Dig – Discus

Dig

(qur, "to dig", chathar; diorusso, "to dig through"): "I have digged (dug) and drunk strange waters" (2 Kings 19:24). In his campaigns on foreign soil, where the enemy had stopped up the watersprings, Sennacherib would at once dig fresh wells for his armies. "They dig through houses" (Job 24:16; Matthew 6:19,Matthew 6:20 margin). Walls of eastern houses are often made of mud or clay, and frequently have no windows; and as the threshold of a Syrian house is sacred, the thief breaks in through the wall (see Trumbull, The Threshold Covenant).

M. O. Evans

Dignities; Dignity

dig'-ni-tiz, dig'-ni-ti (Hebrew marom, se'eth, gedhullah): Rank or position, not nobility or austerity of personal character or bearing, is denoted by this word in its Old Testament occurrences (Genesis 49:3; Esther 6:3; Ecclesiastes 10:6; Habakkuk 1:7). In 2 Peter 2:10; Jude 1:8, "dignities" (doxai) are angels, lofty spiritual beings, possible objects of blasphemy; compare the context in both passages.

Dike

di'-ke (dike, "justice"): The avenging justice of God personified as a goddess (Acts 28:4). See JUSTICE.

Diklah

dik'-la (diqlah, "place of palms"): One of the "sons" of Joktan (Genesis 10:27; 1 Chronicles 1:21). Perhaps a south-Arabian tribal or place-name connected with a palm-bearing district.

Dilean

dil'-e-an (dil`an, "cucumber"): A town in the Shephelah of Judah named with Migdal-gad and Mizpeh (Joshua 15:38, the English Revised Version "Dilan"), which lay probably on the North of Lachish and Eglon. It has not been identified.

Diligence; Diligent; Diligently

dil'-i-jens, dil'-i-jent-li: This word is used in various senses in our English Bibles.

1. In the Old Testament:

In Ezra 5:8, "with diligence" means "with care"; in Ezra 6:12; Ezra 7:17, "with speed," "speedily"; in Proverbs 4:23 "watchfulness"; in Deuteronomy 4:9; Deuteronomy 6:17; Deuteronomy 19:18; Psalms 77:6; Proverbs 27:23; Isaiah 55:2; Micah 7:3, "with care," "scrupulously," "earnestly." Sometimes it means "early" "with haste" (Job 8:5; Proverbs 8:17). It may mean "industrious," "exacting" (Proverbs 10:4; Proverbs 12:27; Proverbs 22:29).

2. In the New Testament:

The American revisers have rendered "diligence" for various words in the King James Version, e. g. for "business" in Romans 12:11; "giving diligence" for "endeavoring" (Ephesians 4:3); "give diligence" for "study" (2 Timothy 2:15,), for "labor" (Hebrews 4:11); "diligently" for "carefully" (Philippians 2:28; Hebrews 12:17); "be diligent in" for "meditate upon" (1 Timothy 4:15). It is well also to remember that the Old English meaning of diligence is "with love," from diligo, "to love."

G. H. Geberding

Dill

See ANISE.

Diminish

di-min'-ish: the Revised Version (British and American) has retained nearly all passages of the King James Version where "to diminish" is used. Some of these uses have become obsolete: Deuteronomy 4:2, "neither shall ye diminish from it." "Diminish" generally means "to reduce," "to lessen." In this sense it is employed in Ezekiel 5:11 from the Hebrew gara`, literally, "to shear." The picture of shearing the beard, expressing degradation and loss of manhood, may underlie this passage.

Dimnah

dim'-na (dimnah, "dung"; Damna): A city of the Merarite Levites in the territory of Zebulun (Joshua 21:35). The name is probably a clerical error for Rimmon.

Dimon; Dimonah

di'-mon, di-mo'-na. See DIBON.

Dinah

di'-na (dinah, "justice"): The daughter of Jacob and Leah, whose violation by Shechem, son of Hamor, caused her brothers, especially Simeon and Levi, to slay the inhabitants of Shechem, although they had induced the Shechemites to believe, if they would submit to circumcision, Shechem, the most honored of all the house of his father, would be permitted to have the maiden to whom his soul clave for wife (Genesis 34:1–31). The political elements of the story (compare Genesis 34:21–23, Genesis 34:30) suggest a tribal rather than a personal significance for the narrative.

Nathan Isaacs

Dinaites

di'-na-its (dinaye'): A people mentioned in Ezra 4:9, as settled in the city of Samaria by Osnappar (Assurbanipal). The identification is uncertain.

Dinhabah

din'-ha-ba, din-ha'-ba (dinhabhah): The royal city of Bela, son of Beor; king of Edom (Genesis 36:32; 1 Chronicles 1:43). There may be a resemblance in the name of Hodbat et-Teneib. about 8 miles East of Heshbon; but this is in the land of Moab, and probably much too far to the North. No satisfactory identification has been proposed.

Dinner

din'-er (ariston; Matthew 22:4; Luke 11:38 (the Revised Version, margin "breakfast"); Luke 14:12; compare Ruth 2:14; John 21:13): In oriental as in classical lands it was customary, in ancient times, as now, to have but two meals in the day, and the evidence, including that of Josephus, goes to show that the second or evening meal was the principal one. The "morning morsel," as the is Talmud calls it, was in no sense a "meal." The peasant or artisan, before beginning work, might "break (his) fast" (John 21:12,John 21:15) by taking a bit of barley bread with some simple relish, but to "eat (a full meal) in the morning" was a reproach (Ecclesiastes 10:16). The full meal was not to be taken until a little before or after sunset, when the laborers had come in from their work (Luke 17:7; compare the "supper time" of Luke 14:17). The noon meal, taken at an hour when climatic conditions called for rest from exertion (the ariston of the Greeks, rendered "dinner" in English Versions of the Bible, Matthew 22:4; Luke 11:38, the Revised Version, margin "breakfast"), was generally very simple, of bread soaked in light wine with a handful of parched corn (Ruth 2:14), or of "pottage and bread broken into a bowl" (Bel and the Dragon 33), or of bread and broiled fish (John 21:13). Many, when on journey especially, content with one meal a day, taken after sunset. In general, eating at other times casual and informal; evening is the time for the formal meal, or feast. See MEALS.

George B. Eager

Dionysia

di-o-nish'-i-a (Dionusia, "festivals of Dionysus" (Bacchus)): The rural (vintage) Dionysia were celebrated in the month of Poseideon (19th day), which is roughly our December. The celebration consisted of feasts, processions, songs and (sometimes) scenic performances. The Ascolia formed one of the most prominent features. After sacrificing a goat to the god, they filled the wine-skin with wine, made it slippery on the outside with oil, and then tried to hop on it with one leg. Whoever fell down furnished great sport for the spectators, but if anyone succeeded in maintaining an upright position to the end, he was declared victor. The demarch conducted the festival, the expenses of which were paid by the deme. The Lenea were celebrated on the 12th of Gamelion (January) in Athens, and later in Ionia in Asia Minor. At this festival also the new wine was tasted. A procession was formed and they marched through the city, indulging in all sorts of jesting and buffoonery, to attend the pantomimic performances.

The Anthesteria (Flower-Feast) came in the month of Anthesterion (February), when the first flowers appeared. This festival resembled somewhat our Christmas. On the first day (11th of the month) the wine-cask was opened; on the second was the feast of pitchers. Wine was drunk, and contests in trumpet-playing were held. At the drinking contest everybody was permitted to make as much merriment as he pleased. There was also a mystic marriage of the king archon's wife to Dionysus (compare the marriage of the Doges of Venice to the sea). On the third day they offered pots filled with vegetables to Hermes, Conductor of the Dead. This day was sacred to the gods of the nether world and to the spirits of the departed (All Souls' Day); and the people celebrated Persephone's resurrection and reunion with the god.

The Greater, or City Dionysia, were held in Elaphebolion (March) as a spring festival. This is the most important of all the Dionysia (for us), since practically all the great tragedies of Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides were performed in conjunction with this festival. All the demes took part. They accompanied the ancient image of Dionysus Eleutherios (from Eleutherae in Boeotia, one of the first places in which the worship of the god was established in Greece), as it was carried in solemn procession from the Lenaeon (the original center of his cult in Athens) to a small temple in the Ceramicus in the northwestern part of the city, while choruses of men and boys sang the dithurambos (the ancient hymn to Dionysus). Crowned with the vine and dressed in unusual costumes, they greeted the god with loud shouts of joy.

The festival was revived with great pomp by the Pisistratidae. In theater of Dionysus all the people beheld an imposing rehearsal of their great achievements. Even the poorest and humblest were given an opportunity to see and hear the contests between the professional rhapsodists, who recited Homer, between choruses specially trained to sing the dithyrambs, and between poets, whose great dramatic productions were presented for the first time. The state set aside a special fund for the purchase of tickets for those who were too poor to buy for themselves. Comedies, tragedies and satyr dramas were presented after elaborate preparation and at a great expenditure of money. The prize, a bronze tripod, was erected with an appropriate inscription on the Street of Tripods. The awarding of prizes to the victors concluded the festival.

The quinquennial festival at Brauron in Attica was also celebrated with extraordinary license and merriment. The city of Athens sent delegates regularly to attend the festival.

There were also Dionysiac clubs in Athens at the time of the Peloponnesian War. These had peculiar doctrines and observances. They had their foundation in Orphic mysticism. The members refrained from eating the flesh of animals. They possessed holy scriptures and had peculiar propitiatory rites. The Dionysiac religious observance continued as a state cult down to 366 AD. See BACCHUS.

J. E. Harry

Dionysius

di-o-nish'-i-us (Dionusios, surnamed "the Areopagite"): One of the few Athenians converted by Paul (Acts 17:34). We know nothing further about him (see AREOPAGUS). According to one account he was the first bishop of the church at Athens; according to another he suffered martyrdom in that city under Domitian. We are even told that he migrated to Rome and was sent to Paris, where he was beheaded on Montmartre (Mount of the Martyr). The patron saint of France is Denys; compare the French "Denys d'Halicarnasse" (Dionysius of Halicarnassus). The mystical writings which were circulated in the Middle Ages and are still extant, are pronounced by the best authorities to be forgeries, and date from a period not earlier than the 5th century.

J. E. Harry

Dionysus, (Bacchus)

di-o-ni'-sus (Dionusos): The youngest of the Greek gods. In Homer he is not associated with the vine. In later Greek legend he is represented as coming from India, as traversing Asia in a triumphal march, accompanied by woodland beings, with pointed ears, snub noses and goat-tails. These creatures were called satyrs. The vine was cultivated among European-Aryans first in Thrace, and here Dionysus is said to have established his worship first in Europe. Then the cult of Dionysus passed down through the Balkan peninsula to Thebes; and in the localized form of the myth the deity was born here--son of Zeus and Semele. "Offspring of Zeus on high .......................... Thou that carest for all Who on Bacchus in Italy call And in Deo's sheltered plain Of Eleusis lord dost reign, Whither worshippers repair! O Bacchus that dwellest in Thebes, On whose broad and fertile glebes Fierce warriors from the dragon's teeth rose, Where Ismenus softly flows, The city that Semele bare!" --Sophocles, Antigone. Among all the Greek deities none appealed more vividly to the imagination than Dionysus. Greek tragedy is a form of worship, the ritual cult of the god of wine, who makes the initiate wise and the ungodly mad. Dionysus speaks most strongly to the sense and to the spirit at the same time. There is nothing monotonous in the Dionysiac legend; it is replete with both joy and sorrow--in some aspects it is a "passion" in others a triumph. All the passion plays of the world (even the Oberammergau Schauspiel) are in the ancient spirit. One Dionysus after another has been substituted, but from the first there has been a desire on the part of the devotee to realize his god vividly with thrilling nearness, to partake of his joys and sorrows and triumphs in his manifold adventures. In the early myths Dionysus was one of the lesser gods; he is mentioned only twice in the Iliad and twice in the Odyssey; but he is always represented as being more nearly akin to man than the great august deities of Olympus.

He is a man-god, or god-man. To the inhabitants of the vine-clad slopes of Attica, to which his cult had been brought from Phrygia through Thracian Boeotia, he was particularly dear. At their vintage feasts last year's cask of wine was opened; and when the new year brought life again to the vines, the bountiful god was greeted with songs of joyful praise. The burial of the wine in the dark tomb of the jars through the winter, and the opening of these jars at the spring festival symbolized the great awakening of man himself, the resurrection of the god's worshippers to a fuller and more joyous life. The vine was not the only manifestation of the god--oil and wheat were also his; he was the god of ecstasy, the giver of physical joy and excitement, the god of life, the god of certain laws of Nature, germination and extinction, the external coming into being and the dying away of all things that are, fructification in its widest aspect whether in the bursting of the seed-grain that lies intreasured in the earth, or in the generation of living creatures. Hence, the prominence given to the phallus in the solemn processions in honor of the god.

Nicanor (2 Macc 14:33) and Antiochus Epiphanes (2 Macc 6:7) thought that the cult of Dionysus would not be objectionable to the Jews. Ptolemy Philopator branded the Jews with an ivy-leaf (3 Macc 2:29), which was sacred to Dionysus. See also BACCHUS.

J. E. Harry

Dioscorinthius

di-os-ko-rin'-thi-us: A certain (unidentified) month (2 Macc 11:21). See CALENDAR; TIME.

Dioscuri

di-os'-ku-ri (Dioscouroi; in Acts 28:11, the King James Version Castor and Pollux, the Revised Version (British and American) THE TWIN BROTHERS; in margin, "Dioscuri"): The sign of the ship on which Paul sailed from Melita to Syracuse and Rhegium. The Dioscuri (i.e. sons of Zeus), Castor and Pollux, are the two chief stars in the constellation of the Twins. Some 4,000 years BC they served as pointers to mark the beginning of the new year by setting together with the first new moon of springtime. The constellation of the Twins was supposed to be especially favorable to sailors, hence, ships were often placed under the protection of the twin gods.

E. W. Maunder

Diotrephes

di-ot'-re-fez (Diotrephes): A person mentioned in 3 John 1:9,3 John 1:10 as contentiously resisting the writer's authority and forbidding others from exercising the Christian hospitality which he himself refused to show.

The words "who loveth to have the preeminence, among them" may indicate that he was a church official, abusing his position, chief stars in the constellation of the Twins. Some 4,000 years BC they served as pointers to mark the beginning of the new year by setting together with the first new moon of springtime. The constellation of the Twins was supposed to be especially favorable to sailors, hence, ships were often placed under the protection of the twin gods.

Dip

Priests when offering a sin offering were required to dip a finger into the blood of the sacrificed bullock and "to sprinkle of the blood seven times before Yahweh" (compare Leviticus 4:6, et al.). See also the law referring to the cleansing of infected houses (Leviticus 14:51) and the cleansing of a leper (Leviticus 14:16). In all such cases "to dip" is "to moisten," "to besprinkle," "to dip in," the Hebrew Tabhal, or the Greek bapto. See also ASHER. In Psalms 68:23 "dipping" is not translated from the Hebrew, but merely employed for a better understanding of the passage: "Thou mayest crush them, dipping thy foot in blood" (the King James Version "that thy foot may be dipped in the blood"). Revelation 19:13 is a very doubtful passage. the King James Version reads: "a vesture dipped in blood" (from bapto, "to dip"); the Revised Version (British and American) following another reading (either rhaino, or rhantizo, both "to sprinkle"), translates "a garment sprinkled with blood." the Revised Version, margin gives "dipped in." See also SOP.

A. L. Breslich

Diphath

di'-fath (diphath): A son of Gomer, son of Japheth, son of Noah (1 Chronicles 1:6), called RIPHATH (which see) in the corresponding genealogy in Genesis 10:3.

Disallow

dis-a-lou': "To disallow" as used in the Scriptures means either "to oppose," "not permit" (Hebrew no', Numbers 30:5,Numbers 30:8,Numbers 30:11), or "to reject" (Greek apodokimazo, literally, "to consider useless," 1 Peter 2:4,1 Peter 2:7 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) "rejected").

Disannul

dis-a-nul'. See ANNUL.

Disappoint

dis-a-point': "To disappoint" may be used transitively or intransitively. In the former case it naturally has a more forceful meaning. Therefore the Revised Version (British and American) changes the translation of the King James Version wherever "disappoint" is used with an object: Job 5:12, "frustrateth"; Psalms 17:13, "confront him," the Revised Version, margin "forestall"; Judith 16:6, "brought them to nought"; but the Revised Version (British and American) retains "disappoint" where the person wh disappoints is not expressed. Compare Proverbs 15:22.

Discern

di-zurn': Five Hebrew words are thus translated: bin, yadha`, nakhar, ra'ah and shama`. It may simply mean "observe" (bin), "I discerned among the youths" (Proverbs 7:7); or discriminating knowlege, "A wise man's heart discerneth time and judgment" (Ecclesiastes 8:5, yadha`); "He discerned him not, because his hands," etc. (Genesis 27:23, nakhar); "Then shall ye return and discern between the righteous and the wicked" (Malachi 3:18, ra'ah); "So is my lord the king to discern good," etc. (2 Samuel 14:17, shama`). In the New Testament the words anakrino, diakrino and dokimazo are thus translated, expressing close and distinct acquaintance with or a critical knowledge of things. Used in 1 Corinthians 2:14 the King James Version of "the things of the spirit of God"; in 1 Corinthians 11:29 of "the (Lord's) body" in the sacrament; in Matthew 16:3 of "the face of the heaven"; in Hebrews 5:14 of a clear knowledge of good and evil as the prerogative of a full-grown man. See also next article.

Henry E. Dosker

Discernings Of Spirits

di-zurn'-inz, (diakriseis pneumaton, "judicial estimation," "through judgment or separation"): Occurs in 1 Corinthians 12:10 as being one of the gifts of the Spirit. The Greek word occurs in Hebrews 5:14; and Romans 14:1: "But him that is weak in faith receive ye, yet not for decision of scruples." This translation scarcely expresses the meaning, which Thayer has freely rendered, "not for the purpose of passing judgment on opinions, as to which one is to be preferred as the more correct." Taking these three passages together it is evident that the Greek term which is rendered "discerning" means a distinguishing or discriminating between things that are under consideration; hence, the one who possessed the gift of "discernings of spirits" was able to make distinction between the one who spoke by the Spirit of God and the one who was moved by a false spirit. This gift seems to have been exercised chiefly upon those who assumed the role of teachers, and it was especially important in those days, because there were many false teachers abroad (see 2 John 1:7; Acts 20:29,Acts 20:30). See also SPIRITUAL GIFTS.

A. W. Fortune

Disciple

di-si'-p'-l:

(1) Usually a substantive (mathetes, "a learner," from manthano, "to learn"; Latin discipulus, "a scholar"): The word is found in the Bible only in the Gospels and Acts. But it is good Greek, in use from Herodotus down, and always means the pupil of someone, in contrast to the master or teacher (didaskalos). See Matthew 10:24; Luke 6:40. In all cases it implies that the person not only accepts the views of the teacher, but that he is also in practice an adherent. The word has several applications. In the widest sense it refers to those who accept the teachings of anyone, not only in belief but in life. Thus the disciples of John the Baptist (Matthew 9:14; Luke 7:18; John 3:25); also of the Pharisees (Matthew 22:16; Mark 2:18; Luke 5:33); of Moses (John 9:28). But its most common use is to designate the adherents of Jesus. (a) In the widest sense (Matthew 10:42; Luke 6:17; John 6:66, and often). It is the only name for Christ's followers in the Gospels. But (b) especially the Twelve Apostles, even when they are called simply the disciples (Matthew 10:1; Matthew 11:1; Matthew 12:1, et al.). In the Acts, after the death and ascension of Jesus, disciples are those who confess Him as the Messiah, Christians (Acts 6:1,Acts 6:2,Acts 6:7; Acts 9:36 (feminine, mathetria); Acts 11:26, "The disciples were called Christians"). Even half-instructed believers who had been baptized only with the baptism of John are disciples (Acts 19:1–4).

(2) We have also the verb, matheteuo, "Jesus' disciple" (literally, "was discipled to Jesus," Matthew 27:57); "Make disciples of all the nations" (the King James Version "teach," Matthew 28:19); "had made many disciples" (the King James Version "taught many," Acts 14:21); "every scribe who hath been made a disciple to the kingdom of heaven" (the King James Version "instructed," Matthew 13:52). The disciple of Christ today may be described in the words of Farrar, as "one who believes His doctrines, rests upon His sacrifice, imbibes His spirit, and imitates His example."

The Old Testament has neither the term nor the exact idea, though there is a difference between teacher and scholar among David's singers (1 Chronicles 25:8), and among the prophetic guilds the distinction between the rank and file and the leader (1 Samuel 19:20; 2 Kings 6:5).

G. H. Trever

Discipline

dis'-i-plin (mucar): In the King James Version only in Job 36:10, where it refers to moral discipline, the strenuous cultivation of the righteous life; the Revised Version (British and American) "instruction." the Revised Version (British and American) in 2 Timothy 1:7 has "discipline" for a Greek word (sophronismos) meaning "sobering"; in 2 Timothy 3:16 margin, for Greek paideia, "instruction." In classic Greek paideia means "education," mental culture. Through the influence of the Septuagint, which translates the Hebrew mucar by paideia, the meaning of "chastisement" accompanies paideia in the New Testament. Compare Hebrews 12:5,Hebrews 12:7,Hebrews 12:8,Hebrews 12:11.

See CHASTISEMENT; and for ecclesiastical discipline see CHURCH.

Discomfit; Discomfiture

dis-kum'-fit, dis-kum'-fi-tur (hum, mehumah): These words are now obsolete or at least obsolescent and are confined in Biblical literature wholly to the Old Testament. The meaning in general is "to annoy," "harass," "confuse," "rout" and "destroy." The most common usage is that based upon the root meaning, "to trouble" or "annoy," sometimes to the point of destruction (Joshua 10:10; Judges 4:15; 1 Samuel 7:10; 2 Samuel 22:15).

The King James Version errs in the translation in Isaiah 31:8, where the meaning is obviously "to become subject to task work" or "to place a burden upon one." There seems also to be an unwarranted use of the word in Numbers 14:45, where it means rather "to bruise" or "strike." The purest use is perhaps in 1 Samuel 14:20, where the statement is made that "every man's sword was against his fellow, and there was a very great discomfiture."

Walter G. Clippinger

Discourse

dis-kors': In the Revised Version (British and American) of Acts 20:7,Acts 20:9, the translation of Greek dialegomai (the King James Version "preach"), elsewhere rendered, according to the implications of the context, "reason" or "dispute," as Acts 17:2; Acts 19:9 (the King James Version "disputing," the Revised Version (British and American) "reasoning"); Jude 1:9.

Discover

dis-kuv'-er: In modern usage the word "discover" signifies "to get first sight or knowledge of," "to ascertain," or "to explore." Such usage appears in 1 Samuel 22:6 of the discovery of David's hiding-place, where the Hebrew uses yadha`. In the King James Version the word "discover" often occurs in a sense now archaic or even obsolete. (Note in the cases cited below the Hebrew word is galah, except Jeremiah 13:26 (chashaph, "to make bare") and Habakkuk 3:13 (`arar, "to make naked").)

(1) "To exhibit," "uncover" (or "betray"), in which examples the English Revised Version also reads with the King James Version "discover"; the American Standard Revised Version "uncover" (Exodus 20:26; Job 12:22; Isaiah 57:8 ("discovered thyself" the King James Version and the English Revised Version); Jeremiah 13:26; Lamentations 2:14; Hosea 7:1; Nahum 3:5).

(2) "To cause to be no longer a covering," "to lay bare" (2 Samuel 22:16 the King James Version).

(3) "To bring to light," "disclose" (1 Samuel 14:8,1 Samuel 14:11 (the English Revised Version with the King James Version "discover")).

(4) "To unmask" or "reveal oneself" (Proverbs 18:2 the King James Version).

(5) "To take away the covering of" (Isaiah 22:8 the King James Version).

(6) "To lay bare" (Habakkuk 3:13). In Psalms 29:9, the King James Version reads: "The voice of the Lord .... discovereth the forests," where the Revised Version (British and American) reads, "strippeth the forests bare," i.e. "strippeth the forests of their leaves" (Perowne, The Psalms, I, 248); "strippeth bare the forests" (Briggs, Psalms, I, 251, 253).

In the New Testament (the King James Version), the word "discover" occurs as a translation of the Greek anaphanantes in Acts 21:3, and for katenooun in Acts 27:39, where the Revised Version (British and American) reads in the first instance "had come in sight of," and in the latter case "perceived."

W. N. Stearns

Discrepancies, Biblical

dis-krep'-an-siz, bib'-li-kal:

1. Definition:

By this term should be understood substantial disagreements in the statements of Biblical writers. Such disagreements might subsist between the, statements of different writers or between the several statements of a single writer. Contradictions of Biblical views from extra-Biblical sources as history, natural science, philosophy, do not fall within the scope of our subject.

2. Criticism versus Doctrine of Inerrancy:

Observant Bible readers in every age have noted, with various degrees of insight, that the Scriptures exhibit manifold interior differences and contrasts. Differences of literary form and method have ever seemed, except to those who maintained a mechanical theory of inspiration, wholly natural and fitting. Moreover, that there was progress in the Biblical revelation, especially that the New Testament of Jesus Christ signifies a vastly richer revelation of God than the Old Testament, has been universally recognized. In fulfilling the law and the prophets Christ put a marked distance between Himself and them, yet He certainly affirmed rather than denied them. The Christian church has ever held to the essential unity of the Divine library of the Holy Scriptures. Moreover, the evangelical churches have recognized the Bible as "the only and sufficient rule of both faith and practice." Indeed, in the generation following the Reformation, the strictest and most literal theory of inspiration and inerrancy found general acceptance. Over against such a body of presuppositions, criticism, some generations later, began to allege certain errors and discrepancies in the Bible. Of course the orthodox sought to repel all these claims; for they felt that the Bible, whatever the appearances might seem to indicate, must be free from error, else it could not be the word of God. So there came with criticism a long period of sturdy defense of the strictest doctrine of Biblical inerrancy. Criticism, however, kept on its way. It has forced the church to find a deeper and surer ground of confidence in the authority of the Bible as the witness to God's self-revelation to man. In our day the church has for the most part overcome the notion that the certainty of the saving grace of God in Christ stands or falls with the absolute inerrancy of each several statement contained in the Bible. Still there remains, and doubtless ever must remain, a need of a clear understanding of the issue involved in the allegation-- along with other "human limitations"--of Biblical discrepancies.

3. Synopsis of the Argument:

Alleged discrepancies pertain

(1) to statements of specific, concrete facts, and

(2) to the utterance of principles and doctrines. Under the first head fall disagreements respecting numbers, dates, the form and order of historical events, records of spoken words, geography, natural history, etc. Under the second head fall disagreements respecting moral and religious truths, the "superhistorical" realities and values. Our inquiry resolves itself into three parts:

(1) to determine whether there be discrepancies, of either or both sorts, in the Bible;

(2) to obtain at least a general understanding of the conditions and causes that may have given rise to the discrepancies, real or apparent;

(3) to determine their significance for faith.

4. Alleged Discrepancies Pertaining to Facts:

As to the first point, it should be observed that apparent inconsistencies may not be real ones; as so often in the past, so again it may come about that the discovery of further data may resolve many an apparent contradiction. On the other hand, the affirmation a priori that there can be and are no real discrepancies in the Bible is not only an outrage upon the human understanding, but it stands also in contradiction to the spirit of freedom that is of faith. Besides, it should not be overlooked that the discoveries of modern historical and archaeological research, which have tended to confirm so many Biblical statements, seem just as surely to reveal error in others.

In any event we must bow to reality, and we may do this with fearless confidence in "the God of things as they are." But are there real discrepancies in the Bible? It is no part of the present plan to attempt the impossible and at all events useless task of exhibiting definite statistics of all the alleged discrepancies, or even of all the principal ones. Passing by the childish folly that would find a "discrepancy" in mere rhetorical antitheses, such as that in Proverbs 26:4,Proverbs 26:5 ("Answer not a fool," and "Answer a fool according to his folly"), or instances of merely formal contrariety of expression, where the things intended are manifestly congruous (e. g. Matthew 12:30; Luke 11:23 contrasted with Mark 9:40; Luke 9:50: "He that is not with me is against me," "He that is not against us is for us"), it will serve our purpose to notice a few representative examples of real or apparent discrepancy.

The chronologies of Kings and Chronicles are inconsistent (compare CHRONOLOGY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT). The genealogies in Genesis 46:1–34; Numbers 26:1–65; 1 Chronicles 2:7 show considerable variations. The two lists of exiles who returned with Zerubbabel (Ezra 2:1–70; Nehemiah 7:6 ff) show many discrepancies, including a marked difference in the enumeration. The accounts of the creation in Ge 1 and 2 (compare CREATION)--to take an example dependent upon the results of modern criticism--are mutually independent and in important particulars diverse. But the center of interest in our inquiry is the gospel history. Since Tatian and his Diatessaron in the 2nd century, the variations and contrasts in the Gospels have not only been noted and felt, but many have striven to "harmonize" them. After all, however, there remain some irreducible differences. The Gospels, generally speaking, do not give us ipsissima verba of Jesus; in reporting His discourses they show many variations. In so far as the essential meaning is the same in all, no one speaks of discrepancies; but where the variation clearly involves a difference of meaning (e. g. Matthew 12:39,Matthew 12:40 and Luke 11:29,Luke 11:30), one may say that at least a technical discrepancy exists. In recording sayings or events the evangelists manifestly do not always observe the same chronological order; Lk, e. g. records in wholly different connections sayings which Mt includes as parts of the Sermon on the Mount (e. g. the Lord's Prayer, Matthew 6:9 ff; Luke 11:1–4; compare JESUS CHRIST; CHRONOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT). We have two distinct genealogies of Jesus (Matthew 1:1–16; Luke 3:23 ff; compare GENEALOGY). We may even note that Pilate's superscription over the cross of Jesus is given in four distinct forms. Here, however, the discrepancy is not real except in the most technical sense, and is worth mentioning only to show that the evangelists' interest does not lie in a mere objective accuracy. That a perfect agreement as to the significance of an event exists where there are undeniable discrepancies in external details may be illustrated by the two accounts of the healing of the centurion's servant (Matthew 8:5 Luke 7:1 ff). Of enormously greater interest are the various accounts of the appearances of the risen Christ. If a complete certainty as to the form and order of these events is necessary to faith, the case is not a happy one, for the harmonists have been unable to render a perfect account of these matters (compare JESUS CHRIST; RESURRECTION). Turning from the Gospels to apostolic history, we meet some real problems, e. g. how to relate Paul's autobiographical notes in Galatians 1:1–24 with the accounts in Acts.

5. Alleged Discrepancies Pertaining to Doctrine:

The discrepancies thus far noted pertain to historical matters, and not one of them involves the contradiction of a fact in which faith is interested. But are there also real or apparent discrepancies in matters of doctrine? Many scholars maintain, for instance, that the ideal of the prophets and that of the priestly class stand in a relative (not absolute) opposition to each other (compare, e. g. Isaiah 1:11; Micah 6:8 with the ritualism of Le and Dt). Or, to turn to the New Testament, some would assert-- among them Luther--that James stands in opposition to Paul in respect to faith and works (compare James 2:17 ff in contrast with Galatians 2:16 and many other passages in Paul). But particular interest attaches to the problem of Christ's attitude toward the Old Testament law. His "but I say unto you" (Matthew 5:22 and passim) has been interpreted by many as a distinct contradiction of the Old Testament. Another question of acute interest is the agreement of the Johannine picture of Jesus with that of the Synoptists.

It can scarcely require proof that some of these alleged discrepancies are not such at all. For example, Jesus' attitude toward the Old Testament was one of profound reverence and affirmation. He was perfectly conscious that the Old Testament law represented a stage in the Divine education of mankind. His "but I say unto you" was not a denying of the degree of advancement represented by the Old Testament law, but a carrying out of the principle of the law to its full expression (compare LAW; FULFIL). Of course, the Divine education of Israel did not mean the mere inculcation of the truth in a fallow and hitherto unoccupied soil. There was much superstition and error to be overcome. If then one should insist that the errors, which revelation was destined to overcome, still manifest themselves here and there in the Old Testament, it may be replied that at all events the one grand tendency of Divine revelation is unmistakably clear. An idea is not "Scriptural" simply by virtue of its having been incidentally expressed by a Biblical writer, but because it essentially and inseparably belongs to the organic whole of the Biblical testimony. In the case of James versus Paul the antithesis is one of emphasis, not of contradiction of a first principle. And as for the variations in the gospel history, these do not deserve to be called real discrepancies so long as the Gospels unite in giving one harmonious picture and testimony concerning the personal life and the work and teaching of Jesus. Even from this point of view, John, though so much more theological, preaches the same Christ as the Synoptists.

6. Causes of Discrepancies:

As to the conditions under which discrepancies may arise, it may suffice, first, to call attention to the general law that God in revealing Himself to men and in moving men by His Spirit to speak or write, never lifts them out of the normal relations of human intelligence, so far as matters of history or science are concerned. It is their witness to Himself and His will which is the result of revelation and inspiration. Their references to history and Nature are not therefore in any sense super-human; accordingly they have no direct authority for faith (compare REVELATION; INSPIRATION). On this basis the divergences of human traditions or documents as exhibited in different genealogies, chronologies and the like are natural in the best sense and wholly fitting. As for the rest, errors of copyists have played a part.

7. Their Significance for Faith:

Faith, however, has no interest in explaining away the human limitations in God's chosen witnesses. It is God's way to place the heavenly "treasure in earthen vessels" (2 Corinthians 4:7). It seems that God has purposely led the church to see, through the necessity of recognizing the human limitations of the Bible, just where her faith is grounded. God has made Himself known through His Son. The Scriptures of the New Testament, and of the Old Testament in preparation for Him, give us a clear and sufficient testimony to the Christ of God. The clearness and persuasive power of that testimony make all questions of verbal and other formal agreement essentially irrelevant. The certainty that God has spoken unto us in His Son and that we have this knowledge through the Scripture testimony lifts us above all anxious concern for the possible errors of the witnesses in matters evidently nonessential.

LITERATURE.

Besides the literature noted under REVELATION and INSPIRATION, see J. W. Haley, An Examination of the Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible, Andover, 1873; M. S. Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, New York, 1883; Kahler, Zur Bibelf rage, Leipzig, 1907.

J. R. Van Pelt

Discus

dis'-kus (diskos, "the summons of the discus," 2 Macc 4:14 margin, "to the game of the discus," the King James Version "the game of discus"): The discus was a round stone slab or metal plate of considerable weight (a kind of quoit), the contest of throwing which to the greatest distance was one of the exercises in the Greek gymnasia, being included in the pentathlon. It was introduced into Jerusalem by Jason the high priest in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, 175-164 BC, in the Palaestra he had formed there in imitation of the Greek games. His conduct led to his being described in 2 Macc 4:13,14 as that "ungodly man" through whom even the priests forsook their duties to play at the discus. A statue of a discobolos (discus-thrower) is in the British Museum. From discus we have the words "disc," "dish," "desk." See GAMES.

W. L. Walker