divisions, which appear under various names. The custom of reading it
publicly in the Christian assemblies after the law and the prophets,
would soon cause such divisions to be applied to it. The law and the
prophets were for this end already divided into _parashim_ and
_haptaroth_, and the New Testament could not long remain without being
treated in the same way. The distribution into church lessons was indeed
the oldest that took place in it. The Christian teachers gave the name
of _pericopes_, to the sections read as lessons by the Jews. Justin
Martyr avails himself of this expression, when he quotes prophetical
passages. Such is the case also in Clemens of Alexandria; but this
writer also gives the name of ϖερικόπαι to larger sections of the
Gospels and St. Paul’s Epistles. _Pericopes_ therefore were nothing else
but ἀναγνώσματα, church lessons, or sections of the New Testament, which
were read in the assemblies after Moses and the Prophets. In the third
century another division also into κεφαλαία occurs. Dionysius of
Alexandria speaks of them in reference to the Apocalypse, and the
controversies respecting it. Some, says he, went through the whole book,
from chapter to chapter, to show that it bore no sense. In the fifth
century Euthalius produced again a division into chapters, which was
accounted his invention. He himself however lays claim to nothing more
than having composed τὴν τῶν κεφαλαίων ἐκθεσίν, the summaries of the
contents of the chapters in the Acts of the Apostles and the Catholic
Epistles. In the Epistles of St. Paul, not even these are his property;
but they are derived “from one of the wisest of the fathers, and
worshippers of Christ,” as he himself says, and he only incorporated
them into his stichometrical edition of the New Testament. The chapters
must, therefore, have been in existence before Euthalius, if the father
whom he mentions composed notices of their contents. But how old they
are cannot easily be known. The Euthalian κεφαλαία are distinguished
from the _pericopes_, or reading portions, by their extent. The Jews had
divided the law into fifty-three _parashim_, according to the number of
the Sabbaths, taking into account the leap year. Nearly so distributed
were the Acts of the Apostles, St. Paul’s and the Catholic Epistles,
according to the Alexandrine ritual, which Euthalius follows in his
stichometrical edition, namely, into fifty-six _pericopes_; three more
than the number of κουριάκαι ἡμέραι, Sundays, probably for three
festivals, which might be observed at Christmas, Easter, and
Whitsuntide. The Gospels too had naturally in the same way many
_pericopes_. Such in older times was the practice in Asia also; for
Justin says, that the believers there assemble themselves for prayer and
reading on Sunday only, ἐν τῇ τοῦ ἡλίου ἡμερᾷ. Since then the whole New
Testament was distributed into so few sections, these must necessarily
have been great, and a _pericope_ in Euthalius sometimes includes in it
four, five, and even six chapters. We have spoken hitherto only of the
chapters of the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles. In the Gospels
there occur to us κεφαλαία of two sorts, the greater and the lesser. The
lesser are the Ammonian which Eusebius rejected, after which he composed
his ten canons in order to point out in the Monotessaron of Ammonius the
respective contents of every Evangelist. He has explained himself in the
Epistle to Carpianus on their use, and on the formation of his ten
canons, where he names his sections sometimes κεφαλαία, sometimes
ϖερικόπαι. Matthew has three hundred and fifty-five of these, Mark two
hundred and thirty-six, Luke three hundred and forty-two, and John two
hundred and thirty-two. The other chapters are independent of these,
which from their extent are also named the greater. Of these, Matthew
contains sixty-eight, Mark forty-nine, Luke eighty-three, and John only
eighteen. There are but very few manuscripts which have not both of them
together. As to the church lessons, to come back to them once more,
various alterations took place in them. As the festival days multiplied,
the old division could no longer subsist, and in many churches the
_pericopes_ were shortened. At last as the ritual of ceremonies was
enlarged, only certain portions were extracted from the Gospels, the
Acts of the Apostles, and the Epistles, which sometimes were very short.
A codex of this sort was termed ἐκλογάδιον; in reference to the Gospels
alone, εὐαγγελιϛάριον; and in respect to the other books, ϖραξαπόϛολος.
This seems to have taken place among the Latins much earlier than among
the Greeks. There are perfectly credible testimonies, which establish
such an arrangement among the former at the middle of the fifth century,
at which date nothing of the kind is perceptible among the latter. The
expression, ϖραξαπόϛολος, appears indeed frequently in the Typicum of
St. Sabas, who died in the beginning of the fifth century. But the
Greeks do not disavow, that this Typicum or monastic ritual was not by
himself, that it perished in the invasions of the barbarians, and was
composed anew by John of Damascus, with references _memoriter_, [from
memory,] to that of Sabas. He lived toward the middle of the eighth
century, and with an earlier notice of lectionaries among the Greeks we
are not acquainted. Finally, our present chapters come, as it is well
known, from Cardinal Hugo de St. Cher, who in the twelfth century
composed a concordance, and to this end distributed the Bible according
to his own discretion into smaller portions. They are now moreover
generally admitted in the editions of the Hebrew and Greek texts. The
verses, however, are from Robert Stephens, who first introduced them in
his edition of the New Testament, A. D. 1551. His son, Henry Stephens,
was the first to record this for the information of posterity, in the
preface to his Greek Concordance to the New Testament; in which he says,
that two facts connected with it equally demand our admiration: “The
first is, that my father, while travelling from Paris to Lyons, finished
this division of each chapter into verses, and indeed the greater part
of it [_inter equitandum_] when riding on his horse. The second fact is,
that, a short time prior to this journey, while he had the matter still
in contemplation, almost all those to whom he mentioned it told him
plainly that he was an indiscreet man, as though he had a wish to spend
his time and labour on an affair which would prove utterly useless, and
which would not obtain for him any commendation, but, on the contrary,
would expose him to much ridicule. But behold the result: in opposition
to the opinion which condemned and discountenanced my father’s
undertaking, as soon as his invention was published, every edition of
the New Testament, whether in the Greek, Latin, French, German, or in
any other language, which did not adopt it, was immediately discarded.”
It perhaps will not be unedifying to add, that this passage has yielded
mankind another proof that LEARNING is not always synonymous with
WISDOM: for the phrase respecting riding, which occurs in it, has
furnished matter of warm dispute to literary men; some of them
contending that _inter equitandum_ means, that Robert Stephens performed
the greater part of his task while actually on horseback; but others,
giving a more extended construction to the expression, assert that he
was engaged in this occupation only when stopping for refreshment at
inns on the road. Though the first interpretation would probably obtain
the greatest number of suffrages from really learned and impartial men;
yet it is quite sufficient for mankind to know, in either way, that this
division into verses was completed in the course of that journey.
CHARIOTS OF WAR. The Scripture speaks of two sorts of these chariots,
one for princes and generals to ride in, the other used to break the
enemies battalions, by letting them loose armed with iron, which made
dreadful havoc among the troops. The most ancient chariots of which we
have any notice are Pharaoh’s, which were overwhelmed in the Red Sea,
Exodus xiv, 7. The Canaanites, whom Joshua engaged at the waters of
Merom, had cavalry and a multitude of chariots, Joshua xi, 4. Sisera,
the general of Jabin, king of Hazor, had nine hundred chariots of iron
in his army, Judges iv, 3. The tribe of Judah could not get possession
of all the lands of their lot, because the ancient inhabitants of the
country were strong in chariots of iron. The Philistines, in the war
carried on by them against Saul, had thirty thousand chariots and six
thousand horsemen, 1 Sam. xiii, 5. David, having taken one thousand
chariots of war from Hadadezer, king of Syria, hamstrung the horses, and
burned nine hundred chariots, reserving only one hundred to himself, 2
Sam. viii, 4. Solomon had a considerable number of chariots, but we know
of no military expedition in which they were employed, 1 Kings x, 26. As
Judea was a very mountainous country, chariots could be of no great use
there, except in the plains; and the Hebrews often evaded them by
fighting on the mountains. The kings of the Hebrews, when they went to
war, were themselves generally mounted in chariots from which they
fought, and issued their orders; and there was always a second chariot
empty, which followed each of them, that if the first was broken he
might ascend the other, 2 Chron. xxxv, 24. Chariots were sometimes
consecrated to the sun; and the Scripture observes, that Josiah burned
those which had been dedicated to the sun by his predecessors, 2 Kings
xxiii, 11. This superstitious custom was borrowed from the Heathens, and
principally from the Persians.
CHARITY, considered as a Christian grace, ought in our translation, in
order to avoid mistake, to have been translated _love_. It is the love
of God, and the love of our neighbour flowing from the love of God; and
is described with wonderful copiousness, felicity, and even grandeur, by
St. Paul, 1 Cor. xiii; a portion of Scripture which, as it shows the
habitual temper of a true Christian, cannot be too frequently referred
to for self-examination, and ought to be constantly present to us as our
rule. 2. In the popular sense, charity is almsgiving; a duty of
practical Christianity which is solemnly enjoined, and to which special
promises are annexed.
CHARM. See DIVINATION.
CHEBAR, a river of Chaldea, Ezek. i, 1. It is thought to have risen near
the head of the Tigris, and to have run through Mesopotamia, to the
south-west, and emptied itself into the Euphrates.
CHEDORLAOMER, a king of the Elamites, who were either Persians, or
people bordering upon the Persians. This was one of the four
confederated kings, who made war upon the five kings of the pentapolis
of Sodom; and who, after having defeated them, and made themselves
masters of a great booty, were pursued and dispersed by Abraham, Gen.
xiv.
CHEMARIM. This word occurs only once in our version of the Bible: “I
will cut off the remnant of Baal, and the name of the Chemarims
(Chemarim) with the priests,” Zeph. i, 4; but it frequently occurs in
the Hebrew, and is generally translated “priests of the idols,” or
“priests clothed in black,” because _chamar_ signifies _blackness_. By
this word the best commentators understand the priests of false gods,
and in particular the worshippers of fire, because they were, it is
said, dressed in black. Le Clerc, however, declares against this last
opinion. Our translators of the Bible would seem sometimes to understand
by this word the idols or objects of worship, rather than their priests.
This is also the opinion of Le Clerc. Calmet observes that _camar_ in
Arabic signifies _the moon_, and that Isis is the same deity. “Among the
priests of Isis,” says Calmet, “were those called _melanephori_, that
is, wearers of black; but it is uncertain whether this name was given
them by reason of their dressing wholly in black, or because they wore a
black shining veil in the processions of this goddess.”
CHEMOSH, כמוש, an idol of the Moabites, Numbers xxi, 29. The name is
derived from a root which in Arabic signifies _to hasten_. For this
reason, many believe Chemosh to be the sun, whose precipitate course
might well procure it the name of swift. Some identify Chemosh with
Ammon; and Macrobius shows that Ammon was the sun, whose rays were
denoted by his horns. Calmet is of opinion that the god Hamanus and
Apollo Chomeus, mentioned by Strabo and Ammianus Marcellinus, was
Chamos, or the sun. These deities were worshipped in many parts of the
east. Some, from the resemblance of the Hebrew Chamos with the Greek
Comos, have thought Chamos to signify Bacchus. Jerom and most
interpreters consider Chamosh and Peor as the same deity; but some think
that Baal-Peor was Tammuz, or Adonis. To Chemosh Solomon erected an
altar upon the Mount of Olives, 1 Kings xi, 7. As to the form of the
idol Chemosh, the Scripture is silent; but if, according to Jerom, it
were like Baal-Peor, it must have been of the beeve kind; as were,
probably, all the Baals, though accompanied with various insignia. There
can be little doubt that part of the religious services performed to
Chemosh, as to Baal-Peor, consisted in revelling and drunkenness,
obscenities and impurities of the grossest kinds. From Chemosh the
Greeks seem to have derived their Κῶμος, called by the Romans _Comus_,
the god of feasting and revelling.
CHERETHIM. כרתים. Cherethim, or Cherethites, are denominations for the
Philistines: “I will stretch out mine hand upon the Philistines, and
will cut off the Cherethim, and destroy the remnant of the sea coast,”
Ezek. xxv, 16. Zephaniah, exclaiming against the Philistines, says, “Wo
unto the inhabitants of the sea coasts, the nation of the Cherethites,”
Zeph. ii, 5. It is said, 1 Sam. xxx, 14, that the Amalekites invaded the
south of the Cherethites; that is, of the Philistines. David, and some
of the kings, his successors, had guards called Cherethites and
Pelethites, 2 Sam. xv, 18; xx, 7. Calmet thinks that they were of the
country of the Philistines; but several expositors of our own country
are of a different opinion. “We can hardly suppose,” say the latter,
“that David would employ any of these uncircumcised people as his
body-guard, or that the Israelitish soldiers would have patiently seen
foreigners of that nation advanced to such places of honour and trust.”
It may, therefore, be inferred that guards were called Cherethites,
because they went with David into Philistia, where they continued with
him all the time he was under the protection of Achish. These were the
persons who accompanied David from the first, and who remained with him
in his greatest distresses; and it is no wonder, if men of such approved
fidelity should be chosen for his body-guard. Beside, it is not uncommon
for soldiers to derive their names, not from the place of their
nativity, but of their residence.
CHERUB. כרב, plural כרבים. It appears, from Gen. iii, 29, that this is a
name given to angels; but whether it is the name of a distinct class of
celestials, or designates the same order as the seraphim, we have no
means of determining. But the term _cherubim_ generally signifies those
figures which Moses was commanded to make and place at each end of the
mercy seat, or propitiatory, and which covered the ark with expanded
wings in the most holy place of the Jewish tabernacle and temple. See
Exodus xxv, 18, 19. The original meaning of the term, and the shape or
form of these, any farther than that they were _alata animata_, “winged
creatures,” is not certainly known. The word in Hebrew is sometimes
taken for a calf or ox; and Ezekiel, x, 14, sets down the face of a
cherub as synonymous to the face of an ox. The word _cherub_, in Syriac
and Chaldee, signifies to till or plough, which is the proper work of
oxen. _Cherub_ also signifies strong and powerful. Grotius says they
were figures much like that of a calf; and Bochart, likewise, thinks
that they were more like the figure of an ox than any thing beside; and
Spencer is of the same mind. But Josephus says they were extraordinary
creatures of a figure unknown to mankind. The opinion of most critics,
taken, it seems, from Ezek. i, 9, 10, is, that they were figures
composed of parts of various creatures; as a man, a lion, an ox, an
eagle. But certainly we have no decided proof that the figures placed in
the holy of holies, in the tabernacle, were of the same form with those
described by Ezekiel. The contrary, indeed, seems rather indicated,
because they looked _down_ upon the mercy seat, which is an attribute
not well adapted to a four-faced creature, like the emblematical
cherubim seen by Ezekiel.
The cherubim of the sanctuary were two in number; one at each end of the
mercy seat; which, with the ark, was placed exactly in the middle,
between the north and south sides of the tabernacle. It was here that
atonement was made, and that God was rendered propitious by the high
priest sprinkling the blood upon and before the mercy seat, Lev. xvi,
14, 15. Here the glory of God appeared, and here he met his high priest,
and by him his people, and from hence he gave forth his oracles; whence
the whole holy place was called דביר, _the oracle_. These cherubim, it
must be observed, had feet whereon they stood, 2 Chron. iii, 13; and
their feet were joined, in one continued beaten work, to the ends of the
mercy seat which covered the ark: so that they were wholly over or above
it. Those in the tabernacle were of beaten gold, being but of small
dimensions, Exod. xxv, 18; but those in the temple of Solomon were made
of the wood of the olive tree overlaid with gold; for they were very
large, extending their wings to the whole breadth of the oracle, which
was twenty cubits, 1 Kings vi, 23–28; 2 Chron. iii, 10–13. They are
called “cherubim of glory,” not merely or chiefly on account of the
matter or formation of them, but because they had the glory of God, or
the glorious symbol of his presence, “the Shekinah,” resting between
them. As this glory abode in the inward tabernacle, and as the figures
of the cherubim represented the angels who surround the manifestation of
the divine presence in the world above, that tabernacle was rendered a
fit image of the court of heaven, in which light it is considered every
where in the Epistle to the Hebrews. See chapters iv, 14; viii, 1; ix,
8, 9, 23, 24; xii, 22, 23.