^Vlien we come to the NT treatment of this subject, we have the description of John the Baptist in his rough dress and simple fare, feeding on the native products of the wilderness (Mk 1'^), whom our Lord contrasts with those who ' wear soft raiment,' and ' are in kings' houses ' (Mt 1 1'). But the .supreme example of temperance is atibrded by the lile of Jesus Clirist. That was not ascetic ; the charge of gluttony and wine - bibbing was brought again.st our Lord by malignant slanderers because He did not practise asceticism. And yet the extreme simplicity of His living, the many hardships He voluntarily endured, and His com- plete unconcern with regard to His own comforts, as well as His perfect freedom from all forms of sin and sellishness, show Him to us as one who lived the ideal life of temperance, avoiding excess and extravagance in all directions. This was the method of life He inculcated on His disciples. There is no passage in His teaching runuiring asceticism, and no direct commendation of fasting (the word 'fasting' is omitted in KV of Mk ",)-" and the parallel ^It 17^ in accord.ance with best MSS) ; but there is much urgent dissuasion from the life of ease and self-indulgence. The di.scii)le of Christ is required to hold his thoughts as well as his words and actions under control (e.g. Mt .")-'• ^-- "■ **). In the par.able of the Rich Man and Lazarus tlie self-indulgence of the former, while he ignores the sullcrer at his gate, aggravates his guilt. The Or. word for 'temperance,' iyKpireia, .ind its verbal form, (yKpa-Tevbiiai, are found in tlie NT only in Acts (there ascribeil to St. Paul), St. Paul's Epistles, and 2 Peter. Derived from Kpiro^, ' strong,' they indicate the strength a man uses towards himself in self-control. St. Paul makes temperance one of the subjects of his very per- sonal address to Felix (Ac 24^') ; and elsewhere brings it forward as one of the fruits of the spirit (Gal 5!^). Using the verbal form of the same word, he appeals to the analogy of the athlete whose training involves univer.sal self-restrnint (1 Co !)•'•). The virtue is one of the requisites for a bishop (Tit 1"). In 2 P 1' it appears in an a.sccniling series of commended attainments, following know- ledge and preceding godliness.
See also art. SoiiER. W. F. Adeney.
TEMPLE (A.S. tempel, from Lat. templum, a space marked out ; a s.anetiiary : cf. riixtyo^ [from Tifivu, ' to cut '], a piece of land cut otl' from the rest and dedicated to a god). — In the EV 'temple' renders the Hebrew words: — Sj'n (hi'knl, in a narrower sense the Holy Place) and n"3 (' house,' including lUkdl and dihir tj";, or Most Holy Place). Three Gr. words are tr. 'temple' in the NT: lepbv (more correctly the whole of the sacred enclosure), vabt (strictly the sanctuary or sacred ediHce alone, embracing hfhal an<l di'hir), olitot.
i. SOLOUotrs Buildings.— TUe pile or series of
edifices of which the Temple formed one part.o emiiraced in addition the king's house,j3 the porch of pillars,7 the throne porch, a the house for Pharaoh's daughter now married to Solomon, e the king's dwelling, and the Itaram. The following is
d
D
-Q Q
FIO. 1. — fLAN OP BOTAX, BDILDWOS.
1. The preat court. 2. The 'other' ormiddle court 8. The inner (or temple) court. 4. House of Lebanon. 6. Porch of pillars. 6. Throne porch. 7. Royal palace. 8. Qaram. 9. Temple. 10. Altar.
Stade'sf plan of the royal buildings as slightly simplified by Benzinger in his Heb. Arch, i; and in his Com. on Kings. 8
The above plan takes for granted that the pile of buildings formed a complete whole. There was one 'great court' (1) which surrounded the whole. The ' other court ' (2) encompassed the king's palace i and hirnm ; k in 2 K 20'' it is called the ' middle court,' because it lay between the inner or temple court and the southernmost buildings (Lebanon house, etc.). The 'inner court' X (3) was that which contained the temple and its belong- ings: 'inner' not in contrast with an outer court of the temple (of such a court Solomon's temple knows notliing), but as distinguished from the 'greater court,' which contained within it all the royal buildings. Apart from the description in 1 K .5-7, Kzk 43* /i makes it exceedingly likely that the whole of these buildings were together, making one whole.
On the other hand, TheniuB,* Furrer.f and others place the temple on the eoat hill, but the other royal buikiinj,'« on the inodt-rn Mount Zion and the haram hill, between which two
« But to the author, or at all events the editor, of even Kings the temple was the principal building of the ((roup, if not the llnal cause of the whole.
0 1 K 72 ' House of the forest of Lebanon,' so called on account of the cedar wood used in its construction and the piles upon which it rested. J. D. Michaelis, Dathe, Iken {Dissert. I'hiiolog. i. diss.), and Hamelsfeld {Bihl. Geofj. i. p. 3:18) hold that the house in Question was a summer residence for kintf Solomon built on Lebanon or at the foot of it. Dathe refers for support to 1 K 91", 2 Ch 8». But the fact that Solomon deposited the golden shields in the house (see 91") shows that the house was close to Jerusalem. Besides, we never read of Solomon's having more than one palace.