There is a trustworthy tradition which connects the name of Philip the Apostle with Hierapolis. Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus towards the end of the 2nd cent. — as quoted by Eu.sebius (HE iii. 31) — states that Philip, ' one of the twelve,' was among ' the great lights of Asia,' and that he was ' buried at Hierapolis along with his two virgin daughters.' Theodoret [Commentary on Ps 116) says that ' the Apostle Philip controverted the error of the Phrygians.' St. John is also believed to have preached at Hierapolis, and the progress of Christianity there was represented as the victory over the Echidna or serpent of ^sculapius, which was identified with Satan. Hierapolis was made a metropolis by Justinian. The ruins of the city are extensive and well-preserved. The theatre is one of the finest in Asia Minor. The white terrace now bears the fanciful name of ' Cotton Castle ' (Pambuk-Kalessi).
LiTERATDRE. — W. J. Hamilton, Researches in Asia Minor, 1842, i. 507 ff. ; T. Lewin, Life and Epistles of St. Paul^, 1875, i. 356 f.; W. M. Ramsay, Hist. Geog. of Asia Minor, 1890, p. 84, and Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, i. [1S95] 84-120.
James Strahan. HIGH PRIEST.— See Priest.
HOLINESS, PURITY.— This article is intended to include the conceptions of holiness and purity as we find them in the literature of the Apostolic Church. So far as the Gospels are concerned, these have already been dealt with in separate articles in the DCG, to which reference is now made. There is a certain advantage in dealing with both subjects in one article, as the two are fundamentally connected ; and in the course of the article it will be found that the tie is very close. IJotli are priniarilj'- religious ideas, whose ethical significance diverges. In the JST holiness em- phasizes rather tiie Divine side, and purity the human side of that comprehensive condition of peace with and access to God the Fatlier, along with all the consequences for character whicli had been mediated through the gospel of Jesus Christ. There seems to be no fundamental difierence in the use of the terms 'holiness' and 'purity' by the various NT writers. Hence the method fol- lowed in the article has been to use in illustration
of the general conceptions certain leading NT passages.
1. Holiness.— i. The general conception.— The
original idea is stated by A. B. Davidson {Ezekiel, Cambridge, 1892, p. xxxix) to be ' not now recover- able ' (cf. Robertson Smith, ES^, London, 1894, p. 140). The most plausible suggestion is that it is connected with a root = ' separate.' Our idea of holiness is misleading for the interpretation of both OT and NT meaning. To us, holiness is exclusively an ethico-religious quality, attaching to persons, in so far as they are God-like in life and character ; and applied (less accurately) to institu- tions (including sacraments) on account of their religious significance. In ancient Semitic religion, the ' holiness ' of God or of men had nothing to do with morality and ethical purity of life. P^ven in Israel it came to be an appropriate epithet of, almost a synonym for. Deity (cf. Am 4'^ 6*, where God is said to swear 'by his holiness,' and 'by himself,' without any real difierence of meaning). In other words, 'holiness' is a relative term in ancient religion.
'The divine holiness was not so much an object of intellectual contemplation as a fact borne in upon the mind by the constant presence of things and persons that might not be touched, places that might not be entered, and times in which ordinary employments were suspended, because of their appropriation to the service or worship of God ' (J. Skinner, UDB ii. 397* ; cf. H. Schultz, OT Theology, Eng. tr., Edinburgh, 1892, p. 168 ff.).
Holiness is not to be confused with transcendence in its aj^plication to God. Jahweh, as holy, in Hebrew thought is not originally opposed to the universe, but rather is guarded or guards Himself, on the one hand against the arrogance and pre- sumption of man (1 S 6-") and, on the other, against the false deity of the national gods (Jos 4'^*'), The Hebrews, in transferring the epithet to Jahweh, also took over the ancient idea involved in it, and persisting in the NT, that any thing or person that comes into any relation with Deity is ipso facto holy. Any part of God Himself may be holy (e.g. His arm, His spirit) ; or what constitutes His property is ' holy ' (e.g. His sanctuary, land, people, ofi'erings, or ministers). Angels are also called 'holy ones' (Job 5*).
The real antithesis to 'holy' in this original sense is, therefore, ' profane ' or ' common ' (Ml, ^fjSriXos, lit. ' that which is allowed to be trodden ' [Lv lO'", 1 S 21^ 1 Ti 4^ 6-«, 2 Ti 2'«] ; used in the NT of men [1 Ti P, He 12'6]). Tiie 'holy' was also accessible only under certain strict ceremonial regulations. And it is just at this point that the affinity of holiness and purity or cleanness becomes apparent (see further under II.).
2. The NT conception. — This idea of 'holiness' as essentially a relationship between God and man, in which God takes the initiative, persists all through the NT ; and it is obvious that, as the idea of God developed, holiness would also tend to carry with it ever-increasing moral demands on character. We may therefore turn to the uses of the word in the NT.