Le Fevre. See Faber Stapulexsis.
Left (prop. PIN^b, semol', a primitive word ; Gr. evwi'vixog, lit. well-named, i. e. lucky, by euphemism for (\piarep6c, as opposed to 'p'3'^, ^t^ioc, the right). The left hand, like tlie Latin Iwrus, was esteemed of iU omen, hence the term sinister as equivalent to unfortunate. This was especialh' the case among the superstitious Greeks and Romans (see Potter's Gr. Ant. i, 323; Adams, Bom. Ant. p. 301). Among the Hebrews the left like- wise indicated the no7-th (Job xxiii, 9 ; Gen. xiv, 15), the person's face being supposed to be turned towards the east. In all these respects it was precisely the op- posite of the rif/ht (q. v.).
LEFT-HANDED Oi^T^'^ l'^! I^X, shut as to his right hand [Judg.ui,!^; xx, 16]; Sept. 6^i(poTSpo()t'^ioc, Vulgate q7,i utraque mann pro dextera utehatur, and ita sinistra lit dextra prcelians), properly one that is imable skilfully to use his right hand, and hence employs the left ; but also, as is usual, ambidexter, i. e. one who can use the left hand as well as the right, or, more literally, one Avhose hands are both right hands. It was long supposed that both hands are naturally equal, and that the preference of the right hand, and comparative inca- pacity of the left, are the result of education and habit. ]5ut it is now known that the difference is really phys- ical (see Bell's Bridgewater Treatise on the IlaiuV), and that the ambidexterous condition of the hands is not a natural development. See Ambidexter.
The capacity of equal action with both hands was highly prized in ancient times, especially in war. Among the Hebrews this quality seems to have been most common in the tribe of Benjamin, for all the per- sons noticed as being endued with it were of that tribe.
By comparing Judg. iii, 15; xx, IG, with 1 Chron. xii, 2, we may gather that the persons mentioned in the two former texts as '• left-handed" were really ambidex- ters. In the latter text we learn that the Benjaraites who joined David at Ziklag were " mighty men, helpers of the war. They were armed with bows, and could use both the right hand and the left in hurling [sling- ing] and shooting arrows out of a bow." There were thirty of them ; and as they appear to have been all of one family, it might almost seem as if the greater com- monness of this power among the Benjamites arose from its being a hereditary peculiarity of certain families in that tribe. It may also partly have been the result of cultivation ; for, although the left hand is not naturally an equally strong and ready instrument as the right hand, it may doubtless be often rendered such by early and suitable training. — Kit to. See Hand.
Leg is the rendering of several words in the A. V. Usually the Heb. term is i'^S, lara' (only in the dual B"'^'13), the lower limb or shank of an animal (Exod. xii, 9 ;' xxix, 17 ; Lev. i, 9, 13 ; iv, 11 ; viii, 21 ; ix, 14 ; Amos iii, 12) or a locust (Lev. xi, 21) ; the oKiXoc, of a man (John xix, 31, 32, 33). pid, shuk (Chald. plj, shak, of an image, Dan. ii, 33), is properly the shin or lower part of the leg, but used of the whole limb, e. g. of a person (Deut. xxviii, 13 ; Psa. cxlvii, 10 ; Prov. xxv'i, 7; "thigh," Isa. xlvii, 2; in the phrase "/»}) [q. v.] and thigh," Judg. xv, 7 ; spoken also of the drawers or leggins, Cant, v, 15) ; also the " heave shoulder" (q. v.) of the sacrifice (Exod. xxix, 22, etc. ; 1 Sam. ix, 24). Once by an extension of PS"!, i-e'gel (1 Sam. xvii, G), properly a foot (as usually rendered). Elsewhere im- properly for ?!2uj, sho'bel, the train or trailing dress of a female (Isa. xlvii, 2) ; and In'n"^, tsedda', a step-chain for the feet, or perh. bracelet for the wrist (" ornament of the leg," Isa. iii, 20). See Thigh.
Goliath's greaves for his legs doubtless extended from the knee to the foot (1 Sam. xvii, G). See Gkeaa'es. The bones of the legs of persons crucified were broken to hasten their death (John xix, 31). See Ckccifixion.
Legalists. Properly speaking, a legalist is one who " acts according to the law ;" but in general tlic term is made use of to denote one who seeks salralion by u-o}-ks of law (not of the law, but of "law" generally, whether moral or ceremonial, t4' ipyeov ropov, Eom. v, 20) instead of by the merits of Christ. Manj^ who are alive to the truth that it is impossible to do anything that can purchase salvation, and who desire that thLi doctrine should be earnestly and constantly incidcated by Christian ministers in their teaching, conceive that there is a danger also on the opposite side'; and that while plain Antinomian teaching would disgust most hearers, there is a kind of doctrine scarcely less mis- chievous in its consequences, that which only uiciden- tally touches on good works. They think that what- ever leads or leaves men, without distinctly rejecting Christian virtue, to feel little anxiety and take little pains about it; anything which, though perhaps not so meant, is liable to be so understood by those who have the wish as to leave them without any feeling of real shame, or mortification, or alarm on account of their own faults and moral deficiencies, so as to make them anxiously watchful onl// against seeking salvation bg good works, and not at all against seeking salvation without good works — all this (they consider) is likely to be much more acceptable to the corrupt disposition of the natural man than that which urges the necessity of being '■•careful to maintain good works." Those who take such a view of the danger of the case thiuk that Christian teachers should not shrink, through fear of incurring the wrongful imputation of ''legalism," from earnestly inculcating the points Avhich the apoftlts found it necessarv to dwell on with such continual watchful- ness and frecjuent repetition. But in general the term is made use of to denote one who expects salvation by