17<\/strong>. a sardius<\/em>. Heb. ’dem<\/em>, ‘redness,’ LXX. , Vulg. sardius<\/em>: Eze 28:13<\/span>, Rev 21:20<\/span>. The sardius is described by the ancients as ‘blood-red’: it is either what we call the cornelian<\/strong> (Kn. Di., Myres altern.<\/em>), or the opaque red jasper<\/strong> (Petrie, Myres altern.<\/em>). The ruby<\/em> (RVm.) is improbable, because (1) it is found only in countries as distant from the Hebrews as Ceylon and Burmah, and (2) because it is so hard that it was scarcely ever engraved in antiquity.<\/p>\n a topaz<\/em>. Heb. p<\/em> <\/em> idh<\/em>, , topazius<\/em> (Eze 28:13<\/span>, Rev 21:20<\/span>); spoken of in Job 28:19<\/span> as coming from Ethiopia. The modern ‘topaz’ was hardly known before Greek times. ‘The of the Greeks was a translucent, golden-coloured ( , Strabo xvi. 770), or yellow-green ( e virenti genere<\/em>, Plin. H. N.<\/em> xxxvii. 8) stone, probably the modern chrysolite<\/strong> (or peridot<\/em>); and this was in common use for scarabs and cylinders of all dates’ (Myres). The ancient topaz was obtained chiefly from an island ( ) in the Red Sea (Strabo, p. 770). The identification with the Ass. ipindu<\/em> [ EB.<\/em> iv. 4803) depends upon an alteration in the Heb. text ( ibid.<\/em> 5140).<\/p>\n a carbuncle<\/em>. Heb. breth<\/em>, , smaragdus<\/em>: Eze 28:13<\/span>, Rev 4:3<\/span>; Rev 21:20<\/span>. Probably, if these renderings are right, a<\/em> rock-crystal<\/strong>, a colourless<\/em> stone, used for engraving in Egypt at all periods: or (Petrie) only a colourless stone would shew a rainbow of prismatic colours (Rev 4:3<\/span>), or could have been used by Nero for an eye-glass (Pliny, H. N.<\/em> xxxvii. 64). So also Myres, who compares carefully the rival claims of beryl.<\/p>\n 17 21<\/strong>. Twelve precious stones, each engraved with the name of one of the tribes of Israel, to be arranged in gold settings in four rows of three each, and fastened in front of the pouch. The identity of several of the stones mentioned is very uncertain; for philology throws little or no light upon the meanings of the names, and the ancient Versions in several cases give inconsistent renderings, or renderings which are themselves of uncertain interpretation. The oldest interpretations of the names are those given by the LXX.; and in identifying these, much help is afforded by Theophrastus, On Stones<\/em> [ c.<\/em> 300 b.c.), and notices in Pliny, H. N.<\/em> See more fully Petrie, DB.<\/em> iv. 619 ff., and esp. J. L. Myres, EB.<\/em> iv. 4799 ff. The list is repeated in Exo 39:10-13<\/span>: comp. also the lists in Eze 28:13<\/span> (= the 1st, 2nd, and 4th rows here, the stones being however differently arranged) of stones in the ‘covering,’ or decorated garment, of the king of Tyre, and in Rev 21:19<\/span> f. of the stones forming the foundations of the walls of the New Jerusalem (cf. Isa 54:11<\/span> f.; Tob 13:16 f.).<\/p>\n Verse 17<\/span>. Four rows of stones<\/B><\/I>] With a name on each stone, making in all the twelve names of the twelve tribes. And as these were disposed according to their birth, Ex 28:10<\/span>, we may suppose they stood in this order, the stones being placed also in the order in which they are produced, Ex 28:17-20<\/span>: – <\/P> FIRST ROW<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/B><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> Upon a<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Sardius or Ruby<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> was engraven<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Reuben<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Sons of Leah<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> Topaz<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Simeon<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> –<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> Carbuncle<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Levi<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> –<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> SECOND ROW<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/B><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> Upon an<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Emerald<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> was engraven<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Judah<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> –<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> Sapphire<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Issachar<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> –<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> Diamond<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Zebulun<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> –<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> THIRD ROW<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/B><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> Upon a<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Ligure or Jacinth<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> was engraven<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Dan<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Sons of Bilhah, <\/SPAN><\/SPAN> <\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> Agate<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Naphtali<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Rachael’s maid<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> Amethyst<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Gad<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Son of Zilpah, <\/SPAN><\/SPAN> <\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> FOURTH ROW<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/B><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> Upon a<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Beryl, or Crysolite<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> was engraven<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Asher<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Leah’s maid<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> Onyx, or Sardonyx<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Joseph<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Sons of Rachel<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> Jasper<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> Benjamin<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> –<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> <\/TABLE> In this order the Jews in general agree to place them. See the Jerusalem Targum<\/I> on this place, and the Targum<\/I> upon Canticles, Son 5:14<\/span>; and see also Ainsworth<\/I>. The Targum<\/I> of Jonathan<\/I> says, “These four rows were placed opposite to the four quarters of the world; but this could only be when laid down horizontally, for when it hung on the breast of the high priest it could have had no such position. As it is difficult to ascertain in every case what these precious stones were, it may be necessary to consider this subject more at large.<\/P> <\/P> 1. A SARDIUS, odem<\/I>, from the root adam<\/I>, he was ruddy<\/I>; the ruby<\/I>, a beautiful gem of a fine deep red<\/I> colour. The sardius,<\/I> or sardie<\/I> stones, is defined to be a precious stone of a blood-red<\/I> colour<\/I>, the best of which come from Babylon.<\/P> <\/P> 2. A TOPAZ, pitdah<\/I>, a precious stone of a pale dead green<\/I>, with a mixture of yellow<\/I>, sometimes of a fine yellow; and hence it was called chrysolite<\/I> by the ancients, from its gold<\/I> colour. It is now considered by mineralogists as a variety<\/I> of the sapphire<\/I>.<\/P> <\/P> 3. CARBUNCLE, bareketh<\/I>, from barak<\/I>, to lighten,<\/I> glitter<\/I>, or glister<\/I>; a very elegant gem of a deep red colour<\/I>, with an admixture of scarlet<\/I>. From its bright lively colour it had the name carbunculus<\/I>, which signifies a little coal<\/I>; and among the Greeks anthrax<\/I>, a coal<\/I>, because when held before the sun it appears like a piece of bright burning charcoal. It is found only in the East Indies, and there but rarely.<\/P> <\/P> 4. EMERALD, nophech<\/I>, the same with the ancient smaragdus<\/I>; it is one of the most beautiful of all the gems, and is of a bright green colour, without any other mixture. The true oriental emerald<\/I> is very scarce, and is only found at present in the kingdom of Cambay<\/I>.<\/P> <\/P> 5. SAPPHIRE, sappir<\/I>. See this described, Ex 24:10<\/span>.<\/P> <\/P> 6. DIAMOND, yahalom<\/I>, from halam<\/I>, to beat<\/I> or smite upon<\/I>. The diamond is supposed to have this name from its resistance to a blow<\/I>, for the ancients have assured us that if it be struck with a hammer, upon an anvil, it will not break<\/I>, but either break them<\/I> or sink<\/I> into the surface of that which is softest<\/I>. This is a complete fable, as it is well known that the diamond can be easily broken, and is capable of being entirely<\/I> volatilized or consumed by the action of fire. It is, however, the hardest, as it is the most valuable, of all the precious stones hitherto discovered, and one of the most combustible substances in nature.<\/P> <\/P> 7. LIGURE, leshem<\/I>, the same as the jacinth<\/I> or hyacinth<\/I>; a precious stone of a dead red<\/I> or cinnamon<\/I> colour, with a considerable mixture of yellow<\/I>.<\/P> <\/P> 8. AGATE, shebo<\/I>. This is a stone that assumes such a variety of hues and appearances, that Mr. Parkhurst thinks it derives its name from the root shab<\/I>, to turn<\/I>, to change<\/I>, “as from the circumstance of the agate changing its appearance without end, it might be called the varier<\/I>.” Agates are met with so variously figured in their substance, that they seem to represent the sky, the stars, clouds, earth, water, rocks, villages, fortifications, birds, trees, flowers, men, and animals of different kinds. Agates have a white<\/I>, reddish, yellowish<\/I>, or greenish<\/I> ground. They are only varieties of the flint<\/I>, and the lowest in value of all the precious stones.<\/P> <\/P> 9. AMETHYST, achlamah<\/I>, a gem generally of a purple<\/I> colour, composed of a strong blue<\/I> and deep red<\/I>. The oriental amethyst<\/I> is sometimes of a dove<\/I> colour, though some are purple<\/I>, and others white<\/I> like diamonds<\/I>. The name amethyst<\/I> is Greek, , and it was so called because it was supposed that it prevented inebriation<\/I>.<\/P> <\/P> 10. The BERYL, tarshish<\/I>. Mr. Parkhurst derives this name from tar<\/I>, to go round<\/I>, and shash<\/I>, to be vivid<\/I> or bright<\/I> in colour. If the beryl<\/I> be intended, it is a pellucid gem of a bluish green<\/I> colour, found in the East Indies, and about the gold mines of Peru. But some of the most learned mineralogists and critics suppose the chrysolite<\/I> to be meant. This is a gem of a yellowish green<\/I> colour, and ranks at present among the topazes. Its name in Greek, chrysolite<\/I>, , literally signifies the golden stone<\/I>.<\/P> <\/P> 11. The ONYX, shoham<\/I>. See Clarke on Ge 2:12<\/span>; and “<\/I>Ex 25:7<\/I><\/span>“<\/I>. There are a great number of different sentiments on the meaning of the original; it has been translated beryl, emerald, prasius, sapphire, sardius, ruby, cornelian,<\/I> onyx<\/I>, and sardonyx<\/I>. It is likely that the name may signify both the onyx<\/I> and sardonyx<\/I>. This latter stone is a mixture of the chalcedony<\/I> and cornelian<\/I>, sometimes in strata, at other times blended together, and is found striped with white<\/I> and red<\/I> strata or layers. It is generally allowed that there is no real difference, except in the degree of hardness<\/I>, between the onyx,<\/I> cornelian, chalcedony, sardonyx<\/I>, and agate<\/I>. It is well known that the onyx<\/I> is of a darkish horny<\/I> colour, resembling the hoof<\/I> or nail<\/I>, from which circumstance it has its name. It has often a plate of a bluish white<\/I> or red<\/I> in it, and when on one or both sides of this white there appears a plate of a reddish<\/I> colour, the jewellers, says Woodward<\/I>, call the stone a sardonyx<\/I>.<\/P> <\/P> 12. JASPER, yashepheh<\/I>. The similarity of the Hebrew name has determined most critics and mineralogists to adopt the jasper<\/I> as intended by the original word. The jasper<\/I> is usually defined a hard stone, of a beautiful bright green<\/I> colour, sometimes clouded<\/I> with white<\/I>, and spotted<\/I> with red<\/I> or yellow<\/I>. Mineralogists reckon not less than fifteen<\/I> varieties of this stone: 1. green<\/I>; 2. red<\/I>; 3. yellow<\/I>; 4. brown<\/I>; 5. violet<\/I>; 6. black<\/I>; 7. bluish grey<\/I>; 8. milky white<\/I>; 9. variegated<\/I> with green, red<\/I>, and yellow clouds<\/I>; 10. green<\/I> with red specks<\/I>; 11. veined<\/I> with various colours<\/I>, apparently in the form of letters<\/I>; 12. with variously coloured zones<\/I>; 13. with various colours<\/I> mixed without<\/I> any order<\/I>; 14. with many colours together<\/I>; 15. mixed with particles of agate<\/I>. It can scarcely be called a precious stone; it is rather a dull opaque rock.<\/P> <\/P> In examining what has been said on these different precious stones by the best critics, I have adopted such explanations as appeared to me to be best justified by the meaning and use of the original words; but I cannot say that the stones which I have described are precisely those intended by the terms in the Hebrew text, nor can I take upon me to assert that the tribes<\/I> are arranged exactly in the manner intended by Moses; for as these things are not laid down<\/I> in the text<\/I> in such a way as to preclude all mistake, some things must be left to conjecture<\/I>. Of several of these stones many fabulous accounts are given by the ancients, and indeed by the moderns also: these I have in general omitted because they are fabulous<\/I>; as also all spiritual<\/I> meanings which others have found so plentifully in each stone, because I consider some of them puerile<\/I>, all futile<\/I>, and not a few dangerous<\/I>.<\/P><\/p>\n It is needless to trouble the reader with the explication of these stones, which the Jewish doctors themselves are not agreed in, seeing this use of them is now abolished. It may suffice to know that they were precious stones severally allotted to the names of the several tribes, according to Gods good pleasure, possibly with respect to some disposition or concernment of each tribe, which at this distance we cannot learn. <\/P><\/p>\n And thou shalt set in it settings of stones<\/strong>,…. Or “fill in it fillings of stones” d; which shows that there were in it ouches, or sockets of gold, the hollows of which were to be filled up with precious stones:<\/p>\n even four rows of stones<\/strong>; making a four square, and so filling up the measure of the breastplate:<\/p>\n the first row shall be a sardius, a topaz, and a carbuncle<\/strong>; about these stones, and those that follow, there is a great variety of interpretations of them, both among Jews and Christians; and they seem to be little known: our translators upon the whole seem to be as right as any in giving the names of them; the first of these, the “sardius”, is a red stone of a blood colour, as the “cornelian” or “ruby”, and which some have thought is here meant, and has its name either from the place where it has been found, Sardis or Sardinia; or rather from its red colour; for “sered” signifies red in Eze 28:13<\/span> as Braunius e has observed from Kimchi; and so Odem, which is the word here used, signifies, and undoubtedly intends a stone of such a colour; and it is highly probable that this is the Demium of Pliny f, which is one of the three kinds of sardius in India; and the red is so called from its redness, as the same Braunius observes. The second stone, the “topaz”, had its name, according to Pliny g, from an island in Arabia, in the Red sea, called Topazos; and the best topaz is the topaz of Cush or Arabia, as in Job 28:19<\/span>. The topaz of the ancients was of a green colour; and so the three Targums call this stone Jarken or Jarketha, which signifies green; hence some have taken this to be the emerald, which is of a fine green colour: the third stone is the “carbuncle”, as we render it; whatever stone is meant, it must be a bright and glittering one, like lightning, as the word signifies; wherefore some have taken it to be the emerald, so the Septuagint and Braunius h; it being a very radiant and glittering stone, of a grass green, and very refreshing to the sight; but Danaeus i says, that the carbuncle is that species of the ruby, which of all is most beautiful and excellent, and darts out light like lightning to those that look at it at a distance, and shines in the middle of the night and darkness, so that it enlightens places near it, as if it were a sun:<\/p>\n [this shall be] the first row<\/strong>; now upon these three stones were engraven the names of Reuben, Simeon, and Levi, as both the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem agree.<\/p>\n d “et implebis in eo plenitudinem lapidis”, Montanus; “vel eum impletione lapidis”, Pagninus; “implebis in eo impletione lapidis”, Drusius. e De Vestitu Sacerd. Heb. l. 2. c. 8. sect. 10. p. 639. f Nat. Hist. l. 37. c. 7. g Ibid. l. 6. c. 29. h Ut supra, (De Vestitu Sacerd. Heb. l. 2.) c. 10. sect. 4. p. 653. i Apud De Dieu in loc.<\/p>\n “ And fill thereon<\/em> (put on it) a stone-setting, four rows of stones,<\/em> ” i.e., fix four rows of set jewels upon it. The stones, so far as their names can be determined with the help of the ancient versions, the researches of L. de Dieu<\/em> ( animadv<\/em>. ad Ex 28) and Braun<\/em> ( vestit<\/em>. ii. c. 8-10), and other sources pointed out in Winer’s R. W<\/em>. ( s. v. Edensteine<\/em>), were the following: – In the first or upper row, odem<\/em> ( ), i.e., our cornelian, of a blood-red colour; pitdah<\/em>, , the golden topaz; bareketh<\/em>, lit., the flashing, , the emerald, of a brilliant green. In the second<\/em> row, nophek<\/em>, , carcunculus <\/em>, the ruby or carbuncle, a fire-coloured stone; sappir<\/em>, the sapphire, of a sky-blue colour; jahalom<\/em>, according to the lxx, but this is rather to be found in the jaspeh<\/em>, – according to the Graec<\/em>., Ven<\/em>., and Pers<\/em>., to Aben Ezra<\/em>, etc., the diamond, and according to others the onyx<\/em>, a kind of chalcedony, of the same colour as the nail upon the human finger through which the flesh is visible. In the third<\/em> row, lesehm<\/em>, , lugurius <\/em>, i.e., according to Braun<\/em> and others, a kind of hyacinth, a transparent stone chiefly of an orange colour, but running sometimes into a reddish brown, at other times into a brownish or pale red, and sometimes into an approach to a pistachio green; shevo<\/em>, , a composite stone formed of quartz, chalcedony, cornelian, flint, jasper, etc., and therefore glittering with different colours; and achlaham<\/em>, , amethyst, a stone for the most part of a violet colour. In the fourth<\/em> row, tarshish<\/em>, , chrysolite, a brilliant stone of a golden colour, not like what is now called a chrysolite, which is of a pale green with a double refraction; shoham<\/em>, beryl (see at Gen 2:12<\/span>); and jaspeh<\/em>, no doubt the jasper, an opaque stone, for the most part of a dull red, often with cloudy and flame-like shadings, but sometimes yellow, red, brown, or some other colour.<\/p>\n (17-19) Set in it settings of stones . . . <\/strong>There is always considerable difficulty in identifying ancient with modern gems, the etymologies of the words being frequently uncertain, the names (where they have survived) having sometimes changed their meaning, and the opinions of early commentators, who might seem to speak with some authority, being discrepant. In the present case, scarcely one of the twelve stones can be said to be determined with certainty. 1. The dem, <\/em>identified by the LXX. and the Vulg. With the sard, has been regarded as the ruby, the carbuncle, and the carnelian. Etymologically the word means red, or the red stone. The ruby is certainly wrong, since ancient engravers could not cut it. Either sard or carnelian is probably intended, both being common in Egypt. 2. The pitdah <\/em>is certainly not the topaz, which could no more be cut than the ruby. If the word is derived, as supposed, from a root meaning pale, the chrysolite, which resembles a pale topaz, but is far softer, may be meant. 3. The brketh <\/em>is rendered smaragdus, <\/em>emerald, by the LXX. <\/strong>and Vulg.; but neither could the emerald be cut by the ancient engravers. The word means brightly flashing, which tells us next to nothing. Beryl and a kind of corundum have been suggested; but neither is particularly sparkling. 4. The nphek, <\/em>translated by the LXX. and Josehus, may well be the carbuncle, as is now generally supposed. It cannot, any more than the dem, <\/em>be the ruby. 5. The sappir <\/em>one might have supposed by its name to be certainly the sapphire; but this, again, is a gem which ancient engravers could not cut. It would seem that here we have one of the cases where the name has been transferred from one stone to another, the modern lapis lazuli being the gem which was called sapphire by the ancients. 6. The yahlm <\/em>is certainly not the diamond, which is the hardest of all gems. The LXX. and Vulg. translate by jasper (, jaspis<\/em>); <\/em>but this seems really to have been the twelfth stone. Other renderings are mere conjectures, and the yahlm <\/em>must be regarded as unknown. 7. The leshem, <\/em>rendered ligure by the LXX., the Vulgate, Josephus, and our translators, is probably the stone known to the ancients as lapis ligurius, <\/em>but what that stone was is a matter of great uncertainty. It has been regarded as amber, as jacinth, and as tourmaline; but amber does not admit of engraving, while jacinth and tourmaline are pure conjectures. This stone, then, must also be regarded as unknown. 8. The shevo, <\/em>rendered achates, <\/em>agate, by the LXX. and the Vulg., is generally allowed to have been that stone, which was well known to the ancients, and widely used for engraving. 9. The akhlmh <\/em>was regarded as the amethyst by the LXX., the Vulgate, and Josephus; but it has been suggested that it may have been malachite (Knobel); and there is no disproving the suggestion. Still the amethyst, which is easily engraved, and was well known in Egypt, should find a place in the present list, and may well have been intended by the akhlmh. <\/em>10. The tarshish, <\/em>by its name, should be a stone brought from Tarshish, which is either Tarsus or Tartessus. Some suppose it to have been the beryl, some the chrysolite, others the turquoise. There are really no sufficient grounds for identifying it with any known gem. 11. The shham <\/em>has been already discussed (see Note on Exo. 28:9<\/span>), and identified with the onyx, or the sardonyx. 12. The yshpeh <\/em>should, by its name, be the jasper, which was one of the stones most used in Egypt, and which could scarcely have been absent from the present list. The LXX., however, translate onyx, Josephus and the Vulgate beryl; so that here again there is uncertainty. The views of the present writer may be best presented to the reader by means of a table:<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 1st Row of Gems . . . 3rd Row . . .<\/p>\n 4th Row . . .<\/p>\n Odern Pitdah Brtketh 17<\/strong>. <\/strong> Four rows of stones <\/strong> These were in-wrought into the costly fabric in settings <\/strong> or fillings, <\/em> so as to form a splendid piece of work . The names of these stones, which follow, (Exo 28:17-20<\/span>,) are sufficient to show that this ornamental breast-piece of the high priest must have been prepared with the greatest possible care and skill. It is hardly possible to identify the Hebrew names of all the stones. The student should consult the larger Bible dictionaries on the several words, where all that is known upon the subject is gathered together.<\/p>\n Exo 28:17 And thou shalt set in it settings of stones, [even] four rows of stones: [the first] row [shall be] a sardius, a topaz, and a carbuncle: [this shall be] the first row.<\/p>\n Ver. 17. Four rows of stones.<\/strong> ] According to the number and order of the twelve tribes encamping about God’s tabernacle. In all which rows, a very reverend writer a<\/em> hath well observed eight things: – (1.) The shining of the stones; pointing to the purity of Christ and his Church: (2.) Their price; of great value and worth; signifying what a price Christ valued his Church at: (3.) Their place or situation; they are set in the heart, and Aaron must carry them on his heart, signifying that Christ hath as much care of his Church, as if it were enclosed in his heart, – lets out his blood to make room in his heart for them: (4.) Their number; twelve; noting, that with Christ is plentiful redemption: (5.) Their order; they stood in a comely quadrangle; Christ hath stablished a comely order in his Church; and we must keep our ranks: (6.) The figure; the four square; signifying the stability and firmness of the Church; Satan and all deceivers shall not pick one stone out of Christ’s heart: (7.) Their use; that Aaron must bear them on his heart; signifying Christ’s ardent affection to his, and constant intercession for them: (8.) The quantity; as all the names of Israel were gathered into a narrow compass, so Christ shall “gather together into one all the dispersed sons of God,” and present them before God as the most beautiful and precious parts of the world. Joh 11:52 <\/p>\n<\/p>\n a<\/em> Dr Taylor.<\/p>\n four rows. Three in each row, 3 x 4 = 12, as 3 + 4 = 7. See App-10. <\/p>\n thou shalt: Exo 28:9, Exo 28:11, Exo 39:10-21, Mal 3:17 <\/p>\n set in it settings of stones: Heb. fill in its fillings of stone <\/p>\n the first row: Eze 28:13, Rev 21:19-21 <\/p>\n a sardius: or, ruby, The Hebrew odem, from adam, to be red, ruddy, seems to denote the ruby; as adam does in Persian a beautiful gem, of a fine deep red colour, with a mixture of purple. Job 28:18, Pro 3:15, Pro 8:11, Pro 20:15, Pro 31:10, Lam 4:7 <\/p>\n a topaz: Pitdah, is constantly rendered by the LXX , and Vulgate, topazius, with which agrees Josephus. The topaz is a precious stone, of a pale, dead green, with a mixture of yellow, sometimes of a fine yellow; and hence called chrysolyte by the moderns, from its gold colour. Job 28:19; Rev 21:20 <\/p>\n a carbuncle: Bareketh, from barak, to lighten, glitter, a very elegant gem, of a deep red colour, with a mixture of scarlet. Isa 54:11, Isa 54:12 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Exo 35:9 – General 1Ch 29:2 – onyx stones<\/p>\n And thou shalt set in it settings of stones, [even] four rows of stones: [the first] row [shall be] a sardius, a topaz, and a carbuncle: [this shall be] the first row. 17. a sardius. Heb. ’dem, ‘redness,’ LXX. , Vulg. sardius: Eze 28:13, Rev 21:20. The sardius is described by the ancients as ‘blood-red’: … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Exodus 28:17”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2319","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2319","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2319"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2319\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2319"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2319"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2319"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
<\/P> <\/TD>
<\/P> <\/TD>
<\/P> <\/TD>
<\/P> <\/TD>
<\/P> <\/TD>
<\/P> <\/TD>
<\/P> <\/TD>
<\/P> <\/TD>
<\/P> <\/TD>
<\/P> <\/TD>
<\/P> <\/TD>
<\/P> <\/TD>
<\/P> <\/TD>
<\/P> <\/TD>
<\/P> <\/TD>
<\/P> <\/TD> Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
2nd Row . . .<\/p>\n
(the Sard)
Nphck
(the Carbuncle)
Leshem
(uncertain)
Tarshish
(uncertain)<\/p>\n
(the Chrysolite)
Sappir
(the Lapis Lazuli)
Shevo
(the Agate)
Shham
(the Onyx or the
Sardonyx)<\/p>\n
(uncertain)
Yuhlm
(uncertain)
Akhlmh
(the Amethyst)
Yushpeh
(the Jasper)<\/p>\nFuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"