• iriaiitpovi^etv^ ' sopbronize.' The word ifl sometimes used in English ; of. A. P. Stanley, Life of Arnold^, London, 1868, vol. i. p. 30 : * I am confirmed in mv resolution not to do so (t.e. raise the entrance fees) lest I should get the sons of very great people as my pupils whom it is almost impossible to sophronize.'
excesses on one side or the other' (Moll'att, ti. p. 564 f.).
I.lTRKATCltR. — Tho Lexicons under both words are most in- structive; R. C. Trench, St/nnutjtiu of the iVys, Ixtndciii, 1^7(1, )•. (iOII. ; T. H. Green, i'tfUpiniima la E(hict*, Oxford, Isity, bk. iii. ch. v. ; R. L. Nettleship, Lectures ml Platit'g IWpuUic, Ix>ndoii, 1S9S, p. flilfl. ; Plato, Cralijlua; Aristotle, .Vic. Ethic*, vi. 6.0 ; Joiui Caird, Esuai/x ftrr Stindaij Headiwj. ].ondon, IIHIO, xl. ; 1. Tavlor, yulurat llintury yj t^nthusiasin, do., ISI'9, Fanaticism, do., ls;i:{ ; Hugh Blair. Sennone, do., 1816, vol. i. no. xi., vol. iii. no. xii. ; Augustine Birrell, Selected Ks^ai.'*, do., 1909, p. 258f. ; see also under 'Self-Control' and 'Sclt-Ueniarin y^CU. UONALD MaCKKNZIE.
SODOM AND GOMORRAH.— Sodom and Comor- rah are menlioned in Mt I0'», Jude', 2 P 2", Kev 11' as all'ording liy tlieir fate a warning against strange sins, whether moral or spiritual. The verb l^KTropiieviii) used in .lude is also used in LXX of Ex 3i"- '«, Lv 17', Hos 4'^ Kzk Ki-"-^- », of 'going after' other gods, and this .seems to explain the use of Sodom in Kev 11*. Koine is So<lom beaause its gods are no true gods. Beyond references in The Testaments of the Twelve patriarchs (Test. Naph. 3) and in 3 Mac '2"- the symbolism of Sodom seems to have been dropped out of sight. It is not used in the Apostolic I'atliers, or in any apoca- lyptic or heretical books of the Apostolic Age. The reason is possibly to be found in the belief (Enoch, Ixvii. 4) that the angels who sinned are imprisoned in a subterranean burnin<' valley (tiuhinnom) which extended to the Dead Sea, so that Gehenna extruded Sodom by assimilating it.
W. F. Cobb.
SOLDIER.— See Army.
SOLOMON (SoXojuuji'). — Solomon is mentioned in St. Stephen's speech before the Sanheilrin as the builder of a bouse to (rod, such as his father David had asked (but failed to obtain) permission to erect as a habitation for the (iod of .lacob (Ac 7"''"). Stephen dares to put Solonion's Temple into the category of houses 'made with hands,' in which the Most High does not dwell, and contrasts it with the universe in which God has heaven for His throne and earth for His footstool (v.**). The speaker's a.ssumptioii that the Maker of all things could not have a man- built place of rest, with the implication that He was in reality no more present in the Temjde than in other jiarts of His vast world, was just what roused the fanatical fury of the audience, bringing the speech to an abrupt and tragic conclusion. His fate is all the more remarkable because Solomon himself is represented as protesting, in his prayer at the dedication of the Temple, against the notion that God would dwell on earth, much less in the house which had been built for His worship (1 K 8-'). But careful students of liistory know that there was division of opinion, even among the prophets, on this question, and Ezekiel's conception of ' the glory of the Lord' hlling the Temide (Kzk 43*- », etc.), together with the later Kabliinic doctrine of the Shekinah (' that which dwells ' or the 'dwelling'), which St. Paul calls the SAJo (Ro 9^), indicates how deep-rooted in the Jewish mind was the conviction that God did in some mysterious waj' inhabit the Temple of Solomon, of Zcrubbabel, and even of Herod. Stephen's attempt to revive the si>iritual conception ascribed to Solomon was therefore an assault upon the citadel of Jewish materialism, and cost him his life. James Strahan.
SOLOMON'S PORCH See POKCH, Templb.
SON.— See Family.
SON OF GOD.— See Christ.
SONS OF GOD.— See Children of God.
516
SON OF MAN
SOOTHSAYING
SON OF MAN — The only instance in the NT outside tlie (;!ospel re<»nls of a direct reference to Jesus as 6 vlds toO avOfub-jrov occurs in tlie siieech of Stephen before tlie Jewisli Sanlicdrin (Ac 7''"). Assuming its genuineness, it is significant tliat tlie expression is used by a Hellenistic Jew recently converted to Christianity. Even on the assump- tion that the speech is largely the composition of the author of Acts, the same significance attaches to its employment here. Not only is it evidence that the gospel tradition was, in the main, correct as to its use by Jesus of Himself, but it shows how early the consciousness of the Church awoke to the claims which the designation involves. The strange hesitation of primitive Christianity in using this title proves the sturdiness of the growth and development of independent thought within the Church of the Apostolic Age. The rage of Stephen's audience, on hearing the words of the speaker, is accounted for only on the supposition that ' the Son of man ' was recognized as the Jesus whom they had so recently done to death, and who now is described as occupying the transcendent position, and discharging the functions, of Messiah. The great and final synthesis — the Suliering Servant and the Eternal Judge — had received its justification in the alleged e.xaltation of the Crucified to the right hand of God. Now, no less than in the days of His humiliation. His sym- pathies were active for the despised and the sutier- ing. It is, perhaps, too much to say that ' He is revealed to the eyes of His first martyr, that Christians may learn that that which is begun in weakness shall be com|ileted in eternal majesty ' (B. F. Westcott, The Speaker's Commentary, ' St. .John and the Acts,' London, ISSO, p. 33), but St. Luke's use of the term in this connexion shows how profoundly its implicates had afiected the Christology of the primitive Church (note the word ea-Tuira ; cf. iKa.di.aev, Mk 16'", and Kadou, Ps 110').