generally observed by his disciples with gratitude and joy. His birth
was the greatest blessing ever bestowed on mankind. The angels from
heaven celebrated it with a joyful hymn; and every man, who has any
feeling of his own lost state without a Redeemer, must rejoice and be
glad in it. “Unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and his
name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God, the
everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace,” Isaiah ix, 6. For this
festival, however, there is no authority in Scripture, nor do we know
that it was observed in the age of the Apostles.
On Easter Sunday we celebrate our Saviour’s victory over death and hell,
when, having on the cross made an atonement for the sin of the world, he
rose again from the grave, brought life and immortality to light, and
opened to all his faithful servants the way to heaven. On this great
event rest all our hopes. “If Christ be not risen,” says St. Paul, “then
is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. But now is Christ
risen from the dead, and become the first-fruits of them that slept,” 1
Cor. xv, 14, 20.
Forty days after his resurrection, our Lord ascended into heaven, in the
sight of his disciples. This is celebrated on what is called
Ascension-day, or Holy Thursday. Ten days after his ascension, our Lord
sent the Holy Spirit to be the comforter and guide of his disciples.
This blessing is commemorated on Whit-Sunday, which is a very great
festival, and may be profitably observed; for the assistance of the Holy
Spirit can alone support us through all temptations, and guide us into
all truth.
The pretended success of some in discovering the remains of certain holy
men, called “relics,” multiplied in the fourth century of the Christian
church the festivals and commemorations of the martyrs in a most
extravagant manner. These days, instead of being set apart for pious
exercises, were spent in indolence, voluptuousness, and criminal
pursuits; and were less consecrated to the service of God, than employed
in the indulgence of sinful passions. Many of these festivals were
instituted on a Pagan model, and perverted to similar purposes.
FELIX, CLAUDIUS. See CLAUDIUS.
FERRET, אנקה, from אנק, or _cry out_, Lev. xi, 30. The ferret is a
species of the weasel; but Bochart will have the _anakah_ to be the
spotted lizard, called by Pliny _stellio_. Dr. James takes it for the
frog, in allusion to the name, which literally signifies _the crier_,
befitting the croaking of that animal; but we shall find the frog
mentioned under another name. Dr. Geddes renders it _the newt_, or
rather _the lizard of the Nile_; and it evidently must be of the lizard
species. Pliny mentions “the _galleotes_, covered with red spots, whose
cries are sharp,” which may be the _gekko_, which is probably the animal
here intended. As its name, in the Indies _tockai_, and in Egypt
_gekko_, is formed from its voice, so the Hebrew name _anakah_, or
perhaps _anakkah_, seems to be formed in like manner; the double k being
equally observable in all these appellations. If these remarks are
admissible, this lizard is sufficiently identified.
FESTUS. Portius Festus succeeded Felix in the government of Judea, A. D.
60. Felix his predecessor, to oblige the Jews, when he resigned his
government, left St. Paul in bonds at Cæsarea, in Palestine, Acts xxiv,
27. Festus, at his first coming to Jerusalem, was entreated by the
principal Jews to condemn St. Paul, or to order him up to Jerusalem,
they having conspired to assassinate him in the way. Festus answered,
that it was not customary with the Romans to condemn any man without
hearing him; but said that he would hear their accusations against St.
Paul at Cæsarea. From these accusations St. Paul appealed to Cæsar, and
by this means secured himself from the prosecution of the Jews, and the
wicked intentions of Festus, whom they had corrupted.
FIG TREE, תאגה, Gen. iii, 7; Num. xiii, 23; συκῆ, Matthew vii, 16; xxi,
19; xxiv, 32; Mark xi, 13, 20, 21; xiii, 28; Luke vi, 44; xiii, 6, 7;
xxi, 29; John i, 48; James iii, 12; Rev. vi, 13. This tree was very
common in Palestine. It becomes large, dividing into many branches,
which are furnished with leaves shaped like those of the mulberry, and
affords a friendly shade. Accordingly, we read, in the Old Testament, of
Juda and Israel dwelling, or sitting securely, every man under his fig
tree, 1 Kings iv, 25; Micah iv, 4; Zech. iii, 10; 1 Mac. xiv, 12. And,
in the New Testament, we find Nathanael under a fig tree, probably for
the purposes of devotional retirement, John i, 49–51. Hasselquist, in
his journey from Nazareth to Tiberias, says, “We refreshed ourselves
under the shade of a fig tree, where a shepherd and his herd had their
rendezvous; but without either house or hut.” The fruit which it bears
is produced from the trunk and large branches, and not from the smaller
shoots, as in most other trees. It is soft, sweet, and very nourishing.
Milton is of opinion that the banian tree was that with the leaves of
which our first parents made themselves aprons. But his account, as to
the matter of fact, wants even probability to countenance it; for the
leaves of this are so far from being, as he has described them, of the
bigness of an Amazonian target, that they seldom or never exceed five
inches in length, and three in breadth. Therefore, we must look for
another of the fig kind, that better answers the purpose referred to by
Moses, Gen. iii, 7; and as the fruit of the banana tree, is often, by
the most ancient authors, called a fig, may we not suppose this to have
been the fig tree of paradise? Pliny, describing this tree, says that
its leaves were the greatest and most shady of all others; and as the
leaves of these are often six feet long, and about two broad, are thin,
smooth, and very flexible, they may be deemed more proper than any other
for the covering spoken of, especially since they may be easily joined
together with the numerous threadlike filaments, which may, without
labour, be peeled from the body of the tree. The first ripe fig is still
called _boccôre_ in the Levant, which is nearly its Hebrew name, בכורה,
Jer. xxiv, 2. Thus Dr. Shaw, in giving an account of the fruits in
Barbary, mentions “the black and white _boccôre_, or ‘early fig,’ which
is produced in June, though the _kermes_, or _kermouse_, the ‘fig,’
probably so called, which they preserve and make up into cakes, is
rarely ripe before August.” And on Nahum iii, 12, he observes, that “the
_boccôres_ drop as soon as they are ripe, and, according to the
beautiful allusion of the prophet, fall into the mouth of the eater upon
being shaken.” Farther, “It frequently falls out in Barbary,” says he;
“and we need not doubt of the like in this hotter climate of Judea,
that, according to the quality of the preceding season, some of the more
forward and vigorous trees will now and then yield a few ripe figs six
weeks or more before the full season. Something like this may be alluded
to by the Prophet Hosea, when he says, ‘I saw your fathers as בכורה,
_the first ripe_, in the fig tree, at her first time,’ Hosea ix, 10.
Such figs were reckoned a great dainty.” See Isaiah xxviii, 4. The
Prophet Isaiah gave orders to apply a lump of figs to Hezekiah’s boil;
and immediately after it was cured. God, in effecting this miraculous
cure, was pleased to order the use of means not improper for that end.
2. The account of our Saviour’s denunciation against the barren fig
tree, Matt. xxi, 19; Mark xi, 13, has occasioned some of the boldest
cavils of infidelity; and the vindication of it has exercised the
ingenuity of several of the most learned critics and commentators. The
whole difficulty arises from the circumstance of his disappointment in
not finding fruit on the tree, when it is expressly said, that “the time
of figs was not yet.” While it was supposed that this expression
signified, that the time for such trees to bring forth fruit was not yet
come, it looked very unaccountable that Christ should reckon a tree
barren, though it had leaves, and curse it as such, when he knew that
the time of bearing figs was not come; and that he should come to seek
figs on this tree, when he knew that figs were not used to be ripe so
soon in the year. But the expression does not signify the time of the
coming forth of figs, but the time of the gathering in of ripe figs, as
is plain from the parallel expressions. Thus, “the time of the fruit,”
Matt. xxi, 34, most plainly signifies the time of gathering in ripe
fruits, since the servants were sent to receive those fruits for their
master’s use. St. Mark and St. Luke express the same by the word _time_,
or _season_: “At the _season_ he sent a servant,” &c; that is, at the
season or time of gathering in ripe fruit, Mark xii, 2; Luke xx, 10. In
like manner, if any one should say in our language, the season of fruit,
the season of apples, the season of figs, every one would understand him
to speak of the season or time of gathering in these fruits. When,
therefore, St. Mark says, that “the time or season of figs was not yet,”
he evidently means that the time of gathering ripe figs was not yet
past; and, if so, it was natural to expect figs upon all those trees
that were not barren; whereas, after the time of gathering figs, no one
would expect to find them on a fig tree, and its having none then would
be no sign of barrenness. St. Mark, by saying, “For the time of figs was
not yet,” does not design to give a reason for “his finding nothing but
leaves;” but he gives a reason for what he said in the clause before:
“He came, if haply he might find any thereon;” and it was a good reason
for our Saviour’s coming and seeking figs on the tree, because the time
for their being gathered was not come. We have other like instances in
the Gospels, and, indeed, in the writings of all mankind, of another
clause coming in between the assertion and the proof. Thus, in this very
evangelist: “They said among themselves, Who shall roll away the stone
from the door of the sepulchre? and when they looked, they saw the stone
was rolled away; for it was very great,” Mark xvi, 3, 4; where its being
very great is not assigned as a reason of its being rolled away, but of
the women’s wishing for some one to roll it away for them. St. Matthew
informs us that the tree was “in the way,” that is, in the common road,
and therefore, probably, no particular person’s property; but if it was,
being barren, the timber might be as serviceable to the owner as before.
So that here was no real injury; but Jesus was pleased to make use of
this innocent miracle to prefigure the speedy ruin of the Jewish nation
on account of its unfruitfulness under greater advantages than any other
people enjoyed at that day; and, like all the rest of his miracles, it
was done with a gracious intention, namely, to alarm his countrymen, and
induce them to repent. In the blasting of this barren fig tree, the
distant appearance of which was so fair and promising, he delivered one
more awful lesson to a degenerate nation, of whose hypocritical exterior
and flattering but delusive pretensions it was a just and striking
emblem.
FINGER. The finger of God signifies his power, his operation. Pharaoh’s
magicians discovered the finger of God in the miracle which Moses
wrought, Exodus viii, 19. This legislator gave the law written by the
finger of God to the Hebrews, Exodus xxxi, 18. Our Saviour says he cast
out devils by the finger and Spirit of God, which he intimates was a
sign that the kingdom of God was come; that God’s spiritual government
of his church was begun to be exercised among the Jews, by the Messiah,
Luke xi, 20. To put forth one’s finger, is a bantering, insulting
gesture. “If thou take away from the midst of thee the yoke, and the
putting out of the finger,” Isaiah lviii, 9; if thou take away from the
midst of thee the chain, or yoke, wherewith thou loadest thy debtors;
and forbear pointing at them, and using jeering or menacing gestures.
FIRE. God hath often appeared in fire, and encompassed with fire, as
when he showed himself in the burning bush; and descended on Mount
Sinai, in the midst of flames, thunderings, and lightning, Exodus iii,
2; xix, 18. Hence fire is a symbol of the Deity: “The Lord thy God is a
consuming fire,” Deut. iv, 24. The Holy Ghost is compared to fire: “He
shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire,” Matt. iii, 11. To
verify this prediction, he sent the Holy Ghost, which descended upon his
disciples, in the form of tongues, or like flames of fire, Acts ii, 3.
It is the work of the Holy Spirit to enlighten, purify, and sanctify the
soul; and to inflame it with love to God, and zeal for his glory. Fire
from heaven fell frequently on the victims sacrificed to the Lord, as a
mark of his presence and approbation. It is thought, that God in this
manner expressed his acceptance of Abel’s sacrifices, Gen. iv, 4. When
the Lord made a covenant with Abraham, a fire like that of a furnace
passed through the divided pieces of the sacrifices, and consumed them,
Gen. xv, 17. Fire fell upon the sacrifices which Moses offered at the
dedication of the tabernacle, Lev. ix, 24; and upon those of Manoah,
Samson’s father, Judges xiii, 19, 20; upon Solomon’s, at the dedication
of the temple, 2 Chron. vii, 1; and on Elijah’s, at Mount Carmel, 1
Kings xviii, 38. The fire which came down from heaven, first upon the
altar in the tabernacle, and afterward descended anew upon the altar in
the temple of Solomon, at its consecration, was there constantly fed and
maintained by the priests, day and night, in the same manner as it had
been in the tabernacle. The Jews have a tradition, that Jeremiah,
foreseeing the destruction of the temple, took this fire and hid it in a
pit; but that at the rebuilding of the temple, being brought again from
thence, it revived upon the altar. But this is a fiction: and the
generality of them allow, that, at the destruction of the temple, it was
extinguished: and in the time of the second temple, nothing was made use
of for all their burnt offerings but common fire only. The ancient
Chaldeans adored the fire, as well as the old Persians, and some other
people of the east. The torments of hell are described by fire, both in
the Old and New Testament. Our Saviour makes use of this similitude, to
represent the punishment of the damned, Mark ix, 44. He likewise speaks
frequently of the eternal fire prepared for the devil, his angels, and
reprobates, Matt. xxv, 41. The sting and remorse of conscience is the
worm that will never die; and the wrath of God upon their souls and
bodies, the fire that shall never go out. There are writers who
maintain, that by the worm is to be understood a living and sensible,
not an allegorical and figurative, worm; and by fire, a real elementary
and material fire. Among the abettors of this opinion are Austin,
Cyprian, Chrysostom, Jerom, &c. The word of God is compared to fire: “Is
not my word like a fire?” Jer. xxiii, 20. It is full of life and
efficacy; like a fire it warms, melts, and heats; and is powerful to
consume the dross, and burn up the chaff and stubble. Fire is likewise
taken for persecution, dissension, and division: “I am come to send fire
on earth,” Luke xii, 49; as if it was said, upon my coming and
publishing the Gospel, there will follow, through the devil’s malice and
corruption of men, much persecution to the professors thereof, and
manifold divisions in the world, whereby men will be tried, whether they
will be faithful or not.
FIRMAMENT. It is said, Gen. i, 7, that God made the firmament in the
midst of the waters, to separate the inferior from the superior. The
word used on this occasion properly signifies _expansion_, or something
expanded. This expansion is properly the atmosphere, which encompasses
the globe on all sides, and separates the water in the clouds from that
on the earth.
FIRST-BORN. The first-born, who was the object of special affection to
his parents, was denominated by way of eminence, רחם פטר, _the opening
of the womb_. In case a man married with a widow, who by a previous
marriage had become the mother of children, the first-born as respected
the second husband was the eldest child by the second marriage. Before
the time of Moses, the father might, if he chose, transfer the right of
primogeniture to a younger child, but the practice occasioned much
contention, Gen. xxv, 31, 32; and a law was enacted, overruling it,
Deut. xxi, 15–17. The first-born inherited peculiar rights and
privileges. (1.) He received a double portion of the estate. Jacob, in
the case of Reuben, his first-born, bestowed his additional portion upon
Joseph, by adopting his two sons, Gen. xlviii, 5–8; Deut. xxi, 17. This
was done as a reprimand, and a punishment of his incestuous conduct,
Genesis xxxv, 22; but Reuben, notwithstanding, was enrolled as the
first-born in the genealogical registers, 1 Chron. v, 1. (2.) The
first-born was the priest of the whole family. The honour of exercising
the priesthood was transferred, by the command of God communicated
through Moses, from the tribe of Reuben, to whom it belonged by right of
primogeniture, to that of Levi, Num. iii, 12–18; viii, 18. In
consequence of God having taken the Levites from among the children of
Israel instead of all the first-born to serve him as priests, the
first-born of the other tribes were to be redeemed, at a valuation made
by the priest not exceeding five shekels, from serving God in that
capacity, Numbers xviii, 15, 16; Luke ii, 22, &c. (3.) The first-born
enjoyed an authority over those who were younger, similar to that
possessed by a father, Gen. xxv, 23, &c; 2 Chron. xxi, 3; Gen. xxvii,
29; Exod. xii, 29: which was transferred in the case of Reuben by Jacob
their father to Judah, Gen. xlix, 8–10. The tribe of Judah, accordingly,
even before it gave kings to the Hebrews, was every where distinguished
from the other tribes. In consequence of the authority which was thus
attached to the first-born, he was also made the successor in the
kingdom. There was an exception to this rule in the case of Solomon,
who, though a younger brother, was made his successor by David at the
special appointment of God. It is very easy to see in view of these
facts, how the word “first-born” came to express sometimes a great, and
sometimes the highest, dignity.
2. First-born is not always to be understood literally; it is sometimes
taken for the prime, most excellent, most distinguished of any thing.
“The first-born of the poor,” Isaiah xiv, 30, signifies the most
miserable of the poor; and “the first-born of death,” Job xviii, 13, the
most terrible of deaths.
3. God ordained that all the Jewish first-born both of men and beasts,
for service, should be consecrated to him. The male children only were
subject to this law. If a woman’s first child were a girl, the father
was not obliged to offer any thing for her, or for the children after
her, though they were males. If a man had many wives, he was obliged to
offer the first-born of each of them to the Lord. The first-born were
offered in the temple, and were redeemed for the sum of five shekels.
The firstling of a clean beast was offered at the temple, not to be
redeemed, but to be killed. An unclean beast, a horse, an ass, or a
camel, was either redeemed or exchanged. An ass was redeemed by a lamb,
or five shekels; if not redeemed, it was killed.
FIRST-FRUITS, among the Hebrews, were presents made to God of part of
the fruits of the harvest, to express the submission, dependence, and
thankfulness of the offerers. They were offered at the temple, before
the crop was touched; and when the harvest was over, before any private
persons used their corn. The first of these first-fruits, offered in the
name of the nation, was a sheaf of barley, gathered on the fifteenth of
Nisan in the evening, and threshed in a court of the temple. After it
was well cleaned, about three pints of it were roasted and pounded in a
mortar. Over this was thrown a portion of oil, and a handful of incense.
Then the priest took this offering, waved it before the Lord toward the
four parts of the world, threw a handful of it into the fire upon the
altar, and kept the rest. After this, every one was at liberty to get in
his harvest. Beside these first-fruits, every private person was obliged
to bring his first-fruits to the temple. The Scripture prescribes
neither the time nor the quantity. The rabbins say, that they were
obliged to bring at least the sixtieth part of their fruits and harvest.
These first-fruits consisted of wheat, barley, grapes, figs, apricots,
olives, and dates. They met in companies of four-and-twenty persons to
carry their first-fruits in a ceremonious manner. The company was
preceded by an ox appointed for the sacrifice, with a crown of olives on
his head, and his horns gilded. There was also another sort of
first-fruits paid to God, Num. xv, 19, 20, when the bread in every
family was kneaded, a portion of it was set apart, and given to the
priest or Levite of the place. If there was no priest or Levite, it was
cast into the oven, and consumed by the fire. This is one of the three
precepts peculiar to the women; because they generally made the bread.
The first-fruits and tenths were the most substantial revenue of the
priests and Levites. St. Paul says, Christians have the first-fruits of
the Spirit, Rom. viii, 23, that is, a greater abundance of God’s Spirit,
more perfect and more excellent gifts than the Jews. Christ is called
the first-fruits of them that slept; for as the first-fruits were
earnests to the Jews of the succeeding harvest, so Christ is the
first-fruits or the earnest of the general resurrection.
FIR TREE, ברוש, occurs 2 Sam. vi, 5; 1 Kings v, 8, 10; vi, 15, 34; ix,
11; 2 Kings xix, 23; 2 Chron. ii, 8; iii, 5; Psalm civ, 17; Isaiah xiv,
8; xxxvii, 24; xli, 19; lv, 13; lx, 13; Ezek. xxvii, 5; xxxi, 8; Hosea
xiv, 8; Nahum ii, 3; Zech. xi, 2. The LXX render it so variously as to
show that they knew not what particular tree is meant; the Vulgate,
generally by _abietes_, the “fir tree.” Celsius asserts that it is the
cedar; but Millar maintains that it is the fir. The fir tree is an
evergreen, of beautiful appearance, whose lofty height, and dense
foliage, afford a spacious shelter and shade. The trunk of the tree is
very straight. The wood was anciently used for spears, musical
instruments, furniture for houses, rafters in building, and for ships.
In 2 Sam. vi, 5, it is mentioned that David played on instruments of fir
wood; and Dr. Burney, in his “History of Music,” observes, “This species
of wood, so soft in its nature, and sonorous in its effects, seems to
have been preferred by the ancients, as well as moderns, to every other
kind for the construction of musical instruments, particularly the
bellies of them, on which the tone of them chiefly depends. Those of the
harp, lute, guitar, harpsichord, and violin, in present use, are always
made of this wood.”