sons of thunder,' or Boanerges (Mark iii. 17). The activity which James displayed during the lifetime of Jesus appears to have been resumed after the ascension, for he was made an object of the wrath of Herod Agrippa, who, A. D. 43, caused him to be beheaded (Acts xii. 1, 2). Thus, in fulfilment of the words of Christ, did James drink of his Master's cup (Matthew xx. 20-23. Mark x. 35-48).

The family to which James and John belonged possessed some property, being, as would appear, the joint owner of a fishing barque on the Lake of Galilee, in the working of which they employed hired servants (Mark i. 20. Luke v. 10).

JAMES, distinguished from the former as the Less' (Mark xv. 40), or 'son of Alphæus,' was also probably an apostle (Matt. x. 3. Mark iii. 18. Luke vi. 15. Acts i. 13). Alphæus is a Grecised form of the Aramaic Cleophas, Cleopas, or Klopas (John xix. 25). Hence James the Less was son of Mary, the sister of Christ's mother (John xix. 25. Mark xvi. 1. Luke xxiv. 10), and James and Jesus were sister's sons, or cousins; on which account, with a latitude not unknown to the Hebrew, James is called the Lord's brother' (Gal. i. 19; comp. John vii. 3. 1 Cor. ix. 5. Matthew xiii. 55. Mark vi. 3). From the passage in Galatians, it appears that James the Less held a prominent station in the church at Jerusalem; and Acts xii. 17 shows us a person of distinction in the same community bearing the name of James, who, as James the Elder, is spoken

we find in Acts xv. 18, seq.; xxl. 18, seq Gal. ii. 9, 12, where he appears as high in office in the church at Jerusalem; and after the death of Jarnes the Elder, he seems to have been simply termed James (1 Cor. xv. 7). His alliance with Jesus and his own character combined to raise him to the dignity he held. The influence which ensued he employed for the furtherance of his Jewish views of the gospel, and so was brought into collision with the apostle Paul. According to Josephus (Antiq. xx. 9, 1), he was stoned to death, at the instigation of the high-priest Ananus, cir. 62 A. D.

The passage in Josephus is so important an indirect confirmation of the gospel history, that we shall set down the historian's words:-'Ananus' (or Ananias) 'assembled the Sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus who was called Christ, his name was James, and some of his companions. And when he had made an accusation against them, as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned.'

JAMES, THE EPISTLE OF, written by James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ,' probably James the Less, is termed a catholic or general epistle, because addressed not to a particular community, but to Christian converts from Judaism, of the twelve tribes, that is, of the great body of the Hebrew nation, scattered abroad or living in heathen and foreign lands.

The epistle, which must have been written before A. D. 62, when its author was put to death, appeared in a period of trial and persecution which caused men to waver in their fidelity, and occasioned many sudden alternations of condition (i. 2-12; v. 10), and when it was expected that the coming of the Lord drew nigh (v. 7-9). False views of the origin of temptations (i. 13) and of the justifying efficacy of faith (ii. 14—26), as well as general improprieties of conduct (ii. 1; iii. 1; iv. 1), so prevailed, that James considered it his duty to pen this letter. The passage relating to faith and works (ii. 14— 26) is of special importance as marking the contrast held to have existed between this pillar of the church (Gal. ii. 9) and representative of the Jewish school of Christians, and the apostle Paul, whose views on justification by faith (Gal. ii. 16) it may appear designed to withstand. The passage, however, intelligently viewed, only establishes the perfect agreement which existed between Paul and James, on the subject of faith, and the place it holds in the salvation of a sinner. The point of union between the two is that a justifying faith is an efficacious faith. After the usual greeting, the writer speaks of the topic, temptation, which, as of the most pressing importance, was uppermost in his mind (i. 2-14). Referring evil to man's lusts, he ascribes good to God, who had brought forth Christians as a kind of first-fruits of his new creation, and they ought, in consequence, to be gentle and excellent. Hence arise an exhortation against prevalent vices, and a brief, but fine and true description of religion (14—27). Having spoken of the needy, the writer is led by association of ideas to warn his readers against that unchristian partiality which neglects the humble to show honour to the great. This disregard to the poor was the more inconsistent, because Christians themselves had suffered from the injustice of rich heathen men; and the duty of maintaining equal affections is urged by the consideration that a law is equally broken whether transgressed in one point or many (ii. 1-12). The unbrotherly spirit arose, according to the sequence of the apostle's thoughts, from erroneous notions respecting faith, as if mere belief had a saving power (12-26). This religion of the head had also occasioned a despotic manner of acting, accompanied by an ungoverned tongue, whose transgressions are reproved, as well as its natural effects, bitter envying and strife;' and a picture is by implication drawn of the state of Christians, which proves that writers who paint the earliest days of Christianity as morally all sunshine, borrow largely from their own imaginations. The reproof is terminated by a beautiful description of the wisdom that is from above' (iii.). Reverting to the same topic, doubtless from a conviction of its

urgent importance, James describes the true origin of prevalent wars and fightings, and severely reproves the vices of upidity and sensuality. Evil-speaking is condemned, and an irreligious trusting in time to come, which was the more blameworthy because the Lord was about to make his second advent (iv.). Then follow charges of oppression and injustice against rich men, which it is difficult to think Christians could have rendered themselves liable to, and which may refer to heathens, the rather because, in v. 7, the writer seems to return to the subject of his first address, exhorting his 'brethren' to be patient unto the coming of the Lord' (7-11). Evils which appear to have arisen from the contrary practice, probably since judicial oaths before heathen tribunals (comp. ii. 6) involved the invocation of idols, induced the writer altogether to probibit swearing. Then follow directions of a practical nature, which bring remarks on the efficacy of heartfelt prayer and the greatness of that work which is performed in the conversion of sinners.

If the epistle terminates somewhat abruptly, the fact is only in keeping with its general character, in which, although a train of thought may with care be traced, there are scarcely any of the ordinary observances and tokens of orderly arrangement. The piece is unartistic, a production of piety rather than literature, yet containing passages of high literary merit (i. 17, 27; ii. 17-26; iii.).

The epistle shows that at the very early period to which it refers, an organisation already existed in the Christian church by which each community was governed. Thus the brethren met in their assemblies, which were open to the public (ii. 2), and which were obviously a copy of the Jewish synagogue, this very word being used. These churches were presided over by elders, whose duty it was to visit the sick (i. 27), und, having prayed over them, to anoint them with oil and pronounce the forgiveness of their sins (v. 15). The members succoured each other in want, and, confessing to one another their sins, afforded the aid of mutual advice and prayer (16). They also employed themselves in endeavours to convert sinners. (19, 20).

We have referred above to what has sometimes been mistaken for a difference of opinion between the two apostles on the subject of faith. It has been supposed that Paul teaches that the justification of sinners is on the foundation of faith; and that James teaches that it is on the foundation of works. An intelligent survey of the drift of each, however, will show that there is not the least contrariety between them. The fact is, that the two apostles are viewing faith from two different sides. Paul is speaking of the power of faith to justify, to the exclusion of works. And

James shows that the faith which justifies will always lead to good works; and that a faith which does not produce fruit, cannot justify, nay, that its barrenness proves it to be no true faith. Both agree in that faith justifies, but that a justifying faith wil issue in a holy life.

JANNES and JAMBRES are in 2 Tim. iii. 8 mentioned as the Egyptian magicians who withstood Moses (Exod. vii. 11, 22), who, however, appear to have been more than two. This disagreement, and the similarity of the two names (comp. GoG and MAGOG), give reason to think that we have here a relic and a trace of a Jewish tradition which prevailed on the subject in the first century.

JAPHETH. See DIVISION.

JARMUTH, a city in Judah (Joshua xv. 35), which, before the invasion of the Israelites, was the seat of a Canaanitish king (x. 3; xii. 11). It now lies in ruins, nuder the name of Jarmuk, about twenty miles southwest from Jerusalem, in the direction of Gaza.

JASHOBEAM, son of Hachmon (1 Chron. xi. 11), called also Tachmon (2 Sam. xxiii. 8), one of David's heroes; the chief of three who appear to have fought together in a chariot, or on foot, a manner of fighting prevalent among the Hebrews.

JASON is properly a Greek name which, from the time when Greek influences made themselves felt among the Jews, individuals of that nation were led to adopt (from Jesus, or Joshua), according to a custom which prevailed of borrowing from the Greeks names similar in sound to their own native Hebrew appellations-a practice which has something resembling it in the practice of modern Israelites, as Braham instead of Abraham. The name, which occurs thrice in the books of Maccabees, is found in Rom. xvi. 21 as a kinsman of Paul. This relationship may explain the fact that in Thessalonica Paul is found a guest of Jason (Acts xvii. 5).

JASPER (from a Hebrew word of similar form), an opaque, many-coloured stone, of the species quartz, which was in common use among the ancients for ornament. Pliny remarks of it, that though surpassed by many, it retains the glory of being very ancient (Exod. xxviii. 20. Ezek. xxviii. 13. Revel. iv. 3; xxi. 18, 19).

JAVAN, son of Japheth, and forefather of the Asiatic or Ionian (Ion, Ivan) Greeks, who, as lying nearer to the Hebrews, would give them their own name for the country; which name, Javan, may therefore, in a more extended sense, be taken to represent the Greeks of Ionia and of Greece Proper (Gen.

x. 2-4. Isaiah Ixvi. 19. Ezekiel xxvii. 13).

JAZER (H. he that helps), a city in Peræa, in the tribe of Gad (Numb. xxxii. 1). Its position is not well known, but it has been sought somewhat south of Rabbath Ammon, and identified with Wady Sir, whose water flows into the Jordan opposite Jericho. At that place are some small pools, which are thought to be the sea of Jazer mentioned in Jer. xlviii. 32; for sea, in Biblical language, often means only a sheet of water.

JEALOUS (F. jaloux, from a Greek root signifying to be hot'), a heated state of mind arising from the possession by another of what belongs to yourself. The term is used of God as strongly descriptive of his abhorrence of idols, which received the honour due to Him only (Exodus xx. 5; comp. Is. xlii. 8. Ps. lxxviii. 58).

JEARIM signifies wood (Josh. xv. 10). Mount Jearim (Har-jearim, that is, Woodmount) was the name of a small hilly ridge, along which ran the boundary of Judah, westward from Jerusalem. A neighbouring town was hence called Kirjath-jearim (9).

JEBUS (H. which treads under foot), the ancestor of the Jebusites, a clan of Canaanites (Gen. x. 16) who, at the time of the Hebrew invasion, were settled on Mount Judah, or Ephraim (Joshua ix. 1. Numb. xiii. 29), being under a monarchical government (Josh. x. 1, 23), whom Joshua defeated (xi. xxiv. 11), but could not capture their stronghold, which was afterwards called Jerusalem (see the article; xv. 8, 63), where, in the time of the Judges, the Jebusites are found predominant (Judg. xix. 11), though some Israelites seem to have obtained a footing in the place (i. 21; comp. iii. 5), which was conquered by David, together with Zion, its chief bulwark (2 Sam. v. 6, seq.), but the Jebusite population were not exterminated (xxiv. 16). The remnant of them was made tributary by Solomon (1 Kings ix. 20, seq.). Jebusites are mentioned after the captivity (Ezra ix. 1).

JEDUTHUN (H. who gives praise), a Levite appointed by David, after the ark had been brought to Zion, to aid with music and song in conducting divine worship (1 Chron. xvi. 41, 42). He was aided by his sons, who prophesied with a harp to give thanks and to praise God (xxv. 3; comp. 2 Chron. v. 12). Hence there arose a family or race of singers, who, either from lineage or profession, were termed sons of Jeduthun (2 Chron. v. 12; xxix. 14; xxxv. 15. Neh. xi. 17). To Jeduthun, the chief musician, are inscribed certain Psalms (xxxix. lxii. lxxvii.), but probably only with relation to the composition of the music or its performance.

JEGAR-SAHADUTHA, an Aramæan expression which signifies mount of witness, being of the same import as the Hebrew Galeed (Gen. xxxi. 47). The former term

was used by Laban, who was an Aramæan (xxv. 20; xxviii. 2), and belonged to a race which extended to the north of Palestine, from the Mediterranean to the Tigris, being by political rather than national or linguistic qualities divided into Western Aramæans, known by the special name of Syrians, and Eastern Aramæans, that is, Mesopotamians, Babylonians. The language of the latter generally bears the name of Chaldee.

JEHOAHAZ (H. possession of Jehovah ; A. M. 4700, A. C. 848, V. 856), son of Jehu, eleventh king of Israel, ascended the throne in the twenty-third year of Joash, king of Judah During a reign of seventeen years (comp. Kings xiii. 10; xiv. 1) he continued a course of idolatrous disobedience, and was in consequence made subject to the Syrians, and reduced so low that he could not muster more than fifty horsemen, ten chariots, and ten thousand infantry. His repentance, however, was accepted, and the day of Israel's doom was postponed (2 Kings x. 35; xiii. 1-9).

JEHOAHAZ, or SHALLUM (A. M. 4939, A. C. 609, V. 608), seventeenth king of Judah, son of Josiah and Hamutal, was, after a bad reign of three months, deposed by Pharaoh Necho, who, since his conquest of Josiah, exerted an influence over the kingdom of Judah. The dispossessed monarch was carried captive into Egypt (2 Kings xxiii. 31-34. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 1-3). In Jer. xxii. 11, Jehoahaz bears the name of Shallum, which may have been his personal appellation, exchanged for the former on his ascending the throne.

JEHOASH, or JOASH (H. fire of Jehovah; A. M. 4716, A. C. 832, V. 841 or 839), son of Jehoahaz, and twelfth king of Israel, reigned sixteen years. The repentance of his father and good qualities of his own caused some diminution in Israel's disobedience to God; consequences of which were seen in the pious concern the monarch showed to the dying prophet Elisha, and his threefold defeat of the Syrians. The vigour thus gained was, however, unhappily, turned against Hebrew interests; for Jehoash made war on Amaziah, king of Judah, who, proud of his conquest of Edom, had challenged his neighbour in Samaria. Israel was victorious, but, probably from some remnant of a brotherly feeling, stopped short of destroying the kingdom of Judah. Lamentable, however, is it to see these two representa tives of the Hebrew race engaged in mutual conflict the moment that the defeat of foreign enemies gave them some spare strength. The reply of Joash to the challenge of Amaziah affords an interesting instance of the beauty and expressiveness of the Eastern parable (2 Kings xiii. 10-xiv. 16).

JEHOIACHIN (H. strength of Jehovah; A. M. 4951, A. C. 597, V. 599), called also Jeconiah (1 Chronicles iii. 16), Jechonias

(Matt. i. 12), son and successor of Jehoiakim, and nineteenth king of Judah, ascended the throne at the age of eighteen, under circumstances of a generally adverse character, but of whose exact nature we have no information, though it seems strange to find him apparently taking the sceptre as a matter of right when his father had been carried captive to Babylon. The now rapidly sinking glory of Judah was not retarded by this powerless monarch, who, unwarned by all the punishments suffered by his predecessors, pursued a wicked and idolatrous course (Jer. xiii. 18, seq.), and was consequently, in the eighth year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar (comp. Jer. lii. 28, 29), carried captive to the now all-conquering Babylon, toge ther with his harem, his court, and the chief men of his kingdom. Many years did Jehoiachin languish in chains, till at last EvilMerodach alleviated his lot (2 Kings xxiv. 6, seq. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 8, seq.).

JEHOIAKIM (H. confirmation of Jehovah; A. M. 4940, A. C. 608, V. 608), eighteenth king of Judah, whom, having deposed his elder brother, Jehoahaz, Necho set on the throne, substituting this for his former name, Eliakim. As the result, he became a tributary and vassal of Egypt, to meet whose demands he heavily taxed his own people. This subjection, in consequence of the defeat of the king of Egypt at Carchemish, was in three years exchanged for enslavement to the Chaldees; for Nebuchadnezzar, his father's assailant, carried the nominal king of Judah a captive to Babylon, since he could not be turned away from evil by the warnings of Jeremiah, nor even by the distinct threat, he shall be buried with the burial of an ass, drawn and cast forth beyond the walls of Jerusalem' (Jer. Xxxii. 19). The wicked monarch even sought to take Jeremiah's life, and actually slew another faithful prophet, Urijah (xxvi. 20, seq.), and burned Jeremiah's prophetic roll (xxxvi. 21-23). As a chief cause of his deposition, it is mentioned that he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood (2 Kings xxiii. 36, seq.; xxiv. 1-6. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 1—8).

Jehoiakim's conduct is that of a man whom wickedness has driven to desperation, and desperation made a fool. Rather than turn to God, he resolved to pursue his own bad courses; and when hindrances of the most legitimate kind appeared, instead of reflecting on their admonitions, he took violent measures to remove them out of his way, regardless alike of human blood and his own degradation. Having imbrued his hands in the blood of prophets, he made war on their writings, and, like a madman, thought he could alter the inevitable course of events by destroying the record of words which did not determine, but merely described them. Vain are all these resources against God and his changeless and invin

cible laws. But of all the resources of wickedness none is so absurd as the burning of books; for even when copies were rare the dreaded evil was not averted, and undying infamy was earned.

JEHORAM (H. exaltation of Jehovah; A. M. 4665, A. C. 883, V. 889), fifth king of Judah, son and successor of the pious Jehoshaphat, by whose lessons he did not profit. From the existence of incongruous dates (comp. 1 Kings xxii. 50, 51. 2 Kings viii. 16), he is thought to have reigned for two years conjointly with his father. Through the all-prevailing influence of his spouse, Athaliah, he became a zealous promoter of the worship of Baal, and ere long destroyed the good which Jehoshaphat had originated. Impiety led to crime. In order to make his throne secure and augment his riches, he slew his six brothers, besides other persons of distinction. Good men mourned, Elijah threatened. In vain: the infatuated monarch went on his way, and brought Judah to a lower religious degradation than idolatrous Israel. The external condition of his kingdom corresponded with its internal vices. The Edomites wrested from his hands their national independence (comp. Gen. xxvii. 40). His idolatry set Libnah, a priestly city, in revolt against him. The Philistines rose in hostility. The Arabians made a foray into his country, and carried off, even from Jerusalem, all his sons save one. After a melancholy reign of eight years, he died of a very painful disease (a dysentery), unlamented, and condemned to exclusion from the sepulchres of the kings (2 Chron. xxi.).

JEHOSHAPHAT (H. judgment of Jehovah; A. M. 4614, A. C. 901, V. 914), fourth king of Judah, son and follower of Asa, contemporary of Ahaziah and Joram, kings of Israel, was, during a reign of twenty-five years, eminent for the attention which he gave to the maintenance of pure religion and the improvement of the people. Distinguished for piety, he endeavoured to suppress idolatry; and with the view of setting the religion of his fathers on a firm basis, he took systematic measures for the religious instruction of his people (2 Chron. xvii. 7, seq.), and, as a natural expression of his own religious convictions, he appointed for the administration of justice tribunals in every city subject to a supreme court, sitting in the capital, and consisting of Priests and Levites, who were to act as servants and representatives of Jehovah (xix. 5, seq.). Nor did he neglect the material welfare of his kingdom; so that, small as it was, it became an object of terror to the neighbouring Philistian and Arab tribes, who were brought to acknowledge his supremacy. Unhappy was the influence which arose from the marriage of his son Jehoram with Athaliah, daughter of the idolatrous

Ahab, king of Israel, with whom, however, Jehoshaphat entered into close political relations for the purpose of withstanding his powerful enemy, the Syrians (1 Kings xxii.). The social and religious ameliorations of Jehoshaphat were rewarded by victories, to which they greatly conduced, over the Moabites, Edomites, and Ammonites; but his reforms seem to have been greatly dependent on his own personal influence; for after his demise, they, as must be all changes which have not their root and growth in the people, were for the most part of brief duration (2 Kings iii.).

JEHU (H. he that is; A. M. 4672, A. C. 876, V. 884), the tenth king of Israel, having extirpated the family of Ahab, began the fifth (Zimri being reckoned) dynasty in Israel (comp. 2 Kings ix. 2. 2 Chron. xxii. 7, seq.). As by his position naturally placed in opposition to the preceding family, he proceeded to put down in Samaria the service of Baal (2 Kings x. 18, seq.), but the bovine idolatry of Jeroboam and Egypt he did not touch, probably because he found it too deeply rooted in the affections and habits of the people. Under him, Israel, which was now weak and without aid from Judah, lost all its trans-Jordanic possessions, which were captured by the Syrians. After a powerless reign of twenty-eight years, Jehu finished his days in Samaria (2 Kings x. 34-36).

JEOPARDY (T. gefahr, 'danger,' Scottish jepart), is the translation, in Luke viii. 32, of a term signifying to be in peril,' which in Acts xix. 27, 40, is rendered danger. Comp. 1 Cor. xv. 30, and Rom. viii. 35. The word is written jupartie by Chaucer, and jupardy by Sir Thomas Moore.

JEPHTHAH (H. he will open; A. M. 4303, A. C. 1245, V. 1188), a Gileadite whom, on account of his illegitimacy on his mother's side, his brothers, after the death of their father, thrust out from the family possessions, and who in consequence became the head of a band of freebooters. In this position he gained so much renown, that he was appointed by the Israelites their chief in a war with their oppressors, the Ammonites, whom he defeated. His achievements raised him to the office of judge in Israel, which he governed during six years. He was succeeded by Ibzan.

Before entering into battle with the Ammonites, Jephthah vowed that, if successful, he would give as a burnt offering whatsoever came forth from the doors of his house to meet him on his return. His daughter, in the joy of her heart, came with music to give a welcome to her victorious parent. On seeing her, his only child, how did the heart of the hero sink! But the vow was made, and must be kept. The only favour that his daughter asked was a reprieve of two months, in order that she might go up