tribes in Syria and Arabia claiming the name Rechabite and professing to observe the laws of Jonadab. These tribes are probably connected with the ancient Rechabites in just the same way as the Total Abstinence Society mentioned above. Moreover, as words for ' horseman,' ' camel-rider,' in Heb., Aram., and .\rab., are derived from the root rich, it is easy to see how tribes might be called ' Rechabites without any connexion, real or imaginary, with the Old Testament clan.
In Ps 71 (LXX 70) the L.XX has the title Tv AcLveLd, vluiv 'luvaod^ (R 'ApuvaSdfj.), Kal tujv irpihrtav aixf-a'^t^icOii'Toit', ' To David, of the Bne Jonadab (R Aminadam, i.e. Aniinadab) and of those lirsl can'ied away captive.' This title has sometiim'* been adduced as evidence of the existence and im- portance of the Rechabites in the 3rd or 2nd cent. But the origin, text, and meaning of the title are too uncertain to warrant any such conclusion. Jonadab may be the cousin of David ; or, as the reading of li suggests, a scribe's error for soma other name.
The devotion of the Rechabites to Jehovah is illustrated by the zeal of Jonadab and by the fact that all the names of individual Rechabites known to us include the Divine name Jehovah, viz. Habazziniah, Jaazaniah, J(eh)onadab, Jeremiah, and Malchijah. It has generally been supposed that the Kenites were led to adopt the worship of Jehovah through their association with the Israel- ites ; and that the zeal of Jonadab, like that of Jehu, was inspired by the teaching of Elijah and Elisha. But recent scholars, e.g. Budde, have pointed out the close association of Jeliovah with Sinai, and of Moset, with the Kenites (see Jethro, IIOBAB), and have suggested that the Israelites adopted the worship ol Jehovah from the Kenites, and that the Kenites, and therefore the Rechab- ites, were by ancient practice and tradition the most devoted followers of Jehovah in Israel ; hence the zeal of Jonadab. It should be noted, however, that the only direct evidence for the connexion of the Rechabites with the Kenites ii the very late and obscure passage in Chronicles.
As the Rechabite laws are simply the ordinary customs of nomads, — for primitive nomads the regular use of wine was impossible, — it is easy to tind numerous parallels to them. Probably even the prohibition of wine is not strictly and directly religious, but merely a means for preserving the nomadic life. Hence Mohammed's prohibition of wine and similar laws or taboos (cf. iJ.S 4S4 f. ) are not real parallels. Ol others commonly cited ia the statement of DiodoiusSiculus{xi.\. 9«, c. 8 B.C.), that the Nabat,-ean Arabs forbade sowing seed, planting fruit-trees, using or building houses, under pain of death. Cf., further, Ji'.iion'adab, Jere- miah, Kenites, Tirathites, Shi.meathites, Suc- cathites.
5. In Jg 1" the LXX has for ' because they had chariots (rekhcbh) of iron,' 'because Rechab com- manded them ' ; an obvious mistake.
LiTERATFRB. — W. H. Bennett, Jeremiah xxi.-lii. p. 44 ff. ; Budde, Het. of Igr. to the Exile, p. 19 ff. (for connexion of J" with the Kenites) ; Dillniann, OT Theol. p. 172 ; Oehler, OT ThfoL, Enjr. tr. ii. 195; E. H. Perowne, art. 'Rechabites' in Smith's OB (views of Patristic and other commentators, travellers' tales of ' Rechabites ' in Syria and Arabia) ; Schultz. OT Theol., Eng. tr. L 91, 18S; Smen'd, Atttest. lieligion»jesch.i
93 1. ; /i.S484t. W. H. Bennett.
RECONCILIATION (KaraWayi). —The general doctrine of the Atonement has been dealt with under that title (vol. i. p. 197), and the biblical phraseology under Propitiation (p. 128). The present art. is concerned with the reconciliation made by Christ between God and men ; and the question specially to be investigated is, whethei it is subjective only, our reconciliation to God, o/
EECOXCILIATIOX
RFXOXCILIATION
201
objective also, God's reconciliation to us. The Gr. word occurs four times in NT, Ko 5" 11'° and 2 Co 518. i9_ and in ^n these places it is used objectively to describe the new relation between God and humanity broujrht about by the work of Christ (see Cremer, Bihl.-Theol. Lex. s.v.). This is, perhai)s, most clearly seen in Ro 5" Ji' ov vdf tt)v KaTaXK!xyT]v {\i^o)ur, ' through whom we have now received the reconciliation.' The reconciliation must have been already an accom|)lislied fact before it could be received, i.e. before faith or feeling could have anything to do with it. So in Ro 11" the kut. Kuj/xou is plainly the favourable attitude of God towards tne world through His turning away from Israel. In 2 Co 5"- '" the oiaxoi'ia ttjs KaraX- \ayrjs and the Xiyor tt)! (caraXXaYi/s are the means appointed by God to bring men to a knowledge of what He has done for them in Christ. And what is that ? What is ' the word of reconciliation ' ? It is ' that God was in Christ, reconciling the world nnto himself.' That this refers to an objective matter of f.ict, not a subjective state of feeling, is plain from the exhortation based on it : ' Be ye reconciled to God.' Besides, how was God in Christ reconciling the world to Himself? By ' not imputing unto men their trespasse.s.' But this was only the negative side of it. The positive is reserved to clinch the argument at the close : ' For God made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him' (2 Co 5-'). But if this is the meaning of the reconciliation in the two most important of the passages that bear on it, — the doing on God's part of all that needed to be done to make it right lor Ilim to receive us back into favour, — the re- conciliation cannot have respect to us alone, nor can the whole purpose of the work of Christ be exhausted in the moral effect it has upon us as a ji.athetic disjilay of the love of God. Moreover, according to Ro 3--, the primary object of the work of Christ was not to display the love, but the riijht- eousne.is of God. That righteousness h.id been obscured by the forbearance of God in the past, and might still further be obscured in the future by His forgiving men on the ground of their faith in Jesus. They had been tempted, and might again be tempted, to doubt the reality of His wrath against sin, unless it were made clear that in forgiving it to men God had dealt seriously with it in tliu propitiatory work of Christ.