Evil Spirits – Ezekias

Evil Spirits

As a natural synonym for demons or devils, this phrase is used in the NT only by St. Luke (7" 82, Acts 19:12, 13, 14. i«), and presents no difflculty. But In the OT, especially the historical books, reference is made to an evil spirit as coming from or sent by God; and the context invests this spirit with personality. The treachery of the men of Shechem is so explained (Judges 9). though in this case the spirit may not be personal but merely a temper or purpose of ill-will. Elsewhere there is not the same ground for doubt: ‘an evil spirit from the Lord’ is the alleged cause of Saul’s moodiness (1 Samuel 16:14, where notice the antithetical ‘the spirit of the Lord’), and of his raving against David (1 Samuel 18:10 19:9). Similarly Micaiah speaks of ‘a lying spirit’ from God (1 Kings 22:21–23. 2 Oh IS’"-^). It has been suggested that in all these cases the reference Is to God Himself as exerting power, and effecting good or evil in men according to the character of each. The nearest approach to this is perhaps in Exodus 12. where Jehovah and the destroyer are apparently identified, though the language admits equally of the view that the destroyer is the agent of Jehovah’s will (cf. 2 Samuel 24:16). But the theory is inconsistent with what is known to have been the current demonology of the day (see Devil), as well as with the natural suggestion of the phrases. These spirits are not represented as constituting the personal energy of God, but as under His control, which was direct and active according to some of the writers, but only permissive according to others. The fact of God’s control is acknowledged by all, and is even a postulate of Scripture; and in using or permitting the activity of these spirits God is assumed or asserted to be punishing people for their sins. In this sense He has ‘a band of angels of evil’ (Psalms 78:49), who may yet be called ‘angels of the Lord’ (2 Kings 19:35, Isaiah 37:36). as carrying out His purposes. Micaiah evidently considered Zedekiah as used by God in order to entice Ahab to his merited doom. Ezekiel propounds a similar view (14:9). that a prophet may be deceived by God, and so made the means of his own destruction and of that of his dupes, much as David was moved to number Israel through the anger of the Lord against the people (2 S24i). As the conception of God developed and was purified, the permitted action of some evil spirit is substituted for the Divine activity, whether direct or through the agency of messengers, considered as themselves ethically good but capable of employment on any kind of service. Accordingly the Chronicler represents Satan as the instigator of David (1 Chronicles 21:1). Jeremiah denies the inspiration of lying prophets, and makes them entirely responsible for their own words and influence (23); they are not used by God, and will be called to account. They speak out of their own heart, and are so far from executing God’s justice or anger upon the wicked that He interposes to check them, and to protect men from being misled.

An evil spirit, therefore, wherever the phrase occurs in a personal sense in the earher historical books of the OT, must be thought of simply as an angel or messenger of God, sent for the punishment of evil (cf. 1 Samuel 19:9 RVm). His coming to a man was a sign that God’s patience with him was approaching exhaustion, and a prelude of doom. Gradually the phrase was diverted from this use to denote a personal spirit, the ‘demon’ of the NT margin, essentially evil and working against God, though powerless to withdraw entirely from His rule. R. W. Moss.

EXCELLENCT,EXCELLENT.-These English words are used for a great variety of Heb. and Gr. expressions, a complete list of which will be found In Driver’s Daniel (Camb. Bible). The words (from Lat. exceUo, ‘to rise up out of,’ ‘surpass’) formerly had the meaning of preeminenceand pre-emiTient, and were thus good equivalents for the Heb. and Gr. expressions. But since 1611 they have become greatly weakened; and, as Driver says, ‘it is to be regretted that they have been retained in RV in passages in which the real meaning is something so very different.’ The force of ‘excellency’ may be clearly seen in the margin of AV at Genesis 4:7. where ‘have the excellency’ is suggested for ‘be accepted’ in the text; or the marg. at Ec. 2:13. where instead of ‘wisdom excelleth folly’ is suggested ‘there is an excellency in wisdom more than in folly.’ In Daniel 1:20 it is said that ‘in all matters of wisdom and understanding, that the king inquired of them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and astrologers that were in all his realm’; and this is summed up in the heading of the chapter in the words, ‘their excellency in wisdom.’ The force of ‘excellent,’ again, may be seen from the table in Hamilton’s Catechism, ‘Of the pre-eminent and excellent dignitie of the Paternoster’; or from Sir John Mandeville, Travds, p. 1, ‘the Holy Land, . . . passing all other lands, is the most worthy land, most excellent, and lady and sovereign of all other lands.’

Exchanger

See Money-Changer.

Excommunication

In the OT the sentence against those who refused to part with their ‘strange’ wives (Ezra 10:8) — ‘his substance shall be confiscated and he himself separated’ — is the earliest instance of ecclesiastical excommunication. This was a milder form of the ancient Heb. cittern, curse or ban, which in the case of man involved death (Leviticus 27:29). and devotion or destruction in the case of property. The horror of this curse or clwrem hangs over the OT (Mai 4:6. Zee 14:11). Anathema, the LXX equivalent of chSrem (e.g. in Deuteronomy 7:26, Joshua 6:17. Numbers 21). appears in 1 Corinthians 16:22 ‘It any love not the Lord, let him be anathema’ (which refers, as does also Galatians 1:8. to a permanent exclusion from the Church and doubtless from heaven), and in 1 Corinthians 12 ‘No one speaking in the Spirit of God says, Jesus is anathema,’ i.e. a chjirem or cursed thing under the ban of God. Here there may be a reference to a Jewish brocard which afterwards gave rise to the Jewish tradition that Jesus was excommunicated by the Jews. The forms said to be in vogue in His day were: (1) niddui, a short sentence of thirty days; (2) cKlrem, which involved loss of all religious privileges for a considerable time; (3) shammjitta, complete expulsion or aquae et ignis interdictio. This last form, however, lacks attestation.

References in the NT to some form of Jewish procedure are: John 9:22 12 16:2. Luke 6:22. Matthew 18:15–17 may be a reference to some Jewish procedure that was taken over by the Church. It mentions admonition: (1) in private, (2) In the presence of two or three witnesses, (3) in the presence of the Church. The sentence ‘let him be to thee as the heathen and the publican’ involved loss of social and spiritual privileges (cf. Titus 3:10). 1 Corinthians 5:4 shows a formal assembly met ‘in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ’ to deliver one guilty of incest unto Satan, for the destruction of the flesh. The purpose of the punishment, ‘that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord’ (v. 5) — is remedial, and shows that the sentence is not a life one, as anathema seems to be (cf. 1 Timothy 1:20, where Hymenaeus and Alexander are delivered to Satan, that they may be taught not to blaspheme). The Gr. word exarate, ‘remove,’ used in 1 Corinthians 5:13. suggests ara, which means both ‘curse’ and ‘prayer.’ In this case, at all events, the curse was intended to lead to penitence and prayer. 2 Corinthians 2 seems to refer to a different case. Here the censure or punishment was given by ‘the majority’ without Paul’s intervention, as in 1 Corinthians 5:4; the purpose of his writing here is ‘that your (vJ.’ our’) care for us (,v.l. ‘you’) might be made manifest in the sight of God’; but there he writes for the man’s sake; here the sinner is discussed with leniency, there the case is stated with due severity. If the case be a new one, it shows a growing independence of the Christian communities, and also that the Corinthians had received a salutary lesson. The phrase ‘lest an advantage should be gained over us by Satan’ (2 Corinthians 2:11) refers to the term of excommunication which St. Paul wished to end, lest the punishment should defeat its end and lead to ruin instead of recovery, and so Satan should hold what was only, metaphorically speaking, lent to him to hurt. In 2 Thessalonians 3:14, 15 the Apostle orders an informal and less severe excommunication of those who obey not his word. Its purpose, too, is remedial: ‘that he may be ashamed.’ St. John (2 Jn orders a similar form, and 3 Jn ‘■ describes the manner in which Diotrephes receives neither him nor the brethren, does not permit others to receive them, and casts them out of the Church — the first instance of one party in the Christian Church excommunicating another for difference of doctrine. The loss of social and spiritual intercourse was intended to lead, in such cases, to recantation of opinions, as in others to repentance for sin.

F. R. Montgomery Hitchcock.

Exile

See Isba^l, I. 23.

Ezodus

The book relates the history of Israel from the death of Joseph to the erection of the Tabernacle in the second year of the Exodus. In its present form, however, it is a harmony of three separate accounts.

1. The narrative of P. which can be most surely distinguished, is given first.

Beginning with a list of the sons of Israel (1’-^), it briefly relate the oppression (!’■ "‘■ 2^-^, and describes the call of Moses^ which takes place in Egypt, the revelation of the name Jahweh, and the appointment of Aaron (C’-?^‘) . The plagues (7"-, zi"- s"- 8*-‘- ‘"‘-i" Q’-‘^ 11"), which are wrought by Aaion.f orm a trial of strength with Pharaoh’s magicians. "The last plague introduces directions for the Passover, the feast of uiileavened bread, the sanctification of the firstborn, and the annual Passover (12i-m- 28- 13^‘-). Hence emphasis is laid, not on the blood-sprinkling, but on the eating, which was the perpetual feature.

The route to the Red Sea (which gives occasion to a statement about the length of the sojourn. 12"") is represented as deliberately chosen in order that Israel and Egypt may witness Jahweh’s power over Pharaoh {12?’‘13^ li^-^). When Moses stretches out his hand, the waters are miraculously divided and restored (14"- "■• ‘">-"■ 2i«- ‘"■

£6. S7a. 26a. 1519),

Between the Red Sea and Sinai the names of some halting places are given (16’-‘IT"" IQ^‘).- Ch. 16 is also largely (w.«-u«- JS-M. 31-M) from P. But the mention of the ‘Tabernacle in v.** proves the story to belong to a later date than the stay at Sinai, since the Tabernacle was not in existence before Sinai. Probably the narrative has been brought into its present position by the editor.

On the arrival at Sinai, Jahweh’s glory appears in a fiery cloud on the mountain. As no priests have been consecrated, and the people must not draw near, Moses ascends alone to receive the tables of the testimony (24’^!’-""‘) written by Jahweh on both sides. He remains (probably for 40 days) to receive plans for a sanctuary, with Jahweh’s promise to meet with Israel (in the Tent of Meeting) and to dwell with Israel (in the Tabernacle) (26i-31i8& 32’6). He returns (3428-m), deposits the teBtimony in an ark he has caused to be prepared, and constructs the Tabernacle(36-40) . The differing order in the plans as ordered and as executed, and the condition of the text in the LXX, prove that these sections tmderwent alterations before reaching their present form.

This account was evidently written for men who were otherwise acquainted with the leading facts of the history. It is dominated by two leading interests: (1 ) to insist in its own way that everything which makes Israel a nation is due to Jahweh, so that the religion and the history are interwoven; (2) to give a history of the origins, especially of the ecclesiastical institutions, of Israel.

2. The narrative of JE.— The rest of the book is substantially from JE, but it is extremely difficult to distinguish J from E. For (1) with the revelation of the name of Jahweh, one of our criteria, the avoidance of this name by E disappears; (2) special care has been taken to weld the accounts of the law-giving together, and it is often difficult to decide how much is the work of the editor. We give the broad lines of the separation, but remark that in certain passages this must remain tentative.

A. Israel in Egypt.

According to J, the people are cattle-owners , living apart in Goshen, where they increase so rapidly as to alarm Pharaoh (l^- ^-iz). Moses, after receiving his revelation and commission m Mldian (2" -22 S^-^a- 5- 7t. I6-20 41-16. 19. 20.. 24.26a. 29-81)^ dcmands from Pharaoh liberty to depart three days’ journey to sacrifice (5^- On Pharaoh’s refusal, the plagues, which are natural calamities brought by Jahweh, and which are limited to Egypt, follow Moses’ repeated announcement (7"- "■ ^s- 2i»- 8^-* b-i6»

20_97. 13-35 IQl-n. 13b. Mb. 16a. 15c-lB. M-26. 28f. H4-8V Iq connexion with the Passover (12^-27), blood-sprinkling, not eating, is insisted on. The escape is hurried (2fl-M. 37-‘9). and so a historical meaning is attached to the use of unleavened bread (IS^-^^ [based on J]).

According to E, the people live among the Egyptians as royal pensioners and without cattle. Their numbers are so small that two midwives suffice for them (iio-soa. 2i(.) , Moses (2^ 1"), whose father-in-law is Jethro (30. receives his revelation (3^- ^ii) and commission (4"‘- "‘■). Obeying, he demands that Israel be freed (5"- in order to worship their God on this mountain — a greater distance than three days* journey. E’s account of the plagues has survived merely in fragments, but from these it would appear that Moses speaks only once to Pharaoh, and that the plagues follow his mere gesture while the miraculous element is heightened (7^^- i">- ^ob. 23 922-35 1012. isn. Ma. 15b. 20-23. 27). The IsraeHtes. however, have no immunity except from the darkness. The Exodus is deliberate, since the people have time to borrow from their neighbours (IV-^ 1235f-).

B. The Exodus.

According to J, an unarmed host is guided by the pillar of fire and cloud (13^^-). Pharaoh pursues to recover his slaves (14^f), and when the people are dismayed, Moses encourages them (I4i*‘-"- i^^b. zob.y g^^t wind drives back the water, so that the Israelites are able to cross during the night (142ib- m- ssb. 27b. 28f. aot,)^ but the water returns to overwhelm the Egyptians. Israel offers thanks in a hymn of praise (^160 ; but soon in the wilderness tempts Jahweh by murmunng for water (w.^^-sfia. 27 173. 2b. 7),

According to E, an armed body march out in so leisurely a fashion that they are able to bring Joseph’s bones. For fear of the Philistines they avoid the route of the isthmus (1317-19). Pharaoh pursues (149»- i’‘i>). but the people, protected by an angel, cross when Moses lifts his rod (vv.wb. 16a. 19a. 20a. Bfia. 20). The women celebrate the escape (IS^-^^- and in the wilderness Jahweh tests Israel, whether they can live on a daily provision from Him (16*- "a. i9a. i«a. i9b-2i. a6a). Water, for which the>^ murmur, is brought by Moses striking the rock with hia rod (17*‘‘- 5^). Jethro visits and advises Moses (ch. 18 [in the main from E]). The condition of the account of the journey between the Red Sea and Sinai, and the fact that events of a later date have certainly come into P’s account, make it likely that JE had very little on this stage, the account of which was amplified with material from the wilderness journey after Sinai.

C. At Sinai [here the accounts are exceptionally difficult to disentangle, and the results correspondingly tentative].

According to J, Jahweh descends on Sinai in fire ( 192’>‘i^), and commands the people to remain afar ofif, while the consecrated priests approach (w."**- 20-22. 24f.), Aaron, Nadab, Aoihu, and 70 elders ascend (24") and celebrate a covenant feast (w.^-"). Moses then goes up alone to receive the Ten Words on tables which he himselfhas hewn, and remaining 40 days and 40 nights receives also the Book of the Covenant (ch. 34) [J’s statement as to the 40 days has been omitted in favour of E’s, but its presence in his account can be inferred from references_ in 34^- Ch. 34 is also inserted at this point, because its present position is eminently unsuitable after the peremptory conimand in J and E to leave Sinai (32" 33’-‘) . Hearing from Jahweh of the rebellion (327-12- u\ Moses intercedes for forgiveness, and descends to quell the revolt with help from the Levites (W.2&-29). He further intercedes that Jahweh should still lead His people, and obtains a promise of the Divine presence (33’- ‘• ‘2-23). This was probably followed by Numbers 128: The Law he deposits in an ark which must already have been prepared.

J’s law (ch. 34) is the outcome of the earliest effort to embody the essential observances of the Jahweh religion. The feasts are agricultural festivals without the historical significance given them in Deuteronomy, and the observances are of a ceremonial character, for, according to J, it is the priests who are summoned to Sinai. Efforts have been frequently made (since Goethe suggested it) to prove that this is J’s decalogue — a ceremonial decalogue. Any division into 10 laws, however, has always an artificial character.

According to E, Jahweh descends in a cloud before the whole people (19’-‘‘*), whom Moses therefore sanctifies(w.’^-"). They hear Jahweh utter the Decalogue (v. 19 20:1–17). but, as they are afraid (20:18–21). the further revelation with its covenant is delivered to Moses alone (20:22 in part). The people, however, assent to its terms (24:3–8). Moses ascends the Mount with Joshua to receive the atone tables, on which Jahweh has inscribed the Decalogue (24:12–15), and remains 40 days (v. 185) to receive further commands. He returns with the tables (31). to discover and deal with the outbreak of idolatry (32) On his intercession he receives a promise of angelic guidance (w.’""‘^). From verses in ch. 33 (w.*- which belong to E and from Deuteronomy 10:3, 5 (based on E), this account related the making of an ark and Tent of Meeting, the latter adorned with the people’s discarded ornaments. When JE was combined with P. this narrative, beingsuperfluous alongside 25 ff., was omitted.

E’s account thus contains three of the four collections of laws found in Exodus, for 21-23 consists of two codes, a civil (21:1) and a ceremonial (22:17 [roughly]). Probably the ceremonial section was originally E’s counterpart to ch. 34 in J, while the civil section may have stood in connexion with ch. 18. As it now stands, E is the prophetic version of the law-giving. The basis of the Jahweh religion is the Decalogue with its clearly marked moral and spiritual character. (Cf. art. Deuteronomy.) This is delivered not to the priests (like ch. 34 in J), but to the whole people. When, however, the people shrink back, Moses, the prophetic intermediary, receives the further law from Jahweh. Yet the ceremonial and civil codes have a secondary place, and are parallel. The Decalogue, a common possession of the whole nation, with its appeal to the people’s moral and rehgious sense, is fundamental. On it all the national institutions, whether civil or ceremonial, are based. Civil and ceremonial law have equal authority and equal value. As yet, however, the principles which inform the Decalogue are not brought into conscious connexion with the codes which control and guide the national life. The Book of Deuteronomy proves how at a later date the effort was made to penetrate the entire legislation with the spirit of the Decalogue, and to make this a means by which the national life was guided by the national faith.

The following view of the history of the codes is deserving of notice. E before its union with J contained three of these codes: the Decalogue as the basis of the Covenant; the Book of the Covenant, leading up to the renewal of the Covenant; and the Book of Judgments, which formed part of Moses’ parting address on the plains of Moab. The editor who combined J and E, wishing to retain J’s veraion of the Covenant, used it for the account of the renewal of the Covenant, and united E’s Book of the Covenant, thus displaced, with the Decalogue as the basis of the firat Covenant. The editor who combined JE with D, displaced E’s Book of Judgments in favour of Deuteronomy, which he made Moses’ parting address; and combined the displaced Book of Judgments with the Book of the Covenant. The view represented in the article, however, explains the phenomena adequately, is much simpler, and requires fewer hypotheses. A. C. Welch.

Exorcism

The word may be defined as denoting the action of expelling an evil spirit by the performance of certain rites, including almost always the invocation of a reputedly holy name. An anticipation of the later methods occurs in David’s attempt to expel Saul’s melancholia by means of music (1 Samuel 16:16, 23) and in the perception of the benefit of music may possibly be found the origin of the incantations that became a marked feature of the process. A more complicated method is prescribed by the angel Raphael (Tobit 6 8:2). In NT times the art had developed; professional exorcists had become numerous (Acts 19:13, 19), whilst other persons were adepts, and practised as occasion needed (Matthew 12:27. Luke 11:19). An old division of the Babylonian religious literature (ef. Cuneif. Texts from Tablets in Brit. Mus., pts. xvi., xvii.) contains many specimens of incantations: and the connexion of the Jews with that country, especially during the Exile, is an obvious explanation of the great extension both of the conception of the influence of demons and of the means adopted for their treatment. Exorcism was a recognized occupation and need In the Jewish life of the first century, as it became afterwards in certain sections of the Christian Church.

In the procedure and formulae of exorcism, differences are traceable in the practice of the Jews, of Christ, and of His disciples. An illustration of the Jewish method may be found in Josephus {Ant. vm. ii. 5), who claims Solomon for its author, and describes a case that he had himself witnessed. Other instances occur in the papyri (e.ff. Dieterich, AbraiMS, 138ff.), and in the Talmud {e.g. Berakhoth, 51a; Pesachim, 1126). The vital part of the procedure was the invocation of a name (or a series of names, of a deity or an angel, at the mention of which the evil spirit was supposed to recognize the presence of a superior power and to decline a combat, as though a spell had been put upon him. Christ, on the other hand, uses no spell, but in virtue of His own authority bids the evil spirits retire, and they render His slightest word unquestioning obedience. Sometimes He describes. Himself as acting ‘by the finger of God’ (Luke 11:20) ‘by the Spirit of God’ (Matthew 12:28). and sometimes His will is indicated even without speech (Luke 13:13, 16) but the general method is a stem or peremptory command (Matthew 8:16, Mark 1:25 9:25. Luke 8:29). He does not require any previous preparation on the part of the sufferer,.,though occasionally (Mark 9:23 f.) He uses the incident to exicite faith on the part of the relatives. His own personality, His mere presence on the scene, are enough to alarm the evil spirits and to put an end to their mischief. In the case of His disciples, the power to exorcise was given both before and after the resurrection (Matthew 10:1, 8, Mark 3:15 16:17, Luke 9:1). and was successfully exercised by them (Mark 6:13, Luke 10:17, Acts 5:16 8:7 19:12) but the authority was derived, and on that ground, if not by explicit command (cf. ‘in my name,’ Mark 16:17). the invocation of the name of Jesus was probably substituted for His direct command. That was clearly the course adopted by St. Paul (Acts 16 19), as by St. Peter and the Apostles generally in other miracles (Acts 3:6 4:10. James 5:14). The name of Jesus was not recited as a spell, but appealed to as the source of all spiritual power, as not only the badge of discipleship but the name of the ever-present Lord of spirits and Saviour of men (Matthew 28:19 f.; John 14:13). R. W. Moss.

Expect

‘From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool’ (Hebrews 10:13). that is. waiting. In the Douai Bible the comment on Sirach 11:8 is: ‘Expect the end of another man’s speech before you begin to answer. Expect also if anie that is elder, or better able, wil answer first.’

Exferienge

This word, which plays so large a part in modern philosophy and religion, occurs 4 times (including ‘experiment’) in EV. 01 these instances only one survives in RV, viz., Ecclesiastes 1, where ‘hath had great experience of’ = ‘hath seen much of (wisdom),’ etc. In Genesis 30:27 ‘I have learnt by experience ‘( =’ experiment’) becomes " I have divined,’ the Heb. vb. being the same as in Genesis 44. Deuteronomy 18:10. In Romans 5:4 (RV ‘probation’)’ experience,’ and in 2 Corinthians 9:13 (RV ‘proving’) ‘experiment.’ was the rendering of a Gr. word borrowed from the assaying of metal, which signified the testing, or test, of personal worth ; ttie same noun appears in AV as ‘trial’ (RV ‘proof’) in 2 Corinthians 2:9 8:2. and ‘proof in 2 Corinthians 13 and Philippians 2:22.’ Christian experience,’ in modern phraseology, covers what is spoken of in Scripture as the knowledge of God, of Christ, etc., and as ‘the seal’ or ‘witness (testimony) of the Holy Spirit,’ ‘of our conscience,’ etc., or as peace, assurance, salvation, and the like. Cf. next article. G. G. Findlay.

Experiment

In 2 Corinthians 9 ‘experiment’ means proof: ‘by the experiment of this ministration they glorify God.’ It is proof arising out of experience, as in Hall, Works, ill. 467: ‘We have known, indeed, some holy souls, which out of the generall precepts of piety, and their own happy experiments of God’s mercy, have, through the grace of God. grown to a great measure of perfection this way; which yet might have been much expedited and compleated, by those helps which the greater illumination and experience of others might have afforded them.’ Cf. preced. article.

Eye

The eye was supposed to be the organ or window by which light had access to the whole body (Matthew 6:22). For beauty of eyes cf. 1 Samuel 16:12 [RVm], Song of Songs 1:15 5:12. and the name Dorcas in Acts 9:36; in Genesis 29:17 the reference seems to be to Leah’s weak eyes (so Driver, ad loc). The wanton or alluring eyes of women are referred to in Proverbs 6:25. Isaiah 3:16. Their beauty was intensified by painting, antimony being used for darkening the eyelashes (2 Kings 9:30. Jeremiah 4:30. Ezekiel 23:40 [all RV]‘). Keren-happuch (Job 42:14) means’ horn of eyepaint.’ Proverbs 23:29 speaks of the drunkard’s redness of eye. In Deuteronomy 6:8 14:1 ‘between the eyes’ means ‘on the forehead.’ Shaving the eyebrows was part of the purification of the leper (Leviticus 14:9).

‘Eye’ is used in many figurative phrases: as the avenue of temptation (Genesis 3:6. Job 31:1) of spiritual knowledge and blindness, as indicating feelings — pride (2 Kings 19:22). favour [especially God’s providence (Ps 33)), hostility (Psalms 10:8). An evil eye implies envy (Mark 7:22; of. 1 g 18. the only use of the verb in this sense in English) or niggardliness (Deuteronomy 15:9. Pr 28:22. and probably Matthew 6:22. where the ‘single eye’ may mean ‘liberality’; cf. Proverbs 22:9). In Genesis 20:16 ‘covering of the eyes’ means ‘f orgetf ulness of what has happened.’ In Revelation 3:18 eye-salve or collyrium is a Phrygian powder mentioned by Galen, for which the medical school at Laodicea seems to have been famous. (See Ramsay, Seven Churches.) The reference is to the restoring of spiritual vision. C. W. Emmet.

Ezbai

The father of Naarai, one of David’s mighty men (1 Chronicles 11).

Ezbon

1. Eponym of a Gadite family (Genesis 46:16). called in Numbers 26:16 Ozni. 2. A grandson of Benjamin (1 Chronicles 7:7).

Ezekias

1. (AV Ezechias) 1 Esdras 9:14 = Jahzeiah. Ezra 10. 2. (AV Ezecias 1 Esdras 9:43, called Hilkiah in Nehemiah 8:4.