3. The writer of Hebrews refers to the old Jewish altar and to a new Christian one. (1) Reasoning somewhat in the manner of Philo, he notes the emergence of a mysterious priest from a tribe which has given none of its sons to minister at the altar, and on this circumstance bases an ingenious argu- ment for the imperfection of the Levitical priest- hood, and so of the whole Mosaic system (He 7'^). (2) Against those Christians who occupy themselves with (sacrificial) meats the writer says : ' We have an altar, wliereof they have no right to eat who serve the tabernacle ' (13'"). Few sentences have given rise to so much misunderstanding. ^"'EixoiJ.ev can only denote Christians, and what is said of them must be allegorically intended, for they have no rg ffKTjvr} XarpevovTes, and no dvcnacrri^piov in the proper sense of the word ' (von Soden). The point which the writer seeks to make is that in connexion with the great Christian sacrifice there is nothing corre- sponding to the feasts of ordinary Jewish (or of heathen) sacrifices. Its ti^ttos is the sacrifice of the Day of Atonement, no part of which was eaten by priest or worshipper, the mind alone receiving the benefit of the offering. So we Christians serve an altar from which we obtain a purely spiritual ad- vantage. ^Yhethe^ the writer actually visualized the Cross of Christ as the altar at which all His followers minister, like XeirovpyoL in the Tabernacle, — as many have supposed — is doubtful. Figurative language must not be unduly pressed.
The writer of Rev., whose heaven is a replica of the earthly Temple and its solemn ritual, sees underneath the altar the souls of martyrs— the blood poured out as an oblation (cf. Ph 2^^ 2 Ti 4'') representing the life or i/'uxiy— and hears them cry- ing, like the blood of Abel, for vengeance (Rev 6«- '» ; cf. En. 22^). In 8^ and 9^3 the dvatacrrripwi' is not the altar of burnt-offering but that of incense (see Incense). In 14'* the prophet sees an angel come out from the altar, the spirit or genius of fire, an Iranian conception ; and in 16'' he personifies the altar itself and makes it proclaim the truth and justice of God.
Literature. — I. Benzinger, Heb. Arch., Freiburg, 1894, p. 378 f.; VJ. Nowack, Heb. Arch., Freiburfr, 1894, ii. 17 f.; A. Edersheim, The Temple, Us Ministry and Services, London, 1874; Schurer, HJP, ii. i. 207 f. ; W. R. Smith, Rel. Sem.-\ London, 1894 ; J. Welliiausen, Reste arab. Heidenthums, Berlin, 1887, p. 101 f. ; A. C. McGiffert, Apostol. Age, Edinb. 1897, p. 36 f.; C. v. Weizsacker, Apostol. Age, 2 vols., London, 1894-95, i. 43 ff. J AMES STRAHAN.
AMBASSADOR. — Although this word occurs twice (2 Co 520 and Eph G^") in the EV of the NT, the corresponding Greek noun {wpea-^evTris) occurs nowhere. Instead, we find the verb irpea^eiju, ' to be an ambassador,' while the cognate collective noun (RV 'ambassage') is used in Lk U^'^ 19'*.*
* irpetrPevoi and Trpecr/Sewr^s were the recognized terras in the Greek East for the Legate of the Roman Empire (Ueissraann, Light from the Ancient East-, 1911, p. 379). I
In the OT the idea behind the words translated 'ambassador' (generally ?«aZ'aM) is that of going or being sent, and of this the etymological equivalent in the NT is not ' ambassador ' but 'apostle' (dirdffToXos, 'one sent forth'); but both the OT terms and the NT dTrScTToXos have to be understood in the light of use and context rather than of derivation. In this way they acquire a richer content, of which the chief component ideas are the bearing of a message, the dealing, in a re- presentative character, with those to whom one is sent, and the solemn investiture, before starting out, with a delegated authority sufficient for the task (cf. Gal P^-n).
The representative character of ambassadorship is emphasized by the repeated vv^p, ' on behalf of,' in 2 Co 5^", with the added ' as though God were intreating by us.' The same preposition (iirep) occurs in Eph 6-" ; thus irpea^edta is never found in the NT without it. So also in Lk 14^2 191^ the context shows that the irpea^eia is representative.
There is no very marked difference between 'ambassador' and 'apostle.' irpea^e^u}, having vp^a^vs (' aged ') as its stem, does suggest a certain special dignity and gravity, based on the ancient idea of the vastly superior wisdom brought by ripeness of years. Probably, however, St. Paul was not thinking of age at all, for Trpecr/SetJw had lived a life of its own long enough to be independ- ent of its antecedents. His tone of dignity and of Sride springs not so much from his metaphor as irect from his vividly realized relation to God : vTrip is more emphatic than irpea^evo). It is in exactly the same tone that he claims the title ' aposfle ' (see, e.g.. Gal 1\ 1 Co 9^ 159"") ; cf. Gal psf.^ where his ' separation to preach ' expresses the same thought in yet another form. Nevertheless, his is a humble pride, for only grace has put him in his lofty position (cf. 1 Co 15*'). Moreover, his commission is not to lord it over others, but to ' beseech ' them ; nay, God Himself only ' intreats ' (2 Co 5^"). It is He who seeks ' arrangements for peace' with men (cf. Lk 14^^). On the Trpea-^vrris of Philem9 (AV and RV 'the aged,' RVm 'an am- bassador') see art. Aged. C. H. "Watkins.