TITLE. The title on the cross, was written in Hebrew, in Greek, and in Latin. The essential part of which, and the only and exact words used by Pilate himself was, “THE KING OF THE JEWS." (John, xix. 21.) The additions were evidently made to it by the Jews themselves, to signify essentially what they wanted Pilate to write, but what he refused to write, viz: “I am the King of the Jews!" (v. 21.) Therefore, they added what they deemed equivalent to signify his being a pretender, viz. "Jesus of Nazareth." &c. (See Nazarene.) The manner in which Pilate refused to comply with their request to alter the title (v. 22) is remarkable, and very like his style to them, when they requested him to crucify Christ, (xix. 6,) "What I have written I have written," (v. 22,) giving them a tacit consent that they might add to it what they pleased, but that HE would write nothing else. Accordingly they (one, writing one thing, and another another,) added to it the most contemptuous epithet, viz: "JESUS of Nazareth," but they did not add the word Christ to any of them, for obvious reasons. While this satisfactorily accounts for the sacred historians having mentioned different titles, (for thus it appears the titles differed somewhat from one another,) it affords another incontrovertible proof that there was no collusion between the Evangelists.

TREE, of the knowledge of good and evil, mentioned in Gen. ii. 9, was so called, not because it possessed any active powers of communicating any information, but as a test of man's obedience to his Creator. Hence, whether man obeyed or disobeyed the command of God, it equally proclaimed a knowledge or information respecting good and evil: in case of the former, of good-in case of the latter, evil. See Adam.

TREE, fig. It is written in Matt. xxi. 19, "and when he saw a fig tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves only, and said unto it, let no fruit grow on thee henceforward for ever; and presently the fig tree withered away. And when the disciples saw it, they marvelled, saying, how soon is the fig tree withered away!" Mark tells us (xi. 21) that Peter said unto him, "Master, behold the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away!" There are ideas at present connected with the word "curse," in the English language, which the original for that word by no means warrants: and the reason is obvious, viz: because we connect the word with the idea of the everlasting punishment denounced against the immortal souls of God's enemies. The simple meaning of the word in this instance used, is "mandate," "order" or "command." To use the word curse, (with the ideas we generally have of it,) to inanimate things, such as to trees, stones, winds, or waves, is perfectly absurd. There are two obvious reasons why the Lord commanded the fig tree. 1. To prove to his disciples that all nature was in obedience to Him. The winds and the waves had previously obeyed his voice; the dead heard His voice; the eyes of the blind saw at His command; the devils themselves had acknowledged His authority; the vegetable kingdom had not as yet openly confessed its allegiance to Him; the fig tree presents itself-Christ commands it -it obeys. His power of giving life and health at his command had often before been made manifest; but as yet it was not evident, that he possessed the power of taking away life at command. Nothing could afford so favourable an example; animals he might poisontaking away their life would give pain; the tree presented itself, He commanded its life, it obeyed him, and

fled! 2. To teach His apostles that a profession, without fruits, is nothing!

TWELVE, THE. This term is given by the Sacred writers to the Apostles of Christ, which they retained, even when they were only eleven in number; that is, after Judas's apostacy. Paul calls them the twelve on an occasion when they were only ten in number, viz: Judas being dead, and Thomas being absent. This was a very common method of expression among writers prior to, and about, that age. For example, Xenophon calls the government of Athens by the name of "thirty," when Theramenes, one of them, was dead! Livy calls the five men, who had the command of the Roman army in Tusculum, the Decemviri, or “the ten men." (Lib. iii. c. 43.) Again, he calls the three, who had the joint command of the army against the Sabines, the Decemviri, or "the ten men." And again, he gives the same name to the two, who were left in Rome to take care of the city; (c. 49. Line 20;) simply because they were a part of the Decemviri. Chandler.

UNJUST STEWARD.

U.

In Luke, xvi. 8, it is written, "and the lord commended the unjust steward because he had done wisely." &c. The "lord" here spoken of, was not, as some have supposed, the LORD JESUS CHRIST, but the lord or master of the steward. Hence the argument that some have raised on this passage, immediately comes to nought! For the numerous passages of Scripture in which the term "lord" occurs, as applied to man, see Lord.

UNTO THIS DAY. UNNATURAL. VENGEANCE. 405

"UNTO THIS DAY." Expressions oftentimes occurring in the Sacred volume: some of which were originally written in the margin by some subsequent Sacred writer, and afterwards brought into the body of the book. So far from such notes impeaching the veracity of the writer, or affecting the antiquity or genuineness of the book, they materially substantiate and corroborate them. For if the books were of modern production, where was the necessity of such notes? They evidently prove the body of the work was written before the notes, and the notes are so ancient that we know not their date! But this expression also occurs in the body of the Sacred Text, and was written by the author of the book, as by Joshua, Matthew, &c. and only proves that the writer lived some years (even twenty years would fully justify the saying at any time) after the transaction or event occurred, to which he alludes. For instance, suppose any one now writing a history of the American Revolution, and referring to the transactions that occurred in the vicinity of Boston, was to say, it is called the battle of Bunker's hill "unto this day;" would future ages be justified in coming to the conclusion that the author could not have been alive then, (only 61 years ago,) or that the history of it must have been written some hundreds of years subsequently?

UNNATURAL. See Nature, Laws of. Experi

ence.

V.

VENGEANCE. Infidels complain much against the Scriptures, because they declare that God will take ven

Is

His

geance on the ungodly and rebellious sons of men. it at all compatible, say they, that God can be a God of love and mercy, and also a God of vengeance? Perfectly so, say I. Jehovah is a God of infinite love and mercy, and he is also a God of truth and holiness. love and mercy are beyond conception, yet they never extend so as to mutilate, diminish, or at all affect, his attributes of truth and holiness. He has solemnly announced to mankind, that sin shall not go unpunished; and his righteousness demands a perfect obedience to his perfect law. He could not, therefore, let sin go unpunished, without forfeiting his attributes of truth and holiness, without, in fact, ceasing to be what he is, viz. A UNION OF INFINITE WISDOM, JUSTICE, AND POWER. See Attributes.

His infinite justice demanded satisfaction for the violation of his holy law. His infinite holiness demanded a perfect obedience to his perfect law. His infinite wisdom devised the plan, by which all these attributes would be most perfectly maintained: and his infinite mercy in the person of the despised Jesus, did the work, and this work is the Gospel; in which " mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have embraced each other." Ps.

Jehovah is also called a jealous God; a term, than which there is not one more calculated to exhibit the regard, care, and love, which the Creator has for his creatures. Was there ever real jealousy without love or regard? Never. See Gospel.

VINEGAR. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, all relate that Jesus, while on the cross, was offered vinegar to drink. (Matt. xxvii. 48; Mark, xv. 36; Luke, xxxiii. 36; John, xix. 29, 30.) But Mark informs us (xv. 23)