equally just and eloquent: This most violent man, having such terrible
propensities, whose turbulent impulses rendered him of a most
enterprising character, would have become nothing better than a John of
Gishala, a blood-intoxicated zealot, εμπνεων απειλης και φονου,
breathing out threatenings and slaughter, Acts ix, 1, had not his whole
soul been changed. The harsh tone of his mind inclined him to the
principles of Pharisaism, which had all the appearance of severity, and
was the predominant party among the Jews. Nature had not withholden from
him the external endowments of eloquence, although he afterward spoke
very modestly of them. At Lystra he was deemed the tutelar god of
eloquence. This character, qualified for great things, but, not master
of himself from excess of internal power, was an extreme of human
dispositions, and, according to the natural course, was prone to
absolute extremities. His religion was a destructive zeal, his anger was
fierceness, his fury required victims. A ferocity so boisterous did not
psychologically qualify him for a Christian nor a philanthropist; but,
least of all, for a quietly enduring man. He, nevertheless, became all
this on his conversion to Christianity, and each bursting emotion of his
mind subsided directly into a well regulated and noble character.
Formerly hasty and irritable, now only spirited and resolved; formerly
violent, now full of energy and enterprising: once ungovernably
refractory against every thing which obstructed him, now only
persevering; once fanatical and morose, now only serious; once cruel,
now only firm; once a harsh zealot, now fearing God; formerly
unrelenting, deaf to sympathy and commiseration, now himself acquainted
with tears, which he had seen without effect in others. Formerly the
friend of none, now the brother of mankind, benevolent, compassionate,
sympathizing; yet never weak, always great; in the midst of sadness and
sorrow manly and noble; so he showed himself at his deeply moving
departure from Miletus, Acts xx: it is like the departure of Moses, like
the resignation of Samuel, sincere and heart-felt, full of
self-recollection, and in the midst of pain full of dignity. His
writings are a true expression of this character, with regard to the
tone predominant in them. Severity, manly seriousness, and sentiments
which ennoble the heart, are interchanged with mildness, affability, and
sympathy: and their transitions are such as nature begets in the heart
of a man penetrated by his subject, noble and discerning. He exhorts,
reproaches, and consoles again; he attacks with energy, urges with
impetuosity, then again he speaks kindly to the soul; he displays his
finer feelings for the welfare of others, his forbearance and his fear
of afflicting any body: all as the subject, time, opposite dispositions,
and circumstances require. There prevails throughout in them an
importuning language, an earnest and lively communication. Rom. i,
26–32, is a comprehensive and vigorous description of morals. His
antithesis, Rom. ii, 21–24; 2 Cor. iv, 8–12; vi, 9–11; ix, 22–30; his
enumerations, 1 Cor. xiii, 4–10; 2 Cor. vi, 4–7; 2 Tim. iii, 1–5; Eph.
iv, 4–7; v, 3–6; his gradations, Romans viii, 29, 30; Titus iii, 3, 4;
the interrogations, exclamations, and comparisons, sometimes animate his
language even so as to give a visible existence to it. That, however,
which we principally perceive in Paul, and from which his whole actions
and operations become intelligible, is the peculiar impression which the
idea of a universal religion has wrought upon his mind. This idea of
establishing a religion for the world had not so profoundly engrossed
any soul, no where kindled so much vigour, and projected it into such a
constant energy. In this he was no man’s scholar; this he had
immediately received from the Spirit of his Master; it was a spark of
the divine light which enkindled him. It was this which never allowed
him to remain in Palestine and in Syria, which so powerfully impelled
him to foreign parts. The portion of some others was Judea and its
environs: but his mission was directed to the nations, and his allotment
was the whole of the Heathen world. Thus he began his career among the
different nations of Asia Minor, and when this limit also became too
confined for him, he went with equal confidence to Europe, among other
nations, ordinances, sciences, and customs; and here likewise he finally
with the same indefatigable spirit circulated his plans, even to the
pillars of Hercules. In this manner Paul prepared the overthrow of two
religions, that of his ancestors, and that of the Heathens.
PEACOCK, תוכיים, 1 Kings x, 22; 2 Chron. ix, 21; a bird distinguished by
the length of its tail, and the brilliant spots with which it is
adorned; which displays all that dazzles in the sparkling lustre of
gems, and all that astonishes in the rainbow. The peacock is a bird
originally of India; thence brought into Persia and Media. Aristophanes
mentions Persian peacocks; and Suidas calls the peacock the Median bird.
From Persia it was gradually dispersed into Judea, Egypt, Greece, and
Europe. If the fleet of Solomon visited India, they might easily procure
this bird, whether from India itself, or from Persia; and certainly the
bird by its beauty was likely to attract attention, and to be brought
among other rarities of natural history by Solomon’s servants, who would
be instructed to collect every curiosity in the countries they visited.
PEARL, a hard, white, shining body, usually roundish, found in a shell
fish resembling an oyster. The oriental pearls have a fine polished
gloss, and are tinged with an elegant blush of red. They are esteemed in
the east beyond all other jewels.
PELAGIANS, a sect that arose in the fifth century. Pelagius was a
British monk, of some rank, and very exalted reputation. He, with his
friend Celestius, travelled to Rome, where they resided very early in
the fifth century, and opposed with warmth certain received notions
respecting original sin, and the necessity of divine grace. What
reception their doctrines met with at Rome does not appear; but their
virtue excited general approbation. On the approach of the Goths, they
retired to Africa, where Celestius remained, with a view of gaining
admittance as a presbyter into the church of Carthage. Pelagius
proceeded to Palestine, where he enjoyed the favour and protection of
John, bishop of Jerusalem. But his friend and his opinions met with a
very different reception from St. Augustine, the celebrated bishop of
Hippo. Whatever parts were visited by these unorthodox friends, they
still asserted their peculiar opinions; and they were gradually engaged
in a warm contest, in the course of which they were probably led to
advance more than had originally occurred to them. In contending for the
truth of their doctrines, they are said to have asserted, that mankind
derived no injury from the sin of Adam; that we are now as capable of
obedience to the will of God as he was; that, otherwise, it would have
been cruel and absurd to propose to mankind the performance of certain
duties, with the sanction of rewards, and the denunciation of
punishments; and that, consequently, men are born without vice, as well
as without virtue.” Pelagius is charged also with having maintained,
that it is possible for men, provided they fully employ the powers and
faculties with which they are endued, to live without sin;” and though
he did not deny that external grace, or the doctrines and motives of the
Gospel, are necessary, yet he is said to have rejected the necessity of
internal grace, or the aids of the divine Spirit. He acknowledged, that
the power we possess of obeying the will of God, is a divine gift;” but
asserted, that the direction of this power depends upon ourselves; that
natural death is not a consequence of the sin of Adam, but of the frame
of man; and that Adam would have died, though he had not sinned.”
Isidore, Chrysostom, and Augustine strenuously opposed these opinions;
and the latter procured their condemnation in a synod held at Carthage
in 412. They were, however, favourably received at Rome, and Pope
Zozimus was at the head of the Pelagian party: but his decision against
the African bishops, who had opposed Pelagianism, was disregarded by
them, and the pontiff yielded at length to their reasonings and
remonstrances, and condemned the men whom he had before honoured with
his approbation. The council of Ephesus likewise condemned the opinions
of Pelagius and Celestius; and the Emperor Honorius, in 418, published
an edict, which ordained that the leaders of the sect should be expelled
from Rome, and their followers exiled. Some of the Pelagians taught that
Christ was a mere man, and that men might lead sinless lives, because
Christ did so; that Jesus became Christ after his baptism, and God after
his resurrection; the one arising from his unction, the other from the
merit of his passion. The Pelagian controversy, which began with the
doctrines of grace and original sin, was extended to predestination, and
excited continual discord and division in the church. It must however be
recollected, that we are acquainted with the sentiments of Pelagius only
through the medium of his opponents; and that it is probable that they
were much misrepresented. See AUGUSTINE.
The followers of the truly evangelical Arminius, or those who hold the
tenet of general redemption with its concomitants, have often been
greatly traduced, by the ignorant among their doctrinal opponents, as
Pelagians, or at least as Semi-Pelagians. It may therefore serve the
cause of truth to exhibit the appropriate reply which the Dutch
Arminians gave to this charge when urged against them at the synod of
Dort, and which they verified and maintained by arguments and
authorities that were unanswerable. In their concluding observations
they say, “From all these remarks a judgment may easily be formed at
what an immense distance our sentiments stand from the dogmatical
assertions of the Pelagians and Semi-Pelagians _on the grace of God in
the conversion of man_. Pelagius, in the first instance, attributed all
things to nature: but we acknowledge nothing but grace. When Pelagius
was blamed for not acknowledging grace, he began indeed to speak of it,
but it is evident that by _grace_ he understood the power of nature as
created by God, that is, _the rational will_: but by grace we understand
_a supernatural gift_. Pelagius, when afterward pressed with passages of
Scripture, also admitted this supernatural grace; but he placed it
solely in the external teaching of the law: though we affirm that God
offers his word to men, yet we likewise affirm that he inwardly causes
the understanding to believe. Subsequently Pelagius joined to this
external grace _that by which sins are pardoned_: we acknowledge not
only the grace by which sins are forgiven, but also that by which men
are assisted to refrain from the commission of sin. In addition to his
previous concessions Pelagius granted, that _the grace of Christ_ was
requisite beside the two kinds which he had enumerated; but he
attributed it entirely to the doctrine and example of Christ that we are
aided in our endeavours not to commit sin: we likewise admit that the
doctrine and example of Christ afford us some aid in refraining from
sin, but in addition to their influence we also place the gift of the
Holy Spirit with which God endues us, and which enlightens our
understandings, and confers strength and power upon our will to abstain
from sinning. When Pelagius afterward owned the assistance of divine
power inwardly working in man by the Holy Spirit, he placed it solely in
the enlightening of the understanding: but we believe, that it is not
only necessary for us to know or understand what we ought to do, but
that it is also requisite for us to implore the aid of the Holy Spirit
that we may be rendered capable of performing, and may delight in the
performance of, that which it is our duty to do. Pelagius admitted
grace,--but it has been a question with some whether he meant only
illumination, or, beside this, a power communicated to the will;--he
admitted grace, but he did this only to show that by means of it man can
_with greater ease_ act aright: we, on the contrary, affirm that grace
is bestowed, not that we may be able with greater ease to act aright,
(which is as though we can do this even without grace,) but that grace
is absolutely necessary to enable us to act at all aright. Pelagius
asserted, that man, so far from requiring the aid of grace for the
performance of good actions, is, through the powers implanted in him at
the time of his creation, capable of fulfilling the whole law, of loving
God, and of overcoming all temptations: we, on the contrary, assert that
the grace of God is required for the performance of every act of piety.
Pelagius declared, that by the works of nature man renders himself
worthy of grace: but we, in common with the church universal, condemn
this dogma. When Pelagius afterward himself condemned this tenet, he
understood by _grace_, partly natural grace, which is antecedent to all
merit, and partly remission of sins, which he acknowledged to be
gratuitous; but he added, that through works performed by the powers of
nature alone, at least through the desire of good and the imperfect
longing after it, men merit that spiritual grace by which they are
assisted in good works: but we declare, that men will that which is good
on account of God’s prevenience or going before them by his grace, and
exciting within them a longing after good; otherwise grace would no
longer be grace, because it would not be _gratuitously_ bestowed, but
only _on account of the merit of man_.” That many who have held some
tenets in common with the true Arminians have been, in different
degrees, followers of Pelagius is well known; but the original Arminians
were in truth as far from Pelagian or Semi-Pelagian errors, granting the
opinions of Pelagius to be fairly reported by his adversaries, as the
Calvinists themselves. This is also the case with the whole body of
Wesleyan Methodists, and of the cognate societies to which they have
given rise, both in Great Britain and America.
PELICAN, קאת, Lev. xi, 18; Deut. xiv, 17; Psa. cii, 7; Isa. xxxiv, 11;
Zeph. ii, 14; a very remarkable aquatic bird, of the size of a large
goose. Its colour is a grayish white, except that the neck looks a
little yellowish, and the middle of the back feathers are blackish. The
bill is long, and hooked at the end, and has under it a lax membrane,
extended to the throat, which makes a bag or sack, capable of holding a
very large quantity. Feeding her young from this bag has so much the
appearance of feeding them with her own blood, that it caused this
fabulous opinion to be propagated, and made the pelican an emblem of
paternal, as the stork had been before chosen, more justly, of filial
affection. The voice of this bird is harsh and dissonant, which some say
resembles that of a man grievously complaining. David compares his
groaning to it, Psalm cii, 7.
PENTATEUCH. This word, which is derived from the Greek Πεντάτευχος, from
ϖέντε, _five_, and τεῦχος, _a volume_, signifies the collection of the
five books of Moses, which are Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and
Deuteronomy. That the Jews have acknowledged the authenticity of the
Pentateuch, from the present time back to the era of their return from
the Babylonish captivity, a period of more than two thousand three
hundred years, admits not a possibility of doubt. The five books of
Moses have been during that period constantly placed at the head of the
Jewish sacred volume, and divided into fixed portions, one of which was
read and explained in their synagogues, not only every Sabbath with the
other Scriptures, but in many places twice a week, and not unfrequently
every evening, when they alone were read. They have been received as
divinely inspired by every Jewish sect, even by the Sadducees, who
questioned the divinity of the remaining works of the Old Testament. In
truth, the veneration of the Jews for their Scriptures, and above all
for the Pentateuch, seems to have risen almost to a superstitious
reverence. Extracts from the Mosaic law were written on pieces of
parchment, and placed on the borders of their garments, or round their
wrists and foreheads: nay, they at a later period counted, with the
minutest exactness, not only the chapters and paragraphs, but the words
and letters, which each book of their Scriptures contains. Thus also the
translation, first of the Pentateuch, and afterward of the remaining
works of the Old Testament, into Greek, for the use of the Alexandrian
Jews, disseminated this sacred volume over a great part of the civilized
world, in the language most universally understood, and rendered it
accessible to the learned and inquisitive in every country; so as to
preclude all suspicion that it could be materially altered by either
Jews or Christians, to support their respective opinions as to the
person and character of the Messiah; the substance of the text being, by
this translation, fixed and authenticated at least two hundred and
seventy years before the appearance of our Lord.
But, long previous to the captivity, two particular examples, deserving
peculiar attention, occur in the Jewish history, of the public and
solemn homage paid to the sacredness of the Mosaic law as promulgated in
the Pentateuch; and which, by consequence, afford the fullest testimony
to the authenticity of the Pentateuch itself: the one in the reign of
Hezekiah, while the separate kingdoms of Judah and Israel still
subsisted; and the other in the reign of his great grandson Josiah,
subsequent to the captivity of Israel. In the former we see the pious
monarch of Judah assembling the priests and Levites and the rulers of
the people; to deplore with him the trespasses of their fathers against
the divine law, to acknowledge the justice of those chastisements which,
according to the prophetic warnings of that law, had been inflicted upon
them; to open the house of God which his father had impiously shut, and
restore the true worship therein according to the Mosaic ritual, 2 Kings
xviii; 2 Chron. xxix; xxx; with the minutest particulars of which he
complied, in the sin-offerings and the peace-offerings which, in
conjunction with his people, he offered for the kingdom and the
sanctuary and the people, to make atonement to God for them and for all
Israel; restoring the service of God as it had been performed in the
purest times. And Hezekiah,” says the sacred narrative, rejoiced, and
all the people, that God had prepared the people; for the thing was done
suddenly,” 2 Chron. xxix, 36; immediately on the king’s accession to the
throne, on the first declaration of his pious resolution. How clear a
proof does this exhibit of the previous existence and clearly
acknowledged authority of those laws which the Pentateuch contains!
But a yet more remarkable part of this transaction still remains. At
this time Hoshea was king of Israel, and so far disposed to countenance
the worship of the true God, that he appears to have made no opposition
to the pious zeal of Hezekiah; who, with the concurrence of the whole
congregation which he had assembled, sent out letters and made a
proclamation, not only to his own people of Judah, 2 Chron. xxx, 1, but
to Ephraim and Manasseh and all Israel, from Beersheba even unto Dan,
that they should come to the house of the Lord at Jerusalem, to keep the
passover unto the Lord God of Israel; saying, Ye children of Israel,
turn again to the Lord God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and he will
return to the remnant of you who are escaped out of the hands of the
kings of Assyria; and be not ye like your fathers and your brethren,
which trespassed against the Lord God of their fathers, who therefore
gave them up to desolation as ye see. Now be ye not stiff-necked, as
your fathers were; but yield yourselves unto the Lord, and enter into
his sanctuary which he hath sanctified for ever, and serve the Lord your
God, that the fierceness of his wrath may turn away from you. So the
posts passed from city to city through the country of Ephraim and
Manasseh even unto Zebulun,” 2 Chron. xxx, 6, &c.
Now, can we conceive that such an attempt as this could have been made,
if the Pentateuch containing the Mosaic code had not been as certainly
recognized through the ten tribes of Israel as in the kingdom of Judah?
The success was exactly such as we might reasonably expect if it were so
acknowledged; for, though many of the ten tribes laughed to scorn and
mocked the messengers of Hezekiah, who invited them to the solemnity of
the passover, from the impious contempt which through long disuse they
had conceived for it; Nevertheless,” says the sacred narrative, divers
of Asher and Manasseh and of Zebulun humbled themselves and came to
Jerusalem; and there assembled at Jerusalem much people, to keep the
feast of unleavened bread in the second month, a very great
congregation; and they killed the passover, and the priests and Levites
stood in their places after their manner, according to the law of Moses,
the man of God. So there was great joy in Jerusalem; for since the time
of Solomon, the son of David, king of Israel, there was not the like at
Jerusalem: and when all this was finished, all Israel that were present
went out to the cities of Judah, and brake the images in pieces, and cut
down the groves, and threw down the high places and the altars out of
all Judah and Benjamin, in Ephraim also and Manasseh, until they had
utterly destroyed them all,” 2 Chronicles xxx, 11; xxxi. Can any clearer
proof than this be desired of the constant and universal acknowledgment
of the divine authority of the Pentateuch throughout the entire nation
of the Jews, notwithstanding the idolatries and corruptions which so
often prevented its receiving such obedience as that acknowledgment
ought to have produced? The argument from this certain antiquity of the
Pentateuch, a copy of which existed in the old Samaritan character as
well as in the modern Hebrew, is most conclusive as to the numerous
prophecies of Christ, and the future and present condition of the Jews
which it contains. These are proved to have been delivered many ages
before they were accomplished; they could be only the result of divine
prescience, and the uttering of them by Moses proves therefore the
inspiration and the authority of his writings. See LAW and MOSES.
PENTECOST, Πεντεκοϛὴ, a solemn festival of the Jews; so called, because
it was celebrated on the fiftieth day after the sixteenth of Nisan,
which was the second day of the passover. The Hebrews call it the feast
of weeks, because it was kept seven weeks after the passover. They then
offered the first fruits of the wheat harvest, which was then completed;
beside which, they presented at the temple seven lambs of that year, one
calf, and two rams for a burnt-offering; two lambs for a peace-offering;
and a goat for a sin-offering, Lev. xxiii, 15, 16; Exod. xxxiv, 22;
Deut. xvi, 9, 10. The feast of pentecost was instituted among the
Israelites, first, to oblige them to repair to the temple of the Lord,
there to acknowledge his absolute dominion over the whole country, by
offering him the first fruits of the harvest; and, secondly, to
commemorate and give thanks to God for the law which he had given them
from Sinai, on the fiftieth day after their coming out of Egypt. The
modern Jews celebrate the pentecost for two days. They deck the
synagogues, where the law is read, and their own houses, with garlands
of flowers. They hear an oration in praise of the law, and read from the
Pentateuch and prophets lessons which have a relation to this festival,
and accommodate their prayers to the same occasion. It was on the feast
of pentecost that the Holy Ghost descended in the miraculous manner
related, Acts ii.
PERGAMUS, a city of Troas, very considerable in the time of John the
evangelist, Rev. ii, 12, 13. This city was, for the space of one hundred
and fifty years, the capital of a kingdom of the same name founded by
Philetærus, B. C. 283; who treacherously made use of the treasures
committed to his care by Lysimachus after the battle of Ipsus, and,
seizing on Pergamus, established an independent kingdom. After
Philetærus were five kings of the same race; the last of whom, Attalus
Philopater, left his kingdom, which comprehended Mysia, Æolis, Ionia,
Lydia, and Caria, to the Roman empire; to which it belonged when the
first Christian church was established there. This church early became
corrupted by the Nicolaitans, for which it was reproved by St. John, and
charged quickly to repent, Rev. ii, 14–16. Pergamus, now called Bergamo,
like most other places which have been cursed by the presence of the
Turks, is reduced to comparative decay, containing a poor population,
who are too indolent or too oppressed to profit by the richness of their
soil and the beauty of the climate. The number of inhabitants, however,
is still said to amount to thirty thousand, of whom three thousand are
Greek Christians. Many remains of former magnificence are still to be
found; among which are those of several Christian churches. It is about
sixty miles north of Smyrna. The celebrated physician Galen was a native
of this place.
PERIZZITES. The ancient inhabitants of Palestine, mingled with the
Canaanites. There is also a great probability that they themselves were
Canaanites, but, having no fixed habitations, were wandering about here
and there, and scattered over all the country. Thus, in the time of
Abraham and Lot, the Canaanite and Perizzite were in the land, Gen.
xiii, 7; Josh. xvii, 15. Solomon subdued the remains of the Canaanites
and Perizzites, which the children of Israel had not rooted out, and
made them tributary to him, 1 Kings ix, 20, 21; 2 Chron. viii, 7. There
still remained some of this people as late as the time of Ezra, ix, 1.