<rapi. Class, 'flesh' (physical). LXX and NT {a) ' physical origin,' 'relationship,' Gn 37^', Jg 9^, 2 S 5' W\ Jn .3", Ro P 11", Gal i-^-"^ ; (6) 'man,' considered as weak and mortal, Ps 56 (55)° 78 (77)=*^ al., Jn l'^ Mt 16'", Jn 8'^ 1 P 1-^. Hence in NT (r) the low est part of liuman nature (opp. Trveu/xa) witli its tendency to sin, Mt 26^', 1 Jn 2'« ; and {d) an unspiritual, unregenerate state, only in St. Paul, Ro 8^-'=* nl.
a-KOTOi (* a-Koria). Class, 'darkness,' ' obscurity.' LXX attaches to it a moral significance. Job 30-'",
Ps 112 (111)^ Is 5-» 92. So in NT, Mt (j"\ Lk F" Ip5^ Jn P31S 12'»«^.
o-oj^o), orcoTr]p, -TT)pia, -T-ppiov. Class. ' save ' (from injury, death, etc.). LXX to deliver from the penalties of the Messianic judgment, Jl 2-'2 (3°), Is 45" 498 al. Hence in NT 'save from sin,' Mt Pi, Lk 2" 1«« 2^» and frequently.
<j>ios, <j)<i»Ti£o) (*-ritr;u6s). Class, subst. ' light ' ; vb. 'shine,' 'give light.' In LXX the subst. acquires a moral force (opp. ctkotos), Ps 27 (26)^ 119 (118)'**', Is 5-" and freq. ; and the vb. is used transitively 'to teach,' Ps 119 (118)i»°, Sir 45". Hence both in NT freq. of .spiritual enlightenment and freedom.
Xapis- Class. ' kind feeling' ; 'a kindness done' ; ' gratitude ' and ' thanks ' ; ' enjoyment.' In LXX (=|n) freq. in the expression 'find favour before God.' In NT this kindness of God becomes a two- fold theological conception : (a) the undeserved kindness by which man is saved from sin, (6) the state of heart kept alive by the Holy Spirit in one who has received God's grace.
Xpio-TiSs. Class, 'to be rubbed on,' 'used as ointment.' LXX 'a person who is anointed' — king, priest, or prophet — for n'^'C. Hence the Messianic conception which gave rise to the NT title 6 xP'<'"''os.
Literature. — Swete, Introd. to the OT in Greek; art. ' Septuagint ' (Nestle) in Hastings' DB ; Speaker's Commentary, 'Apocrypha,' vol. 1. pp. xi.-xxiii. ; art. 'Apocryl)ha' (Ryle) in Smith's Z)B2 • Toy, Neiv Testament Quotations ; Hawkins, Horce Synopticce ; Hatch, Essays in Biblical Greek ; Grimm- Thayer, Greek-Encj. Lexicon of the NT; H. A. A. Kennedy, Sources of NT Greek ; Dittmar, Vet. Test, in Novo ; Hiihn, A T Citate u. Meminisc. im NT ; Commentaries on the NT. A very full Bibliography will be found at the end of Nestle's art. ' Bibeliibersetzungen (Griechische)' in PliE^.
A. H. M'Neile. SEPULCHRE. — See Tomb ; and for 'Holy Sepulchre ' see GoLGOTHA.
SERMON ON THE MOUNT.— Professor Votaw's learned and exhaustive article in the Extra Vol. of Hastings' DB is a mine of information and critical study, to Avhicli the reader is referred for a full treatment of questions concerning the Sermon on the Mount that must here be treated more briefly.
1. Sources. — The contents of Mt 5. 6. 7 are com- monly regarded as constituting one discourse, with the title ' The Sermon on the Mount,' on account of the introductory statement in 5^ Some por- tions of the contents of these chapters reappear, with more or less diflerence of form, introduced in a somewhat similar Avay, in Lk 6. Other say- ings of Jesus contained in the three chapters of Mt. are found scattered over the narrative in Lk., and a few are in Mk. ; two are duplicated in Mt., and one is duplicated in Lk. The follow ing is the Synoptic distribution of the Sermon :
Matthew.
Mark.
Luke.
51
617. 20a
53. 4. 6
620b. 21
511. 12
622. 23
513
950
14:!-1. 35
515
421
(1) 816, (2) 1133
518
1617
52.5. 2S
12-58. 59
(1)529.30, (2)187.8
947. 48. 43. 4S
(1) .';32, (2) 199
10"- 12
1618
539-48
629-36
69-13
112-4
620-21
1233-36
624
1613
625-34
122234
71-5
6.17-42
77-12
11913
713. 14
1322-24
7I6-27
644-49
A comparison of these columns will bring out certain clear results, viz. :
(1) Mk. is not the source of any of these sayings. Only four verses or paragraphs of them are in that Gospel at all. Of these four, three are also in Lk.
608 SERMON" ON THE MOUNT
SERMON ON THE M0U:NT
A comparison between the several forms of the three shows (a) that Lk. and Mt. are nearer to one another than either of them is to Mk., and (b) that in the two cases of duplicates in Mt. , Mk. is nearer to Mt.'s second renderings of the sayings than to his earlier renderings, which are those of the Sermon on the Mount, showing that if Mt. is dependent on Mk. in either case, it is in the later jmssages where the sayings are given in another connexion, not in the Sermon. We may account for the duplicates in this Avay. The first appearance of them is due to the non-Markan source ; the second is perhaps derived from Mk.
(2) It is now generally conceded that the main sources of the common elements in the Synoptic Gospels are Mk., and the collection of Logia which Papias says Matthew compiled and wrote in Hebrew, or Aramaic. Further, it is agreed that the Logia must have been translated into Greek, and that it was in a Gr. form that our Evangelists used it. More recently the difterences between Mt. and Lk. in their renderings of the same say- ings, as well as various other phenomena con- nected with them, have led scholars to the con- clusion that (a) there were two or more versions of Matthew's Logia, or [b] that there were other collections of sayings of Jesus besides that made by Matthew (Wendt, Jiilicher, Wernle, J. Weiss, Feine, Hawkins, Votaw, Bacon). Probably both of these suggestions must be admitted. Neverthe- less, even after admitting this, we may still recog- nize the probability that the Sermon, as we have it in ou'- First Gospel, is derived from Matthew's Logia • for (a) that Gospel — apart from its open- ing and closing sections — consists virtually of Mk., split at 5 places, or as some reckon at 7 places, with blocks of Logia wedged in at these openings, the Sermon being the first such insertion ; and (;8) since our chief collection of the sayings of Jesus is that contained in Mt., since Papias ascribed to the Apostle Matthew the only collection of Logia he is reported to have mentioned, and since the Gospel containing it bears the name of that Apostle in all Patristic references to its origin, there is a strong presumption that the Logia it contains are from Matthew's collection, although this does not forbid us to conclude that the collection may have been used by the Evangelist in a revised form. Nor, of course, does it exclude the suggestions of interpolations, glosses, etc., which can only be considered in detail as they arise in the course of the study of the text. The general conclusion is that as a whole our Sermon on the Mount is derived from Matthew's Logia in a Greek version.