EXHORTATION training of the body, i. e., gymnastics (1 Tim. 4:8). The apostle appears to disparage, not the athletic discipline, but rather that ascetic mortification of the fleshly appetites and even innocent affections (comp. 1 Tim. 4:3; Col. 2:23) characteristic of some Jewish fanatics, especially the ESSENES (q. v.). EXHORTATION (Gr. πapákλnois, par-ak'lay-sis, literally a calling near, invitation) appears to have been recognized in the apostolic Church as a special supernatural or prophetic function (Rom. 12:8), probably a subordinate exercise of the general faculty of teaching (1 Cor. 14:3). It has been defined as "the act of presenting such motives before a person as may excite him to the performance of duty." The Scriptures enjoin ministers to exhort men, i. e., to rouse them to duty by proposing suitable motives (Isa. 58:1; Rom. 12:8; 1 Tim. 6:2; Heb. 3:13); and it was also the constant practice of prophets (Isa. 1:17; Jer. 4: 14; Ezek. 37), apostles (Acts 11:23), and of Christ himself (Luke 3:18), (McC. and S., Cyc., s. v.). EXILE (Heb., yaw-law', to denude, 2 Sam. 15.19;, tsaw-aw', to tip over in order to spill, figuratively to depopulate, Isa. 51:14), a transported captive. See CAPTIVITY. EXODUS, THE, the great deliverance extended to the Israelites when "the Lord did bring the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt (Exod. 12:51), “with a mighty hand and with an outstretched arm" (Deut. 26:8). 1. Preparatory History. The Scripture narrative of the Exodus begins with the death of Joseph, the rapid multiplication of the Israelites, and the coming to the throne of "a new king which knew not Joseph" (Exod. 1:6-8). Brugsch Bey finds in a papyrus the report of a high official of the passage of some Edomites (Bedouin) “into the land of Thuku (Succoth) to feed themselves and their herds on the possessions of Pharaoh. This sort of immigration alarmed Pharaoh," lest they (the Israelites) "join also unto our enemies, and so fight against us" (Exod. 1:10). He therefore placed them under taskmasters "to afflict them with their burdens. And they built treasure cities, Pithom and Raamses" (v. 11). These cities have been shown, the one by name, the other from inscriptions, to have been founded by Rameses II, the Pharaoh of the oppression. EXODUS much cattle. Being "thrust out," they had no time to prepare suitable provisions, and therefore baked unleavened bread, which they brought out of Egypt (Exod. 12:1-39). The time of the Exodus was the 15th of Abib, which was to be to them henceforth the beginning of the year. The date of the Exodus as fixed by Usher (B. C. 1490) is wrong by nearly if not quite three centuries. From 1520 to 1210 Palestine was practically a province of Egypt, and such an event as its occupation by Israel was out of the question. The Exodus must therefore have taken place about the end of the 13th or the beginning of the 14th century, probably about 1210 (see CHRONOLOGY). 3. Route. We are informed that God led the people, "not through the way of the land of the Philistines, lest the people repent when they see war" (Exod. 13:17). The Philistines would, in all probability, have opposed the entrance of the Israelites into Canaan. "But God led the people about, through the way of the wilderness of the Red Sea" (v. 18). Leaving Rameses (Num. 33:5) in Goshen they encamped at Succoth, after a march of twelve or fifteen miles (Exod. 12:37). This is identified by Brugsch as Thuku, or Thuket, southeast of Rameses. From Succoth they journeyed to "Etham, in the edge of the wilderness" (Exod. 13:20), probably at or near the southern end of the Bitter Lakes. They were now near the fortress of Zar, which protected Egypt from incursions from the desert. The next stage of the journey is minutely described. God commanded Israel to "turn and encamp before Pi-hahiroth, between Migdol and the sea over against Baal-zephon: before it ye shall encamp by the sea" (14:2). The reason assigned for this movement is that "Pharaoh will say of the children of Israel, They are entangled in the land, the wilderness has shut them in" (v. 3); i. e., "When they looked out upon the desert which lay beyond the fertile fields of Egypt their hearts failed them. and they turned back" (Sayce, Higher Crit. and Monuments, p. 255); or “They have lost their way, they are wandering in confusion, the desert has shut them in; and in his obduracy Pharaoh would resolve to go after them with his army, and bring them under his sway again" (K. and D., Com., in loc.). Much depends now upon the location of PiThe story continues with an account of the still hahiroth. Harper (Bible and Modern Discoveries, more rapid increase of the Israelites; the destruc- p. 84) locates it upon the shore of Lake Timsah, tion of the male children; the birth, education, near the present Ismailia, and Baal-zephon upon and flight of Moses; his call to act as deliverer; Mount Muksheih. He says "that Egyptian recthe plagues and resistance of the Pharaoh of the ords show how at that time the sea extended to Exodus (probably Meneptah). At last the time of that place," and that "the sea had retreated owing their departure is very near, and they are told to to the elevation of the land." This would make ask gifts of their neighbors to aid them in their Lake Timsah the place of crossing. Mr. Sayce extreme poverty (Exod. 11:1-3; 12:35, 36). The (p. 260) says: "This theory would remove a great PASSOVER (q. v.) was instituted; the firstborn of many difficulties, but there is one argument against Egypt were slain, and, overcome by the calam-it so serious as to prevent its acceptance. ities sent upon him, Pharaoh yielded to all that was demanded of him, and urged the Israelites to depart, as did also the Egyptians, "for they said, We be all dead men." A canal already existed in the reign of Meneptah which united the Gulf of Suez with the Nile, not far from the modern Zagazig, and allowed ships to pass from the Mediterranean to the Red Sea. 2. Departure. Thus driven out, the Israelites, This canal, after being choked with sand, was reto the number of six hundred thousand men, and opened by Darius, who caused steles of granite to families took their departure, attended by a be erected at intervals along its banks, recording mixed multitude, and flocks and herds, even very the construction of the work. One of the steles EXODUS stood about five miles only to the north of Suez, where the fragments of it can still be seen. The canal, therefore, must have followed the line of the present Freshwater Canal, not only as far as the Bitter Lakes, but also as far as Suez. It is therefore evident that the canal of Darius and the Pharaohs did not join the sea until it reached the modern town of Suez; in other words, the distribution of land and water in the time of the nineteenth dynasty must have been the same as it is to-day." EXPECT Miriam and the other women sang their triumphal song (Exod. 15:1-21). (1) Taking up their march, they traveled three days without finding water, and came to Marah, the water of which was bitter. The people murmured, and in response to the prayer of Moses God showed him a tree which, cast into the waters, made them sweet (Exod. 15: 23–25). (2) Elim was the next place of encampment, where were twelve wells of water (R. V. "springs," 15:27), generally admitted to be Wâdy Gharandel, and lying about half a day's journey "If we locate Pi-hahiroth a little to the north-southeast from Marah. A short march, but in the west of Suez(Ajrud), about four hours' journey, then we have a plain nearly ten miles long and about as many broad stretching from Ajrud to the sea to the west of Suez, and from the foot of Atâkah to the arm of the sea on the north of Suez" (K. and D., Com.). Dr. J. Strong (Cyc., s. v.) places Pi-hahiroth at the southeast of Mount Atâkah, upon which he locates Migdol, while Baal-zephon he thinks to be on Mount Deraj, to the south of Atâkah. The march of the Israelites would then be by a detour of Mount Atâkah, and through Wâdy Tuwarik (Pi-hahiroth). The pass which leads to Suez between Atâkah and the sea is very narrow and could easily be stopped by the Egyptians. In this plain (of Baideah). Pharaoh had the Israelites hemmed in on all sides. This, then, according to all appearance, is the spot where the passage to the sea was effected. 4. Passage of the Sea. Pharaoh thought that, hemmed in by the sea, the Israelites would be at his mercy, and with his chariot guard-six hundred chosen chariots-pursued after them, overtaking them encamped by the sea. Alarmed at the appearance of the Egyptians, the Israelites murmured at Moses, saying: "It had been better for us to have served the Egyptians than that we should die in the wilderness." Moses encouraged the frightened multitude, and gave them the command from Jehovah that they "go forward." Then, also, Moses received word of the miracle by which the Lord was to deliver his people, viz., the dividing of the waters. Here a very extraordinary event occurs: "The angel of God, which went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them," and the pillar of cloud was now in the rear, showing its bright face to them but darkness to the Egyptians. The time had come for Jehovah to work the decisive miracle for Israel's deliverance. "Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land," upon which the children of Israel passed over. It was during the night that the Israelites crossed, and the Egyptians followed. "In the morning watch the Lord looked unto the host of the Egyptians through the pillar of fire and of the cloud, and troubled the host of the Egyptians." They turned to flee, but the returning waters overwhelmed them, and all of them perished." Thus the Lord saved Israel that day out of the hand of the Egyptians: and Israel saw the Egyptians dead upon the seashore" (Exod. 14). 5. From the Red Sea to Sinai. Having hed the eastern shore, perhaps a little to the the Springs of Moses ('Ayân Musa), there East such movements are largely regulated by the water supply. (3) Leaving Elim they encamped at the Red Sea (Num. 33:10) before coming to the desert of Sin. Their route to the sea was, probably, by way of the plain of El-Gargah, the Wâdy Useit, and down Wâdy Taiyibeh. Some critics, wishing to throw doubts upon the Bible narrative, sneer at the ignorance of Moses in taking this route. But why did Moses take the lower route? For the best of all reasons. The main route (which the Bible shows he did not take) leads to Wâdy Nasb, Serabît-el-Khâdim, and Maghara. What if he did? Why, there were the well-known mines, colonized and worked by Egyptians, held by garrisons of soldiers, with strong positions and passes! And so Moses, 'skilled in all the learning of the Egyptians,' evades this mining country-turns the flank of it, so to speak-and, leading the host to the Red Sea, puts a mountain barrier between the coward host and the Egyptian garrisons and miners!" (Harper, p. 98). (4) The Israelites removed from the Red Sea and encamped next in the Wilderness of Sin, on the 15th of the second month after their departure from Egypt (Exod. 16:1). Sin is identified as the plain El-Markhâ, about sixteen miles long and four to five miles broad. Here they met with scanty supplies; but bread and flesh were both miraculously supplied, the former by manna (q. v.) and the latter by quails (Exod. 16:13–15). (5) Dophkah and Alush are the next camps mentioned, of which there is no satisfactory identification. (6) Turning inland they came to Rephidim, probably the Wâdy Fierân. Here they found no water, and the people murmured against Moses for having brought them out of Egypt to perish with thirst in the wilderness. Moses was directed to smite with his rod the rock in Horeb, and water would come out. The elders were to be eyewitnesses of the miracle that they might bear their testimony to it before the unbelieving people. From this behavior of the unbelieving nation the place received the names Massah ("temptation ") and Meribah ("murmuring"). (7) In the third month after their departure from Egypt the Israelites, proceeding from Rephidim, arrived at Sinai (Exod. 19:1, 2). Their most probable route appears to have been by way of Wâdy Feirân and Wâdy Sheikh. The various encampments of Israel from their leaving Egypt until they reached Canaan are given in Exod. 12:37; ch. 19; Num. 10:21, 33; Deut. 1:2. See WILDER NESS. EXODUS, BOOK OF. See BIBLE, BOOKS OF. EXPEDIENCY EXPEDIENCY, EXPEDIENT (Gr. ovμpa, soom-fer'-o, to advantage), "the principle of doing what is deemed most practicable or serviceable under the circumstances." A rule of expediency often referred to is that laid down by St. Paul: " Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend" (1 Cor. 8:13). The occasion of this declaration was his writing to the Corinthians respecting the Christian's attitude toward flesh offered up to idols (q. v.). This would give offense to some scrupulous consciences, while others, like St. Paul, might make light of the matter, so far as personal feeling was concerned. "It is impossible to state more strongly than does the apostle the obligation to refrain from indulging in things indifferent when the use of them is an occasion of sin to others. Yet it is never to be forgotten that this, by its very nature, is a principle the application of which must be left to every man's conscience in the sight of God. Νο rule of conduct founded on expediency can be enforced by church discipline. It was right in Paul | to refuse to eat flesh for fear of causing others to offend, but he could not justly be subjected to censure had he seen fit to eat. The same principle is illustrated in reference to circumcision. The apostle utterly refused to circumcise Titus, and yet he circumcised Timothy, in both cases acting wisely and conscientiously. Whenever a thing is right or wrong, according to circumstances, every man must have the right to judge of those circumstances. Otherwise he is judge of another man's conscience, a new rule of duty is introduced, and the catalogue of adiaphora (i. e., things indifferent or nonessential), which has existed in every system of ethics from the beginning, is simply abolished" (T. W. Chambers, D.D., in Meyer's Com. on 1 Cor. 8). EXPERIENCE (Heb. 2, naw-khash', to observe diligently, Gen. 30:27; 7, raw-aw', to see, Eccles. 1:16; dokuh, dok-ee-may', proof, testing, Rom, 5:4; 2 Cor. 9:13. R. V. changes experience to probation in its only place in New Testament, Rom. 5:4; an experiment, in 2 Cor. 9:13, to proving). We speak of our knowledge of sins forgiven and the favor of God enjoyed as our Christian experience. It means the practical trial of an acquaintance with the work of God in man which results in the consciousness of salvation. Thus experience is the personal trial of anything and the consequent knowledge of it. EXPIATION, in the theological sense, denotes the end accomplished by certain divinely appointed sacrifices in respect to freeing the sinner from the punishment of his sins. The sacrifices recognized as expiatory are the sin offerings of the Old Testament dispensation (see OrFERINGS; SACRIFICE), and, preeminently, the offering which Christ made of himself for the sins of the world (see ATONEMENT). The above definition is made somewhat general for the purpose of including both of the theories which accept expiation in any real sense. 1. The Calvinistic or Satisfaction theory teaches that the sacrifice of Christ was expiatory in the sense that Christ suffered vicariously the punish EXPIATION ment of the sins of the elect. The expiation thus is absolute in behalf of the limited number for whom it is made. For the non-elect, or reprobate, there is no expiation. See ELECTION. 2. The Arminian theory of expiation holds that the sacrificial sufferings of Christ were not of the nature of punishment, but were a divinely ap pointed, though conditional, substitute for the punishment of the sins of all mankind. The sacrifice of Christ is expiatory in the sense that all who truly repent of their sins and believe on Christ have, on account of that sacrifice, their guilt canceled, the punishment of their sins remitted. The two theories are alike in regarding Christ's sacrifice as the objective ground of forgiveness. 3. The third prominent theory of the atonement, the moral influence theory, admits of no necessity for sacrificial expiation and denies the expiatory character of sacrifices. 4. Thus two principal questions exist: First, as to the fact of expiation by sacritice, and, second, as to the sense in which the sacrifices are to be regarded as expiatory. With regard to the first of these questions it should be noted: (1) The idea of expiation, or of seeking reconciliation with Deity, through sacrifices is a common feature of most if not all forms of religion. It is a fair supposition that, despite all the false conceptions held in connection with the idea, some measure of important truth lies at the bottom. (2) Among the sacrifices appointed of God under the Old Testament dispensation there were sacrifices the purpose of which was clearly expiatory. Not only the simple and most natural understanding of such sacrifices, but also the divine teaching concerning them, was that they stood in important relation to the forgiveness of sins (see Lev. 17:11). Preeminent among these were the sacrifices on the great annual day of atonement. See SACRIFICES; OFFERINGS; ATONEMENT, DAY OF. It is not, however, to be understood that the blood of beasts of itself had expiatory value and effect, or that the offerings in a mechanical or commercial way wrought reconciliation (see Psa. 50; Isa. 1; Amos 5:22). It was only because of divine grace that these sacrifices availed for reconciliation. The sacrifices were not only ap pointed of God, but were also provided by him (Lev. 17:11; Psa. 50:10). (3) In the New Testament dispensation, of which the Old was predictive and for which it was preparatory, the sacrifice which Christ offered of himself is conspicuously set before us as the ground of the forgiveness of sins. Christ is "the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world.” He is the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." It was Christ's own declaration that his blood was shed "for the remission of sins." See also John 3:14, 15; Col. 1:14, 20; Heb. 9:13, 14; Heb. 10:1-12, and many other passages. As to the second question, in what sense are the sacrifices to be regarded as expiatory? it is chiefly to be borne in mind: (4) That in the very nature of things punishment is not transferable-only the guilty can be punished. The innocent may suffer in behalf of EXPRESS the guilty. There may then be vicarious sacrifice, or substitute for punishment. But there can be no vicarious punishment. (5) With this conception of sacrificial expiation the teachings of Scripture correspond. In the Old Testament the effect of sacrifice in obtaining forgiveness was not absolute, but conditional upon the state of the sinner's heart. "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit" (Psa. 51:16, 19). The sacrifices of blood are acceptable and efficacious only when the one who offers them penitently and believingly turns toward God. This would not be the case if the penalty of sin were actually borne by the object sacrificed. But such is the case when the yielding up of life in sacrifice is the divinely appointed but conditional substitute for punishment. In the New Testament Christ is never represented as being punished instead of sinners. But he is frequently represented as suffering death in their stead, yet in such a sense as that the expiation wrought by his death avails for them only upon condition of true repentance and faith. This is the whole trend of New Testament doctrine, as well as the explicit teaching of many passages. As to the necessity of expiation, whence it arises, see ATONEMENT. For full discussion of subject see Pope's Compendium of Christian Theology; Dorner's System of Christian Doctrine; Van Oosterzee's Christian Dogmatics; Watson's Theological Institutes. E. McC. EXPRESS. See GLOSSARY. EYE (Heb. 72, ah'-yin; Gr. op0a2μóc, of-thalmos) is used as the symbol of a large number of objects and ideas, as: (1) A fountain frequently; (2) Color (Num. 11:7, in the Hebrew; see margin); (3) The face or surface (Exod. 10:5, 15; Num. 22: 5, 11, as "the face, i. e., eye of the land"); the expression "between the eyes means the forehead (Exod. 13:9, 16); (4) In Cant. 4:9 " eve seems to be used poetically for look; (5) "Eye" (Prov. 23:31, A. V. "color") is applied to the beads or bubbles of wine when poured out; (6) "Before the eyes" (Gen. 23:11, 18; Exod. 4:30) means in one's presence; "in the eyes" (Gen. 19:8) of any one means according to his judgment or opinion; "to set the eyes" (Gen. 44:21; Job 24:23; Jer. 39:12) upon anyone to regard with favor, but may also be used in a bad sense (Amos 9:8); (7) Many of the passions, such as envy, pride, pity, etc., being expressed by the eye, such phrases as the following occur: Evil eye" (Matt. 20:15, i. e., envious); "bountiful eye (Prov. 22:9); "wanton eyes (Isa. 3:16); "eyes full of adultery" (2 Pet. 2:14); "the lust of the eyes" (1 John 2:16); "the desire of the eyes" (Ezek. 24:16) denotes whatever is a great delight; (8) "To keep as the apple (pupil) of the eye" (Deut. 32:10; Zech. 2:8) is to preserve with special care; "as the eyes of servants look unto the hand of their master" (Psa. 123:2) is an expression which seems to indicate that masters, especially in the presence of strangers, communicated with their servants by certain motions of their hands. EYES, BLINDING OF. See PUNISHMENTS. EYES, COVERING OF THE (Gen. 20:16), EYESALVE a phrase of much disputed significance, understood by some to mean that Abimelech advised Sarah and her women, while in or near towns, to conform to the general custom of wearing veils (q. v.). Another view is the following: "By the covering of the eyes' we are not to understand a veil, which Sarah was to procure for a thousand shekels, but it is a figurative expression for an atoning gift, . .... so that he may forget a wrong done, and explained by the analogy of the phrase he covereth the faces of the judges, i. e., he bribes them (Job 9:24)" (K. and D., Com., in loc.). EYES, PAINTING THE, or rather the eyelids, is an ancient original practice which was known to the Hebrews, and is occasionally mentioned in Scripture. Jezebel is spoken of as "painting her eyes" (A. V. "face") before presenting herself in public (2 Kings 9:30); and the painting of the eyes is mentioned among the other Two Styles of Eye- things by which women painting. 4:30, A. V. "renting the face;" Ezek. 23: thought to win admiration pounded, yields a black powder with a me"The paint prepared from antimony ore, (Jer. 40). when Kohl Boxes and Implements. tallic brilliancy; it was laid upon the eyebrows and eyelashes either in a dry state as a black powder, or moistened generally with oil and made into an ointment, which is applied with a fine smooth eye pencil of the thickness of an ordinary goose quill, made either of wood, metal, or ivory. The way to use it was to hold the central portion of the pencil horizontally between the eyelids, and then draw it out between them, twisting it around all the while, so that the edges of the eyelids were blackened all round; and the object was to heighten the splendor of the southern eye and give it, so to speak, a more deeply glowing fire, and to impart a youthful appearance to the whole of the eyelashes even in extreme old age. Rosellini found jars with eye paint of this kind in the early Egyptian graves " (K. and D., Com., 2 Kings 9:30). diminutive of ko22upa, kol-loo'-ra, coarse bread of EYESALVE (Gr. Ko2λovptov, kol-loo'-ree-on, cylindrical shape), a preparation shaped like a Kolloora, composed of various materials and used as a remedy for tender eyelids (Rev. 3:18). EZAR EʼZAR, a less correct mode of Anglicizing (1 Chron. 1:38) the name EZER (q. v.). EZ'BAI (Heb. ", ez-bah'ee, hyssoplike), the father of Naarai, one of David's mighty men (1 Chron. 11:37), B. C. after 1000. EZ'BON (Heb. 2, ets-bone', uncertain derivation). 1. The fourth son of the patriarch Gad (Gen. 46:16), called also (Num. 26:16) Ozni. 2. The first named of the sons of Bela, the son of Benjamin (1 Chron. 7:7). EZEKI ́AS, a Grecized form (Matt. 1:9, 10) of the name of King HEZEKIAH (q. v.). EZEʼKIEL, one of the four greater prophets. 1. Name and Family. (Heb. ?, yekhez-kale, God will strengthen). The son of a priest named Buzi. EZRA E'ZER (Heb., ay-zer or E, eh'-zer, help). 1. The father of Hushah, one of the posterity of Hur, of the tribe of Judah (1 Chron. 4:4). 2. A son (or descendant) of Ephraim, who, with Elead, was slain by the aboriginal inhabitants of Gath "because they came down to take away their cattle" (1 Chron. 7:21). 3. The first named of the Gadite champions who went to David at Ziklag (1 Chron. 12:9), B. C. after 1000. 4. The son of Jeshua, the ruler of Mizpah, who repaired part of the city walls near the armory (Neh. 3:19), B. C. 445. 5. One of the priests who assisted in the dedication of the walls of Jerusalem under Nehemiah (Neh. 12:42), B. C. 445. 6. (Heb., ay'-tser, treasure.) One of the sons of Seir, and native princes of Mount Hor (Gen. 36:21, 27, 30; 1 Chron. 1:42, 38), in which last verse the name is Anglicized "Ezar." jutting out into the sea here gives to it its name. Called Ezion-Gaber (Num. 33:35, 36; Deut. 2:8; 2 Chron. 20:36). 2. Personal History. Ezekiel was taken captive in the captivity of Jehoiachin, eleven E'ZION-GA'BER or EʼZION-GE'BER years before the destruction of Jerusalem (2 Kings 24:12-15). He was a member of a community of (Heb. 3, ets-yone' gheh'-ber, giant's backJewish exiles who settled on the banks of the bone), a port on the coast of the gulf of Akabah, Chebar, a “river" or stream of Babylonia. It which Solomon used once for a navy station was by this river, "in the land of the Chaldeans," (1 Kings 9:26). It is mentioned as the last station that God's message first reached him (Ezek. 1:3). of Israel before coming to the Wilderness of Sin His call took place "in the fifth year of King (Num. 33:35; Deut. 2:8). Once a large and popuJehoiachin's captivity (1:2, B. C. 592), in the thir-lous town (2 Kings 16:6). The peculiar headland tieth year, in the fourth month." It now seems generally agreed that it was the thirtieth year from the new era of Nabopolassar, father of NEBUCHADNEZZAR (q. v.). We learn from an incidental allusion (24:18)-the only reference which he makes to his personal history-that he was married and had a house (8:1) in his place of exile, and lost his wife by a sudden and unforeseen stroke. He lived in the highest consideration among his companions in exile, and their elders consulted him on all occasions (8:1; 11:25; 14:1; 20:1, etc.). The last date he mentions is the twenty-seventh year of the captivity (29:17), so that his mission extended over twenty-two years. He is said to have been murdered in Babylon by some Jewish prince whom he had convicted of idolatry, and to have been buried in the tomb of Shem and Arphaxad, on the banks of the Euphrates. 3. Character. He is distinguished by his firm and inflexible energy of will and character, and we also observe a devoted adherence to the rites and ceremonies of his national religion. Ezekiel is no cosmopolite, but displays everywhere the peculiar tendencies of a Hebrew educated under Levitical training. We may also note in Ezekiel the absorbed recognition of his high calling, which enabled him cheerfully to endure any privation or misery, if thereby he could give any warning or lesson to his people (ch. 4; 24:15, 16, etc.), whom he so ardently loved (9:8; 11:13). EZE’KIEL, BOOK OF. See BIBLE, BOOKS OF. EʼZEL (Heb. I, eh'-zel, separation; see 1 Sam. 20:19), the memorial stones, or place of the meeting and parting of David and Jonathan. The margin of the A. V. has "that showeth the way;" the margin of the R. V. has "this mound." EʼZEM (1 Chron. 4:29). See AZEM, We believe the EZ'NITE (Heb. 7, ay'-tsen, sharp, spear), apparently the patronymic of ADINO (q. v.) given (2 Sam. 23:8) as chief among David's captains. Concerning this doubtful rendering Luther expresses the following opinion: text to have been corrupted by a writer, probably writing, so that orer should be substituted for adino, and ha-eznib for eth hanitho;" that is to say, the reading in the Chronicles (1 Chron. 11:11), "he swung his spear," should be adopted (K. and D., Com.). from some book in an unknown character and bad EZ'RA (Heb. NE, ez-raw', help). 1. The priest who led the second expedition of Jews back from Babylonian exile into Palestine, and the author of the book bearing his name (see the last four chapters, in which he speaks in the first person). Family. Ezra was a lineal descendant of Phineas, the grandson of Aaron (Ezra 7:1-5), being a son of Seraiah, who was the grandson of Hilkiah, high priest in the reign of Josiah. He is described as "a ready scribe in the law of Moses" (v. 6); "a scribe of the words of the commandments of the Lord, and of the statutes of Israel" (v. 11); “Ezra the priest, a scribe of the law of the God of heaven" (v. 12). History. (1) Appointed leader. Ezra's priestly extraction acted as a powerful lever for directing his vigorous efforts specifically to the promotion of religion and learning among his people. It is recorded (Ezra 7:10) that Ezra “had prepared his heart to seek the law of the Lord, and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments." Living in Babylon he gained the favor of King |