the true and eternal means of salvation (Matt. v.12; Col. i. 5; 1 Pet. i. 4), as well as of the righteous who have been perfected (Heb. xii. 23; comp. Luke x. 20) and of the angels and " ministering spirits " who are to appear on the earth at its renewal (Mark xii. 25; Luke ii. 15; Rev. xxi. 1 sqq.). It thus becomes evident that the " kingdom of God " is regarded as situated in heaven (Dan. ii. 44; cf. Pa. ciii. 19), so that Matthew terms it the " kingdom of heaven " (Matt. iii. 2). It is present on earth wherever its boons, which are righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost (Rom. xiv. 17), are possessed by man, but it will not be revealed in all its glory until the power of evil is annihilated (Matt. vi. 10, 13). Thus it was heaven to which Christ was exalted together with those who were raised with him (Eph. ii. 6; Col. iii. 1 4), and it is there that they have their citizenship (Phil. iii. 20).
The Hebrew plural " heavens " is represented in the great majority of instances by the singular in the
Septuagint, this number being found
4. Use of also in the Apocrypha, except in the
the Plural, Wisdom of Solomon ix. 10, 16, xviii. "Heavens." 15. In Matthew, Paul, Hebrews, and
II Peter the plural is more frequent than the singular; but in Mark the plural is found 'only in i. 10 11; xi. 25 26; xiii. 25; in Luke only in Acts ii. 34, vii. 56, and probably Luke x. 20, xxi. 26; John avoids the plural altogether in the Gospel and the Epistles, and uses it in the Apocalypse only in xii. 12. There is no distinction in meaning between the singular and plural, except in II Cor. xii. 2, where a "third heaven" is mentioned, this being glossed in xii. 4 as " paradise." This statement evidently rests upon a threefold division of heaven, into the sky, heaven in the reiig
Hebrew Language THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG 1813
ious sense, and the dwelling place of God. The
distinction between the physical heaven and the
abode of the blessed is self evident, and Heb. ix. 11
(R.V.) expressly states that the latter is " not of
this creation." It is necessary, moreover, to dis
tinguish between this heaven, where the majesty
and goodness of God are manifested, and the abso
lute divine supremacy, " ° dwelling in the light which
no man can approach unto; whom no man hath
seen, nor can see " (I Tim. vi. 16). In the Epistle
to the Hebrews, in like manner, no stress can be laid
on the variation between the singular and plural
(ix. 24, xi. 12, xii. 26 as contrasted with i. 10,
iv. 14, vii. 26, viii. 1, ix. 23, xii. 23, 25), nor does
the author distinguish between the " heavens " and
" heaven itself " (ix. 24), except in so far as the
latter corresponds to the Holy of Holies in the
Tabernacle (comp. x. 19 23). Jesus is accordingly
described as " higher than the heavens " (vii. 26)
and as having " passed through the heavens " (iv.
14, RX.), and thus as being exalted above all who
are in heaven or who await admission there (xii. 23),
The fact that Satan and evil spirits appear in the presence of God in heaven according to I Kings xxii. 19 22; Job i. 6 sqq.; Zech. iii. 1 sqq.; and Rev. xii. 7 8 merely implies that they work only with the permission of God. The statement that the heavens are unclean in the sight of God (Job xv. 15), moreover, must be regarded as a hyperbole of Eliphaz the Temanite to bring Job to a realization of his sinfulness. This can not be paralleled with such passages as Heb. ix. 23, especially as the heavenly world is represented as " true " (Luke xvi. 11; Heb. viii. 2, ix. 24). It may also be noted that the view that " heaven " occasionally connotes " God," as in Luke xv. 18, 21, is clearly untenable from Matt. v. 34, vi. 10. (H. CREMERt.)
BInLIoaHAPHY: H. Schultz, Afttestamentliche Theolopie, 2 vols., Gottingen. 1888, Eng. tranel., Old Testament Theology. Edinburgh, 1892; W. Beyschlag, Neutestamenlliiche Theoogie, 2 vole Halle 1895; Eng transl., New Testament Theology, Edinburgh,1896; the lmdoons of Cremer and Thayer, s.v. bvpav6vy C Craddock, The Heaven of as Bible, hiladelphia, 1897; R. Winterbotham, The Kingdom of Heaven here and hereafter, New York, 1898; and of. the sections in the works on systematic theology.
HEBER, REGINALD: Anglican bishop of Calcutta; b. at Malpas (14 m. s.s.e. of Chester) Apr. 21, 1183; d. at Trichinopoly (30 m. w. of Tanjore) Apr. 3, 1826. He was educated at Brasenose College, Oxford, and in 1805 was elected fellow of All Souls. He then traveled for two years, and on his return was ordained priest and succeeded his father as rector of HodnetfShrepshire. After an active service there as parish priest, he was made a prebendary of St. Asaph in 1812, and three years later was appointed Bampton lecturer at Oxford, and in 1822 preacher at Lincoln's Inn. He had already become conspicuous for his interest in missions, especially in India, and on the death of T. F. Middleton, the first bishop of Calcutta, the administration of the diocese, which then comprised
the whole of India, was offered to Heber. After much hesitation, he accepted, and was consecrated on June 1, 1823, by the archbishop of Canterbury. Four months later he reached Calcutta, and at once took up his episcopal duties, his task being rendered the more severe by the lapse of more than a year since Middleton's death. Between June, 1824, and Oct., 1825, he visited Bombay and Ceylon, and on Jan. 30, 1826, began his second diocesan tour. At the same time he made a study of the problem of caste, which he was willing to retain so far as it was political rather than religious. His attention was also occupied by a controversy which had broken out among the Christians of St. Thomas on account of the Syrian priests mentioned above.
The chief works of Heber were as follows: Palestine (Oxford, 1807), one of the few prize poems of permanent value, and often reprinted and translated; Poems and Translations (London, 1812); The Personality and Ofce of the Christian Comforter (Bampton Lectures, Oxford, 1816); and an edition of the complete works of Jeremy Taylor (15 vols., London, 1822); while his widow edited the following: Hymns, Written. and Adapted to the Weekly Church Serviceof the Year (1827); Journey through India from Calcutta to Bombay, with Notes upon Ceylon, and a Journey to Madras and the Southern Provinces (2 vols., 1828); Sermons Preached in England (1829); Sermons Preached in India (1830); and his journal of his European tour in her biography of her husband (1830). The first complete edition of his poems appeared at London in 1841. Heber was also the author of nearly sixty hymns, some of which are conspicuous for their beauty, and have attained wide popularity. Among them special mention may be made of the following: " Brightest and best of the sons of the morning;" " The Son of God goes forth to war;" "Bread of the world, in mercy broken;" " Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty;" and the missionary hymn " From Greenland's icy mountains."
BIHLIooBAPHY: Life, by his widow, 2 vole., London, 1830; T. Robinson, The Last Days of Bishop Heber, London, 1830; T. A. Smyth, The Character and Religious Doctrines of Bishop Heber, London, 1831; G. Bonner, Memoir of the Life of Reginald Heber, Cheltenbam 1833; T. Taylor, Life and Writings of . Reginald Heber London, 1836; Jas. Chambers, Bishop Heberand Indian Missions, ondon, 1846; J. N. Norton, Life of Bishop Heber, New York, 1870; A. J. C. Hare Memorials of a Quiet Life, 2 vols., London, 1873; DNB, ncv (1891), 355 357.
HEBICH, h6'biH, SAMUEL: Missionary; b. at Nellingen, Wiirttemberg, Apr. 29, 1803; d. at Stuttgart May 21, 1868. In Dec., 1831, he entered the Basel missionary institute, and in 1834 was sent to India. In 1859 he returned to his native country, and by his sensational revivalistic methods aroused considerable opposition. In 1862 he was pensioned. His chief importance lies in the fact that while in India by his sermons on repentance and his pastoral care and devotion he converted many English officers and soldiers. J. HESsE.
B Hr: $. Hebfch,sin Beitrap sur Geschichte der
indischen Mission, Basel, 1872; E. F. Lsnghans, Pidir mus and Christentum im gpiegel der fsseren Mission, pR 3 eqq., Leipsic, 1864.
HEBREWS, GOSPEL ACCORDING TO Tim. See APOCRYPHA, B, 1. (19).
183 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Heaven
HEBREW LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE.
I. The Hebrew Language.
The Name and Literature (§ 1).
The Semitic Languages (§ 2).
Characteristics of Semitic Languages (¢ 3).
Characteristics and History of the Hebrew Language (¢ 4).
Development of the Hebrew Language (§ b).
Early Study of Hebrew (¢ 8).
Modern Works on Hebrew (§ 7).
II. Hebrew Literature in General. (§ 8).
I. The Hebrew Language: Hebrew is the usual name of the language spoken by the Israelites up to
a few centuries before the birth of r. The Christ. The tongue which was spoken flame and or written by the learned later than Literature. this, a somewhat artificial continua
tion of the earlier language, is called in distinction the New Hebrew. The term Hebrew language is not in the Old Testament; it is found first in the prologue to Ecclesiaaticus, then in Josephus, and afterward in the New Testament, where, however, it denotes the Aramaic speech of the Jews. Isa. xix.18 bas the phrase" the language of Canaan," II Kings xviii. 26 and Neh. xiii. 24 have " the Jews' language " to express the tongue used by the Hebrews of those times. In later times the Jews called the Hebrew " the holy language." The phrase " Hebrew language," therefore, goes back not to the Old Testament, but to the common designation " Hebrews " as the name of the people, and is the equivalent of " the Israelitic tongue." The Hebrew word `Ibri (Gen. x., id.), to which " Hebrew " goes back, comprises a number of Arabic and Aramaic stocks to which, among others, Terah and Abraham belonged. Recent scholars see in the term an appellative denoting " the people from the other side " (of the river Euphrates so Stade or of the Jordan). The Old Testament is the main source of knowledge of this tongue, in which all of it is written except Ears iv. 8 vi. 18, vii. 12 26, Dan. ii. 4 vii. 28, Jer. x. il. Besides this are the Siloam inscription, some inscribed stones from. Assyria, and Babylon, the coins of the Maccabeans, and the fragments of the Hebrew of Ecclesiasticua (see APOCRYPHA, A, IV., 12). The Moabitic Stone may be reckoned here, since its language is practically identical with the Hebrew.
This language belongs to a large family of languages to which, since the time of Eichhorn, the
name Semitic has been given, i.e., the The tongues of the descendants of Shem.
Semitic According to Old Testament usage,
Languages. this name is inexact, since some of the
people who used a language belonging to this group were descendants of Ham. But no thoroughly adequate name bas yet been found. The relationship of the original Semitic speech to others, e.g., the Egyptian language, is yet an open question. The nearest relatives of the Hebrew were the Moabitic, practically identical with it, and the Phenician. Doubtless the other peoples immediately east and west of the Jordan spoke dialects of the same tongue, so that this group may be called the Cflnaanitic. A comparison of Phenician inacrip
The Old Testament a National Literature (§ 1).
Variety of Literary Form and Contents ($ 2).
The Bond of Union ($ 3).
Methods of Composition ($ 4).
Use of "Strands " of Narrative ($ b).
Methods in Prophetical and Wisdom Literature (§ 8).
Authorship ($ 7).
Latee of Old Testament literature
III. Hebrew Poetry.
Recognition of the Nature of Hobrew Poetry (§ 1).
tions with the Hebrew shows divergent dialectic peculiarities, while Neh. xiii. 23 24 makes clear that by the time of Nehemiah the dialects had become so changed as not to be mutually intelligible to those speaking them. Nearest to the Canaanitic group came the Aramaic, the early history of which is obscure, but which developed a rich literature, divided into the East and the West Aramaic. The latter was used by the later inhabitants of Palestine Jews, Samaritans, and Christians and by Nabataeana and Palinyrenes. The East Aramaic was used by Babylonian Jews, Manda'ane (q.v.), and the people of Edema, the last developing a considerable Christian literature. The Aramaic tongues were superseded by the Arabic. A third branch is the South Semitic languages, including the Arabic, Sabean, Mineean, Ethiopic, and Amharic. The East Semitic group comprises the Aesprian Babylonian of the cuneiform inscriptions.
These related branches point backward to an original Semitic tongue, the characteristics of which
remain more or less plainly evident in
3. Charac the later forms, to which original
teristics of speech the Arabic seems the moat
Semitic nearly related. The chief characterie
Languages. tic of Semitic languages is the tri
consonantal form of the roots; possibly
originally the roots consisted of two consonants sub
sequently built up by the addition of another conso
nant. The language was then formed by vocalic
changes inside the word or by additions or prefixes.
Another characteristic of these languages is that only
the consonants were written, the reader supplying
the vocalization in accordance with the native ut
terance. Word building wascomplex,secondaryfor
mationa being very numerous. The verbs are lacking
in tenses, only two main forma being used. The per
sonal pronouns in the genitive and accusative be
come mere enclitics, there are but two genders, and a
dual is sparingly employed. The syntax is simple,
though the use of the numerals is rather complicated.
The Hebrew language holds a position midway
between the Arabic and the Aramaic. It has fewer
original vocals than the Arabic, more
4. Charac than the Aramaic, while it retains case.
nebrew Language THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG 184
syntax a complicated period, while the usual connective is the simple " and," which implies various relationships. Historical narrative usually opens with the phrase " and it came to pass," while delineations of the future begin with " and it shall come to pass." The particles are few, little developed, and therefore ambiguous. Before the Hebrews entered either the East Jordanic or West Jordanic territory, the Canaanitic tongue, closely related to the Hebrew, was spoken there, as is shown both by the place names and by interesting glosses to the Amarna Tablets. Whether the Hebrews got their language from the Canaanites when they settled in Canaan, or already possessed it, is a difficult problem; but at any rate it remained their usual speech till the exile, and during the exile and after it was still cultivated. But in postexilic times it was dislodged by the Aramaic.
The cause of this is to be sought in the diffusion of the Aramaic as the official and commercial tongue of the Persian empire. The first witness to this is in the sources of the Book of Ezra followed by the Aramaic portions of the Book of Daniel. In the time of Christ Aramaic was the common speech, and such it continued till the Arabic conquest; though meanwhile Hebrew had been cultivated as a written language, as is proved by the Hebrew portion of Daniel and by the recovered parts of the original of Ecclesiasticus, as well as by indications in I Maccabees, the Psalms of Solomon, and various pseudepigrapha. It is clear that the supersession of Hebrew was preceded by a period when the land was bilingual, a large part of the people still using Hebrew. But this condition came to an end, and the reading of Hebrew in the synagogue had to be accompanied by translation into the vernacular Aramaic. It was in this way that Hebrew became gradually the speech of the learned only; but it is to be remarked that the Hebrew of the later sort has no more interest for the history of Hebrew than the Latin of the schoolmen for the history of Latin.
Since the Canaanitic existed in different dialects spoken bypeoples living under different conditions,
it might be expected that differences 5. Develop would appear in the Old Testament.
this can be shown in only a limited degree, the reason is partly that only consonantal representation of these writings exists, and partly that later recension obliterated differences. The vocalized text represents only the late tradition of a pronunciation which had lost many of the peculiarities of the early speech, as is proved by the Canaanitic glosses to the Amarna Tablets, above referred to. Differences of dialect are proven by such passages as Judges xii. 6, xviii. 3, in the latter of which passages " voice " possibly means method of speech, dialect. When differences caused by time are considered, it is evident that the differences between the language of the Song of Deborah and Daniel are less than those between the " English " of the ninth and of the nineteenth century; yet it
is seen that there was a history of the Hebrew language. This is well illustrated by the language of Ecclesiastes. Further development was checked by the imitation by later writers of the early models. even to the reintroduction of archaic and disused forms. But even between the earlier and the later prophets there appear indications of a development toward a more flexible form of expression. The introduction of Aramaisms, preferences for one or another form of the personal pronouns, and other peculiarities mark periods in the language.
The history of the study of the Hebrew language began really at the time when it ceased to be a vernacular, and naturally with the Jews
6. Early of the dispersion, by whom Hebrew had
Study of been forgotten. The Septuagint gives
Hebrew. insight into the knowledge of Hebrew
and the understanding of the text of
those who made it, and the translation differs
greatly in the different parts. Even in the case of
Ecclesiasticus the grandson misunderstood the writ
ing of the grandfather, a fact due in part to an un
pointed text. Further testimony of this character is
derived from the explanations of personal and place
names as exhibited in the various Onomastica sacra.
Meanwhile in Palestine also Hebrew had become a
language which had to be learned, as is shown by
the Aramaic paraphrases of Scripture in the syna
gogues, the development of which the Targums
were, and these show in general an excellent under
structions. This sprang, not from interest in lin
guistic study, but from desire for preservation of the
true text, and one result of this work was a system
atic vocalization of the text. Real grammatical
study began with the contact of Jews with Arabic
grammarians (eighth century), and issued in Aaron
ben Moses ben Asher's Dikduke harte'amim of the
tenth century, which contains much grammatical
material. The first grammarian was Saadia Gaon
(d. 942), of whose works on linguistics only a small
part is extant. He was under the influence of
Arabic linguistics, and laid stress upon comparison
of Arabic and Hebrew. Even more strongly was
this emphasized by Judah ben Kuraish in North
Africa, who used both Arabic and Aramaic in lexical
and grammatical comparisons. About the middle of
the tenth century the Spanish Jew Menahem ben
Saruk compiled a Hebrew lexicon with grammatical
introduction, in which he sought to free Hebrew
lexicography from its Arabic bonds. His great
scholar, Judah Hayyuj ben David, about the year
1000, made special contributions to knowledge of
the weak verbs. Beside the Spanish Abraham ibn
Ezra (d. 1167) must be named the great David
Kimhi (d. 1235), whose grammatical lexicographic
Miklol is still of value. Kimhi's father, Joseph,
and his brother Moses were noted grammarians.
Worthy of mention also are Profiat Duran (Isaac
ben Moses Duran), at the end of the fourteenth
185 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA Hebrew Language
century, and Elias Levita (d. 1549). At this time the humanists began to busy themselves with Hebrew. The way was broken by the preachermonk Peter Nigri (1477), the priest Johannes B6hm (1490), Konrad Pellican (1501 04), and Reuchlin (1506). The lexical and grammatical works of the elder Buxtorf (d. 1629) closed this period, in which the Christian world sought to reproduce Jewish learning.
A new advance was begun through the stimulus of the Polyglot Bibles, in which the study of Arabic was revived. Eminent in this period were De Dieu (d. 1642), Castell (d. 1685), Albert Schultens (d. 1750), N. W. Schroder (d. 1798), Alting (d. 1679),
basis of which nineteenth century labors have been
largely based. Hebrew owes a great debt to W.
Gesenius (d. 1842), who, while using the other
Semitic tongues, sought to obtain as much light
upon forms as the Hebrew itself afforded. H. Ewald
sought in his very full grammar to attain deeper
insight into the development of the language.
B6ttcher (d. 1863) and Olshausen sought to carry
out more completely the empirical methods of
Gesenius. Stade carries the reduction of developed
forms to their ground form in synthetic fashion.
Lexicography is developed in the works of Siegfried
and Stade and in the works of Brown, Driver,
and Briggs (1906). The treatises of Lagarde and
Barth are of special value, especially that of Barth,
in which he parallels the nouns partly with verbal
preterites and partly with imperfects, and so
brings out a useful principle. (F. BUHL.)
II. Hebrew Literature in General: Ethnically speaking, the term Hebrew literature not only con
notes the books of the Old Testament, x. The Old but includes the Apocrypha (q.v.), the Testament laterpseudepigraphicbooks(seePsEuDa National EPI(iRAPHA), the writings of Josephus Literature. and Philo (qq.v.), the Talmud and the Targums (qq.v.; also see BIBLE VERsioNs,A. V.). .This discussion is necessarily limited to the Hebrew literature of the Old Testament. Thus limited, the term Hebrew literature covers what may be called the classic books of a nation. This, in turn, involves other implicates, one of the most important and suggestive of which is that this body of writings is an evolution, the product of different ages, the work of many individuals, even of whole schools or tendencies, therefore expressing changing ideals under differences of environment and condition, and employing a wide range of literary form. It would be expected that, as in the case of other national literature, Hebrew writings would not remain wholly unaffected by the peoples which conditioned the national life of the Israelites, this influence coming out even in those portions which most closely expressed its ideals a fact which recent study has confirmed. But one has not to go far in the investigation of this literature before discovering that the body of writings included within the Old Testament is not all of Hebrew writings
existent and available in the period which the Old Testament covers. To phrase it differently, the Old Testament is a selected literature not selected, however, in the sense that it was deliberately chosen to represent Hebrew thought and feeling, but rather selected by its own fitness, persisting by its own right to live becaxse of its appeal to the heart and conscience of the people to whom it came and because of its complete expression of their varying hopes, fears, and convictions. And this exclusive position was won not without a struggle. For nearly three centuries other books strove for admission to this circle of writings, were for a time admitted and used by the Jewish diaspora, but were finally rejected by what, outside of the Roman and Greek branches of the Christian Church, is regarded as the best judgment of the Hebrew race with its Palestinian traditions behind it. It is a remarkable fact that the one book of Hebrew production which bears any trace of the author's hope that it would be included among the canonical books did not succeed in forcing its entrance (cf. Ecclus., Prologue). And that other literature was once available becomes evident when one notes references to such writings as the book of Jasher (Josh. x. 13), the book of the wars of Yahweh (Num. xxi. 14), the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel (II Kings x. 34 and often), and numerous other works quoted as sources in various parts of the extant literature (cf. C. F. Kent, Student's Old Testament, ii. 10 sqq.; New York, 1905).
As comprising a national literature, therefore, the Old Testament possesses the characteristics and
varieties which inhere in the literature 2. Variety of a nation. It is in prose and in of Literary poetry; it contains myth, legend, hisForm and tory, legislation, oratory, epistolary Contents. literature, drama, parable, proverb, fable, idyl, philosophy, praise and prayer, patriotic national pieces, and portions universal in their application. Its writings betray at one time individualistic peculiarities of style and vocabulary and preferences for certain methods of expression; at another, they display the general tendencies of a school existing through generations. It includes the perfervid outpourings of the impassioned worshiper and the deliberate musings of a reflective philosopher. There are utterances hot from the furnace of passion, and polished, even labored and artificial, poems of the study. God, man, and Satan appear as speakers within its pages. Representing the externalization of a nation's history, it contains recollections of the pastoral life, mirrors the fresh, buoyant, and heroic period when a home was in the winning, registers the age of the adoption and formation of institutions, records the pride of achievement of eminence among the peoples, shows the depression of decadence and the rise of religious skepticism, and echoes the groan of extinction of national life. Indeed, this literature runs the entire gamut of national and of individual emotion as well as of literary form. Among the sacred books of the world's faiths none is nearly so rich in its variety & form, content, and expression as the Old Testament of the Christian Bible.