gun by David; for we learn from 1 Καὶ 9% #4 (and especially 1157 ‘Solomon built [the] Millo and shut in the ravine [RV ‘repaired the breach’) of the city of David’), that the actual building was carried out by his successor. The Millo is men- tioned again as forming an important part of the defences of Jerusalem in 701 B.c., when Hezekiah prepared to resist the attack of Sennacherib (2 Ch 325).
The above explanation is quite consistent with the old derivation of the word given by the Tar-
ums (xpyD* ‘a filling up’), and adopted by Gesenius (7165. 787f.), Schick, and others. The Millo would, on this view, be connected with the Hebrew root xbp, but, as Grove (Smith, DB? ii. p- 367) and Moore (Jg 9°) have pointed out, its occurrence in connexion with the old Canaanite town Shechem (see below) makes it probable that it is an archaic, possibly Jebusite, form borrowed by the Israelites. See JEBUS and JERUSALEM.
2. The House of Millo (x\>> m3=Beth-millo;
* Elsewhere in the Targums xn‘Sp corresponds to the Hebrev )7?D=the mound raised against a city by the besieging force.
374 MILLSTONE
MINES, MINING
B οἶκος Βηθμααλών [Βηϑθμααλλών] ; A οἶκος Μααλλών). (a) Most probably the name of a place (Beth-millo) in the neighbourhood of Shechem (Jg 9% 3), Some identify it with the tower of Shechem (vv.“6), but this view lacks support, as ap- parently the latter verses do not ἔδιδον to the same narrative as the rest of the chapter. (See Moore, ad loc.). If we accept the rendering of the RV, we must take ‘the house of Millo’ as the name of a family or clan.
(4) (otkos Μααλώ ; domus Mello), the place where Joash was slain by his servants (2 K 12”), ap- parently in Jerusalem. See above, under 4, and art. SILLA. J. Ἐς STENNING.
MILLSTONE.—See MILL.
MINCE (derived by Skeat from Anglo-Sax. minsian to grow enki fail, but clearly connected with Old Fr. mincer to shred) is found in AV only in Is 316 ‘Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, and walk with stretched forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go,” where the meaning is ‘taking short steps.’ Cf. Shaks. Merch. of Venice, ut. iv. 67—
‘And turn two mincing steps Into a manly stride.’
J. HASTINGS.
MIND.—This aspect of the human soul, or of man’s inner life, is not distinguished in the OT by any radical term, but only by derivatives such as ay2, which has the meaning of ‘ prudence’ or ‘ good sense’ rather than ‘ knowledge’ or ‘ understanding.’ The term 33) or 35, and its equivalent καρδία in the NT, include the ΒΕ θεία as well as all other inward movements. (See HEART). The greater analytic precision of Greek thought and its closer attention to the intellectual element in our nature brought into the language of the NT such words as νοῦς with its congeners διάνοια, ἔννοια, νόημα ; also σύνεσις, διαλογισμός, etc. But even there, they are not used with any psychological refinement or exactitude. It is quite impossible, for example, to follow Olshausen (Opuscula Theologica, p. 156) when he attempts to show that νοῦς and σύνεσις, with their corresponding verbs, as used in the NT, repre- sent the Kantian distinction between Vernunft and Verstand, familiarized to us in English by Coleridge as that between Reason and Understanding—the former, the higher intuitive perception ; the latter, the lower or dialectic judgment. It is plain that the terms are really interchangeable (Mk 8", Mt 13115, 2 Ti 27), Some more abstract terms, such as ‘ thought,’ ‘minding,’ ‘thinking,’ are used in the NT, almost indiscriminately, to represent the contents or products of the inward life, or what the OT calls ‘the imagination of the thoughts of the heart’ (Gn 6°).
Of the two Greek words most frequently repre- senting the notion, νοῦς may be held to denote the faculty of reflective consciousness, the organ of moral thinking and knowing ; σύνεσις a peculiar force or acuteness in the exercise of that faculty. The leading word (νοῦς) occurs very seldom in the Septuagint. In the few places where it does, it represents 23? or 22. In Is 40" νοῦν Κυρίου stands for m7 ox, and the rendering is retained in 1 Co 2", The OT Apocryphal writers have used it a few times and in a sense more distinctively Greek. In the NT its almost entire absence from the Gospels and from the writings of the older apostles (it oceurs there only in ἕκ 24*®, Rev 1318 179) shows how closely they adhered to OT phraseology from which the special notion represented by νοῦς was absent. To note its frequent use by St. Paul and that almost delicate antithesis in which he con- trasts it with σάρξ in one connexion and with «νεῦμα in another, completes its history.
St. Paul uses πνεῦμα for the divine or spiritual
ower coming to the renewed man: for man’s ow” Ἐπ δεν sense of right or faculty of knowledge he uses νοῦς, as do the best classical writers. Accord- ingly, in sharp contrast with the ‘flesh,’ in which evil dwells, he calls the divine commandment ‘the law of his mind’ (Ro 7%), and declares that ‘ with the mind’ (y.“) he serves it. This same faculty, when perverted or enthralled by inherent evil, becomes ‘ the fleshly mind’ (Col 918), ‘a reprobate mind’ (Ro 1%), ‘ corrupted mind’ (1 Ti 6°, 2 Ti 3°).