and holes of the rock. When, however, the original spirituality of worship began to deeline, and the church was first at ease and then in luxury, altars came into use under an influence derived as much from Heathenism as from the Jewish ritual. The real altar, typified by the altar of the Old Testament dispensation, on which the true sacrifice was offered, was Christ. This is the altar whereof they have no right to eat, which serve the tabernacle' (Heb. xiii. 10; comp. 1 Cor. ix. 13; x. 18). Under the law, it was only specially privileged persons — the Israelite priest and people-who were allowed to eat of the offerings; so under grace, none but members of the new covenant could partake of the bounties provided in and by Jesus Christ (comp. John vi. 48-58). Faith, says Luther on this place, is the eater (1 Cor . 16, 17). Whence it is easy to see, that the entire circle of these terms, borrowed from Moses, regarding sacrificial observances -altar, offering, eating, &c.—are to be taken, in regard to the gospel, not in their shadowy form, as found under the law, but in their high spiritual reality, as presented in the gospel. A literal interpretation of these things loses the substance in the shadow, inverts the relation of type and antitype, truth and its symbol, and makes the law not a preparatory schoolmaster, but the way, the truth, and the life.' The altar of incense is referred to in Rev. . 13, and the incense in Luke i. 10. In Rev. v. 8; viii. 3-5, prayer is symbolised by reference to the incense-offerings. The odours of incense are spoken of in 2 Cor. ii. 14-16. As these odours readily spread themselves abroad on all sides, so do they serve as an appropriate figure to show the rapid and wide diffusion of the gospel (ver. 14). Then the apostle represents himself as an offered incense pleasing to God. His influence, too, on others, according to their use of it, proves an odour of life or of death. AMALEKITES (H. descendants of Amakek), a very ancient tribe of Arabs, who are distinguished for the opposition which they gave to the Israelites when on their passage towards Canaan. In their origin they have been supposed to be connected with Amalek, mentioned in Gen. xxxvi. 12, as the grandson of Esau. The tribe is found at an earlier period in Biblical history; for in the days of Abraham (Gen. xiv.), they, with the Amorites, occur among those whom Chedorlaomer and his associated princes smote. Their antiquity seems to be meant in Numb. xxiv. 20, where Balaam says, 'Amalek was the first of the nations; but in his latter end he shall perish for ever. The Arabians hold the Amalekites, whom they name Imlik, to be the most ancient tribe of Arabia, as well as to be related in blood with the Canaanites and Phoenicians. the southern part of Canaan were they In found, when the Israelites first attempted to enter the land (Numb. xiii. 29; xiv. 43). They are also found fighting with the Israelites, on their journey at Rephidim (Exod. xvii. 8), united with the Ammonites (Judg. iii. 13); with the Kenites (1 Sam. xv. 6); and in the neighbourhood of the Philistines (1 Sam. xxvii. 8), where they, with the Geshurites and the Gezrites, are thus spoken of:-'Those were of old, the inhabitants of the land, as thou goest to Shur (Pelusium), even unto the land of Egypt." As a nomad tribe, they had no fixed abode, but seem to have wandered in the district which had Philistia and Egypt on the west, the desert of Sinai on the south, and Edom on the east. But beyond even these boundaries they went, and for a time dwelt at large, as it may have pleased them (comp. Judg. v. 14; xii. 15). In consequence of their hostility to the Israelites, they were threatened with extirpation (Exod. xvii. 14. Deut. xxv. 17), which, after various fortunes, they finally suffered at the hands of the sons of Simeon, in the reign of Hezekiah (1 Chron. iv. 42, 43). Agag seems to have been a name common to their kings (Numb. xxiv. 7. 1 Sam. xv. 8, 9, 20, 32). The Amalekites have been regarded as including the whole race of Esau, and thus as being the representatives of all the Edomite tribes throughout Northern Arabia. It has also been said, that the extirpation of them was merely their expul sion or extermination from Northern Arabia, whence they proceeded southward, and by conquests succeeded in planting, under the name of Homerites, a kingdom in the extremity of Arabia Felix. AMARANTHINE (G. unfading).—There are two passages in the first Epistle of Peter (i. 4; v. 4), that admit of illustration, by reference to this word, which is in substance the same as that employed there:- — ' inheritance that fadeth not away,'-amaranthine; 'a crown of glory that fadeth not away,' literally, the amaranthine crown of glory.' The name was generally applied to what we call 'everlasting flowers'-plants and flowers, that is, which retained their colour and shape for a very long time; and particularly to one named, according to Discorides, amarantus, whose flowers were said never to wither; whence it was usual to put chaplets made of it on the heads of conquerors, and to use it at funerals, as an emblem of life in death. With peculiar propriety, then, does Peter speak of the amaranthine chaplet' — the true amaranthine, or unfading crown of glory which Jesus would give; thus calling to mind the words of Milton: 'Immortal amaranth! a flower which once In Paradise, fast by the tree of life, Began to bloom. With these, that never fade, the spirits elect Bind their resplendent locks, inwreath'd with beams.' fifteen cubits high, and equal both in length and breadth; each dimension being fifty cubits. The figure it was built in was square; it had corners like horns, and the passage up to it was by a gentle acclivity. It was formed without any iron, nor did iron at any time touch it.' The Mischna gives different dimensions to this altar, making it thirty-two cubits square at the base, the size lessening at three unequal heights, until at the top it was twenty-four cubits square. There was a passage for the priests running on each side a cubic each way. On the south side was an ascent, thirty-two cubits long and sixteen broad. With the horn or corner on the south-west, there was a pipe connected, through which ran the blood of the victims into the brook Kedron. There was a cavity under the altar which received the drinkofferings, covered with a slab of marble. Several iron rings were put on the north side of the altar, in order to hold the oxen while they were slaughtered. There also ran exactly round the middle of the altar, a red line, to distinguish between the parts where the blood above or below the altar was to be sprinkled. The fire on the altar of burnt-offerings was to be perpetual (Exod. xxvii. 20. Lev. vi. 12), symbolising, doubtless, the ever-during fire of God, which was thus understood to consume the offering, and so to signify that it was accepted on high. Similar instances may be found in the everlasting fire of the Persians, and the vestal fire of Roman worship. This fire was continued from that which is related to have fallen from heaven (Lev. ix. 24), and of which many stories are told. In 2 Macc. i. 19, we read how this fire which had been extinguished by the captivity, was discovered in an empty pit, where it had been miraculously preserved. The Rabbins assert that the fire kindled originally from heaven (Lev. ix.), burned till the days of Solomon, when a new fire again came down from heaven, and consumed the burnt-offering, and the glory of Jehovah filled the house (2 Chron. vii. 1). This fire lasted till the days of Manasseh, who allowed it to go out. The altar of incense was of smaller dimensions, of shittim-wood overlaid with gold: it stood in the temple, and served for burning incense on in divine worship; whence its name. On the day of atonement, it was sprinkled with blood. In Exod. xxx. 1-3, a full description of that which was in the tabernacle may be found. Its position was before the mercy-seat, and the incense was to be perpetually burnt. It also had horns at the corners, on which was to be put some of the blood of the victim offered as a priest's sin-offering. The altar of sweet incense' which was found in the temple of Solomon, was of a similar make. It is only cursorily mentioned, and consisted of cedar overlaid with gold (1 Kings vi. 20; vii. 48. 2 Chron. xxix. 18). That which was in the temple, built on the return from Babylon, was removed by Antiochus Epiphanes (1 Macc. i. 21), and restored, with other holy utensils, when the temple was consecrated anew (1 Macc. iv. 49). No altar of incense appears on the arch of Titus; but we know from Jewish authorities that there was one in the last temple. Altars were held in so great respect among the Jews, in part from the purposes to which they were applied, in part from the place where they stood, and the associated circumstances, that, at a late and corrupt period of the nation, it was usual to swear by them, or by the offerings which they bore (Matt. xxiii. 18). The altar served as a place of refuge; and, accordingly, to put a man to death, as in the case of Zacharias, who perished between the altar and the temple, was great impiety as well as injustice. The word horn, as applied in case of altars, is not to be strictly understood. A projection running to a point somewhat after the manner of a horn, is all that seems to be intended. These projections were partly for ornament, and partly for fastening the animals intended to be slain. As easily laid hold on, they also served as the points which those who sought asylum near the altar were to seize. For an account of these rights of sanctuary, consult the following passages of Scripture: 1 Kings i. 50; ii. 2S. Exod. xxi. 14. 1 Macc. x. 43. Paul found at Athens an altar to the unknown God, of which he made admirable use in his address (Acts xvii.). We do not see that the words of the apostle need any confirmation. They are themselves a sufficient evidence of the fact. But external proof is not wanting. In the New Testament, and in the primitive church, there are no altars found, as there were no sacrifices to offer; and the early Christians, suffering under constant persecution, put up their worship in caves we find a con- rs, under ua: they were eat, discomfited At an earlier to have been gs (Deut. iii. ritory extended n. The Amo>owerful people, Their ter es. The I were given to Doke forth giving mporary f Isaiah. pursued 1 AMAZIAH (H. strength of the Lord. A.M. 4717; A.C. 831; V. 839), the ninth king of Judah, son of Joash (2 Kings xii. 21; xiv. 2), whose mother's name was 'Jehoaddan, of Jerusalem. He was twenty-five years old when he began to reign, and reigned in Jerusalem twenty and nine years. At the beginning of his reign, he in a measure did right in the sight of the Lord; but the high places were not taken away, nor the idolatrous services rendered there by the people discontinued. As soon as he felt himself firmly seated on his throne, he slew his father's murderers, sparing their children, mindful of the law of Moses (Deut. xxiv. 16). After this he conquered the Edomites, who had rendered themselves independent, and took their capital Petra (2 Kings xiv. 1—7). This success elated him, and he formed designs against the kingdom of Israel. With a view to forward them, he sent a message to its monarch Jehoash - Come let us look one another in the face.' Truly Oriental was the reply-The thistle that was in Lebanon sent to the cedar that was in Lebanon, saying, Give thy daughter to my son to wife; and there passed by a wild beast that was in Lebanon, and trod down the thistle. Thou hast indeed smitten Edom, and thine heart hath lifted thee up: glory of this, and tarry at home; for why shouldest thou meddle to thy hurt, that thou shouldest fall, even thou, and Judah with thee?' Enraged at the quiet sarcasm thus conveyed, Amaziah went out to war, was beaten, and made prisoner. The conqueror proceeded to Jerusalem, dismantled that part of its fortifications which lay towards his own territories, took all the valuables found in the temple, and the trea sures of the palace, and carried away these things to Samaria, as well as hostages, whom he appears to have accepted, on liberating his royal captive, after whose death he reigned fifteen years. He came by his death at Lachish, on the borders of the Philistines, whither he had fled, and where he was slain, as a result of a conspiracy which had broken out against him in Jerusalem (2 Kings xiv. 8, seq.). In 2 Chron. xxv. 14, seq. Amaziah's failure with Jehoash, and the conspiracy which led to his death, are referred as their cause to the idolatrous practices into which he fell, having brought from Idumea the gods of the land, and made them his own. tures. Amaziah's reign has two distinct epochs, one of glory, the other of disgrace; a distinction which explains the fact, that blame as well as praise is given him in the ScripHe began his reign in justice, piety, and disinterestedness: he ended it by persecuting a prophet, and worshipping idols. What caused the painful change? a victory; he could not withstand the intoxication of triumph. No instance of idolatry is worse than that of this prince. If Ahaz sacrificed to the gods of Damascus, he had the excuse that they had smitten him (2 Chron. xxviii. 23); but Amaziah bowed down before the gods of the children of Seir, whom he had vanquished. AMBASSADOR (F. a messenger) is the delegate or representative of a prince or potentate to another party, bearing from the first to the second an embassage' (Luke xiv. 32) or message, to which the ambassador gives all the recommendation in his power. The essential elements of the conception are well given by Paul in 2 Cor. v. 20. AMBER, a sort of resinous inflammable mineral, of which there are two kinds, white and yellow, differing in their lustre and transparency. The Hebrew word, which denotes a shining translucent substance, is used in Ezek. i. 4 and i. 27, both times in relation to its colour, and may probably be intended in Apoc. i. 15, where the feet of the Son of man are described as 'like unto fine brass.' The colour seems to have been thought appropriate for representing the appearance of heavenly essences, as, indeed, there is something pleasingly soft, rich, and lustrous in its pale yellow, not unlike tints sometimes seen in the sky at the time of sunset. AMBUSH (F. in a bush) signifies the lying in a bush or wood, in order to take an enemy by surprise. The Hebrew word, of which ambush is a translation, denotes to conceal, and hence to lie in wait for. It has frequently a metaphorical import, signifying to ensnare. Thus in Ps. x.8, 9, the wicked man is represented thus:-'He sitteth in the lurking places; he lieth in wait secretly as a lion in his den; he lieth in wait to catch the poor.' 'But in the wood an ambush I prepare, And try to foil him in the wiles of war. PITT. AMETHYST is a precious stone mentioned only three times in Scripture, namely, Exod. xxviii. 19; xxxix. 12. Rev. xxi. 20. It constituted the ninth gem in the breastplate of the high priest, and the twelfth in the foundations of the heavenly Jerusalem. The English word is a mere transcript of the Greek, which is thought to be made up of two words, in allusion to the supposed power of the amethyst to relieve from the effects of intoxication. The Hebrew term denotes the quality of hardness, for which the stone is remarkable, being next to the diamond the hardest substance known. There are eastern and western amethysts: the first are by far most valuable. Amethysts were known in Egypt at a very early period, and were accounted so precious as to give rise to the art of imitating their qualities. Their existence in Egypt shows that at least a commercial connection existed between India and the Western world in the days of the patriarchs. The prevailing colour of amethysts is purple, which varies in hue from a deep rose to a light violet. The amethyst is composed chiefly of alumina, with a small portion of iron and of silica. AMMONITES (H. descendants of Ammon), a tribe of nomads, that lived on the east of Jordan towards Arabia, from the river Jabbok to the river Arnon, in a land strongly fortified by nature, whose chief city was called Rabbath, and whose origin is referred to a discreditable connection recorded in Gen. xix. 33 (see also Deut. iii. 16. Josh. xii. 2). The ill-feeling of which this event is the indication, remained till the latest period. After the expulsion of the Zamzummim, the Ammonites took possession of the country, which, it is said, they afterwards gave up to the Amorites, though, from the similarity of many of the facts as recorded of the Ammonites and the Amorites, it may be doubted whether they were not substantially one people, having names of different import; the second denoting mountaineers; the first, people, that is gentiles, Heathen idolaters as contradistinguished from the Israelites, the true worshippers. They are found so late as the time of the Maccabees (1 Macc. v. 6). Justin Martyr, in the second century, mentions them. What the Scriptures give of their intermediate history may be found in Deut. ii. 19, 20. Josh. xiii. 25. Judg. iii. 13; xi. 13, 32; xii. 2. 1 Sam. xi. 11; xiv. 47. 2 Sam. viii. 12; 1 14; xi. 1; xii. 26. 2 Chron. xx. 1; xxvi. 8; xxvii. 5. Isa. xi. 14. Zeph. ii. 8. Jer. xxvii. 3; xl. 11, 14; xli. 15; xlix. 1. 2 Kings xxiv. 2. Ezek. xxv. 1-7. Neh. iv. 1. AMORITES (H. mountaineers), a general name, descriptive, in its wider application, of several Canaanitish tribes which dwelt on the south or hill country of Canaan (Gen. IV. 16. Josh. xxiv. 18. Judg. vi. 10). To them belonged-I. The Hittites, or children of Heth, who dwelt on the heights of Judah as far as Hebron (Gen. xxiii. 7. Numb. xiii. 29), together with the Jebusites, and a tribe of Amorites who bore that sole name. II. The Jebusites, who also lived in the mountains' (Josh. xi. 3) of Judah and Ephraim, em bracing the place which at a later day bore the name of Jerusalem, which place the Canaanites termed Jebus (Numb. xiii. 29. Josh. xi. 3; xv. 8; xviii. 28. Judg. xix. 11. 2 Sam. v.6-8). III. The Girgashites, on the west of the Jordan (Deut. vii. 1. Josh. xxiv. 11). IV. The Hivites: they lay more towards the north, in the vicinity of Shechem and Gibeon (Gen. xxxiv. 2. Josh. ix. 7; xi. 19; ecmp. 2 Sam. xxi. 2). Lastly, while the term Amorites denoted generally these Canaanitish tribes, it was also applied to a particular elan, which had their abode on the mountains that run along the western border of the Dead Sea, and also on the east of the Jordan, from the river Jabbok to the river Arnon, by which they were separated from the Moabites-(Numb. xxi. 13. Josh. v. 1; ix. 10. Judg. xi. 21). In Josh. x. 5, we find a confederacy of these mountaineers, under 'five kings,' formed against Joshua: they were defeated, and, on their retreat, discomfited and destroyed by a hailstorm. At an earlier period, their forces seem to have been marshalled under two kings (Deut. iii. 8; iv. 47), when their territory extended southward to Mount Hermon. The Amorites, though a warlike and powerful people, were overcome by the Israelites. Their territories on the east of Jordan were given to Gad, Reuben, and the half tribe of Manasseh (Numb. xxxii. 33, 39. Deut. iii. 8). Those which lay on the east of the Jordan, Joshua vanquished, but could not uproot, nor even effectually restrain (Judg. i. 34, 35; iii. 5. 1 Sam. vii. 14). In process of time, their power was curtailed, till at length Solomon made them tributary (1 Kings ix. 21). The term is sometimes employed as significative of the superstitions of the Canaanites (Ezek. xvi. 3. 1 Kings xxi. 26). In Amos ii. 9, their power is poetically described thus,—' whose height was like the height of the cedars, and he was strong as the oaks, yet I destroyed his fruit from above, and his roots from beneath;' language which is very appropriate to the subjugation of a strong mountain-race. AMOS (H. elevated. A. M. 4745; A. C. 803; V. 810), the well-known prophet, author of the book of that name, was a native of Tekoa, a place which lay some twelve miles to the south-east of Jerusalem, in the high pasture-lands of Judah, where he was one among the herdsmen,' whose business was held in high estimation. He appears to have been nothing more than an ordinary Hebrew shepherd, living on the food of the common peasantry (i. 1; vii. 14). Of his early history we know nothing positive. He was neither a prophet nor a prophet's son when he was taken by Jehovah, as he followed the flock, and bade to go and prophesy unto Israel. The time when he appeared was in the days of Uzziah king of Judah, and of Jeroboam II king of Israel, which is further defined as being 'two years before the earthquake' (i. 1; vii. 15), that is, in the 27th year of the last monarch. Agreeably to the divine command, he proceeded into Israel, and began to deliver his burden. It was a time of general dissoluteness. Political prosperity had brought forth pride, ease, luxury. The great gave themselves to enjoyment; the poor were op pressed. Then came the word of the Lord into the heart of Amos, and he spoke forth his feelings truthfully (vi. 1, seq.); threatening Israel with destruction, giving hope to the pious, and a promise of better days. His freedom of speech gave offence to the priesthood, who used their offices with the king to procure the prophet's banishment (vii. 10, seq.). Amos was a contemporary of Hosea and Joel, and in part of Isaiah. The business which the prophet had pursued |