32, 37; xxvii, 1, 6; xxx, 5; xxxv, 7, 24; xxxvi, 20, 31, 36; xxxvii, 1,
4, 10, 15, 25, 28; xxxviii, 1, 6; Deut. x, 3; Isaiah xli, 19. What
particular species of wood this is, interpreters are not agreed. The
LXX. render ἄσηπτα ξύλα, _incorruptible wood_. St. Jerom says, the
shittim wood grows in the deserts of Arabia, and is like white thorn, as
to its colour and leaves: but the tree is so large as to furnish very
long planks. The wood is hard, tough, smooth, and extremely beautiful.
It is thought that this wood is the black acacia, because that, it is
said, is the most common tree growing in the deserts of Arabia; and
agrees with what the Scriptures say of the shittim wood. The _acacia
vera_ grows abundantly in Egypt, in places far from the sea; in the
mountains of Sinai, near the Red Sea, and in the deserts. It is of the
size of a large mulberry tree. The spreading branches and larger limbs
are armed with thorns which grow three together; the bark is rough; the
leaves are oblong, and stand opposite each other; the flowers, though
sometimes white, are generally of a bright yellow; and the fruit which
resembles a bean, is contained in pods like those of the lupin. “The
acacia tree,” says Dr. Shaw, “being by much the largest and most common
tree in these deserts, Arabia Petræa, we have some reason to conjecture,
that the shittim wood was the wood of the acacia; especially as its
flowers are of an excellent smell, for the shittah tree is, in Isaiah
xli, 19, joined with the myrtle and other fragrant shrubs.”
SHOES. To put off the shoes from one’s feet, was an act of reverence to
the Divine majesty of God, Exod. iii, 5. It was likewise a sign of
mourning and humiliation. David went up the ascent of Mount Olivet
barefoot, 2 Sam. xv, 30; Isa. xx, 2, 4; Ezek. xxiv, 17. See SANDAL.
SHOULDER. To give or lend the shoulder for the bearing of a burden,
signifies to submit to servitude. “Issachar bowed his shoulder to bear,
and became a servant unto tribute,” Gen. xlix, 15. And Isaiah, x, 27,
comforting Israel with the promise of deliverance from Assyria, says,
“His burden shall be taken away from off thy shoulder.” The Scripture
calls that a rebellious shoulder, a withdrawing shoulder, which will not
submit to the yoke; and to bear it together with joint consent, is
termed “serving with one shoulder.” To bear any thing upon the shoulder,
is to sustain it, and this is applied to government and authority. Thus
Messiah was to bear the government upon his shoulder: “For unto us a
child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon
his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor,” &c,
Isa. ix, 6; and God promises Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, to give him the
key of the house of David, and to lay it upon his shoulder; “so he shall
open, and none shall shut, and he shall shut, and none shall open;” that
is, the sole authority shall rest upon him.
SHUSHAN, or SUSA, the ancient capital of Persia, seated on the river
Ulai, the modern Abzal. After the union of the kingdoms of Media and
Persia by Cyrus, Susa was made the winter residence of the kings of
Persia, from its southern position, and the shelter afforded by a range
of mountains on the north and east, which rendered the heat
insupportable in the summer season; while Ecbatana, in Media, from its
greater elevation, and more northern situation, was preferred at this
season, as being more cool and agreeable. Here the transactions occurred
related in the book of Esther. Here also Daniel had the vision of the
ram with two horns, and the goat with one horn, &c, in the third year of
Belshazzar’s reign. Susa was situated in the ancient province of Elam,
or Elymais, called also Susiana, and now forming a part of Kuzestan. It
has for several hundred years, like Babylon, been reduced to a heap of
undistinguished ruins. Mr. Kinneir says, “About seven or eight miles to
the west of Dezphoul, commence the ruins of Shus, stretching not less,
perhaps, than twelve miles, from one extremity to the other. They extend
as far as the eastern bank of the Kerah; occupying an immense space
between that river and the Abzal; and, like the ruins of Ctesiphon,
Babylon, and Kufa, consist of hillocks of earth and rubbish, covered
with broken pieces of brick and coloured tile. The largest and most
remarkable of these mounds stand at the distance of about two miles from
the Kerah. The first is, at the lowest computation, a mile in
circumference, and nearly a hundred feet in height; and the other,
although not quite so high, is double the circuit of the former. These
mounds bear some resemblance to the pyramids of Babylon; with this
difference, that instead of being entirely made of brick, they are
formed of clay and pieces of tile, with irregular layers of brick and
mortar, five or six feet in thickness, to serve, it should seem, as a
kind of prop to the mass. Large blocks of marble, covered with
hieroglyphics, are not unfrequently here discovered by the Arabs when
digging in search of hidden treasure; and at the foot of the most
elevated of the pyramids stands the tomb of Daniel, a small and
apparently a modern building, erected on the spot where the relics of
that prophet are believed to rest. The site of the city of Shus is now a
gloomy wilderness, infested by lions, hyænas, and other beasts of prey.
The dread of these furious animals compelled Mr. Monteith and myself to
take shelter for the night within the walls that encompass Daniel’s
tomb.” Of this tomb Sir John Malcom observes, that “it is a small
building, but sufficient to shelter some dervishes who watch the remains
of the prophet, and are supported by the alms of pious pilgrims who
visit the holy sepulchre. These dervishes are now the only inhabitants
of Susa; and every species of wild beast roams at large over that spot
on which some of the proudest palaces ever raised by human art once
stood.” He also observes, respecting the authenticity of this tomb, that
“although the building at the tomb of Daniel be comparatively modern,
nothing could have led to its being built where it is, but a belief that
this was the real site of the prophet’s sepulchre.”
SIDON, or ZIDON, a celebrated city and port of Phenicia, and one of the
most ancient cities in the world; as it is supposed to have been founded
by Sidon, the eldest son of Canaan, which will carry it up to above two
thousand years before Christ. But if it was founded by Sidon, his
descendants were driven out by a body of Phenician colonists, or Cushim
from the east; who are supposed either to have given it its name, or to
have retained the old one in compliment to their god Siton, or Dagon.
Its inhabitants appear to have early acquired a preëminence in arts,
manufactures, and commerce; and from their superior skill in hewing
timber, by which must be understood their cutting it out and preparing
it for building, as well as the mere act of felling it, Sidonian workmen
were hired by Solomon to prepare the wood for the building of his
temple. The Sidonians are said to have been the first manufacturers of
glass; and Homer often speaks of them as excelling in many useful and
ingenious arts, giving them the title of Πολυδαιδάλοι. Add to this, they
were, if not the first shipwrights and navigators, the first who
ventured beyond their own coasts, and in those early ages engrossed the
greatest part of the then commerce of the world. The natural result of
these exclusive advantages to the inhabitants of Sidon was, a high
degree of wealth and prosperity; and content with the riches which their
trade and manufactures brought them, they lived in ease and luxury,
trusting the defence of their city and property, like the Tyrians after
them, to hired troops; so that to live in ease and security, is said in
Scripture to be after the manner of the Sidonians. In all these
respects, however, Sidon was totally eclipsed by her neighbour and rival
Tyre; whose more enterprising inhabitants pushed their commercial
dealings to the extremities of the known world, raised their city to a
rank in power and opulence unknown before, and converted it into a
luxurious metropolis, and the emporium of the produce of all nations.
After the subversion of the Grecian empire by the Romans, Sidon fell
into the hands of the latter; who, to put an end to the frequent revolt
of the inhabitants, deprived it of its freedom. It then fell
successively under the power of the Saracens, the Seljukian Turks, and
the sultans of Egypt; who, in 1289, that they might never more afford
shelter to the Christians, destroyed both it and Tyre. But it again
somewhat revived, and has ever since been in the possession of the
Ottoman Turks.
SIGN. This word is used in the sense of token and pledge; as, when the
Lord gave to Noah the rainbow, as a sign of his covenant, Gen. ix, 12,
13; and when he appointed to Abraham the use of circumcision, as the
seal of the covenant he had made with him and his posterity, Gen. xvii,
11. Sign is also put for a miracle: “Thou shalt do these signs and
wonders in the midst of Egypt,” Exodus iv, 7–9, &c. A sign or token is
often put for the proof or evidence of a thing: For example, “This shall
be a token or sign unto thee, that I have sent thee,” Exod. iii, 12.
“Shew me a sign, that thou talkest with me,” Judges vi, 17, that is a
proof. “What shall be the sign,” or evidence, “that the Lord will heal
me?” 2 Kings xx, 8. This acceptation agrees with the first above
mentioned; as also what is said in Gen. iv, 15, “And the Lord set a mark
or sign upon Cain;” he gave him a pledge that his life should not be
taken away. The signs of heaven, and the signs of the magicians, are the
phenomena of the heavens, and the impostures of magicians, which they
made use of for the purposes of deception: “The Lord frustrateth the
tokens or signs of the liars, and maketh diviners mad,” Isaiah xliv, 25.
“Be not dismayed at the signs of heaven, for the Heathen are dismayed at
them,” Jer. x, 2. To be a sign was farther to be a type, or prediction,
of what should happen. Thus the Prophet Isaiah, viii, 18, “Behold, I and
the children whom the Lord hath given me, are for signs and for wonders
in Israel.” See also Ezek. iv, 3.
SILAS, or SYLVANUS, was, according to St. Luke, Acts xv, 22, one of the
“chief men among the brethren,” which makes it probable, that he was of
the number of the seventy disciples. When a dispute was raised at
Antioch about the observation of the legal ceremonies, they chose Paul,
Barnabas, Judas, and Silas, to go to Jerusalem, to advise with the
Apostles concerning this question. He is thought to be the same Silas
who is mentioned by the name of Sylvanus, in the title of the two
epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians. St. Peter sent his first
epistle by him from Rome, wherein he styles him “a faithful brother.”
Silas joined himself to St. Paul; and after Saul and Barnabas had
parted, on account of John Mark, Acts xv, 37–41, Silas followed St.
Paul, and went with him to visit the churches of Syria and Cilicia.
SILENCE. This word not only signifies to refrain from speaking; but also
in the style of the Hebrews, it is taken for, “to be quiet, to remain
immovable.” As for example: “Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon,” in
Hebrew, be silent. “And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed,”
Joshua x, 12, 13, or were silent, at the commandment of Joshua.
SILOAH, the same as Siloam, Neh. iii, 15; Luke xiii, 4; a fountain under
the walls of Jerusalem, toward the east, between the city and the brook
Kidron, perhaps the same with Enrogel. Near this was a tower, Luke xiii,
4.
שריקות SILK, משי. As the word which is rendered “silk” in our version
more probably meant cotton, or rather muslin, it is doubtful whether
silk is mentioned expressly in the Scripture, unless, perhaps, in Isaiah
xix, 9, where we find the Hebrew word שריקות, from שרק, _yellowish_,
_tawny_; which is generally the natural colour of raw silk; hence the
Latin sericum: or it may be from the Seres, a nation whence the Greeks
and Romans first obtained the article silk. Calmet remarks that the
ancient Greeks and Romans had but little knowledge of the nature of
silk. The Seres communicated their silk to the Persians, from whom it
passed to the Greeks, and from them to the Romans. But the Persians and
orientals for a long time kept the secret of manufacturing it among
themselves. Silk was first brought into Greece after Alexander’s
conquest of Persia, and came into Italy during the flourishing times of
the Roman empire; but was long so dear in all these parts as to be worth
its weight in gold. At length the emperor Justinian, who died in the
year 365, by means of two monks, whom he sent into India for that
purpose, procured great quantities of silk worms’ eggs to be brought to
Constantinople, and from these have sprung all the silk worms and all
the silk trade that have been since in Europe, See FLAX.
SILVER, כסף, Gen. xx, 16; ἀργύριον, 1 Pet. i, 18; Acts iii, 4; xx, 33; a
well known metal, of a white shining colour; next in value to gold. It
does not appear to have been in use before the deluge; at least Moses
says nothing of it: he speaks only of the metals brass and iron, Gen.
iv, 22. But in Abraham’s time it was become common, and traffic was
carried on with it, Gen. xxiii, 2, 15. Yet it was not then coined, but
was only in bars or ingots; and in commerce was always weighed.
SIMEON, son of Jacob and Leah, was born A. M. 2247, Genesis xxix, 33;
xxxiv, 25. Jacob, on his death bed, showed his indignation against
Simeon and Levi for their cruelty to the Shechemites, Gen. xlix, 5: “I
will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel.” And in effect
these two tribes were scattered in Israel. As to Levi, he never had any
fixed lot or portion; and Simeon received only a canton that was
dismembered from the tribe of Judah, Joshua xix, 1, &c, and some other
lands they went to conquer in the mountains of Seir, and the desert of
Gedor, 1 Chronicles iv, 27, 39, 42.
2. SIMEON, a holy man, who was at Jerusalem, full of the Holy Ghost, and
expecting the redemption of Israel, Luke ii, 25, 26, &c. The Holy Ghost
had assured him, that he should not die before he had seen the Christ of
the Lord; he therefore came into the temple, prompted by inspiration,
just at the time when Joseph and Mary presented Jesus Christ there, in
obedience to the law. Simeon took the child into his arms, gave thanks
to God, and then blessed Joseph and Mary. It is believed, with good
reason, that he died soon after he had given his testimony to Jesus
Christ. Some have conjectured, that Simeon, who received Jesus Christ
into his arms, was the same as Simeon the Just, the son of Hillel, and
master of Gamaliel, whose disciple St. Paul was. See SANHEDRIM.
SIMON MACCABÆUS, surnamed Thossi, son of Mattathias, and brother of
Judas and Jonathan. He was chief prince and pontiff of the Jews from A.
M. 3860 to 3869, and was succeeded by John Hyrcanus. For the particulars
of his life and transactions, see 1 Mac. ii, 65; v, 17; x, 74–82; xii,
33, &c; xiii, 1, &c; xiv, 4, &c; xv, 1, &c.
2. SIMON, the Canaanite, an Apostle of Jesus Christ. It is doubtful
whether the name of Canaanite was derived to him from the city Cana in
Galilee, or whether it should not be taken according to its
signification in the Hebrew, by deriving it from the root _kana_, “to be
zealous,” and this is the opinion of some learned men. See Luke vi, 15;
Acts i, 13, where he is surnamed Zelotes; see also Matt. x, 4; Mark iii,
18.
3. SIMON, brother of our Lord, Matt. xiii, 55; Mark vi, 3; that is to
say, his cousin-german, being son of Mary, sister to the holy virgin. He
is thought to be the same with Simeon, bishop of Jerusalem, and son of
Cleopas.
4. SIMON MAGUS. Of this heretic, or rather father of heresy, Dr. Burton
gives the following account:--Justin Martyr, about A. D. 140, presented
a defence of Christianity to the emperor Antoninus Pius, in which he
mentions, as a well known fact, that Simon, a native of Gittum, a
village in Samaria, came to Rome in the reign of Claudius, was looked
upon there as a god, and had a statue erected to him, with a Latin
inscription, in the river Tiber, between the two bridges. Justin adds,
that nearly all the Samaritans, and a few also in other nations,
acknowledged and worshipped him as the supreme God. There is in this
passage such a minute detail, such a confident appeal to the emperor’s
own knowledge of what the apologist was saying, that we can hardly
suppose the story to be false, when not only the emperor, but every
person in Rome would have been able to detect it. I would observe, also,
that Justin Martyr was himself a native of Samaria; hence he was able to
name the very place where Simon was born; and when he says, in his
second defence, which was presented a few years later, “I have despised
the impious and false doctrine of Simon which is in my country;” when we
see the shame which he felt at the name of Christian being assumed by
the followers of that impostor; we can never believe that he would have
countenanced the story, if the truth of it had not been notorious, much
less would he have given to his own country the disgrace of originating
the evil.
Simon Magus was a native of Gittum, a town in Samaria; and it is stated
in a suspicious document of ancient though doubtful date, that he
studied for some time at Alexandria. Concerning the time of his birth,
and of his first rising into notice, little can now be known. The only
contemporary document which mentions him is the Acts of the Apostles;
and we there read, that, when Philip the deacon preached the Gospel in
Samaria after the death of Stephen, “there was a certain man, called
Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the
people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one; to whom
they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is
the great power of God. And to him they had regard, because that of long
time he had bewitched them with sorceries,” Acts viii, 9–11. According
to my calculation, the death of Stephen happened in the same year with
the crucifixion of our Lord; and it appears from the passage now quoted,
that Simon’s celebrity had begun some time before. We are then told that
“Simon himself believed also; and when he was baptized, he continued
with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were
done,” Acts viii, 13. I need not mention how he shortly fell away from
the faith which he had embraced, and how St. Peter rebuked him for
thinking that the gift of God might be purchased for money, Acts viii,
20; but I would observe, that some of those persons who insist upon the
fact that Simon was not a Christian appear to have forgotten that he was
actually baptized. For a time, at least, he believed in Jesus Christ;
and part of this belief he appears always to have retained; that is, he
always believed that Jesus Christ was a being more than human, who came
from God. If these events happened, as I have supposed, within a short
time of our Lord’s ascension, the fathers had good reason to call Simon
Magus the parent of all heresies; for he must then have been among the
first persons, beyond the limits of Jerusalem, who embraced the Gospel;
and we might hope that there was no one before him who perverted the
faith which he had professed.
From the detailed account which we have of Simon in the Acts of the
Apostles, I should be inclined to infer these two things: 1. That St.
Luke knew no earlier instance of apostasy from the Gospel; and he
mentions this because it was the first: and 2. That when St. Luke wrote
the Acts of the Apostles the heresy of Simon was widely spread; and
therefore he tells his readers how it had begun. Concerning the
remainder of Simon’s life we know little, and in that little it is
difficult to separate truth from fiction. I should be inclined, for the
reasons given above, to believe the account of Justin Martyr, who says
that Simon Magus went to Rome in the reign of Claudius, and attracted
numerous followers. Eusebius quotes this passage of Justin Martyr; but
he adds, upon some other authority, which he does not name, that St.
Peter came to Rome at the same time; and that, in consequence of his
preaching, the popularity of the impostor was entirely destroyed. This
would be a most interesting and important fact, if we were certain of
its being true; but Eusebius contradicts himself in his account of Simon
Magus going to Rome; and later writers have so embellished the story of
this meeting, and made the death of Simon so astonishingly miraculous,
that criticism is at a loss to know what to believe. The account which
we have of Simon’s death is, in a few words, as follows: St. Peter and
St. Paul being both at Rome, Simon Magus gave out that he was Christ;
and, in proof of his assertion, he undertook to raise himself aloft into
the air. The attempt at first appeared as if it would succeed; but the
two Apostles addressing themselves in prayer to God, the impostor fell
to the ground, and his death ensued shortly after. It is difficult to
give this marvellous narration, without forgetting that we are treating
of a grave and sacred subject; and the question for us to consider is,
whether we are to look upon the whole as a fiction, or whether, as is
most probable, it contains a basis and groundwork of truth. I must
observe, in the first place, that Arnobius, who did not write till the
fourth century, is the first person who says anything of Simon’s death
at all approaching to this story; nor does he by any means give it all
the particulars which later writers have supplied. It will be observed,
also, that Eusebius, who wrote after Arnobius, does not say any thing of
Simon’s extraordinary end; but merely states that his credit and
influence were extinguished, as soon as St. Peter began to preach in
Rome. It is probable, therefore, that no Greek writer before the time of
Eusebius had mentioned this story; but, on the other hand, there is such
a host of evidence, that the death of Simon Magus was in some way or
other connected with the presence of St. Peter and St. Paul at Rome,
that we might be carrying our skepticism too far if we rejected it.
With respect to the doctrines of Simon Magus, we know for certain that
Christ held a conspicuous place in the philosophy which he taught; but
to define with accuracy the various points of this philosophy, is a
difficult, if not impossible, task. The fathers perhaps may be suspected
of laying too many impieties to the charge of this heretic; and some of
their accounts cannot be reconciled with each other. Still, however, we
may extract from their writings an outline of the truth; and in this
instance, as before, I would attach particular weight to the authority
of Justin Martyr. That writer says that nearly all the inhabitants of
Samaria, and a few persons in other countries, acknowledged and
worshipped Simon Magus as the first or supreme God: and in another place
he says that they styled him God, above all dominion and authority and
power. Later writers have increased the blasphemy of this doctrine, and
said that Simon declared himself to the Samaritans as the Father, to the
Jews as the Son, and to the rest of the world as the Holy Ghost. But I
cannot bring myself to believe that he ever advanced so far in
wickedness or absurdity. The true state of the case may perhaps be
collected from the words of St. Luke, who tells us that Simon gave
himself out to be “some great one,” and that the people said of him,
“This man is the great power of God,” Acts viii, 10. Such is the title
which he bore before he had heard of Christ; and there is no reason to
think that he afterward raised his pretensions, and identified himself
with God. He gave himself out as “the great power of God,” that is, a
person in whom divine power resided: and, after he had heard the
Apostles, he seems to have so far enlarged his doctrine, as to have
said, that the God whose minister he was, and who had always been
worshipped in Samaria, had revealed himself to the Jews by his Son, and
to the rest of the world by the Holy Ghost. There is reason to believe
that he declared himself to be the Christ who appeared to the Jews; or
rather, he said that the same spirit which descended upon Jesus had
descended afterward upon himself; for he did not believe that Jesus had
a real body, but he taught that he was only a phantom. To this he added,
that the Holy Ghost, by which God was revealed to the Gentiles, resided
in himself: and this I take to be the real origin of the story, that he
was the God who revealed himself as the Father to the Samaritans, as the
Son to the Jews, and as the Holy Ghost to the rest of the world.