altar, but of its intimate relation to the ministry of the inner sanctuary on the Day of Atonement.
2. In Rev 8^- ^, \ij3aviOT6s, which is strictly ' frank- incense,' the gum exuding from the XLfiavos, is used instead of Xt/Javwrts (or -rpts) for ' censer,' corre- sponding to the wvpelov (irvpLov) or dvlcTKT) (' fire pan ') of the LXX. In the prophetic symbolism this censer holds (1) the fire which burns the incense that is added to the prayers of the saints, and (2) the fire, or hot ashes, of God's vengeance, which are cast upon a hostile and impenitent world. See Incense.
LrrERATTTRB. — Grimm-Thayer, s.v. Ov/itianjpiov ; Schurer, EJP II. i. 295 ; T. Zahn, Introd. to NT, Ens?, tr., 1909, ii. 363; H. B. Swete, Apocalypse of St. John~, 1907, p. 108; ExpT i. [18S9-90] 74, ii. [1&90-91] 18 ; see also art. 'Censer' in HDB and Literature there cited. JaMES STKAHAN,
CENTURION.— See Army. CEPHAS.— See Peter.
CERINTHUS.— Probably Cerinthus was educated in Egypt (Hippol., vii. 7, 33 ; x. 21 [ed. Duncker]) ; certainly he taught in proconsular Asia contempor- aneously with John, the writer of the Gospel and Epistles, i.e. in the last quarter of the 1st cent. A.D. (Polj'carp, quoted in Iren., adv. Hcer. III. iii. 4). Cerinthus is one of the earliest of the Gnostics. The world, he taught, was made not by the Supreme God, but by a Power inferior to, and ignorant of, Him. He denied the virgin birth of Jesus, who was, however, pre-eminent for right- eousness, prudence, and wisdom. He separated Jesus and Christ. Christ descended on Jesus after baptism and left Him before the crucifixion. Jesus suffered and rose again, but Christ, a pure spirit, Avas impassible (Iren., adv. Hcer. I. xxvi. 1 ; cf. III. xi. 1; Hippol., vii. 33, x. 21; Pseudo- TertuUian, adv. omn. Hcer. x.).
It is not incredible that Cerinthus judaized to the extent of teaching the obligation of circum- cision and the Sabbath (Epiph., Hcer. chs. L and ii., and Philaster). Though Judaizing and Gnosticism afterwards became inconsistent with each other, at Cerinthus' stage such a limited alliance is not unthinkable. It is, however, his christology that is most important, and it is an interesting query — Is it this that is attacked in 1 John? Beyond doubt St. John has an actual heresy in view ; he gives no mere general warning against errors that may arise. The crucial passage is 1 Jn 4-' ^, which, literally translated from the critical texts, reads : ' Hereby know ye the spirit of God ; every spirit which confesses Jesus Christ come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit which confesses not Jesus is not of God.' The use of 'Jesus' alone in V.** makes it almost cei'tain that v.*^ should be taken to mean ' confesses Jesus as Christ come in tiie flesh.' Thus it is not Docetism that is opposed, but a separation such as Cerintlius made between Jesus and Christ. Further, according to Socrates (HE vii. 32), ' confesses not ' in v.^ was substituted for an original 'dissolves' or 'disrupts' {\{iei, so Vulg. solvit). If we accept this, the case may be said to be proved. It is exactly the christology of Cerinthus that is attacked. So in 1 Jn 2--, the denial that Jesus is Christ can scarcely be the old Jewish denial, but a refusal like that of Cerinthus to identify Jesus with Christ. Again, in 1 Jn 5® ' blood ' probably refers either to the birth or to the deatii of Christ, both of which Cerinthus denied. Quite possibly other errors are in St. John's mind as well as Cerintliianism. Docetism, no doubt, was a real danger, and i)assages like 1 .Jn I"* seem to have it in view. But it is probable in the highest degree that it is mainly Cerinthus who is to St. John the enemy of the truth.
CERTAIjS'TY
CHASTISEMENT
173
The errors dealt -with in 1 John had antinomian consequences. According to Gains of Rome (quoted by Euseb., HE iii. 28), Cerinthus taught the coming of a millennium of sensual delights. Too much credence, however, is not to be attached to such statements. In early days, as always, heretics were readily and rashly painted as moral delinquents, and, as noted above, John may have others besides Cerinthus in view.
Other views have been attributed to Cerinthus, but the evidence is so scanty, confused, and con- tradictory, that it is not worth whUe to state them.
LiTBRATTRE.— J. B. Lightfoot, Colossians and Philemon^, London, 1879 ; H. L. Mansel, The Gnostic Heresies, do. 1S75 ; A. Hilgenfeld, Eetzergesehichte, Leipziir, 1S84, p. 411 ff. ; D. R. A. Lipsius, Zur Quellenkritik d. Epipbanios, Vienna, 1865, p. 32S f. ; R. Law, The Tests of Life, Edinburgh, 1909, chs. ii. and xiii. ; art. 'Cerinthus,' by A. S. Peake, in EME iii. 318. W. D. NiVEN.
CERTAINTY.— See Assurance.
CHAIN, BONDS.— The word SiXvan is used of the
coupling-chain or manacle by which the prisoner was attached to his guard, as distinguished from veOT), the foot-fetters. It diiiers apparently from decTfioi in conveying the idea of attachment rather than confinement. Among the Romans, it was customary to attach the prisoner by a light chain to the soldier responsible for his safe custody. One end of the chain was fastened to the right wrist of the captive, and the other to the left A^ rist of his custodian, whose right hand was thus free. It is to this method of confinement that St. Paul alludes, when speaking of his 'chain' (Ac 28=", Eph 620™, 2 Ti l'"). Sometimes, for greater security, the prisoner was bound to two soldiers, one on each side of him, in which case, of course, the use of two chains would be necessary. This more rigorous method of confinement is the sort to which St. Peter was subjected during his im- prisonment (Ac 12'^), and also St. Paul during the early days of his captivity at Jerusalem (Ac 21*^). Later on, at Caesarea and Rome, the latter Apostle, although still kept in strict military custody, was permitted to enjoy a considerable measure of freedom (Ac 24^ 28'"'-)- More fre- quently, the less precise and graphic terms deafioL and oecr/xd, 'bonds' or 'imprisonment' are used to describe the condition of persons in captivity. St. Paul, speaking of himself as a prisoner, makes repeated allusions to his 'bonds' (Ph l^- is. w. le^ Col 43, 2 Ti 29, Philem i"- 1^). The neuter and mascu- line forms are used with distinct shades of mean- ing, SecT/xd referring to the fetters by which the person was bound (Ac 16-^ ['bands'] 20'-^, 26-''), Seffnol to the state of captivitj- into Avhich the person had been thrown. W. S. MONTGOMERY.