Numbers 28:14 — Word Study

ov:

(1) In Anglo-Saxon, had the meaning "from," "away from" (as the strengthened form "off" has still), and was not used for genitive or possessive relations, these being expressed by special case-forms. In the Norman period, however, "of" was taken to represent the French de (a use well developed by the time of Chaucer), and in the Elizabethan period both senses of "of" were in common use. But after about 1600 the later force of the word became predominant, and in the earlier sense (which is now practically obsolete) it was replaced by other prepositions. In consequence the King James Version (and in some cases the Revised Version (British and American)) contains many uses of "of" that are no longer familiar--most of them, to be sure, causing no difficulty, but there still being a few responsible for real obscurities.

ov:

(1) In Anglo-Saxon, had the meaning "from," "away from" (as the strengthened form "off" has still), and was not used for genitive or possessive relations, these being expressed by special case-forms. In the Norman period, however, "of" was taken to represent the French de (a use well developed by the time of Chaucer), and in the Elizabethan period both senses of "of" were in common use. But after about 1600 the later force of the word became predominant, and in the earlier sense (which is now practically obsolete) it was replaced by other prepositions. In consequence the King James Version (and in some cases the Revised Version (British and American)) contains many uses of "of" that are no longer familiar--most of them, to be sure, causing no difficulty, but there still being a few responsible for real obscurities.

ov:

(1) In Anglo-Saxon, had the meaning "from," "away from" (as the strengthened form "off" has still), and was not used for genitive or possessive relations, these being expressed by special case-forms. In the Norman period, however, "of" was taken to represent the French de (a use well developed by the time of Chaucer), and in the Elizabethan period both senses of "of" were in common use. But after about 1600 the later force of the word became predominant, and in the earlier sense (which is now practically obsolete) it was replaced by other prepositions. In consequence the King James Version (and in some cases the Revised Version (British and American)) contains many uses of "of" that are no longer familiar--most of them, to be sure, causing no difficulty, but there still being a few responsible for real obscurities.

The manufacture of wine is carried back in the Bible to the age of Noah, (Genesis 9:20,21) to whom the discovery of the process is apparently, though not explicitly, attributed. The natural history and culture of the vine are described under a separate head. [VINE] The only other plant whose fruit is noticed as having been converted into wine was the pomegranate. (Solomon 8:2) In Palestine the vintage takes place in September, and is celebrated with great rejoicing. The ripe fruit was gathered in baskets, (Jeremiah 6:9) as represented in Egyptian paintings, and was carried to the wine-press. It was then placed in the upper one of the two vats or receptacles of which the winepress was formed, and was subjected to the process of "treading," which has prevailed in all ages in Oriental…

The vine being natural to the soil of Canaan and its vicinity, wine was much used as a beverage, especially at festivals, Es 1:7 5:6 Da 5:1-4 Joh 2:3. As one of the staple products of the Holy Land, it was employed for drink-offerings in the temple service, Ex 20:26 Nu 15:4-10; it was included among the "first-fruits," De 18:4, and was used in the celebration of the Passover, and subsequently of the Lord’s supper, Mt 26:27-29. Together with corn and oil it denoted all temporal supplies,

ov:

(1) In Anglo-Saxon, had the meaning "from," "away from" (as the strengthened form "off" has still), and was not used for genitive or possessive relations, these being expressed by special case-forms. In the Norman period, however, "of" was taken to represent the French de (a use well developed by the time of Chaucer), and in the Elizabethan period both senses of "of" were in common use. But after about 1600 the later force of the word became predominant, and in the earlier sense (which is now practically obsolete) it was replaced by other prepositions. In consequence the King James Version (and in some cases the Revised Version (British and American)) contains many uses of "of" that are no longer familiar--most of them, to be sure, causing no difficulty, but there still being a few responsible for real obscurities.

Month

Among the Egyptians the month of thirty days each was in use long before the time of the Exodus, and formed the basis of their calculations. From the time of the institution of the Mosaic law the month among the Jews was lunar. The cycle of religious feasts depended on the moon. The commencement of a month was determined by the observation of the new moon. The number of months in the year was usually twelve (1 Kings 4:7; 1 Chr. 27:1-15); but every third year an additional month (ve-Adar) was inserted, so as to make the months coincide with the seasons.

“The Hebrews and Phoenicians had no word for month save ’moon,’ and only saved their calendar from becoming vague like that of the Moslems by the interpolation of an additional month. There is no evidence at all that they ever…

From the time of the institution of the Mosaic law downward the religious feasts commencing with the passover depended not simply on the month, but on the moon; the 14th of Abib was coincident with the full moon; and the new moons themselves were the occasions of regular festivals. (Numbers 10:10; 28:11-14) The commencement of the month was generally decided by observation of the new moon. The usual number of months in a year was twelve, as implied in (1 Kings 4:7; 1 Chronicles 27:1-15) but since twelve lunar months would make but 354 1/2 days, the years would be short twelve days of the short twelve days of the true year, and therefore it follows as a matter of course that an additional month must have been inserted about…

The Hebrews months were lunar months, that is, from one new moon to another. These lunar months were each reckoned at twenty-nine days and a half; or rather, one was of thirty days, the following of twenty-nine, and so on alternately: that which had thirty days was called a full or complete month; that which had but twenty-nine days was called incomplete. The new moon was always the beginning of the month and this day they called new-moon day, or new month. The Hebrews usually designated the months only as first, second, etc.; and the names by which they are now known are believed to be of Persian origin, and to have been adopted by the Jews during the captivity. At the exodus from Egypt, which occurred in April, God ordained that that month-the seventh of the civil year—should be the first of the sacred year, according to which the religious festivals were to be reckoned; and from that…

ov:

(1) In Anglo-Saxon, had the meaning "from," "away from" (as the strengthened form "off" has still), and was not used for genitive or possessive relations, these being expressed by special case-forms. In the Norman period, however, "of" was taken to represent the French de (a use well developed by the time of Chaucer), and in the Elizabethan period both senses of "of" were in common use. But after about 1600 the later force of the word became predominant, and in the earlier sense (which is now practically obsolete) it was replaced by other prepositions. In consequence the King James Version (and in some cases the Revised Version (British and American)) contains many uses of "of" that are no longer familiar--most of them, to be sure, causing no difficulty, but there still being a few responsible for real obscurities.

the highest ordinary division of time. Two years were known to, and apparently used by, the Hebrews. A year of 360 days appears to have been in use in Noah’s time. The year used by the Hebrews from the time of the exodus may: be said to have been then instituted, since a current month, Abib, on the 14th day of which the first Passover was kept, was then made the first month of the year. The essential characteristics of this year can be clearly determined, though we cannot fix those of any single year. It was essentially solar for the offering of productions of the earth, first-fruits, harvest produce and ingathered fruits, was fixed to certain days of the year, two of which were in the periods of great feasts, the third itself a feast reckoned from one of the former days. But it is certain that the months were lunar, each commencing with a new moon. There must therefore have been some…

The Hebrews always had years of twelve months. But at the beginning, as some suppose, they were solar years of twelve months, each month having thirty days, excepting the twelfth, which had thirty-five days. We see, by the enumeration of the days of the deluge, Ge 7:1-8:22, that the original year consisted of three hundred and sixtyfive days. It is supposed that they had an intercalary month at the end of one hundred and twenty years, at which time the beginning of their year would be out of its place full thirty days. Subsequently, however, and throughout the history of the Jews, the year was wholly lunar, having alternately a full month of thirty days, and a defective month of twenty-nine days, thus completing their year in three hundred and fifty-four days. To accommodate this lunar year to the solar year, (365 days, 5 hours, 48…