Cloak
cloak
Emblem in Christian art associated with Saints Martin, Angela Merici , Ursula, and Raymond of Penafort. With Saint Ursula, it is as protectress, richly dressed; with Saint Martin, it is commemorative of his gift of his cloak (or half of it) to a beggar.
Fuente: New Catholic Dictionary
Cloak
(, meil’, Isa 59:17, elsewhere rendered in our version robe, or mantle) was an upper garment or robe (of cotton?), which extended below the knees, open at the top, so as to be drawn over the head, and having arm-holes. It was worn by the high-priest under the ephod (Exo 28:31); also by kings and persons of distinction (1Sa 15:27; Job 1:20; Job 2:12), and by women (2Sa 13:18). SEE APPAREL.
So, in the New Testament, the word , rendered cloak in Mat 5:40, is in its plural form taken for garments in general in other places (Mat 17:2; Mat 26:65; Act 7:58; Act 9:39). The cloak, or pallium (Act 9:39), was the outer garment (different from the coat or tunic, ), and it seems to have been a large piece of woollen cloth nearly square, which was wrapped round the body, or fastened about the shoulders, and served also to wrap the wearer in at night. It might not be taken by a creditor (Exo 22:26-27), though the tunic could (Mat 5:40), which fact gives peculiar force to the injunction of our Lord. SEE CLOTHING.
The , rendered cloak in 2Ti 4:13, was the Roman poenula, a thick upper garment, used chiefly in traveling, instead of the toga, as a protection from the weather. It seems to have been a long cloak without sleeves, with only an opening for the head. Others suppose it to have been a traveling-bag or portmanteau for books, etc. Discussions de palo Pauli have been written by Brenner (Giess. 1734), Heinse (Viteb. 1697), Lakemacher (Helmst. 1722), Rusmeier (Gryph. 1731), Vechner (s. 1. 1678). SEE DRESS, etc.
Fuente: Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature
Cloak
an upper garment, “an exterior tunic, wide and long, reaching to the ankles, but without sleeves” (Isa. 59:17). The word so rendered is elsewhere rendered “robe” or “mantle.” It was worn by the high priest under the ephod (Ex. 28:31), by kings and others of rank (1 Sam. 15:27; Job 1:20; 2:12), and by women (2 Sam. 13:18).
The word translated “cloke”, i.e., outer garment, in Matt. 5:40 is in its plural form used of garments in general (Matt. 17:2; 26:65). The cloak mentioned here and in Luke 6:29 was the Greek himation, Latin pallium, and consisted of a large square piece of wollen cloth fastened round the shoulders, like the abba of the Arabs. This could be taken by a creditor (Ex. 22:26, 27), but the coat or tunic (Gr. chiton) mentioned in Matt. 5:40 could not.
The cloak which Paul “left at Troas” (2 Tim. 4:13) was the Roman paenula, a thick upper garment used chiefly in travelling as a protection from the weather. Some, however, have supposed that what Paul meant was a travelling-bag. In the Syriac version the word used means a bookcase. (See Dress)
Fuente: Easton’s Bible Dictionary
Cloak
See GARMENTS.
Fuente: Concise Bible Dictionary
Cloak
Paul’s, left at Troas
2Ti 4:13
Figurative
Joh 15:22; 1Pe 2:16
Fuente: Nave’s Topical Bible
Cloak
himation (G2440) Cloak, Coat
chiton (G5509) Tunic
himatismos (G2441) Garment
chlamys (G5511) Robe
stole (G4749)
poderes (G4158)
This section will not be a treatise on clothing, since Ferrarius, Braun, and others have written a great deal about this topic. Instead, I will briefly explain a few of the words most frequently used in the New Testament to refer to garments.
Himation is most common word used to refer to garments in a general sense (Mat 11:8; Mat 26:65). When used more restrictively, himation refers to the large upper garment that a man could sometimes sleep in (Exo 22:26), the cloak as distinguished from the chiton or close-fitting inner vest. Endyein chitonaliterally means “to go into a tunic.” Himation and chiton often occur together to refer to the upper and the under garment. In Mat 5:40 Jesus instructed his disciples: “If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic [chitona], let him have your cloak [himation] also.” Here the despoiler begins with the less costly under garment, translated “tunic,” and proceeds to the more costly outer garment. Since this process is a legal one, this is a natural sequence. But in Luk 6:29 the order is reversed: “And from him who takes away your cloak [himation], do not withhold your tunic [chitona] either.”
In this context Jesus is clearly referring to an act of violence, and so the cloak or outer garment would be named first because it would be seized first. In the Aesopic fable the violent wind makes the traveler wrap his himation around him more closely, but when the sun begins to shine, he first discards his himation and then his chiton. Agymnos (G1131) was one who had laid aside his himation and was clad only in his chiton. This did not mean “naked,” as it appears in many translations (Joh 21:7), suggesting indecency, but stripped for toil. Joseph left his himation in the hands of his temptress (Gen 39:12), but in Jud 1:23 chiton is correct.
Himatismos appeared comparatively late and belonged to koine Greek. It usually referred to stately or costly garmentsthe “vesture” of kings. It was used to refer to Solomon in all of his glory, and it was associated with gold and silver as part of a precious spoil. It is used with such terms as endoxos, poikilos, diachrysos, and polyteles. It was also the name given to Jesus’ chiton, which was one woven piece and which was so desirable that even the rude Roman soldiers were unwilling to tear and destroy it.
The purple robe that the mockers in Pilate’s judgment hall scornfully placed on Jesus is called a chlamys (Mat 27:28-31), a very appropriate word for the context. Chlamys so obviously refers to a garment of dignity and office that chlamyda peritithenia (to put on a robe) was a proverbial phrase for assuming a magistracy. This might be a civil magistracy, but chlamys usually refers to the robe of military officers, captains, commanders, or imperators (emperors). The use of chlamys in the passion narrative implies that Christ was arrayed in the cast-off cloak of some high Roman officer. Matthew’s use of kokkinos (G2847) confirms this supposition (Mat 27:28). The chlamys was “scarlet,” the color worn by Roman officers of rank. The other evangelists described it as “purple,” but this does not affect our conclusion because the “purple” of antiquity was an indefinite color.
Stole is any stately robe, especially a long sweeping garment that reaches to the feet or a garment that has a train that sweeps the ground. Most frequently a stole was worn by women, which explains the Latin use of stola (a long robe worn by women, a noble woman). Among the things that the emperor Marcus Antoninus learned from his tutor, the famous Stoic philosopher Rusticus, was not to stalk about the house in a stole. It was, on the contrary, the custom and pleasure of the scribes to “go around in long robes,” to display themselves before men. Stole is always used to refer to the holy garments of Aaron and his descendants and to refer to any garment of special solemnity, richness, or beauty.
Poderes designates “a long garment reaching to the ankle.” Thus we have aspis (G785) poderes, poderes endyma, and poderes pogon, which are respectively a shield, a garment, and a beard that reaches to the feet.
Poderes differs very little from stole. Indeed the same Hebrew word that is translated poderes in Eze 9:2-3 is translated stole in Eze 10:2 and stole hagia (G40) in Eze 10:6-7. At the same time, in the list of the high-priestly garments this stole or stole hagia signifies the whole array of the high priest, and the poderes (chiton poderes) is distinguished from it and refers to only one portion, namely the robe or chetoneth.
Other words that might be included in this group are esthes, esthesis and endyma, but it would be difficult to assign each of these a distinct meaning.
Fuente: Synonyms of the New Testament
Cloak
Mat 5:40 (c) This is an expression, both literal and figurative, to show how willing we should be to go the second mile for those who are in need.
1Pe 2:16 (a) It refers to hypocrisy and pretense.