598
TOMB
TONGUES, GIFT OF
The word fySeiy/ia as related to ^j-Scitis indicates strictly the concrete re.iiilt in contrast with tlie process. In iiu^iiiiin;;, however, the two words are practically iiidistin^juishable. Tins becomes ap- parent from a consideration of the passage in which the latter word occurs.
2. In I'll 1^, St. I'aul bids his converts be ' noth- ini,' all'riglited by the adversaries : which is for them an evident token (?i'5ti{is) of perdition, but of your salvation, and that from God' ; i.e. if the Philippians do not waver before the attacks of the adversaries, but maintain their ground, this stead- fast attitude in itself will be an ' evident token,' a 'proof that the adversaries will sutler defeat, while the Philip|)ians will enjoy the Divine salva- tion. 'EcSeifis, like lv5eiy/j.a, is a Pauline word, and does not occur in the Greek Bible apart from his Epistles. It is an Attic law term and appears to mean, more distinctively, ' proof ' that rests on an appeal to facts, as contrasted with mere logical demonstration. 'Token' coupled with the adjec- tives ' manifest' or ' evident' is an adequate render- ing of either li'Say/xa or IvScL^ii.
3. In 2 Th 3", St. Paul, referring to the conclud- ing salutation written by his own hand, says that it ' is the " token " {(Tri/ieiov) in every epistle.' An exhaustive account of these interesting words would require a general examination of the epistol- ary methods of the contemporary Grseco-Roman world. It must suffice here to say that St. Paul, in accordance with the common practice of his age, probably dictated his Epistles to an amanuensis (cf. Ro 16~), adding a few words at the end, in his own writing, to vouch for the authenticity of the document. These authenticating words might consist of the bare salutation, as in the present passage, or might contain other words in addition (cf. 1 Co 16-'-, Col 418, Gal 6"-" ; Deissmann goes so far as to hold that in 2 Cor. the apostolic auto- gi'aph begins at 10'). The probability is that the Apostle would authenticate every Epistle by his autograph greeting at the end. In the cases where be calls special attention to the fact (1 Co 16^', Col 4'*, and the present passage ; cf. too Gal 6") he may have been anxious to certify the letter, as against any forgeries that might be circulating in his name. The use of the word (n)n€ioi> here, followed by the elucidating oCrws ypdipw (almost like our English 'signed') is closely parallel to the aeixri- /ictu/xai (generally contracted into aea-q.) with which many papyri and ostraca close. An alternative method of certifying a letter was to give to the bearer a ' token {<j6ij.^o\ov) as proof of his com- mission (cf. S. Witkowski, Epistulce Privatm, Leip- zig, 1906, no. 25).
LiTERATFRE.— J. B. Lightfoot, Notes on Epistles of St. Paul, London, 1S95, p. 135 f. ; A. Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, Eng. tr.2, do.. 1911, p. 153 ; G. Milligan, St. Paul's EpiMes to the Thessalonians, do., 190S, Note A, 'St. Paul as a Letter- Writer,' pp. 121-130. Dawson Walker.
TOMB.— See Sepulchre.
TONGUE. — Physiologically, the tongue (7Xui<ra-a) is accessory both to the sense of taste and to the faculty of speech, but in the literature of apostolic Christianity (e.g. 1 Co 14') it is connected with speech alone.* Here, as in primitive thought gener- ally, to which the nervous system and the more minute structure of the tissues were unknown, the tongue was thought to possess an inherent faculty of speech, and the ethical qualities attach- ing to what was said were attributed to the organ itself (ethnic parallels in J. G. Frazer, GB',
* Similarly, in the OT, taste is not specially connected with the tongue (Job 2012 refers to the mouth as a whole), but with the palate (5n). For the more scientific Greek view, see Aristotle, de Anima, ii. 10.
London, 1900, ii. 421, 422, note). As, in the OT, the tongue is said to concoct deceit (Ps 50'"), and iniquity is said to be in it (Job 6'°) or under it (Ps 10'), so, in the NT, it is said to delile the whole body, to be a restless evil, full of deadly poison (Ja 3"- *). This vivid language is not adequately characterized by saying, with Mayor, ' The tongue is of course merely the innocent instrument em- I)l<)yed by the free will of man ' (The Epistle of St. James', London, 1910, p. 220). That which seems to us to be ' odd and exaggerated ' in the language of St. James really marks the difference between ancient and modern psychology. When joy (.4c 2-", 1 Clem, xviii. 15), arrogance (1 Clem. Ivii. 2), deceit (Ko 3'^ 1 Clem. xxxv. 8) are connected with the tongue, a psycho-phy.sical idea underlies the usage, which springs from the conception of the organ as an integral part of the whole personality.
Early Christian ethics seems to have found it necessary to emphasize the control of the tongue ; it is even made the sine qua non of religion (Ja !•') and the condition of life (1 P 3'°, 1 Clem. xxii. 3; cf. Ps 34'^). It is particularly urged on women (1 Clem. xxi. 7, Hermas, Vis. II. ii. 3). Evidently 'the scourge of the tongue' (1 Clem. Ivi. 10; cf. Job 5-') was a very real evil in early Christian communities. We may also note the rebuke of hypocrisy and insincerity, as shown by the con- trast between the inner life and its outer expres- sion : ' let us not love in word, neither with the tongue' (1 Jn 3"). On confession itself great emphasis was naturally placed (Ro 14''; see also art. Mouth) ; it is felt that the truth of the inner life will instinctively utter itself in the testi- mony of the spoken word : ' As the fountain gushes out its water, so my heart gushes out the praise of the Lord and my lips utter praise to Him, and my tongue His psalms ' {Odes of Solomon, xl. 4, 5).