Gnosticism (continued) – Goblet

Gnosticism (continued)

The Christology of the Gnostics accordingly assumed one of two types. "One class of early Gnostics separated the spiritual being Christ from the man Jesus; they supposed that the Christ entered Jesus at the time of His baptism, and left Him at the moment of His crucifixion. Thus the Christ was neither born as a man nor suffered as a man. In this way they obviated the difficulty, insuperable to the Gnostic mind, of conceiving the connection between the highest spiritual agency and gross corporeal matter, which was involved in the Catholic doctrine of the Incarnation and Passion, and which Gnostics of another type more effectually set aside by the doctrine of Docetism, i.e. by assuming that the human body of our Lord was only a phantom body, and not real flesh and blood. Irenaeus represents the former class as teaching that `Jesus was the receptacle of the Christ,' and that the Christ `descended upon Him from heaven in the form of a dove, and after He had declared to mankind the nameless Father, entered again into the pleroma imperceptibly and invisibly.' Here no names are given. But in another passage he ascribes precisely the same doctrine, without however naming the pleroma, to Cerinthus" (Lightfoot, Col, 264). How strenuously this doctrine was combated in apostolic circles has already been shown in speaking of John's First Epistle.

4. Asecticism and Antinomianism:

The necessary consequence of the Gnostic theory in an ascetic morality which passed over by sure steps into antinomian license has likewise been fully illustrated in the foregoing, and need not be further enlarged on. The whole has its root in a false intellectualism, to which the gospel in its inculcation of humility, faith and dependence upon God's Spirit for guidance into truth is, in its inmost principle, opposed.

VI. Harnack's View of Gnosticism.

Harnack's view of Gnosticism differs from that now given in laying the chief emphasis on its Judeo-Hellenistic side. He describes well how, when Christianity appeared, an extensive spiritualizing or allegorizing of the Old Testament had already taken place. "This spiritualizing was the result of a philosophic view of religion, and this philosophic view was the outcome of a lasting influence of Greek philosophy, and of the Greek spirit generally, upon Judaism. In consequence of this view, all facts and sayings of the Old Testament in which one could not find his way, were allegorized. Nothing was what it seemed, but was only the symbol of something invisible. The history of the Old Testament was here sublimated to a history of the emancipation of reason from passion" (History of Dogma, I, 223). This allegorical interpretation disclosed to the mature mind a wealth of relations, of hints and of intuitions from the Old Testament, which to the uninitiated was only a dry record of fact. This view of the Old Testament gave its readers a strange interest, which proceeded to transfer their ancient Jewish hopes into the world of Greek philosophy, and transformed the result into a metaphysic. When these thinkers entered the Christian church, Christian hopes and terms were added to the already existing Judaic-Greek- Alexandrian compound, and such was Gnosticism. It represented the acute secularizing or Hellenizing of Christianity. The Gnostics "are therefore those Christians, who, in a swift advance, attempted to capture Christianity for Hellenic culture, and Hellenic culture for Christianity, and who gave up the Old Testament in order to facilitate the conclusion of the covenant between the two powers and make it possible to assert the absoluteness of Christianity" (p. 227).

Harnack indeed grants that there were other elements in Gnosticism, but he strongly asserts that the Greek element was the predominating one. In this he seems to us to be in error. Laying the chief emphasis on Hellenism, he fails to give the due and preponderating place to eastern dualism. As already seen, an eastern dualistic theosophy is the chief element in Gnosticism. This eastern source is also acknowledged by Harnack, but only as if it were subsidiary to Hellenism. As he regards it, "Gnosticism was an acute Hellenizing of Christianity" (p. 230).

In regard to the fundamental philosophic doctrines of Gnosticism, the indefinable nature of the Divine primeval Being, the sinfulness of matter, the fullness of God in eons, the Demiurge, etc., Harnack agrees generally with other writers, and adds, "All these are ideas for which we find the way prepared in the philosophy of the time, anticipated by Philo, and represented in neo-Platonism as the great final result of Greek philosophy" (p. 233).

VII. Influence and Development of Gnosticism.

Gnosticism is peculiarly the heresy of the 2nd century, and in itself a proof of the extent to which a knowledge of the Christian faith had, at that early period, penetrated in literary and philosophical circles. Though it is true that Christianity at first influenced chiefly the humbler classes, yet it was not among these persons that the various Gnostic heresies arose.

1. Not a Heresy of the Humbler Classes:

Gnosticism "was a product which did not spring up spontaneously in the minds of the mechanics and slaves and women and children, whom most, like Celsus, suppose to have formed the bulk of the Christian communities, but could only have taken its rise in minds of a more cultured and speculative cast. This, indeed, was its claim--to be a religion of gnosis (knowledge), for the more highly trained or elite. It could only exist at all, therefore, as the result of a Christian ferment which had entered these speculative circles, and was there powerfully at work. Baur rightly appreciates the situation, when he says: `Gnosticism gives the clearest proof that Christianity had now come to be one of the most important factors in the history of the time, and it shows especially what a mighty power of attraction the new Christian principles possessed for the highest intellectual life then to be found either in the pagan or in the Jewish world.' Above all, these systems are a striking witness to the impression produced on the heathen mind by the great Christian idea of redemption. `When the Gnostic systems,' says Neander, `describe the movement which was produced in the kingdom of the Demiurge by the appearance of Christ as the manifestation of a new and mighty principle which had entered the precincts of this lower world, they give us to understand how powerful was the impression which the contemplation of the life of Christ and His influence on humanity, had left on the minds of the founders of these systems, making all earlier institutions seem to them as nothing in comparison with Christianity.' We must beware, therefore, of underestimating either the extent or the intensity of this great intellectual ferment set up by the gospel in the heart of heathenism" (Orr, Neglected Factors, etc., 196).

2. Cerinthus: His Teaching:

The earliest of the Gnostics known to us by name is Cerinthus, the antagonist of the apostle John. It seems to be beyond reasonable doubt that these two encountered each other at Ephesus. Irenaeus relates on the authority of those who heard the story from Polycarp how the apostle and Cerinthus met in the public baths in that city. When John discovered that Cerinthus was in the same building with him, he instantly left, exclaiming that he could not remain while Cerinthus, the enemy of God and of man, was there. From the accounts which have been preserved of Cerinthus and of his teaching, it can be gathered that he taught that the world was created not by the Supreme God, but by an inferior power, and that he also taught a docetic theory of the Incarnation. Caius of Rome, a disciple of Irenaeus, records that Cerinthus held that there would be a millennium of unrestrained sensuality. Dionysius of Alexandria (circa 260 AD) more than confirms this. "Thus so far as they go, the historical data harmonize with the internal evidence of the Epistle (of John) itself, in giving the impression that the different tendencies it combats are such as were naturally combined in one consistently developed Gnostic system, and that the object of its polemic is, throughout, one and the same" (The Tests of Life, 37).

As regards the Gospel of John there is the testimony of Irenaeus, that it was written to oppose that form of Gnosticism which was taught by Cerinthus, and, before him, by the Nicolaitans. The nature of that heresy may be stated in the words of Irenaeus himself:

"A certain Cerinthus," he says, "in Asia, taught that the world was not made by the Supreme God, but by some power altogether separate and distinct from that Sovereign Power which is over the universe, and one ignorant of the God who is over all things. He taught, moreover, that Jesus was not born of a virgin (for this seemed to him to be impossible), but was the son of Joseph and Mary, born after the manner of other men; though preeminent above other men in justice and prudence and wisdom; and that after His baptism the Christ, in the form of a dove, descended upon Him from that Sovereign Power which is over all things; and that He then announced the unknown Father and wrought miracles; but that, at the end, the Christ departed again from Jesus, and that Jesus suffered and was raised from the dead, while the Christ continued impassible, as a spiritual being" (Mansel, The Gnostic Heresies, 74).

3. The Gospel of John:

Such a passage as John 19:34,John 19:35 seems to refer to docetic Gnosticism, and to be a personal protest against it. After describing the piercing of Christ's side by the soldier's spear, and how "straightway there came out blood and water," the apostle adds, "And he that hath seen hath borne witness, and his witness is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye also may believe." There are many other passages which seem to be directed against Docetism, e.g. "The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory)" (1:14); "Jesus therefore, being wearied with his journey, sat thus by the well" (4:6); "Reach hither thy finger, and see my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and put it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing" (20:27).

Cerinthus seems to have taught that the religion of Christ was identical with undiluted Mosaism, including even circumcision and the earthly kingdom of the future. The Cerinthian theory, however, was held under various forms by its adherents, some teachers holding that the God of the Old Testament was, at the best, a subordinate angel of limited power, wisdom and goodness, and that the creation of the world was very imperfect. Others went so far as to identify the God of the Old Testament with Satan. The ethic of systems such as these was antinomian, sometimes even going the length of libertinism.

Generally, the forms under which Gnosticism appeared varied greatly in different periods. Some went farther than others from the Christian faith.

4. Various Sects:

Some communities, such as the Encratites, laid the greatest stress on the necessity for asceticism; other communities were wholly docetic; the Carpocratians taught the philosophy and communism of Plato. One of these teachers, Epiphanes, was honored as a god, and this sect crowned the image of Jesus along with those of Pythagoras, Plato and Aristotle. Further, there were impostors of all varieties: magicians, soothsayers, jugglers, deceivers and hypocrites, "who appeared using mighty words with a host of unintelligible formulas and taking up with scandalous ceremonies in order to rob men of their money" (Harnack, op. cit., 239), and even for viler purposes.

(1) The Ophites.

Gnosticism, before reaching its full development, is chiefly represented by the ophite sects or systems. These were so named from the word ophis, "serpent," to which they paid honor as the symbol of intelligence. They held that the Creator of the world was an ignorant and imperfect being, Ialdaboth, the Son of Chaos; and that it was a meritorious act when the serpent persuaded Adam and Eve to disobey him, There were several of the ophite sects, such as the Cainites, who reversed all the standards of moral judgment, choosing as their heroes the persons whom the Bible condemned, such as Cain, the men of Sodom, Esau and Korah.

(2) Valentinus.

By the time of Justin Martyr (circa 150 AD), Gnosticism had become divided into a variety of sects and schools, Valentinians, Basilideans, Saturninians and Marcionites. In the Valentinian system, Christ and the Holy Spirit were two eons. The Valentinians granted that ordinary Christians were better than the heathen, and that they might look forward to a kind of salvation; even now ordinary Christians occupied a middle position, better than the "hylic" or "psychic," but inferior to the "pneumatic" or "spiritual," as the Gnostics termed themselves.

(3) Basilides.

The Basilideans take their name from Basilides of Alexandria, a man of powerful intellect. He and his son Isidore taught this system, which was afterward considerably modified for the purpose of popular apprehension. The world is continuously evolved from a pansperma or "seed of the world," in which all things were originally potentially contained. It is ruled by two great Archons, who yet subserve the designs of the Supreme. There are no eons, but the highest "light" descends through the successive spheres till it rests on Jesus of Nazareth. The process is complete when the Divine element ("sonship") is all drawn out and restored to God; oblivion then falls on lower intelligences. Many fine sayings are attributed to Basilides, e.g. "I will say anything rather than doubt the goodness of Providence" (Orr, The Early Church, 75).

(4) Saturninus.

The Saturninians were so called from Saturninus, said to be a disciple of Menander, who in turn is said to have been a disciple of Simon Magus. The system of Saturninus is marked both by a strong dualism and by a gloomy asceticism. He is also reported to have been one of the founders of the Encratite heresy, which condemned marriage. Tatian, Justin Martyr's disciple, became a member of this Gnostic sect, holding, it is alleged, the usual theory of eons, and that there was a Demiurge, who was not the Supreme God.

(5) Marcion.

Marcion, a native of Pontus, taught in Rome circa 140-55 AD. His system differs much from ordinary Gnostic theories, except that he absolutely distinguished between the God of the Old Testament, who is regarded as merely great, harsh, rigorous, and the good God of the New Testament, who is wholly love. He also held to the usual Gnostic dualism and docetism. Marcion's system has been described as an overstrained Paulinism, as he lays the stress on faith, not on knowledge. Marcion was the author of a book called the Anthitheses, which contrasted the Old Testament with the New Testament. He also drew up a canon of Scripture, which contained only one gospel, namely, Luke in a mutilated state, and ten Epistles of Paul. Marcion was a rigorous ascetic. In the Lord's Supper he allowed only water to be used instead of wine. The Marcionites refused baptism to married persons. This sect or "church" endured for several centuries.

5. Relation to the Old Testament:

"All the Gnostic systems had one feature in common, namely, that they regarded the Old Testament and the New Testament as revelations of two different Gods, and considered the mission of Christ to proceed from a higher power than the God of the Jewish religion, who was identified with the Demiurge, or Maker of the world. But under this common assumption there was room for two very opposite estimates of the older revelation and of the God whom it reveals. Some of the Gnostic sects regarded the Demiurge as being altogether alien from and opposed to the Supreme God; others considered him merely as a subordinate power, inferior but not hostile to the Supreme God, and acting before the coming of a more perfect revelation, as his unconscious organ" (Mansel, The Gnostic Heresies, 45). "There can be no doubt that the Gnostic propaganda was seriously hindered by the inability to organize and discipline churches, which is characteristic of all philosophic systems of religion" (Harnack, History of Dogma, I, 252). "From about 210 they ceased to be a factor of the historical development, though the church of Constantine and Theodosius was alone really able to suppress them" (ibid., 251).

6. The Christian Verities:

In contrast to Gnosticism the Christian church held fast to these great facts, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, preexistent before the Incarnation, and manifest in the flesh and crucified for us men and for our salvation; that He rose from the dead; that the Old Testament is a true revelation of the one supreme and holy God, the Creator of all things. Dualism, the eternity of matter and its inherent evil, as well as Docetism and oriental mythologies were accordingly rejected as contrary to the Christian faith.

7. Influence on Theology:

During the period of the prevalence of Gnosticism there took place the earlier developments of Christian theology. Gnosticism gave a powerful impetus to the formation of a New Testament canon of Scripture; and to the shaping of the earliest creed.

See APOSTLES' CREED.

8. Truth Underlying Docetism:

In the revulsion from Gnosticism and Docetism it should not be forgotten that there is truth to be found even amid the errors of these systems. Docetism was an over-statement of a great truth, an over-statement so large as to destroy the true humanity of our Lord. But the truth in Docetism is that the eternal Christ touches and appeals to and has a definite relationship to and actually influences every human heart; and also, that, to the Christian believer, Christ is more and does more than this; Christ dwells in the believer's heart by faith, "Christ in you, the hope of glory" (Colossians 1:27). "Docetism was not all folly. Rather we may regard it as one primitive form of the assertion of that mystical element which has never been wanting to Christianity from the first days until now, and we may be sure, never will be wanting to it" (Sanday, Christologies Ancient and Modern, 9).

VIII. Modern Gnosticism.

Gnosticism in its ancient form has passed away, but it is interesting to observe how its spirit reappears from time to time in modern days. Gnosticism, as already seen, is not one aspect of thought alone, but many. And in one form or another it is seen again and again. For example, the modern denial of the virgin birth of our Lord is that form of Gnosticism which taught that the man Jesus became Christ only at His baptism, when the Holy Spirit descended upon Him from heaven.

Phases of Gnostic teaching are reproduced in modern pantheistic philosophies and other forms of religious doctrine, which hold that there has been no objective atonement and no resurrection of Christ from the dead. "Basilides with his powerful speculative grasp and all-embracing evolutionary process might be termed the Hegel of the movement; Valentinus with his robe of fantasy and triple fall and redemption was its Schelling; Marcion with his severe practical bent, his doctrine of faith, and his antitheses of the just God and the good, might without straining be termed its Ritschl" (Orr, The Progress of Dogma, 59).

"Fichte said, `There were no external realities at all, they were the mere objectivity of the subject or creations of the inward eye'; after Fichte came Schelling, and Schelling said, `Then this creating eye is God's own eye'; and after Schelling came Hegel, and Hegel said that `God and man are one, and God all men, and all men God, and the whole universe God eternally thinking in the process of development,' and that or something like it is Hegelianism. I feel in studying this philosophy, as Baron Humboldt says he felt, when he experienced the first shock of an earthquake. I feel a dreadful sense of restlessness and insecurity. The ground seems to give way beneath, and the earth and the heaven to dissolve, the universe becomes a dream, a myth" (W.B. Robertson, D.D., Martin Luther, German Student Life, etc., 138).

"Philosophy," says Mansel, "striving after a first principle which shall be one and simple and unconditioned and incapable of all further analysis in thought, is naturally tempted to soar above that complex combination of attributes which is implied in our conception of personality, and in endeavoring to simplify and purify our representation of the Divine nature, ends by depriving it of every attribute which can make God the object of any religious feeling or the source of any moral obligation" (The Gnostic Heresies, 11). God is no longer the author and source of goodness and truth and moral law, but the mind is occupied with the metaphysical relation between God and the world, as absolute and relative, cause and effect, principle and consequence, and God becomes identical with the world.

It is easily seen how teaching of this sort strikes at the root of all religion and morality. The personality of God, the personality and free will of man, the existence of moral evil, the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ, the redemption which He accomplished for the world, His resurrection, the whole significance of His person and His work--all is denied. This is the spirit and the meaning of Gnosticism.

Dr. Gwatkin sums up the matter thus: "Gnosticism undermined Christian monotheism by its distinction of the Creator from the Supreme, Christian morals by its opposition of the philosopher to the unlearned, Christian practice by its separation of knowledge from action; and it cut away the very basis of the gospel whenever it explained away its history. In every case it had got hold of truth on one side--the reality of evil in the world, the function of knowledge in religion, the difference between the letter and the spirit; but fragments of truth are not enough for a gospel, which is false if all truth is not summed up in Christ. Therefore, there could be no peace between the Gnostic illuminati and the Christian churches" (Early Church History, II, 68). LITERATURE.

Uhlhorn, The Conflict of Christianity with Heathenism; Neander, Church History, Antignostikus; Reuss, History of Christian Theology in the Apostolic Age; Lightfoot, Notes on Epistles of Paul, Colossians, Philippians; Gwatkin, Early Church History to 313 AD, II; W. Bousset, article "Gnosticism," Encyclopedia Brit, 11th edition; Harnack, History of Dogma, I (English translation); Orr, Neglected Factors in the Study of the Early Progress of Christianity, Sin as a Problem of Today, The Progress of Dogma, The Early Church; Mansel, The Gnostic Heresies; Robert Law, B.D., The Tests of Life.

John Rutherfurd

Go

(halakh, yalakh, bo', yatsa'; ago, hupago, anabaino, erchomi, aperchomai, poreuomai): "Go" ("went," etc.) occurs very frequently in the English Bible, and is the translation of a great many different Hebrew and Greek terms. As the word implies movement of all kinds, physical and mental, it has naturally many applications.

1. In the Old Testament:

In the Old Testament halakh and yalakh are among the commonest words, meaning "to go" in its original sense of "to walk," but also in the most varied senses, according to the verbal conjugations, etc., the preposition attached, and the words in connection with which the terms stand; halakh and yalakh are often used figuratively (translated "to walk," etc.) for to live, to pursue a way of life, e.g. "to walk ever in his ways" (Deuteronomy 19:9; compare Psalms 15:2; Psalms 89:30; 1 Kings 2:3; 1 Kings 3:3, etc.); to die, "He departed (Hebrew "went") without being desired" (2 Chronicles 21:20); bo', properly "to go in," "to enter" (e.g. Genesis 7:9), is very common, and yatsa', "to go or come out," also occurs frequently; yatsa', has frequently the meaning "to go forth," e.g. Genesis 8:7, "He sent forth a raven, and it went forth." Other frequent words are yaradh, "to go down" (Genesis 11:7, etc.); `alah, "to go or come up" (Genesis 2:6, etc.; Isaiah 15:5, "go it up," the King James Version) ; used also figuratively, e.g. "to rise up or excel" "Thou excellest them all" (Proverbs 31:29), "to come up on the nears," to be remembered, "The former things shall not be remembered, nor come into mind" (Isaiah 65:17; compare Jeremiah 3:16); `abhar, "to go or pass over," "to cross" (Genesis 41:46, etc.), also used figuratively "to pass away," e.g. "as chaff that passeth away" (Isaiah 29:5), `passeth by transgression' (Micah 7:18); shubh, "to go again" (Genesis 43:2, etc.); saTah and cur, "to go aside," occur several times with the meaning of wrongdoing (e.g. Numbers 5:12; Deuteronomy 28:14, the Revised Version (British and American) "turn aside"); nasa', "to remove (Exodus 14:15), "Speak unto the children of Israel that they go forward" (Exodus 14:19"removed"; Numbers 2:24 etc.); 'azal (Aramaic), "to go away or about" (Ezra 4:23; Daniel 2:17, etc.). Many other words occur only once or twice, e.g. 'arach, "to travel" Job (34:8); 'ashar, "to go straight or right" (Proverbs 4:14; Proverbs 9:6, the Revised Version (British and American) "walk"); darakh, "to tread" (Isaiah 59:8); dadhah, "to go softly" (Psalms 42:4; Isaiah 38:15, the Revised Version, margin "as in solemn procession"); raghal, "to stir" "to move" "I taught Enhraim to go" (Hosea 11:3, the Revised Version (British and American) "to walk").

The obsolete expression "go to" (derived from Tyndale) is the translation of yahabh in Genesis 11:3,Genesis 11:4,Genesis 11:7; Genesis 38:16; Exodus 1:10, "come on," the Revised Version (British and American) "come"; of bo' (2 Kings 5:5 the Revised Version (British and American)), "go now"; na' (Judges 7:3; Isaiah 5:5; Jeremiah 18:11, omitted in the Revised Version (British and American)).

2. In the New Testament:

In the New Testament anabaino is "to go up" (Matthew 3:16; Matthew 5:1, etc.); erchomai, "to go on" (Matthew 12:9, etc.); aperchomai, "to go off or away" (Matthew 2:22; Matthew 4:24, etc.); poreuomai, "to go or pass on" (Matthew 2:8,Matthew 2:20, etc.); hupago, "to go away" (Matthew 5:41; Matthew 8:32, etc.). We have also other combinations with different shades of meaning, e.g. huperbaino, "to go over or beyond" (1 Thessalonians 4:6); eiserchomai, "to go into" (Matthew 7:13; Matthew 15:11, etc.); proporeuomai, "to go before" (Luke 1:76; Acts 7:40), and other forms; ago (agomen), "Let us go" (Matthew 26:46; John 14:31, etc.); age is rendered "go to" (James 4:13; James 5:1), the Revised Version (British and American) "come."

"Go about (to)" the King James Version is the translation of zeteo, "to seek," in John 7:19, "Why go ye about to kill me?" the Revised Version (British and American) "Why seek ye?" and Romans 10:3; of peirazo, "to try," "attempt" (Acts 24:6, the Revised Version (British and American) "assayed"), and of peiraomai (26:21, the Revised Version (British and American) "assayed"), of epicheireo "to lay hands on" (Acts 9:29), which remains in the English Revised Version unchanged, the American Standard Revised Version "seeking"; "to let go" is the translation of apoluo "to loose off" or "away" (Luke 14:4, etc.), "to go astray," of planao (Matthew 18:12, etc.).

Various other words occurring singly are translated by forms of "go," e.g. phero, "to bear on," the King James Version "Let us go on unto perfection" (Hebrews 6:1, see below); epiduo, "to go in upon," "Let not the sun go down upon your Wrath" (Ephesians 4:26).

Among the many changes in the Revised Version (British and American) are the following: For "go," Exodus 4:26, "alone"; Leviticus 9:7, "draw near"; Numbers 2:31, "set forth"; 16:46, "carry it"; Isaiah 11:15; Isaiah 27:4, "march"; Matthew 11:4; John 8:11, "Go your way"; Luke 17:7, "Come straightway"; 18:25, "enter in"; John 21:3 b, "come." "Go" is substituted for "pass" (Exodus 12:12), "came" (Exodus 13:4), "away" (Exodus 19:24), "be put" (Leviticus 6:12), "enter" (Job 34:23), "return" (Ecclesiastes 1:7), "come" (Micah 4:2; compare Zechariah 14:18,Zechariah 14:19), "should be cast" (Matthew 5:30); "if I go up" for "I will come up" (Exodus 33:5); "make to go forth" for "bring forth" (Psalms 37:6); "let them go" for "gave them up" (Psalms 81:12). For the phrase, "go a whoring," the American Standard Revised Version has "play the harlot" (Exodus 34:15 f, etc., "commit fornication"); for "go about even now" (Deuteronomy 31:21, the American Standard Revised Version), "frame this day"; for "go well" (Proverbs 30:29), "are stately in their march"; for "suffer us to go" (Matthew 8:31), "send us" (a different text); for "not to think of men above that which is written" (1 Corinthians 4:6), "not (to go) beyond the things which are written"; for "that no man go beyond" (1 Thessalonians 4:6), "transgress," margin "overreach"; for "Let us go on unto perfection" (Hebrews 6:1), the English Revised Version "and press," the American Standard Revised Version "Let us press on unto perfection."

W. L. Walker

Goad

god (dorebhan, malmadh; kentron): The goad used by the Syrian farmer is usually a straight branch of oak or other strong wood from which the bark has been stripped, and which has at one end a pointed spike and at the other a flat chisel-shaped iron. The pointed end is to prod the oxen while plowing. The flattened iron at the other end is to scrape off the earth which clogs the plowshare. The ancient goad was probably similar to this instrument. It could do villainous work in the hands of an experienced fighter (Judges 3:31). If 1 Samuel 13:21 is correctly translated, the goads were kept sharpened by files.

Figurative: "The words of the wise are as goads" (Ecclesiastes 12:11). The only reference to goads in the New Testament is the familiar passage, "It is hard for thee to kick against the goad" (Acts 26:14). It was as useless for Saul to keep on in the wrong way as for a fractious ox to attempt to leave the furrow. He would surely be brought back with a prick of the goad.

James A. Patch

Goah; Goath

go'-a, go'-ath (go`ah; the King James Version; Septuagint reads ex eklekton lithon): A place named in describing the boundaries of Jerusalem as restored in the "days to come" (Jeremiah 31:39). If Gareb is the Northeast hill, then probably Goah is to be identified with the Northwest hill, which is called by Josephus "the camp of the Assyrians" (BJ, V, vii, 3; xii, 2).

See JERUSALEM.

Goat

got:

1. Names:

The common generic word for "goat" is `ez (compare Arabic `anz, "she-goat"; aix), used often for "she-goat" (Genesis 15:9; Numbers 15:27), also with gedhi, "kid," as gedhi `izzim, "kid of the goats" (Genesis 38:17), also with sa`ir, "he-goat," as se`ir `izzim, "kid of the goats" or "he-goat," or translated simply "kids," as in 1 Kings 20:27, "The children of Israel encamped before them like two little flocks of kids." Next, frequently used is sa`ir, literally, "hairy" (compare Arabic sha`r, "hair"; cher, "hedgehog"; Latin hircus, "goat"; hirtus, "hairy"; also German Haar; English "hair"), like `ez and `attudh used of goats for offerings. The goat which is sent into the wilderness bearing the sins of the people is sa`ir (Leviticus 16:7–22). The same name is used of devils (Leviticus 17:7; 2 Chronicles 11:15, the Revised Version (British and American) "he-goats") and of satyrs (Isaiah 13:21; Isaiah 34:14, the Revised Version, margin "he-goats," the American Standard Revised Version "wild goats"). Compare also se`irath `izzim, "a female from the flock" (Leviticus 4:28; Leviticus 5:6). The male or leader of the flock is `attudh; Arabic `atud, "yearling he-goat"; figuratively "chief ones" (Isaiah 14:9; compare Jeremiah 50:8). A later word for "he-goat," used also figuratively, is tsaphir (2 Chronicles 29:21; Ezra 8:35; Daniel 8:5,Daniel 8:8,Daniel 8:21). In Proverbs 30:31, one of the four things "which are stately in going" is the he-goat, tayish (Arabic tais, "he-goat"), also mentioned in Genesis 30:35; Genesis 32:14 among the possessions of Laban and Jacob, and in 2 Chronicles 17:11 among the animals given as tribute by the Arabians to Jehoshaphat. In Hebrews 9:12,Hebrews 9:13,Hebrews 9:19; Hebrews 10:4, we have tragos, the ordinary Greek word for "goat"; in Matthew 25:32,Matthew 25:33, eriphos, and its diminutive eriphion; in Hebrews 11:37 derma aigeion, "goatskin," from aix (see supra). "Kid" is gedhi (compare En-gedi (1 Samuel 23:29), etc.), feminine gedhiyah (Song of Songs 1:8), but also `ez, gedhi `izzim, se'-ir `izzim, se`ir `izzim, se`irath `izzim, bene `izzim, and eriphos. There remain ya`el (1 Samuel 24:2; Job 39:1; Psalms 104:18), English Versions of the Bible "wild goat"; ya`alah (Proverbs 5:19), the King James Version "roe," the Revised Version (British and American) "doe"; 'aqqo (Deuteronomy 14:5), English Versions of the Bible "wild goat"; and zemer (Deuteronomy 14:5), English Versions of the Bible "chamois."

2. Wild Goats:

The original of our domestic goats is believed to be the Persian wild goat or pasang, Capra aegagrus, which inhabits some of the Greek islands, Asia Minor, Syria, Mesopotamia, Persia, Afghanistan, and Northwestern India. It is called wa'l (compare Hebrew ya`el) by the Arabs, who in the North apply the same name to its near relative, the Sinaitic ibex, Capra beden. The last, doubtless the "wild goat" (ya`el) of the Bible, inhabits Southern Palestine, Arabia, Sinai, and Eastern Egypt, and within its range is uniformly called beden by the Arabs. It is thought by the writer that the "chamois" (zemer) of Deuteronomy 14:5 may be the Persian wild goat. The word occurs only in this passage in the list of clean animals. See CHAMOIS; DEER; ZOOLOGY. Wild goats are found only in Southern Europe, Southwestern Asia, and Northeastern Africa. They include the well-known, but now nearly extinct, Alpine ibex, steinbok, or bouquetin, the markhor, and the Himalayan ibex, which has enormous horns. The so-called Rocky Mountain goat is not properly a goat, but is an animal intermediate between goats and antelopes.

3. Domestic Goats:

Domestic goats differ greatly among themselves in the color and length of their hair, in the size and shape of their ears, and in the size and shape of their horns, which are usually larger in the males, but in some breeds may be absent in both sexes. A very constant feature in both wild and domestic goats is the bearded chin of the male. The goats of Palestine and Syria are usually black (Song of Songs 4:1), though sometimes partly or entirely white or brown. Their hair is usually long, hanging down from their bodies. The horns are commonly curved outward and backward, but in one very handsome breed they extend nearly outward with slight but graceful curves, sometimes attaining a span of 2 ft. or more in the old males. The profile of the face is distinctly convex. They are herded in the largest numbers in the mountainous or hilly districts, and vie with their wild congeners in climbing into apparently impossible places. They feed not only on herbs, but also on shrubs and small trees, to which they are most destructive. They are largely responsible for the deforested condition of Judea and Lebanon. They reach up the trees to the height of a man, holding themselves nearly or quite erect, and even walk out on low branches.

4. Economy:

Apart from the ancient use in sacrifice, which still survives among Moslems, goats are most valuable animals. Their flesh is eaten, and may be had when neither mutton nor beef can be found. Their milk is drunk and made into cheese and semn, a sort of clarified butter much used in cooking. Their hair is woven into tents (Song of Songs 1:5), carpets, cloaks, sacks, slings, and various camel, horse and mule trappings. Their skins are made into bottles (no'dh; Greek askos; Arabic qirbeh) for water, oil, semn, and other liquids (compare also Hebrews 11:37).

5. Religious and Figurative:

Just as the kid was often slaughtered for an honored guest (Judges 6:19; Revelation 13:2), so the kid or goat was frequently taken for sacrifice (Leviticus 4:23; Leviticus 9:15; Leviticus 16:7; Numbers 15:24; Ezra 8:35; Ezekiel 45:23; Hebrews 9:12). A goat was one of the clean animals (seh `izzim, Deuteronomy 14:4). In Daniel, the powerful king out of the West is typified as a goat with a single horn (8:5). One of the older goats is the leader of the flock. In some parts of the country the goatherd makes different ones leaders by turns, the leader being trained to keep near the goat-herd and not to eat so long as he wears the bell. In Isaiah 14:9, ".... stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth," the word translated "chief ones" is `attudh, "he-goat." Again, in Jeremiah 50:8, we have "Go forth out of the land of the Chaldeans, and be as the he-goats before the flocks." In Matthew 25:32, in the scene of the last judgment, we find "He shall separate them one from another, as the shepherd separateth the sheep from the goats." It is not infrequent to find a flock including both goats and sheep grazing over the mountains, but they are usually folded separately.

Alfred Ely Day

Goats' Hair

('ez): The word for she-goat is used elliptically to mean goats' hair, which was used in the tabernacle furnishings in the form of curtains (Exodus 26:7; Exodus 36:14). Goats' hair was probably used in the Midianite and Israelite camps in much the same way as in the Bedouin camps today (compare Numbers 31:20). The tents, tent ropes and rugs are made of spun goats' hair. The provision sacks which hold wheat, rice, etc., and the saddlebags are made of the same material. A strip of the cloth rolled up furnishes a bolster for the head while sleeping (compare 1 Samuel 19:13,1 Samuel 19:16). Goats' hair cloth is admirab1y suited to stand the hard usage of a frequently shifting encampment. The children of Israel appreciated its utility, even for the tabernacle, where to the modern critical eye it would have looked out of place, matched against scarlet and fine linen (Exodus 25:4; Exodus 35:6,Exodus 35:26). The fact that goats' hair was used is good indication of the comparative crudeness of the tabernacle, when contrasted with present-day furnishings.

See also HAIR; WEAVING.

James A. Patch

Goatskins

got'-skinz (en aigeiois dermasin): Such skins are mentioned only once (Hebrews 11:37), where the wearing of goatskins, indicating extreme poverty, is referred to, by implication, as the possible lot of the faithful Christian, even as it had been of others. Ascetics of different religions, especially of the Moslem sects, are frequently seen going about Syria and Palestine today, clad in sheepskins or goatskins, a sign of their renunciation of all things worldly.

Gob

gob (gobh): A place mentioned in 2 Samuel 21:18 f as the scene of two of David's battles with the Philistines. The name appears here only. In the parallel passage, 1 Chronicles 20:4, it is called Gezer (compare Ant, VII, xii, 2). Certain texts read "Nob" for "Gob," while Syriac and Septuagint read "Gath." The latter is probably correct.

Goblet

gob'-let ('aggan): A bowl or basin (Song of Songs 7:2), the only place where the word is used. `Aggan is used in the plural in Exodus 24:6 and Isaiah 22:24, and is translated "basins" and "cups." These "basins" were used to hold the blood of the sacrifices and must have been of moderate size. The "cups" were bowl-shaped vessels and belonged evidently to the smaller class of vessels used in a house.