judah (Nehemiah 11:25). Perhaps it is the same as Dimonah (Joshua 15:22) among the southernmost cities of Judah.

Dibri

A Danite, grandfather of the blasphemer who was stoned to death (Leviticus 24:11).

Dictionaries

1. Of the Bible.— Francis Roberts, Clams Bibliorum (1675); Kitto, Cydopoedia of Biblical Literature (3 vols. 1862); Fairbaim, Imperial Bible Dictionary (1864-66; new ed. 1888); Smith, Diet, of Bible (3 vols., 1860-63), 2nd ed. of vol. i. only (1899), also Concise Bible Diet, and Smaller Bible Diet.; R. Hunter, Concise Bible Diet. (Gassell, 1894) ; M. G. Easton, Bible Diet. (Nelson, 1894); J. Eadie, Biblical Cyclopwdia (new ed. by Sayce, 1901); C. R. Barnes, People’s Bible Encyc. (New York and Lond. 1900); J. D. Davis, Diet, of the Bible (Philad. 1898); Schaff, Religious Encydopcedia, or Dictionary of Biblical History, etc., based on Herzog’s PRE (3 vols., T. & T. Clark, 1883); M’ Clintock-Strong, Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological, and Eccles. Literature (10 vols, and 2 vols, suppl.. New York, 1871-1887); Herzog, RealencyklopUdie f. protest. Theol. und Kirche (18 vols., 1877-88; new ed. by Hauck, 1896 £E.); Zeller, Bibl. HaridwOrterbuch Ulustriert (1893); Riehm, Handworterbuch des bibl. Altertums’ (2 vols., 1893); Vigoroux, Diet, de la Bible (1895 ff.); Hamburger, Beolencyklopddie f. Bibd und Talmud (2 vols, and 3 supplements, 1875, 1892); Guthe, Kurzes BibdwOrterbuch (1903); Jewish Encyclopedia (12 vols., 1901-06); Cheyne & Black, Encydopcedia Biblica (4 vols., 1899-1903); Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (4 vols, with extra vol. and indexes, T. <fe T. Clark, 1898-1904), also Dictionary of Christ and the Gospds (2 vols., 1906-08).

2. Hebrew, Aramaic, Syrlac. — (a) Gesenius, Thesaurus PhUologicus Criticus Linguce Heb. et Chald. Vet. Test. (1829-42), alsoLexicon Manuale, tr. by E. Robinson (1836) and subsequently, with additions and corrections from the author’s Thesaurus and other works, by S. P. Tregelles (Bagster), Gesenius’ HandwSrterbuch, in Verbindung mit A. Socin und H. Zimmern, bearbeitet von F. Buhl, 13th ed. 1899; B. Davidson, Analytical Heb. Lexicon (do.); Fuerst, Heb. and Chald. Lex. to the OT, tr. by S. Davidson (Williams & Norgate); Siegfried-Stade, Heb. Worterbuch zum AT (Leipzig, 1893); Brown-Driver-Briggs, Heb. Lex. to OT (Oxford, 1906). (6) Levy, Neuheb, und Chald. WSrterbuch uber die Talmudim und Midraschim (4 vols., 1875-89): G. Dalman, Aram.-Neuheb. WOrterbuch zu, Targum, Talmud und Midrasch (1901). (c) Roediger, Chreslomathia Syriaca (1868); R. Payne Smith, Thesaurus Syriacus (continued by Margoliouth, 1879-1901); also A Compendious Syriac Diet., by J. Payne Smith [Mrs. MargoUouth] (Oxf. 1903); C. Brockelmann, Lex. Syriacum (T. & T. Clark, 1895).

3. Greek (esp. NT).— Liddell-Scott, Greek-English Lexicon; Robinson, Greek and English Lexicon of the NT; Cremer, Biblico-Theological Lex. of NT Oreek^ (T. & T. Clark), 3rd Germ. ed. 1881-1883; Analytical Gr. Lex. to NT (Bagster) ; Grimm-Thayer, Greek-English Lex. of the NT, being Grimm- Wilke’s Clavis NT revised and enlarged by Thayer (T. & T. Clark, 1888). Deissmann has a Lex. in hand.

Of the Dictionaries named above, the foil, are most accurate and up to date — (o)Biblb: Cheyne and Black, Encyc, Biblica; Hastings, Diet, of the Bible, Diet, of Christ and the Gospds, and the present work. (B) Hebrew, etc. : Brown-Driver-Briggs, Heb. Lex. ; Dalman, Aram.-Neuheb. Warterbuch; Margoliouth, Compend. Syr. Diet., or Brockelmann, Lex. Syr. (c) Greek: Cremer, Biblico-Theological Lex. of NT.; Thayer, Greek-Eng. Lex. of NT. W. F. Adeney and J. S. Banks.

DIDRACHMLA, Matthew 17:24 In marg. of EV; AV has ‘tribute money,’ RV correctly ‘half-shekel.’ See Money, § 7.

Didymus

See Thomas.

Diet

In AV, apart from Sirach 30:25. where it signifies ‘food,’ this word occurs only In Jeremiah 52:34. where RV has the more correct ‘allowance,’ i.e. of food, as AV in the parallel passage 2 Kings 25:30. In Jeremiah 40:5 the same word is rendered ‘victuals,’ but RVm ‘allowance.’

Diklah

The name of a son of Joktan (Genesis 10:27, 1 Chronicles 1:21). probably representing a nation or community. The names immediately preceding and following Diklab give no clue to its identification.

Delai

Delai f (Joshua 15:38). — A town of Judah, in the same group with Lachish and Eglon. The site is unknown.

DILL, — See Anise.

Dimnah

A Levltioal city in Zebulun (Joshua 21:35). The name is possibly a copyist’s error for Rimmon (rf. 1 Chronicles 6:22. Joshua 19:13).

Ddhon, Dimonah

See Dibon.

Dinah

The daughter of Jacob by Leah, and sister of Simeon and Levi, according to Genesis 30:21.

This verse appears to have been inserted by a late redactor

Serhaps the one who added the section Genesis 46 (cf. v. 15). [othing is said in 29:31 35:16 ff.: ■, where the birth stories of Jacob’s children are given, of other daughters of Jacob; but 37:35 (J) and 46:7 (P) speak of ‘all his daughters." P, moreover, clearly distinguishes between his daughters and his’ daughters-in-law.’

In Genesis 34 we have a composite narrative of the seizure of Dinah by the Hivite prince, Shechem, the son of Hamor. The probable remnants of J’s story make it appear that the tale, as it was first told, was a very simple one. Shechem took Dinah to his house and cohabited with her, and her father and brothers resented the defilement. Shechem, acting on his own behalf, proposed marriage, promising to accept any conditions of dower her father and brothers might impose. The marriage took place, and afterwards her full brothers, Simeon and Levi, slew Shechem and took Dinah out of his house. Jacob rebuked them for this, because of the vengeance it was liable to bring upon his house. Jacob thinks only of consequences here. If, as is generally supposed, Genesis 49:5 ff. refers to this act, the reprimand administered was based by him not upon the dread of consequences, but upon the turpitude of a cruel revenge. The remaining verses of ch. 34 make Hamor spokesman for his son. He not only offered generously to make honourable amends for Shechem’s misconduct, but also proposed a mutual covenant of general intercourse, including the connubium. Jacob and his sons see their opportunity for revenge, and refuse, except upon the one condition that all the males of the city be circumcised. When, as a result, the latter were unable to defend themselves, all the sons of Jacob fell upon them with the sword, sparing only the women and children, whom they took captive with the spoil of the city. The words ‘two of and’ Simeon and Levi, Dinah’s brethren’ in v. 25 are interpolated (ct. v.). This story is clearly an elaboration of the earlier form, despite its one or two more antique touches, and suggests, moreover, the spirit at work in Ezra’s marriage reforms.

The story, like many others, introduced aa episodes in the family history of Jacob, should probably receive a tribal interpretation. Simeon and Levi are tribes. Dinah was perhaps a small Israelite clan, according to the traditions closely related to Simeon and Levi; according to the name, possibly more closely to Dan. Schechem, the prince, is tne eponymous hero of the city of that name. Hamor is the name of the Hivite clan in possession of the city. The weak Israelite clan, having become detached from the related tribes, was overpowered by the Canaanite inhabitants of Shechem and incorporated. Simeon and Levi, by a wilily plotted and unexpected attack, hoped to effect ita deliverance. ‘They were momentarily successful, and inflicted a severe blow upon the Shechemites; but their temerity cost them their tribal existence. A counterattack of the Canaanites resulted immediately in the decimation of the tribe, and finally in the absorption of their remnants into the neighbouring tribes. The Dinah clan, disappeared at the same time. James A. Craig.

Dinaites

(Ezra 4:9). A people settled in Samaria by Osnappar (i.e. probably Ashurbanipal). They have been variously identified with the Da-ja-eni, a tribe of western Armenia, mentioned in inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser i.; and with the inhabitants of Deinaver, a Median city, or of Din-Sharru near Susa. The last view seems the most probable.

Dinhabah

The capital city of king Bela in Edom (Genesis 36:32 = 1 Chronicles 1:43). There is some doubt as to its identification. Possibly it is Thmib, E.N.E. from Heshbon.

Dihner

See Meals, § 2.

Dionysia

A feast in honour of Dionysus, another name of the god Bacchus (2 Maccabees 6:7). He was the god of tree-life, but especially of the life of the vine and its produce. The festival celebrated the revival of the drink-giving vine after the deadness of winter. It was accompanied by orgiastic excesses, themselves at once emblematic of, and caused by, the renewed fertility of the soil. The most famous festivals of Dionysus, four in all, were held in Attica at various periods of the year, corresponding to the stages in the life of the vine, the Anthesteria, the Lencm, the Lesser and the Greater Dionysia. The Lesser Dionysia was a vintage festival held in the country in December; the Greater Dionysia was held in the city, and it was in connexion with this that the tragedies and comedies were produced in the theatre of Dionysus. Attendance at these plays was an act of worship. In 2 Maccabees 6:7 we are told that Antiochus compelled the Jews to attend a festival of Dionysus, wearing wreaths of ivy, a plant sacred to the

god. A. SOUTER.

Dionysius the Areopagite

A member of the University Court of the Areopagus at Athens (Acts 17:34). converted by St. Paul. The writings ascribed to Dionysius are of a much later date. He is by some identified with St. Denys of France.

A. J. Maclean.

Dionysus

One of the various names applied to the god who is most commonly called Bacchus, It is probable that, to begin with, he was a god of vegetation in general, but as time went on he became identified with the vine exclusively. It is supposed that tills specialization originated in Thrace. Later still, the worship, under Assyrian and Babylonian influence, took the form of mysteries, like that of Demeter, the goddess of bread. Mythology speaks of a triumphal journey taken by the god in India. His worship was widely disseminated over Greek lands, and it was assumed that the Jews would have no objection to it (2 Maccabees 6:7 14:33). Ptolemy Philopator also attempted to force the worship of Dionysus, the god of his family, upon the Jews (3 Maccabees 2:29). A. Soutek.

Dioscorinth

Dioscorinth rUS.— See Time.

Dioscuri

Dioscuri (RVm), or The Twin Brothers (RV), or Castor and Pollux (AV). — The sign or figurehead of the Alexandrian ship in which St. Paul sailed from Malta (Acts 28:11). perhaps one of those employed to bring corn to Rome. The Twins (Gemini) were the protectors of sailors; in mythology they were sons of Zeus and Leda, and were placed in the sky as a constellation for their brotherly love. A. J. Maclean.

DIOTREPHES, — A person, otherwise unknown, who is introduced in 3 John (vv. 9, 10) as ambitious, resisting the writer’s authority, and standing in the way of the hospitable reception of brethren who visited the Church.

Difhath

Difhath occurs in RV and AVm of 1 Chronicles 1:6. but it is practically certain that AV Biphath (wh. see) is the correct reading.

Disallow

1 Peter 2:4. ‘a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God’ ; 2’, ‘the stone which the builders disallowed.’ The Eng. word means emphatically disoumed, as in the AV heading to 1 Samuel 29, • David, marching with the Philistines, is disallowed by their princes.’ RV gives ‘rejected,’ as the same Gr. verb is rendered in Matthew 21:42. Mark 8:31. Luke 17:25. But in Numbers 30:5, 8, 11 ‘disallow’ means no more than disapprove, as in Barlowe’s Dialogue, p. 83, ‘ye can not fynde that they be dysalowed of God, but rather approved.’

Disciples

In the ancient world every teacher had his company of disciples or learners. The Greek philosophers and the Jewish Rabbis had theirs, and John the Baptist had his (Mark 2:18 ‘the disciples of John and the disciples of the Pharisees’; cf. John 1:35. Matthew 14:12). In like manner Jesus had His disciples. The terra had two applications, a wider and a narrower. It denoted (1) all who believed in Him, though they remained where He had found them, pursuing their former avocations, yet rendering no small service to His cause by confessing their allegiance and testifying to His grace (cf. Luke 6:13 19:37. John 4:1 &‘"■ "). (2) The inner circle of the Twelve, whom He called’ Apostles,’ and whom He required to forsake their old lives and follow Him whithersoever He went, not merely that they might strengthen Him by their sympathy (cf. Luke 22:28). but that they might aid Him in His ministry (Matthew 9:37 10). and, above all, that they might be trained by daily intercourse and discipline to carry forward the work after Hebrews 8. These were ‘the disciples’ par excdlence (Matthew 10:1 12:1, 49 15:23, 32. Mark 8:27. Luke 8:9. John 11:7 12:4 16:17, 29). See also Apostles. David Smith.

Discover

In AV ‘discover’ is used in some obsolete meanings. 1. To uncover, make to be seen, as Knox, Hi^t. p. 250, ‘who rashly discovering himself in the Trenches, was shot in the head.’ So Psalms 29:9. ‘The voice of the Lord . . . discovereth the forests,’ and other passages. 2. To disclose, as Shakespeare, Merry Wives, II. ii. 190, ‘I shall discover a thing to you.’ So Proverbs 25:9. ‘discover not a secret to another,’ etc. 3. To descry, get sight of, as Acts 21:3. ‘When we had discovered Cyprus, we left it on the left hand’; 27:39 ‘they discovered a certain creek.’

Discus

See Games.

Disease

See Medicine.

Dish

See Charger; House, § 9; Meals, § 6; and Tabernacle, § 6 (a).

Dishan

A son of Seir, Genesis 36 = ! Ch 1.

Dishon

1. A son of Seir (Genesis 36:21 = 1 Chronicles 1:38). 2. A son of Anah and grandson of Seir (Genesis 36:25, cf . v. = 1 Chronicles 1:41 ; Dishon should also be read for MT Dishan in Genesis 36:26). Dishan and Dishon are, of course, not individual names, but the eponyms of Horite clana. Their exact location is a matter of uncertainty.