Godliness This word appears in the EV [Note: V English Version.] of the NT as the translation of the Gr. ε ὐ σέβεια (1 Timothy 2:2; 1 Timothy 3:16; 1 Timothy 4:7, 1 Timothy 4:8, 2 Timothy 3:5, Titus 1:1, Titus 1:2 P 1:3, 6, 7; 3:11, also Acts 3:12 RV [Note: V Revised Version.]). In 1 Timothy 2:10 it translates θεοσέβεια. Cf. also 2 Clem. xix. 1 (ε ὐ σέβεια), xx. 4. (θεοσέβεια). ‘ε ὐ σέβεια is a more general word than θεοσέβεια, and is almost equivalent to the Latin pietas, due esteem of superiors, whether human or Divine, while θεοσέβεια is restricted to God as its object. However, in the NT ε ὐ σέβεια always has reference to God’ (J. H. Bernard, The Pastoral Epistles [Camb. Greek Test., 1899], p. 39f.).
It will be seen from the above references that the word ε ὐ σέβεια (θεοσέβεια) is particularly characteristic of the Pastoral Epistles, H. J. Holtzmann speaks of the idea represented by it as one of the most individual ideas of these letters, and points out that its appearance in them (cf. also ε ὐ σεβ ῶ ς ζ ῆ ν [2 Timothy 3:12, Titus 2:12 ]) is connected with the recession of the one-sidedly religious interest of the great Pauline Epistles (Gal., Rom., 1 and 2 Cor.), and the coming to the front of an ethical conception of the business of life (See his NT Theol . 2, Tübingen, 1911, ii. 306). In the original Paulinism the supreme stress lies on the religious relation to God, and the central idea is that of justification by faith; while the ethical note is struck only in the second place, and in connexion with the peculiar Pauline mysticism. The Christian united to Christ in His Death and Resurrection is a new man, and must accordingly live as such. In the Pastoral Epistles, however, it is justification by faith and the specifically religious relation to God which are in the background; while the ethical demand of Christianity comes to the front in c onnexion with a fresh idea-that of adhesion to the Church, its doctrine and practice. It is just this latter point of view as a whole which is summed up in the word ε ὐ σέβεια. ‘It is above all significant of the tendency of our epistles, that this conceptio n serves to gather up in one both of these hues, in which the entire thought and effort of the author moves, viz. the ecclesiastical and the practical character of the type of religion recommended by him (Holtzmann, loc, cit .). On the one hand, therefore, godliness, as adhesion to the Church, appears as guaranteeing true doctrine (the teaching which is according to godliness [1 Timothy 3:16 ], the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness [Titus 1:1 ], the mystery of godliness [1 Timothy 3:16 ]; cf. Ap. Const . iii. 5: κατηχε ῖ σθαι τ ὰ τ ῆ ς ε ὐ σεβείας δόγματα). On the other hand, godliness evidences itself in good works and a life without reproach (1 Timothy 2:2; 1 Timothy 4:7). It is in fact because of the practical and ethical character of Christianity that its doctrine in opposition to the heretical speculations of Gnosis is sound speech (Titus 2:8), sound teaching (1 Timothy 6:3, 2 Timothy 1:13, Titus 1:9; Titus 2:1), sound words (1 Timothy 1:10, 2 Timothy 4:3); cf. ‘to be sound in the faith’ (Titus 1:13; Titus 2:2). On all this See Holtzmann, op. cit.
Holtzmann, of course, dues not accept the Pauline authorship of the Pastoral Epistles. Bernard, who does, says that the group of words connected with ε ὐ σέβεια was within St. Paul’s sphere of knowledge, as they are all found in the LXX [Note: XX Septuagint.] and are common in Greek literature; as a matter of fact, too, St. Paul uses the corresponding forms ἀ σέβεια and ἀ σεβής in Romans. ‘But why he should not have used them before and yet should use them so often in these latest letters is among the unsolved problems of the phraseology of the Pastorals, although corresponding literary phenomena have been often observed’ (op. cit. p. 39), The problem created by the use of these words is, however, only a part of the larger problem of the whole change in thought and atmosphere which has taken place between the ‘Hauptbriefe’ and the Pastoral Epistles (See the writer’s Man, Sin, and Salvation, London, 1908, pp. 137-140).
In conclusion, it may be observed, and it has a bearing on the question of the authorship of th e Pastorals, that the idea of ‘godliness’ serves to hind these letters together with the certainly late and unauthentic 2 Peter and 2 Clement. In 2 Pet., moreover, ε ὐ σέβεια serves to denote, just as in the Pastorals, the religion of the Church, in oppositi on to that of a heretical Gnosis (1:16; 2:1f.).
Robert S. Franks.
GOD AND MAGOG
In the Book of Revelation (20:7, 8) the seer tells that Satan, after being bound for one Thousand years, shall be loosed and go forth to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle. This is conceived in the Apocalypse as the last great battle between the powers of evil and the armies of God, and as the occasion of the final overthrow of the wicked, when fire comes forth from heaven to devour them. In this passage Gog and Magog are represented as nations dwelling in the four quarters of the earth and symbolic of the enemies of the Lord. The names are taken from the prophecy of Ezekiel (chs. 38 and 39), where Gog is represented as a person, ‘the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal,’ and Magog as the name of his land (38:2). The prophet depicts this prince as leading a great host against the restored Israel, and being utterly defeated and overthrown. In the ethnological table in Genesis 10 Magog is represented as the son of Japheth and brother of Gomer. As to the etymology of the names, considerable difference of opinion exists. Driver (in SDB [Note: DB Hastings’ Single-vol. Dictionary of the Bible.], art. [Note: rt. article.] ‘Gog’) states that the name Gog recalls that of Gyges (Gr. Γύγης; Assyr. G ugu), the famous king of Lydia of whom Herodotus (i. 8-14) tells us, and who, Assurbanipal states (KIB [Note: IB Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek.] ii. 173-5), when his country was invaded by the Gimirra (Cimerians), expelled them with Assyrian help. The name may have reached Palestine as that of a successful and distant king of barbarian tribes and may have been used by Ezekiel as symbolic of powers hostile to the Kingdom of God. Another interesting explanation is that of Uhlemann (ZWT [Note: WT Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Theologie.] v. (ed. Hilgenfeld, 1862], p. 265ff.). He points out that Magog originally signified ‘dwelling-place ,’ or ‘land of Gog,’ and that the name Gog itself means ‘mountain.’ According to Uhlemann, all etymological and geographical indications point to the nation of Gog being the inhabitants of the Caucasus, as the καυκάσιν α ὖ ρος of Herodotus is simply the Asia tic ‘Kauk’ or the Asiatic ‘mountain range.’ Others, such as Augustine and several ancient commentators, connect the word with Heb. נָּנ ‘roof,’ ‘cover’ or ‘protection,’ but it is unlikely that there is any connexion.
The Jews themselves regarded Gog and Magog as vague descriptions of northern barbaric nations, with whom they were very slightly acquainted. Josephus (Ant . I. vi. I) identifies them with the Seythians-a term which was generally used to describe vaguely any northern barbaric people. Perhaps oven in Ezekiel, where Gog is the prince and Magog the name of his country, the terms are little more than symbolic names for the opponents of God and His people. The picture that Ezekiel gave of their overthrow gave rise to the apocalyptic conception that finally the enemies of God and His people would he utterly overthrown in a great battle, and the names Gog and Magog frequently appear in later Jewish apocalyptic literature as leaders of the hostile world powers (cf. Sib. Orac . iii. 319, 322; Mishna, Eduyoth, 2.10). This final and abortive attack on the part of the powers of evil is referred to in Revelation 19:17 ff., while in 20:8 the names of Gog and Magog appear as the description of hostile nations. Probably Revelation 19 and 20, like most of the book, is part of a Jewish apocalypse which has been transformed by the Christian writer. The Christian seer, like the Hebrew prophet, looks for a day when the enemies of God and His saints will be utterly overthrown.
Many and varied are the interpretations that have been given of Gog and Magog by those who, ignoring the poetical and pictorial nature of apocalyptic literature, regard the Apocalypse as a prophecy of actual historic events. Thus the names have been applied to nations beyond the bounds of the Roman Empire, to Bar Cochba, the Jewish Messianic pretender, and frequently to the Turks. These interpretations depend on the view taken of the ‘thousand years’ and the ‘first resurrection.’ For a full discussion of the subject, See artt. [Note: rtt. articles.] Eschatology, Parousia.
Literature.-A. B. Davidson, Ezekiel (Camb. Bible, 1892); F. Düsterdieck. Handbuch über die Offenbarung Johannis 2 in Meyer’s Kommentar über das NT, 1865; W. Bousset, Die Offenbarung Johannis 5 in Meyer’s Kommentar, 1896, Der Antichrist, 1895, Religion des Judentums im NT Zeitalter 2, 1906; J. Moffatt, ‘Revelation’ in EGT [Note: GT Expositor’s Greek Testament.], 1910; B. Stade, Geschichte des Volkes Israel, 1888; E. Schürer, GJV [Note: JV Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes (Schürer).] 4 1901-1911; E. Schrader, KAT [Note: AT Zimmern-Winckler’s ed. of the preceding (a totally distinct work), 1902-03.] 3 [Note: Zimmern-Winckler’s ed. of the preceding (a totally distinct work), 1902-03.] . 1902-03; S. R. Driver, artt. [Note: rtt. articles.] ‘Gog,’ ‘Magog’ in SDB [Note: DB Hastings’ Single-vol. Dictionary of the Bible.]; A. H. Sayce, artt. [Note: rtt. articles.] ‘Gog,’ ‘Magog’ in HDB [Note: DB Hastings’ Dict. of the Bible (5 vols.).] .
W. F. Boyd.