FRAGMENTS {K\i<r/iaTa, pieces broken for dis- tribution ; cf. KXaajiaruv Apruv of LXX Ezk 13"). — AU the Synoptists record that, when the miraculous feeding of the multitude ended, the broken pieces remaining over from the meal were gathered up and deposited in twelve baskets (Mt U-"", Mk 6", Lk 9"). St. John adds that this was done in obedience to Christ's command, addressed to the disciples, by whom apparently the work was performed (Jn 6'-). The surplus thus collected far exceeded the amount of the original stock, and bore witness to the abun- dance of the meal partaken of. The carefulness shown in collecting the remnants of food was intended to avoid any appearance of waste, and served to correct any tendency to undervalue what had come to the recipients so cheaply. The miracle was one of the very exceptional cases in which Christ provided for men's ordinary Avants, was wrought only in view of the urgent necessity that had arisen (Mt 14''), and, whUe it raised expecta- tions of similar benefits in the future (Jn 6-'), was not designed to produce this result. The storing of the fragments for future use would tend to indicate that such miracles were not to be every- day occurrences. As in all Christ's miracles, there is strict economy of supernatural resources, which are resorted to only when natural resources fail. W. S. Montgomery.
FRANKINCENSE (mh^i, Xl^Sa.-os). — One of the iiii;i.-.liiiits of incense (.iTep), Ex 30**, and one of 1 1 !•■ u i ft - 1 irought by the Magi to the infant Saviour (Mt .'"i. The name is derived from p^ 'to be \\hite.' akin to which is liib^oi, the name by which frankincense is known in Arabia. It is a fragrant gum or resin, the produce of the tree Boswcllia Srn-nta, of tlie natural order Amyridacefe, from which it is obtained by slitting the bark. The
FREEDOM
FREE WILL
tree itself is a native of Central and Southern India, whence the gum, ■which requires no further prejjaration than being allowed to harden, is ex- ported to Europe, the yellowish or inferior quality in larger quantities than the white. Some un- certainty has existed as to the source of the supply. It seems clear that no such tree existed in Palestine, but that the frankincense used tliere was imported through Arabia (cf. Is 60°, Jer 6"", where ' incense ' in AV ought to be 'frankincense,' and is mi rendered in KV). The opening up of Imliri \'\ liii(:iiii made it plain that the source of the --niiiily, wliirh had previously come through Persia, amis lo be found there.
The ritual use of frankincense, in the OT as among the heathen, denotes direct adoration. It is burned as an apjiendaye to the minhdh (Lv 2-). According to ul.l :illc.u..i izinn traditions, the frank- incense oH'ered liv tlie -M.iui ^i.uiiilird tlir Divinity of the Holy ClnUl. tii.' ,i;ol,l r.'prrsrntiii- His royalty, the niynli either His healing poN\ers or His prospect of sufi'ering.
LiTERATDRB. — Birdwood, The Gemis BosiueUia, London, 1870, also in Trmis. Linn. Society, xxvii., 1871 ; Encyc. Britfi art. • t>ankincense.' S. J. RaMSAY SIBBALD.
FREEDOM.— See Fkee AVill and Liberty.
FREE WILL. — It is not ea.sy to give a definition of Free Will that is not tautological, — indeed, strictly speaking, it cannot be defined. It may, however, be described as the ability to determine within oneself as to one's acts or courses of action. We have not anywhere in the Gospels or, indeed, in the NT mention made in specific terms of Free Will, or any statement made in so many words that either tlie Divine will or the will of man is free. We have little, in fact, of philosophical or philosophico-theological discussion of any kind in the NT. The nearest approach to such a thing is in Bo 9""-'', where the question of human freedom is approached, and even there such discussion is rather deprecated, as verging on impiety, than entered upon. But while the question of the free- dom of the will, whctlier tlie will of God or the will of man, is not foriji.'illy dealt with in the NT, it is quite plain that ( iud is regarded as acting freely, and that man is recognized as a free agent.
1. That God is not bound by any necessity ex- ternal to Himself, that He acts according to the counsel of His will, is r.athcr to Ije gathered from the general sjiirit *ii Scripture teaching than to be deduced from partiiul.ir passages. The freedom of the Divine will is, indeed, plainly implied, although not explicitly mentioned, in such words as (Ko USj-sc)^ 'For who hath kno\vn the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recom- pensed unto him again ? For of hiiii, .md Ihrou^li him, and to him are all things : (.i\\li..iu Iii-I,,iy for ever. Amen.' But Scripture siiii|il\ accepts the freedom of the Divine will lathir than fdvni- ally states it. We cannot, howe\-er, think of God as acting other than freely, if we are to accept Him as a living God at all. Did we suppose that there _w,as any necessity outside of Himself con- straining Him to act in a certain waj-, we should be making an impersonal force the true Deity. We are constrainetl to believe that God acts freely. Yet to say that the Most High acts freely does not mean that He acts capriciously. He acts in accord- ance \yith His own nature. "VVe can conceive that He miglit have made the material universe other than He has made it, but we cannot conceive Him as acting otherwise than in love and holiness and justice. Still, the necessity by whicli, in a sense. He may be said to act where His nroral govern-