churches, as given in the advertisement to Baron Von Wessenberg’s
Correspondence with the Court of Rome,” may not be uninteresting to the
reader: The Germans have just set the noble example of forming a union
between these two branches of the Protestant faith. This union, which
originated, we believe, in the grand duchy of Nassau, has taken place
almost universally throughout Germany; and the separate appellations of
Lutheran and Calvinistic churches have merged in the common appellation
of the Evangelical church. The Lutheran and Reformed churches of Prussia
met in synod together, on the invitation of their monarch, the first of
October, 1817, and soon came to an agreement; and the union was
celebrated on the day of the tri-centenary festival of the Reformation.
A similar synod of the Lutherans and Calvinists in Hesse-Cassel was held
at Hanau in May and June, 1818, and attended with the same result. The
royal confirmation was given to the Bavarian union on the first of
October following. Saxe-Weimar, and most of the other small states have
followed this example. The Protestant Germans have now, therefore, only
one Gospel, one temple, one divine Instructer, and one mode of
communion; and, what is singular, and highly honourable to their
liberality, this union was every where accomplished with the greatest
ease, and without a dissentient voice having been raised against it.”
How different was this result from that of the synods and councils of
other times; and what a change in the state of public opinion does it
indicate! And yet it is to be feared that the _liberality_ from which
this union has resulted, is rather indifference to the grand
peculiarities of the Christian faith than mutual charity.
LYCAONIA, a province of Asia Minor, accounted a part of Cappadocia,
having Pisidia on the west, and Cilicia on the south. In it were the
cities of Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe, mentioned in the travels of St.
Paul. The former was the capital, and the country itself at that time a
Roman province. The speech of Lycaonia,” mentioned Acts xiv, 11, is
supposed to have been a corrupt Greek, intermingled with many oriental
words.
LYCIA, a country of Asia Minor, having Phrygia on the north, Pamphylia
on the east, the Mediterranean on the south, and Caria on the west. The
greatest part of the country, however, is a peninsula projecting into
the Mediterranean. Lycia derived its name from Lycus, the son of
Pandion, who settled here. It was conquered by Crœsus, king of Lydia,
and passed with his kingdom into the hands of the Persians. It
afterward, in common with the neighbouring countries of Asia Minor,
formed part of the Macedonian empire, under Alexander; then of that of
the Seleucidæ, his successors in those countries; and, at the time of
the Apostles, was reduced to the state of a Roman province.
LYDDA, by the Greeks called Diospolis. It lay in the way from Jerusalem
to Cæsarea, four or five leagues to the east of Joppa. Lydda belonged to
the tribe of Ephraim. It seems to have been inhabited by the Benjamites,
at the return of the Jews from the Babylonish captivity, Neh. xi, 35.
St. Peter coming to Lydda, cured a sick man of the palsy named Eneas,
Acts ix, 33, 34.
LYDIA, a woman of Thyatira, a seller of purple, who dwelt in the city of
Philippi, in Macedonia. She was converted to the faith by St. Paul, and
both she and her family were baptized. She offered her house to the
Apostle, and pressed him to abide there so earnestly, that he yielded to
her entreaties. She was not a Jewess by birth, but a proselyte, Acts
xvi, 14, 15, 40.
2. LYDIA, an ancient celebrated kingdom of Asia Minor, which, in the
time of the Apostles, was reduced to a Roman province. Sardis was the
capital.
LYSTRA, a city of Lycaonia, the native place of Timothy. The Apostle
Paul and Barnabas having preached here, and healed a cripple, were taken
for gods. But so fickle are human praise and popular encomiums, that, in
the space of a few hours, those who had been deemed gods were regarded
as less than mortals, and were stoned by the very persons who so lately
deified them. See Acts xiv.
MAACAH, or BETH-MAACHA, a little province of Syria to the east and the
north of the sources of the river Jordan, upon the road to Damascus.
Abel or Abela was in this country, whence it was called
Abelbeth-Maachah. We learn from Joshua xiii, 13, that the Israelites did
not destroy the Maachathites, but permitted them to dwell in the land
among them. The distribution of the half tribe of Manasseh, beyond
Jordan, extended as far as this country, Deut. iii, 14; Joshua xii, 5.
MACCABEES, two apocryphal books of Scripture, containing the history of
Judas and his brothers, and their wars against the Syrian kings in
defence of their religion and liberties, so called from Judas, the son
of Mattathias, surnamed Maccabæus, as some authors say, from the word
מכבי, formed of the initials of מי-כמכה באלים יהוה, Who is like unto
thee, O Lord, among the gods?” Exod. xv, 11, which was the motto of his
standard; whence those who fought under his standard were called
Maccabees, and the name was generally applied to all who suffered in the
cause of true religion, under the Egyptian or Syrian kings. This name,
formed by abbreviation according to the common practice of the Jews,
distinguished Judas Maccabæus by way of eminence, as he succeeded his
father, B. C. 166, in the command of those forces which he had with him
at his death; and, being joined by his brothers, and all others that
were zealous for the law, he erected his standard, on which he inscribed
the above mentioned motto. Those, also, who suffered under Ptolemy
Philopater of Alexandria, fifty years before this period, were afterward
called Maccabees; and so were Eleazar, and the mother and her seven
sons, though they suffered before Judas erected his standard with the
motto from which the appellation originated. And therefore, as these
books which contain the history of Judas and his brothers, and their
wars against the Syrian kings, in defence of their religion and
liberties, are called the first and second books of the Maccabees; so
that book which gives us the history of those who, in the like cause,
under Ptolemy Philopater, were exposed to his elephants at Alexandria,
is called the third book of the Maccabees; and that which is written by
Josephus, of the martyrdom of Eleazar, and the seven brothers and their
mother, is called the fourth book of the Maccabees.
The first book of the Maccabees is an excellent history, and comes
nearest to the style and manner of the sacred historians of any extant.
It was written originally in the Chaldee language, of the Jerusalem
dialect, and was extant in this language in the time of Jerom, who bad
seen it. From the Chaldee it was translated into Greek, from the Greek
into Latin. Theodotion is conjectured to have translated it into Greek;
but this version was probably more ancient, as we may infer from its use
by ancient authors, as Tertullian, Origen, and others. It is supposed to
have been written by John Hyrcanus, the son of Simon, who was prince and
high priest of the Jews near thirty years, and began his government at
the time where this history ends. It contains the history of forty
years, from the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes to the death of Simon, the
high priest; that is, from the year of the world 3829 to the year 3869,
B. C. 131. The second book of the Maccabees begins with two epistles
sent from the Jews of Jerusalem to the Jews of Egypt and Alexandria, to
exhort them to observe the feast of the dedication of the new altar
erected by Judas, on his purifying the temple. The first was written in
the 169th year of the era of the Seleucidæ, that is, B. C. 144; and the
second, in the 188th year of the same era, or B. C. 125; and both appear
to be spurious. After these epistles follows the preface of the author
to his history, which is an abridgment of a larger work, composed by one
Jason, a Jew of Cyrene, who wrote in Greek the history of Judas
Maccabæus, and his brethren, and the wars against Antiochus Epiphanes,
and Eupator his son. The two last chapters contain events under the
reign of Demetrius Soter, the successor of Antiochus Eupator, and
contain such varieties in their style, as render it doubtful whether
they had the same author as the rest of the work. This second book does
not by any means equal the accuracy and excellency of the first. It
contains a history of about fifteen years, from the execution of
Heliodorus’s commission, who was sent by Seleucus to fetch away the
treasures of the temple, to the victory obtained by Judas Maccabæus over
Nicanor; that is, from the year of the world 3828 to the year 3843, B.
C. 157.
There are in the Polyglott Bibles, both of Paris and London, Syriac
versions of both these books; but they, as well as the English versions
which we have among the apocryphal writers in our Bibles, are derived
from the Greek. For a farther account of Judas Maccabæus, and of his
brothers, whose history is recorded in the first and second books of the
Maccabees, and also by Josephus, we refer to the article JEWS. The third
book of the Maccabees contains the history of the persecution of Ptolemy
Philopater against the Jews in Egypt, and their sufferings under it; and
seems to have been written by some Alexandrian Jew in the Greek
language, not long after the time of Siracides. This book, with regard
to its subject, ought to be called the first, as the things which are
related in it occurred before the Maccabees, whose history is recorded
in the first and second books; but as it is of less authority and repute
than the other two, it is reckoned after them. It is extant in Syriac,
though the translator did not seem to have well understood the Greek
language. It is in most of the ancient manuscript copies of the Greek
Septuagint, particularly in the Alexandrian and Vatican, but was never
inserted into the vulgar Latin version of the Bible, nor, consequently,
into any of our English copies. The first authentic mention we have of
this book is in Eusebius’s _Chronicon_.” It is also named with two other
books of the Maccabees in the eighty-fifth of the apostolic canons. But
it is uncertain when that canon was added. Grotius thinks that this book
was written after the two first books, and shortly after the book of
Ecclesiasticus, from which circumstance it was called the third book of
Maccabees. Moreover, Josephus’s history of the martyrs that suffered
under Antiochus Epiphanes, is found in some manuscript Greek Bibles,
under the name of the fourth book of the Maccabees. This book, ascribed
to Josephus, occurs under the title, Concerning the Empire or Government
of Reason;” but learned men have expressed a doubt whether this was the
book known to the ancients as the fourth book of the Maccabees.
MACEDONIA, a kingdom of Greece, having Thrace to the north, Thessaly
south, Epirus west, and the Ægean Sea east. Alexander the Great, son of
Philip, king of Macedonia, having conquered Asia, and subverted the
Persian empire, the name of the Macedonians became very famous
throughout the east; and it is often given to the Greeks, the successors
of Alexander in the monarchy. In like manner, the name of Greeks is
often put for Macedonians, 2 Maccabees iv, 36. When the Roman empire was
divided, Macedonia fell to the share of the emperor of the east. After
it had long continued subject to the Romans, it fell under the power of
the Ottoman Turks, who are the present masters of it.
St. Paul was invited by an angel of the Lord, who appeared to him at
Troas, to come and preach the Gospel in Macedonia, Acts xvi, 9. After
this vision, the Apostle no longer doubted his divine call to preach the
Gospel in Macedonia; and the success that attended his ministry
confirmed him in his persuasion. Here he laid the foundation of the
churches of Thessalonica and Philippi.
MAGDALA, a city on the west side of the sea of Galilee, near Dalmanutha;
Jesus, after the miracle of the seven loaves, being said by St. Matthew
to have gone by ship to the coasts of Magdala, Matt. xv, 39; and by St.
Mark, to the parts of Dalmanutha,” Mark viii, 10. Mr. Buckingham came to
a small village in this situation called Migdal, close to the edge of
the lake, beneath a range of high cliffs, in which small grottoes are
seen, with the remains of an old square tower, and some larger
buildings, of rude construction, apparently of great antiquity. Migdol
implies a tower, or fortress; and this place, from having this name
particularly applied to it, was doubtless, like the Egyptian Migdol, one
of considerable importance; and may be considered as the site of the
Migdal of the Naphtalites, as well as the Magdala of the New Testament.
MAGI, or MAGIANS, a title which the ancient Persians gave to their wise
men, or philosophers. Magi, among the Persians, answers to σόφοι, or
φιλόσοφοι, among the Greeks; _sapientes_, among the Latins; druids,
among the Gauls; gymnosophists, among the Indians; and priests, among
the Egyptians.
The ancient magi, according to Aristotle and Laertius, were the sole
authors and conservators of the Persian philosophy; and the philosophy
principally cultivated among them was theology and politics; they being
always esteemed as the interpreters of all law, both divine and human;
on which account they were wonderfully revered by the people. Hence
Cicero observes that none were admitted to the crown of Persia, but such
as were well instructed in the discipline of the magi; who taught τὰ
βασιλικὰ, and showed princes how to govern. Plato, Apuleius, Laertius,
and others, agree that the philosophy of the magi related principally to
the worship of the gods: they were the persons who were to offer
prayers, supplications, and sacrifices, as if the gods would be heard by
them alone. But, according to Lucian, Suidas, &c, this theology, or
worship of the gods, as it is called, about which the magi were
employed, was little more than the diabolical art of divination; so that
μαγεί.ἁ, strictly taken, was the art of divination. These people were
held in such veneration among the Persians, that Darius, the son of
Hystaspes, among other things, had it engraven on his monument, that he
was the master of the magi. Philo Judæus describes the magi to be
diligent inquirers into nature, out of the love they bear to truth; and
who, setting themselves apart from other things, contemplate the divine
virtues the more clearly, and initiate others in the same mysteries. The
magi, or magians, formed one of the two grand sects into which the
idolatry of the world was divided between 500 and 600 years before
Christ. These abominated all those images which were worshipped by the
other sect, denominated Sabians, and paid their worship to the Deity
under the emblem of fire. Their chief doctrine was, that there were two
principles, one of which was the cause of all good, and the other the
cause of all evil. The former was represented by light, and the latter
by darkness, as their truest symbols; and of the composition of these
two they supposed that all things in the world were made. The sect of
the magians was revived and reformed by Zoroaster. This celebrated
philosopher, called by the Persians Zerdusht, or Zaratush, began about
the thirty-sixth year of the reign of Darius to restore and reform the
magian system of religion. He was not only excellently skilled in all
the learning of the east that prevailed in his time, but likewise
thoroughly versed in the Jewish religion, and in all the sacred writings
of the Old Testament that were then extant: whence some have inferred
that he was a native Jew both by birth and profession; and that he had
been servant to one of the prophets, probably Ezekiel or Daniel. He made
his first appearance in Media, in the city of Xix, now called Aderbijan,
as some say; or, according to others in Ecbatana, now called Tauris.
Instead of admitting the existence of two first causes, with the
magians, he asserted the existence of one supreme God, who created both
these, and out of these two produced, according to his sovereign
pleasure, every thing else. According to his doctrine, there was one
supreme Being independently and self-existing from all eternity. Under
him there are two angels: one the angel of light, the author and
director of all good; and the other the angel of darkness, who is the
author and director of all evil. These two, probably speaking
figuratively, out of the mixture of light and darkness, made all things
that are; and they are in a state of perpetual conflict; so that where
the angel of light prevails, there the most is good; and where the angel
of darkness prevails, there the most is evil. This struggle shall
continue to the end of the world; and then there shall be a general
resurrection, and a day of judgment: after which, the angel of darkness
and his disciples shall go into a world of their own, where they shall
suffer in everlasting darkness the punishment of their evil deeds; and
the angel of light and his disciples shall go into a world of their own,
where they shall receive in everlasting light the reward due unto their
good deeds: and henceforward they shall for ever remain separate.
Of the controversy as to Zoroaster, Zeratusht, or Zertushta, and the
sacred books said to have been written by him, called Zend or
Zendavesta, which has divided the most eminent critics, it would answer
no important end to give an abstract. Those who wish for information on
the subject are referred to Hyde’s _Religio Veterum Persarum_;”
Prideaux’s Connection;” Warburton’s Divine Legation;” Bryant’s
Mythology;” The Universal History;” Sir W. Jones’s Works, vol. iii, p.
115; M. Du Perron, and Richardson’s Dissertation,” prefixed to his
Persian and Arabic Dictionary. But whatever may become of the authority
of the whole or part of the Zendavesta, and with whatever fables the
history of the reformer of the magian religion may be mixed, the learned
are generally agreed that such a reformation took place by his
instrumentality. Zeratusht,” says Sir W. Jones, reformed the old
religion by the addition of genii or angels, of new ceremonies in the
veneration shown to fire, of a new work which he pretended to have
received from heaven, and, _above all, by establishing the actual
adoration of the supreme Being_;” and he farther adds, The reformed
religion of Persia continued in force till that country was conquered by
the Musselmans; and, without studying the Zend, we have ample
information concerning it in the modern Persian writings of several who
profess it. Bahman always named Zeratusht with reverence; he was, in
truth, a pure Theist, and strongly disclaimed any adoration of the fire
or other elements; and he denied that the doctrine of two coëval
principles, supremely good and supremely bad, formed any part of his
faith.” The Zeratusht of Persia, or the Zoroaster of the Greeks,” says
Richardson, was highly celebrated by the most discerning people of
ancient times; and his tenets, we are told, were most eagerly and
rapidly embraced by the highest in rank, and the wisest men in the
Persian empire.” He distinguished himself by denying that good and evil,
represented by light and darkness, were coëval, independent principles;
and asserted the supremacy of the true God, in exact conformity with the
doctrine contained in a part of that celebrated prophecy of Isaiah in
which Cyrus is mentioned by name: I am the Lord, and there is none else,
there is no God beside me,” no coëval power. I form the light, and
create darkness, I make peace,” or good, and create evil, I the Lord do
all these things.” Fire, by Zerdushta, appears to have been used
emblematically only; and the ceremonies for preserving and transmitting
it, introduced by him, were manifestly taken from the Jews, and the
sacred fire of their tabernacle and temple.
The old religion of the Persians was corrupted by Sabianism, or the
worship of the host of heaven, with its accompanying superstition. The
magian doctrine, whatever it might be at first, had degenerated; and two
eternal principles, good and evil, had been introduced. It was therefore
necessarily idolatrous also, and, like all other false systems,
flattering to the vicious habits of the people. So great an improvement
in the moral character and influence of the religion of a whole nation
as was effected by Zoroaster, a change which is not certainly paralleled
in the ancient history of the religion of mankind, can scarcely,
therefore, be thought possible, except we suppose a divine
interposition, either directly, or by the occurrence of some very
impressive events. Now as there are so many authorities for fixing the
time of Zoroaster or Zeratusht not many years subsequent to the death of
the great Cyrus, the events connected with the conquest of Babylon may
account for his success in that reformation of religion of which he was
the author. For, had not the minds of men been prepared for this change
by something extraordinary, it is not supposable that they would have
adopted a purer faith from him. That he gave them a better doctrine, is
clear from the admission of even Dean Prideaux, who has very unjustly
branded him as an impostor. Let it then be remembered, that as the Most
High ruleth in the kingdoms of men,” he often overrules great political
events for moral purposes. The Jews were sent into captivity to Babylon
to be reformed from their idolatrous propensities, and their reformation
commenced with their calamity. A miracle was there wrought in favour of
three Hebrew confessors of the existence of one only God, and that under
circumstances to put shame upon a popular idol in the presence of the
king and all the rulers of the provinces,” that the issue of this
controversy between Jehovah and idolatry might be made known throughout
that vast empire.--Worship was refused to the idol by a few Hebrew
captives, and the idol had no power to punish the public affront:--the
servants of Jehovah were cast into a furnace, and he delivered them
unhurt; and a royal decree declared that there was no god who could
deliver after this sort.” The proud monarch himself also is smitten with
a singular disease;--he remains subject to it until he acknowledges the
true God; and, upon his recovery, he publicly ascribes to him both the
justice and the mercy of the punishment. This event takes place, also,
in the accomplishment of a dream which none of the wise men of Babylon
could interpret. It was interpreted by Daniel, who made the fulfilment
to redound to the honour of the true God, by ascribing to him the
perfection of knowing the future, which none of the false gods, appealed
to by the Chaldean sages, possessed; as the inability of their servants
to interpret the dream sufficiently proved. After these singular events,
Cyrus takes Babylon, and he finds there the sage and the statesman,
Daniel, the worshipper of the true God, who creates both good and evil,”
who makes the light, and forms the darkness.” There is little doubt but
that he and the principal Persians throughout the empire would have the
prophecy of Isaiah respecting Cyrus, delivered more than a hundred years
before he was born, and in which his name stood recorded, along with the
predicted circumstances of the capture of Babylon, pointed out to them.
Every reason, religious and political, urged the Jews to make the
prediction a matter of notoriety; and from Cyrus’s decree in Ezra it is
certain that he was acquainted with it; because there is in the decree
an obvious reference to the prophecy. This prophecy, so strangely
fulfilled, would give mighty force to the doctrine connected with it,
and which it proclaims with so much majesty:--
I am JEHOVAH, and none else,
Forming LIGHT, and creating DARKNESS,
Making PEACE, and creating EVIL;
I JEHOVAH am the author of all these things.”