J-f.2^1, bS, Srom t^e feifitarj^ of (profeBBor TJ?iffiam ^enrj (Bteen Q^equeat^e^ 6^ ^im fo t^e feifirar^ of (princefon t^eofogicdf ^eminarjj FOUR BIBLE STUDIES SHAMELESSNESS REVENGE PRAYER FIDELITY BY / JOHN H. OSBOENE NEW YORK A. C. ARMSTRONG & SON 51 East Tenth Street 1896 Copyright, 1896, by JOHN H. OSBORNE Press of J. J. Little & Co. Astor Place, New York PREFACE. It is with great diffidence, in view of the un- broken accord in interpretation of the long Hne of expositors hitherto, that three of these studies are now offered as new and better exegeses of three of the parables of our Lord. If from these, under guidance of the Spirit, some of the deep things of God shall appear as more easily to be fathomed, or if any suggestion has been furnished tending to clearer apprehension of the passages treated of, the purpose of this publication will have been fully answered. For, in our daily search of the Script- ures, as in the daily test of our inner spiritual life, the constant and reverent inquiry ev^er should be, whether these things are so ? and in both cases, not counting ourselves to have yet fully apprehended, the faithful endeavour should be to reach forward to the things that are before. It will be seen that, as the parables discussed in the first two studies both bear upon two different phases of the subject of prayer, the third study would naturally follow them, in order that the three together might set forth a more full and com- prehensive (though by no means an exhaustive) treatment of the whole subject of prayer. J. 11. O. Auburn, N. Y. CONTENTS. Shamelessness 1 Revenge 22 Prayer 47 Fidelity 63 SHAMELESSNESS. Luke xi. 1-10. The interpretation of this parable, The Friend at Midnight, now generally accepted, is : that the host, who, after receiving his travelling friend at midnight, goes to his neighbour's house to ask for food, represents the praying disciple ; and the householder roused up by him represents our Heav- enly Father; but interpreters are careful to state that there is a difference as to the methods of representation in these two portions of the parable ; the host, as he asks for bread is like unto and stands for the praying Christian ; but the house- holder is not like our Heavenly Father. In the case of the host, the lesson is said to be given by way of likeness, but in the other case it is said to be given by w^ay of contrast. It is allowed that the neighbour is like God in giving "as man}^ loaves as he needeth," but that he is unlike Him in the exhibition of a morose and crabbed nature. Here we make the first issue and claim that it is not according to the functions of a parable, nor a legitimate exercise of its true methods, to teach by contrast or dissimilarity, but always by likeness or similarity. It is a napapoXt], a " casting along- side " the objects or truths to be illustrated, the objects that are to effect and make clear such illus- tration. The attributes and qualities of the divine 2 Four Bible Studies. and spiritual are to be set forth and explained by natural objects in which there are qualities, func- tions, and sometimes attributes bearing a likeness, ethically, to the objects, persons, or truths of a spir- iti \ nature. " Know ye not this parable, and how, th. ., will ye know all parables? " was the reply of our Lord when asked for a solution of the parable of The Sower ; as if the interpretation and appli- cation of a parable were so plain and easy that every one having ears to hear and eyes to see might understand it in its several parts, and might readily know to what truth or object each part was intended to refer by reason of its spiritual or ethical likeness to that truth or object. Thereupon Jesus gives the explanation of the parable. The sower is the Son of Man, the seed is the Word of God, the fowls by the wayside repre- sent Satan taking away the seed so it might not bear fruit ; the stony places are the stony hearts w^hereon the seed taking root will flourish for a short time and then be scorched up in the heat of tribulation and persecution ; the thorns that choke and render unfruitful the Word are the cares of this world, deceitfulness of riches, and lusts of other thino^s; the o^ood o^round is the o'ood and honest heart, that nourishes the good seed until it brings forth most bountifully. In this exegesis given by our Lord there is a plain, direct, and self-evident likeness between each truth to be illustrated and the object in nature that illustrates it. The sower is *' placed alongside" the Son of Man, and a like- ness appears at once ; He is in action perfectly and directly represented by the sower ; so also, when Shmnelessness, 3 the fowls of the air are " placed alongside " Satan, the likeness in action is easily apparent, and there is no dissimilarit}^ or contrast between tliem. This same line of remark will apply to the other mem- bers of the parable, the stony ground, the thor..y, and the good ground. Thus is the true nature of every parable set forth by Jesus Himself ; always illustrating by similarity, never by contrast; always by likeness, never by unlikeness. Another fine example of this method is given by the Lord in His explanation of "• The Tares of the Field " (Matt. xiii. 37-43). There the sower, the good seed, the field, the enemy, the har- vest, and the reapers, all and each, stand for charac- ter in persons, or qualities in things, of the king- dom of God, and the acts of the persons and the results following the operations in the harvest field of nature are types and emblems of similar acts and results in the spiritual and heavenly world. Thus every parable must, by virtue of its very con- stitution as a parable, operate on direct lines, and ofl'er and bring out all its lessons on points of agree- ment, and not of difference. So was it in all other parables uttered by our Master ; the kingdom of Heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed ; is like unto leaven hid in meal ; is like unto treasure hid in a field ; is hke unto a merchantman seeking goodly pearls ; is like unto a man that is an house- holder ; is like unto a certain king who made a marriage for his son ; is like unto ten virgins ; is as a man travelling in a far country. In fact, the only two parables that have ever been made by expositors to teach thus wrongfully by contrast and 4 Four Bible Studies. unlikeness are this one and that of the Unjust Judge. It cannot therefore be admitted that the neigh- bour in this parable can represent our Father by contrast, but he must represent Him by similarity ; and the qualities in the character of the neighbour and his acts must and do, for the purposes of the parable, set forth like qualities and stand for sim- ilar actions, the outcome of the purposes and plans of our Heavenly Father. If, at this point, the de- vout reader is ready to lay down this paper and exclaim, " Surely God is not the crabbed, morose, and unlovely character personated in the neigh- bour," we can say in reply, " Have patience, and we may perhaps help you to see that the neighbour is not of such character at all." Taking up now the second issue on which we differ and dissent from the received exposition of the parable, in all the exegeses there is one propo- sition not expressed in terms, but always tacitly assumed and taken for granted ; and out of this proposition, falsely assumed as a fact, and which we will show to have no reasonable basis, has been developed the false and unnatural interpreta- tion commonly accepted as the onlv valid one. That assumed proposition is that the traveller, arriving at midnight, was hungry and needed food, or that it was best and proper for him, whether hungry or not, to take food at that hour before lying down to rest till morning. But there is nothing to show that he Avas hungry, for the natural presumption is that he took his evening meal at the regular hour before starting on his SJiamelessness. 5 journe}^ ; he makes no plea of hunger and does not ask for bread ; yet, even if hungry, would it have been conducive to his health or comfort to take a meal at the midnight hour ? The physical constitution of man is the same in all ages ; we may therefore ask the question of ourselves as appropriate for the solution of this case, What would I do on arriving at my destina- tion, having before the start taken the usual even- ing meal, and then travelling by rail or stage till midnight? I have put such a question to physi- cians and commercial travellers, and they, speak- ing the one from knowledge of physiology and the other from practical experience, all agreed that the sensible and healthful part for the traveller Avould be to go to bed, whether hungry or not, without taking food ; the physician Avould say that the stomach, having digested the evening meal, should be allowed its usual rest durino^ the remainino^ hours of the night, that if roused and compelled to fur- ther action, it must call upon the brain for an unwonted supply of nerve force, and the brain, thus kept active, cannot get the rest it should have in sleep ; the commercial traveller confirms this by his statement that food taken at that un- seasonable hour keeps him tossing and restless all the remainino^ hours of the nio^ht, so that mornintr finds him worn out and unrefreshed. We must, then, consider as altogether unfounded the assump- tion that, even by an overstrained rule of hospi- tality, the traveller should properly have had anything offered him at that time. A volume lately published by Canon 11. 13. Tris- 6 Four Bihle Studies. tarn, entitled " Eastern Customs in Bible Lands," furnishes, in a chapter headed " Journeying in the East," some very useful information ou this point : " The requisites for an Eastern journey are few and simple — scrip, purse, and shoes ; though now, when the country is not under the settled rule which pre- vailed in the daj^s of the Romans, a weapon of some kind or at least a stout cudgel must be added. The equipment was the same many ages before that period : for Homer (Odyssey, 17 — 197) describes Ulysses as travelling with a purse, a bag, and a staff, using the same word for scrip or bag which occurs in the New Testament. The purse is a small leather bag hung round the neck, under the shirt, by country folk, but concealed in the folds of the voluminous girdle Avorn by townsmen. It contains the owner's money and other valuables, especially the signet ring so treasured by every Arab, who always carries it in this purse. The scrip is a bag of larger dimensions, slung across the shoulder over the outer garment, generall}^ made of leather, but, in the case of the poorest, of flexible matting, in which provision for the journey, usually olives, dried figs, and thin barley cakes, rolled up or folded square, is carried." It is thus clear that this traveller in our parable is to be regarded as already, and before his arrival at the house of his host, provided with any needed loaves contained in the "scrip" he carried. There is no intimation that he was furnished differently or with aught less than what travellers were accus- tomed to carry with them ; nor are we to take it for granted that the fact of the host asking the &7iamelessness. 7 neighbour for bread, of itself implied the absence of that article from the traveller's scrip. Our Lord sets forth this man, the traveller, and in fact all the characters in all His parables, as acting under natural motives and according to the ordinary con- dition and mode of life of each of them.* We can now see that the host develops a charac- ter entirely different from that usually accorded him ; for it turns out that the request he made of the neighbour for the loaves was not a reasonable one for a necessary article, but the very opposite. The question therefore arises. Why should the host do so unreasonable and unnecessary an act, and what was his motive in doing it? The answer is ready at hand in the one word that characterizes his action, ocvaidlav, shamelessness ; for it was no motive of benevolence that led him to the neio'hbours house, but a vain wish to make for him- self a certain kind of reputation with the guest and his neighbour and any others who would be sure to hear of the act he now proposed. Hospitality was accounted as one of the cardinal and almost saving virtues of his time and his peo- ple ; he would make a great show of zeal in fulfill- ing its duties on any occasion that might offer; so he goes with ostentatious and inconsiderate * In the exposition of this parable by the Siniday School T'imes, in its issue of February 29, 189G, the following note is contributed by Rev. William Ewing : '"Now the laws of (Eastern) hospitality lay it down that he who arrives after sun- set may be sent to sleep without supper ; that is to say, arriving at midnight, he had a right to shelter, but none to food. So this man acted within the understanding of hospitable duty in refus- ing to be disturbed at that hour of the night." 8 Four Bible Studies, eagerness to the neighbour, regardless of the fact that he is asking for what is not at all needed, and reckless also of the outrage he is committing against all the kindly and considerate feelings of his neigh- bour. He had no plea of hunger from the traveller to urge; so the onl}^ reason he can give is one that relates to himself. " I have nothing to set before him"; it is the superserviceable "setting before" that constitutes his real motive, and not any desire to do his travelling friend a benefit; he would have all the world know how zealous he is to fulfil the duties of a host at all times, even at the mid- night hour. "I have nothing to set before him" is the specious reason given for the demand, and it is left to the friend to infer, what the man would not declare outright, that there is a real need for the three loaves. Yery clearly this man Avas of that blatant, shallow-minded sort, not sparsely met with in Oriental lands, who are ever thrusting for- ward their fine virtues and moral attainments " to be seen of men " ; they are constantly bringing them to the front on dress parade, and are seem- ingly haunted by the fear that all the good traits of their character Avill be, by the mass of men, overlooked and forgotten. The neighbour, however, is not moved by the appeal; he may suspect it has no genuine basis, but at least he knows his friend of old, and under- stands his reckless spirit and brazen ways ; he gives at first a prompt refusal ; a request perfectly rea- sonable at a reasonable hour deserves no attention, no consideration now ; no plea of a benevolent motive has been made to him, and this display of 8hamelessness. 9 shamelessness by his friend calls for no act of benevolence or good-will in return ; it is quite proper for him to return a selfish response to the selfish request, M// ^A.oL uoTrovb Ttdfjsxs, " Do not bring troubles upon me." The rendering in the Authorized and Ke vised versions of these four Greek words by the three English Avords " trouble me not," is a very inadequate translation ; this phrase, nonov ncxpex^iy, is thus mistranslated not only in this parable and that of the Unjust Judge, but also at Matt. xxvi. 10 and at Galatians vi. 17 ; in Matthew, our Lord in rebuke of the unjust criti- cisms spoken against that Mary who poured the ointment on His feet, exclaimed, "Why do you bring trouble upon the woman ? " in anticipation of the wrong and wicked slanders that might be sent forth about her from envious tongues, to injure her good name and cast a cloud upon her fair character ; these were the '' troubles " such words as they had spoken would " bring upon" her, and He then and there interposed in her behalf, declar- ing that the account of this act of hers should form part of the imperishable record of His own life, and thus the memory of it would be preserved to the remotest ages of the world. Paul's adjuration in his letter to the Galatians, Tov XoiTtov KOTTOvi f.101 /.i}/d£i? TtapsxiTGjy was made in view of the questions about circumcision that had come up, and troubled the disciples while he was staying in Antioch, Lystra, and Derbe, as they are stated in Acts xv. and xvi. ; so, in writing to the Galatians, he admonishes them of the futility of such questions, raised as they are by 10 Four Bible Studies. those who " desire to make a fair show in the flesh " and that they may escape " persecution for the cross of Christ." Circumcision is nothinof, but a newly created mind and heart are everything ; these zealots for outward conformity do not keep the law ; their only glory is in the numbers of their followers ; but Paul's glory is in that symbol of shame, the Cross ; let no man now wantonly attempt to bring troubles any more upon him ; the welts upon his body yet remaining from the jailer's lash at Philippi were the ffriy^ara to testify of him that he was the Lord's bondman ; all ques- tions about customs and requirements under the old law were obsolete, and agitation of them in the churches could only bring useless trouble upon Paul. To the careful student of the Greek, therefore, this must appear as the only true and adequate rendering of the four words of adjuration as Luke has written them in this parable ; they mean much more than to say : " Do not bother me," or " Stop this worrying," for they signify an actual trouble that is to be brought on the neighbour through compliance with the demand of his friend. If our Lord meant that the former was onlj^ protesting against a mere teasing by the host, there are three or four single verbs anj^ one of which He would have employed to express this, and with far greater accuracy than b}^ this phrase of four words which He has put in the mouth of the house- holder. See Luke vii. 6, viii. -19 ; Acts xvii. 8 ; Gal. i. 7, V. 10. Thus the neighbour's thought is not that he is personally pestered, irritated, and provoked ; but S7iamelessness. \ \ he means that the host's irrational conduct will " bring troubles " as its result ; and we can well understand what those troubles would be; the noise of unlocking and opening the door, and the drawing off from his children the covering that is over both him and them will awaken them, and so the cold, the noise, and the voice to them strano*e at this hour in their half-awakened state, all in the deep darkness of the night, must set his children in great fright with crying and screams and calls for " Papa" ; but expostulation is of no avail with the shameless and reckless petitioner; the neighbour quickly perceives this, and promptly decides that the easiest way out of this predicament is to get up at once, give the man his loaves, and send him off as soon as possible ; he will not stop to count them in the darkness, but will be sure to give him more than he asks for, so that he will not return. We need not assume that in doing this he is actuated by the least ill-will or by any thought of unkind- ness ; his conduct is simply governed by and suited to the facts of the case ; while he well understands the pleader's motive, he does not indulge in recrimi- nation or passion ; he calmly and practically acts according to the circumstances of the moment, and merely in a Avay to avoid the " troubles." The picture commonly drawn of this scene, repre- senting the host as standing without for quite a time and making repeated requests, using " impor- tunity," is not the true one ; importunity is the last thing the neighbour can allow ; it is the one event of all others to be prevented or arrested, for the longer the importunity the greater the '' troubles " ; 12 Four Bible Studies. it must be cut off short ; so he rises at once and stops it by giving the man what he wants. The riofht renderino: of the Greek word avaidiai^ is not " importunity," but shamelessness ; the very composition of the word indicates its meaning, "without shame." And here we must come to the conclusion that the translators of the Authorized version nearly three hundred years ago adopted this wrong word, importunity, as a necessary con- sequence of their wrong interpretation of the parable ; the error of it began then, for, wrongly assuming that the host was in the right with his petition, they could not see wherein he was shame- less ; so they had to make a new meaning for the word; in this way it undoubtedly was that the wrong exegesis of the first part of this parable determined and made necessary the translation of this word into " importunity," and this meaning was adopted also in order to preserve a consistent exegesis in its latter part. Having been mistranslated in our Eng- lish Bibles for two hundred and eighty years, it must now perforce appear in our Greek lexicons as one of the meanings of avaidiai^ , but it should not be forgotten that it was the wrono^ translation that created the wrong dictionary meaning, and not the dictionary meaning that made the wrong translation ; the Revised version has simply fol- lowed in the same line of error {vide Alford m loco). It must be believed that our Master exercised at least ordinary care and precision in the use of words, and that He would not employ any terms in His discourse except such as would convey His thought accurately and with definite clearness ; Shameless iiess. 13 therefore, if He had meant only "importunity " in this case, He would have spoken a more appropriate word than dv aid lav ,• or, if He uttered this parable in Aramaic, then Luke, in selecting the right word in Greek for the purpose of this record, did cer- tainly take pains to give us this as the one word justly and accurately corresponding to the Aramaic word Jesus had used ; for if He had really intended " importunity " there are Greek words that would have much better convej^ed His thought, such as some of the compounds of aiTeoo^ as TtpoGairyjaiv, or TtapairijaiVy or STtaiTjjffiv. But He used a Avord which, both by general usage of that time and by derivation, bore the meaning " without shame." We have endeavoured to show that the term " shamelessness " applies not simply to the act of asking, but also to the character of the host, and to his conduct as the natural exhibition of his heedless selfishness, and that the neighbour's knowl- edge of this trait, and thus his ready appreciation of the uselessness of remonstrance, prompted him to quickly give all and more than was asked for. So that to put importunity in place of shameless- ness is absolutely to reverse the parable, to turn it around and make it teach just the opposite of what it does teach. And now, under our right exegesis, what is the application of the parable? Jesus himself gives it in the next sentence — "Ask and ye shall receive, seek and ye shall find, knock and it shall be opened unto you ; for every one that asketh receiveth, and he that seeketh findeth, and to him that knocketh it shall be opened." Here are simply six repeti- 14 Four Bible Studies. tions of tlie same thought, and there is nothing more in them than the assurance, " Your prayers shall be answered, your prayers shall be answered," six times repeated and variously given to make it tremendously emphatic, and as if our dear Sav- iour would impress the fact on our memories with such force and vividness that it might never be for- gotten. Much paper has been spoiled in the attempt to set forth the supposed figurative meanings of these six phrases, but such expositions are to be discredited as overstrained, far-fetched, and at va- riance with that direct and simple clearness in method which always constitutes the power and charm of Jesus' teaching ; we are simply to accept them in their plain intent and meaning, and as evidence of the intense earnestness of Jesus in assuring us that our prayers can never fail of an answer. These two verses, Luke xi. 9, 10, are to be cherished as next in value to John iii. 16 ; the latter is precious to the penitent seeking for pardon and salvation, but the former is the golden signet- ring given into the hand of the redeemed by which he makes claim to the royal heritage pledged in the words, " If ye abide in me and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you." But there is another lesson to be drawn from the parable. God sees our thoughts and knows our motives, whatever our acts and words may be. The host, rousing up his friend, was not at heart a bad character; he was vain, fond of displaying his vir- tues, inconsiderate of others, selfish and persistent where his own advantage was concerned ; but, in Shamelessness. 1 5 all, he was honest and sincere ; he did not pretend that the traveller was hungry, but f rankl}^ gave the reason for his petition as one relating to himself alone; though his motive was not of the highest and purest, he jet obtained the bread and thus an answer to his prayer. God is in heaven and we upon earth ; lie knows what we have need of be- fore we ask Him; He can make allowance for all our ignorance, our mistakes, misjudgments, preju- dices, likes and dislikes, our disregard of others or lack of consideration for them, our selfishness and vanity. We do not know our own hearts fully and cannot ever know how much " shamelessness " arising from these qualities God sees in us when we offer prayer ; but if we are sincere and true, and particularly if our prayers can abide the test the Apostle James has given, that we ask not to " con- sume it upon our lusts," then we may feel some as- surance that our praj^ers will have an answer. The petition of the host began and ended with self ; our prayers are too often shameless in beginning and ending with self, yet God hears and answers them. The demand of the host must have come upon his friend at midnight with very much of a shock, at both its untimeliness and the lack of a valid reason for it ; in his first hasty thought his re- monstrant mood makes Irim say, " I cannot rise and give thee," but his second thought is, " Yes, I can, and that is the best way to deal with this strange and foolish request." Is it not so many times with God when our prayers at first go up before Him ? The absurdities in them which we do not see are so open to Him ; looking at them 16 Four Bible Studies. from His own point of view, He would deem it impossible to grant them; but regarded from our point of view and as we think they would affect ourselves and others. He sees the best course is to answer them. But still further than this, there is a spiritual shamelessness actually enjoined upon us, both by the lesson of the parable and by that of the pas- sage immediately preceding it. A disciple has just besought Jesus, " Lord, teach us to pray," and in response He gives them the Lord's Prayer. Now, since the parable directly follows the prayer with naught else between, we may fairly infer that it was spoken altogether in illustration and expo- sition of it ; and thus we might expect to find in the several petitions of the prayer the elements of a spiritual shamelessness corresponding closely to the shamelessness in word and act of the midnight petitioner. Consider the first four petitions of the Lord's Prayer : ^' Hallowed be Thy name {ayiaGdrjroo) ; Thy kingdom come (fA/9^rf») ; Give [didov) us each day our daily bread ; And forgive {a^es) us our sins, for we also forgive every £)ne that is indebted to us." The imperative verbs in these four requests are very significantly put in the aorist tense, and they furnish a broad, per- vasive, and inclusive sweep for the meaning of every sentence. Thus the four petitions may be read : " Let Thy name be hallowed completely, immediately, universally ; May thy kingdom come at once and everywhere; Supply our temporal needs fully to-day ; Forgive us our debts fully and completely, for after that manner have we for- Bliamelessness. 17 ffiven our debtors." In these four of its terms the Lord's Prayer is positive, unconditional, downright ; and their very brevity im])hes their comprehensive scope. Whatever may be our conclusions as to the answers God makes to our prayers, there can be no doubt here as to the intent of our Lord to have His prayer (the model for all others) framed upon these lines of positive and direct supplication, and for present and immediate benefits. IIoav to pray is one thing, how God answers prayer is another and very different thing ; our prayers for all good objects may be conceived in a spirit of great ex- aggeration and unbounded expectancy ; this is what our Lord commands and commends and exemplifies in the model set for us: "After this manner pray ye" (Matt. vi. 9). Consider for a moment what a climax of spiritual shamelessness is in these words : " And forgive us our sins ; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us." A certain servant owed his lord ten thousand tal- ents, but when about to be sold with wife and children, he appealed successfully to the mercy of his lord and was forgiven the debt ; the same ser- vantj however, could not forgive a fellow-servant one hundred pence. Ten thousand (silver) talents are fifteen million dollars ; one hundred pence are fifteen dollars. Now, it is fair and natural to be- lieve that Jesus, in naming these two sums, had in mind a sense of the difference between them and that He intended by them to represent, not accu- rately nor to any minute particular indeed, but still in some proportional measure, the relation our 18 Four Bible studies. sins against Gocl bear to the sins of our fellow-men ao^ainst us; He miD:ht have named one talent or even ten talents in place of one hundred pence, or five thousand in place of the ten thousand talents, and then the difference would have seemingly been almost great enough ; but by what He did say. He without doubt meant that there was virtually an infinite degree of proportion between the two cases of debt ; and we are to interpret the expressions as constituting a declaration that the sins of others against us are to be accounted as nothing in com- parison with our sins against our Heavenly Father. Yet in this prayer we are to ask Him to forgive us our infinite debt when we have forgiven our fellow- man a paltry nothing, and are to boldly proffer this fact of our forgiveness of mere trifles as a valid and sufficient EEASON for His forgiveness ! ! ! Oh, the unbounded shamelessness of it ! When did ever human reason or love operate to make fifteen dollars equal in a spiritual or moral applica- tion to fifteen millions ? yet here they are made so in the equations of God's arithmetic, and we see them, by a rule of divine dynamics, set in precious equipoise, swinging free in opposite scales with level beam and even balance ! Observe the notable difference between the passage here and as it occurs in Matthew's Gospel, " Forgive us, for we also forgive," nai TAP avroi a(j)ioijiev • while in Matthew it is : " As we also have forgiven," go^ Having thus, under our new interpretation, found the true lessons of the parable, let us draw a com- parison between the new and the old. The old Sliamelessness. 19 and erroneous exposition represents the traveller as desiring or needing food at midnight, a time when it is neither natural nor healthful to take it, nor made obligatory under the rules of hospitality to furnish it ; it ignores also the custom of travellers to carry their own loaves with them in their scrip. The host is represented as perfectly right and rea- sonable in waking up his neighbour and urging a petition for food ; the neighbour is all wrong in objecting, in manner and words he is surly and cross, and gives the bread only after much " im- portunity." The application is, we must always go to God with proper requests and great importunity, for He loves our clamour and delays answer in or- der to enjoy our repeated appeals, just as an earthly father enjoys the teasing of his children ; but God is not like the neighbour in that the latter was morose and sullen in his giving. Thus the parable is lamely made to deny its own nature, in giving a lesson by contrast and not, according to the true constitution of a parable, b}^ likeness. In opposition to this, our new exposition declares that the ti'aveller did not need food and was not entitled to it as a guest, or that, if he did need, he had it with him ; that the host was doing an unnec- essary act in rousing up the neighbour, and that the latter gave the shameless one at once all that he asked for. Our application is that, in spite of any extravagance or impropriety in our prayers, God does hear and answer them ; He loves us for the motives that prompt to shamelessness in asking for any good thing, but He does not love us for mere importunity, and He has assured us that He will 20 Four Bible Studies. certainly answer our prayers. Our Lord has given us encouragement in this by the unlimited terms in which nearly all the petitions of His model prayer are conceived. The Apostle Paul confirms us in this blessed assurance, declaring in his letter to the Ephesians (iii. 20) that " God is able to do exceed- ing abundantly above all that we ask or think." There is a tremendous sweep in these words. Do we ask for all, everything good we would have done ? He is able to do exceeding abundantly above that ; but we are not able to ask or even to think of all the good things He is able to do ; we cannot THINK of enough good things to have done! Nor is there need to be very choice or precise in the selection of our words. To show this, Paul in another place (Komans viii. 26, 27) sets forth the manner in which God receives and interprets our petitions. We know not what we should pray for as we ought, so the Spirit helps our infirmities and makes up for our ignorance and our failure to com- prehend all the glorious possibilities open to us through prayer; so far from making selection of subjects, or fine choice of words ; so far from con- finino: ourselves to those thino^s which to our limited view seem only the proper things to be prayed for, we may go as the host did, careless about words or about proprieties of time or place, and with shame- lessness ask, knowing that we can never ask enough ; for we are assured that He that searcheth our hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit when that Spirit translates our weak, ill-directed, dis- jointed, and thinly-diluted prayers into such ripe, Shamelessness. 21 rounded, symmetrical prayers as shall call down from heaven a response fully in consonance with that good and acceptable and perfect will of God. There are thus furnished to us in this parable rea- sons without number or limit for going boldly to The Throne of Grace. REVENGE. Luke xviii. 1-8. This parable was spoken " to the end that men ought alwaj^s to pray and not faint." The inter- pretation general!}^ given is : that a widow, by her importunity, obh'ged an unwilhng and unjust judge to grant the justice rightfully her due from her ad- versary ; and the lesson is said to be, that we should use importunity in our prayers, going often with the same petition to God; He loves to hear us pray, takes pleasure in our importunity, and, after withholding for a time the answer, eventually grants what we ask. Our faith is also said to be increased and strengthened by this persistence in prayer. In this parable also, as in that of the Friend at Midnight, there is one character by whom the lesson is said to come in the way of contrast and not of likeness ; it is asserted that God cannot be like the unjust judge, indifferent as to the righteousness or unrighteousness of His own conduct and the administration of His own o-overn- ment; that, in contrast to the unjust judge. He is always willing to hear us, and that if an unjust judge was constrained by importunity to grant a helpless widow's request, much more our Father, a just judge, will be moved by our importunity. We take decided exception to this interpretation and to its application, and, as in the former parable, Revenge. 23 declare that the unjust judge represents God di- rectly and by likeness in both his acts and words, and does not represent Him by way of contrast or unlikeness. We are to have the judge " cast along- side " of God as in the true method of a napafiokrfy and in all that he does and says he is actino^ in a truly parallel way, and illustrates God's methods and plans as directly as any character in any other parable spoken by Jesus. On a close study it will be seen that in both Authorized and Revised ver- sions the following words and phrases have not been correctly translated : First, in the reason given b}^ the judge for a change in his conduct toward the widow, diaye ro naptx^iy f^ioi uonov '''W X^'jP^'^ TavT7]v, the translation is, " because this widow troubleth me " ; but the true meaning to be given it is, " because this widow is bringing trouble upon me " ; in the wrong translation the thought is, "she is a pestering, teasing, worrying creature," but by the right rendering the thought is, "there is a real, tano-ible trouble she is brino-ino: upon me as a consequence of this continual com- ing." Secondly, the words i'yoL jat/ vnooniaar) fje are rendered, "lest she weary me," but the right meaning is, " lest she give me a black eye " ; the thought is, not that the woman will pester the judge till he is tired out, and so yields from mere intolerance of her worriments, but it is that a black eye will be given him through her coming; this black eye being a more specific name for, or a cul- mination of, the "trouble" she was to bring on him. What was meant by the black eye will be shown further on. 24 Four Bible Studies. Thirdly, Our Lord savs (Ttb and 8th verses) noirfffsi TYjv sKdiKYjaiv^ '' He will (do or work or) make revenge for His chosen " ; this is the literal and correct translation, and the two words should be so rendered in English that they may preserve the full force of the Greek, and not by the milder and weaker phrase, " He will avenge " ; for the thought is of an intense purpose by our Heavenl}^ Father to do very effectively and completely what- ever He would do for His elect. These two ex- pressions, made up of the verb with the noun, are thus notably twice repeated in this application made by our Lord of the parable. Again, in the first part of the parable, there are presented by the current method of exposition other wrong readings of certain terms. The word "avenge," as used by the widow, is made to mean " do right or do justice " ; such rendering is utterly inade- quate; ehShij^aov pi8 (the aorist of the imperative) in the mouth of the woman plainly means " avenge me " ; mere right or justice is not what she is ask- ing for ; it is something more than these and very much more ; she is set on securing a recompense beyond what is just or right ; she demands revenge. She does not say, ShcaiGoaov m^, "do me justice," Avhich would be the proper verb if only justice was sought for, but ejiSbiriGov //f, "avenge me"; and ijidiKrjGii, for its full and true significance, can never be restricted to mean only duir]. One principal difference between this present interpretation of the parable and the exegesis hitherto generally accepted consists in the differ- ence in application of the Greek word e7i6Lja](jis Revenge. 25 or tK8iKr)60D and of the English word " avenge." To illustrate: A may do an injury to B, and E may express in English a desire to be avenged for that injury ; such an expression is susceptible of two meanings: either (c) that B should receive a recompense exactly and justly commensurate with the injury, which would be simple justice; or (d) that this recompense should exceed the limit of what would be rightfully and equitably due him ; and then it would be revenge. But it will be found, upon a close study of all those passages in the New Testament and Septuagint in which hidinriaii and its co-derivatives are employed, that those words in all of them bear the wide and com- prehensive meaning indicated in (d) ; and that the significance of them would be unwarrantably re- stricted, and the true and full tenor of those passages would be lost, if their application were to be limited as set forth in (c). Thus it may be seen that the usage of the English " avenge " is much broader in scope than that of the Greek word, since it is in our modern tongue loosely and without discrimination applicable to any case of recompense, whether of justice or revenge. Therefore, proceeding from such conclusion in this present case, it must appear as a fact estab- lished, that the limitation by interpreters of the widow's appeal to a demand for mere justice can- not be constituted from a proper application of the Greek word andiK/fGov. The broad and loose usao-e of the English word "avenge" has thus misled our exegetes into the wrong assignment to the Greek Avord of a meaning more restricted 26 Four Bible Studies. and narrow than its usage by contemporary Greek authors would sanction. Indeed, the tendency has ever been to minimize the meaning's of words and phrases of this parable in some instances, and to " strain " the meanings in others. It must be be- lieved that our Divine Master exercised at least ordinary intelligence in the choice of words, and that Luke, under guidance of the Holy Spirit, as well as of his own mental power to discriminate, chose the right Greek words to express the thoughts uttered by our Saviour in Aramaic, if He did so utter them. There was a purpose definitely exer- cised in the selection of the characters of the para- ble, and in the words that set forth their thouirhts and acts. The selection of an unjust instead of a just judge was for a purpose ; there was a signifi- cance in making a widow the petitioner rather than any other character; it was for a purpose and with right appreciation of the force of the words that Jesus four times spoke of revenge and not once of justice ; if He had used this latter term but once in the parable, there might have been some slight ground for regarding the two terms as convertible, but as He did not, we are fairly to conclude that He used the word ijidiHrjaiv in its ordinary and accepted Greek sense. Too often, apparently, an excessive fear of mak- ing a parable " go on all fours " has restrained expositors from giving to each character and act and expression in a parable its proper representa- tive value ; such a fear has doubtless operated in this instance to nullify and make valueless the words and acts of the two persons in the parable ; Revenge. 27 attention has been strongly fixed upon the " im- portunity " supposed to be its only lesson, the word- meanings have been made adjustable as closely as might be to that, and no stress at all has been laid upon the peculiar and operative words and sentences evidently framed with a fine discriminative sense of their import by our Great Teacher, that they might convey clearly and ac- curately all of the lesson He intended. The warn- ing: against o-oinof on all fours mio;ht well enouo^h be addressed, as doubtless it often was of old, to those hair-splitting scribes who could make their microscopic analyses so fine as to discover mean- ings in the turn of every letter or in its position on the parchment roll ; who could strain out gnats and swallow many a camel in their elaborate and fantastic expositions of the Law ; but we need not, in this day of enlightenment, be restrained, through any consideration of its abuse, from putting to its right and fairly intended use every portion of these divine teachings of Jesus ; and we need claim for Him simply the same discretion in the ordinary use of language that we ourselves would have. It certainly could not be that He, in all other cases so careful and unerring in diction, should in the two instances of these parables have been so very negligent and clumsy ; it is preferable, at all hazards, to take these terms in their plain, usual, and open sense, and if that does not lead us to a natural and fair explanation, then to confess our inability to find a present solution, and wait in patience, ignorant of the precious lesson, until the Spirit of Truth may give such spiritual insight into 28 Four Bible Studies. " the deep things of God " as will enable us to fully unfold them in their beauty and power. Mean- while, and Avith earnest pra^^er for that light, let one humble attempt here be made to bring out what may be deemed its right interpretation. A widow comes to the court of an unjust judge ; she can come because she is a widow, uncontrolled by any one ; a wife or daughter could not come, for the Oriental husband or father, if he* approved of the cause, would come himself in their place, and if he disapproved would not allow them to come ; a man would not be allowed to come, even " for a while," for he could be more summarily dealt with than a woman, and driven with blows from the judgment seat. So it is a widow, one with the privilege to come "continually," who appears before a judge, not of righteousness, but of unrighteousness, and pleads, " avenge me of my adversar}^" Evidently, we are not to regard this woman as like other Avidows referred to in the Bible; she was not of the weak-minded, nerveless sort, yielding without opposition to any oppression it was the common custom to visit upon defence- less Avidows of that time ; the fact of coming with a petition for rcA^enge marks her as of strong Avill and probably unscrupulous purpose ; so that, not tamelv submitting to injustice, she is before the judge, Avith full resolution and a settled plan for getting even and more than even Avith her adver- sary. She comes to an unjust, not to a just judge, for the former could give her re Avenge, but the lat- ter only justice. The judge allows her to come for a while, eni xporov, but at the end of that " while," Revenge. 29 hoTvever long it may have been, lie finds it not best for him to let her come any longer; she is bring- ing trouble and must be stopped, for if her coming should be continual, fzb rtAo?, she would give him a black eye. It is evident from the manner of statement that in the judge's view the nonov and the vnoDuiaaiv are the same, or at least that the former is a direct and immediate result of the lat- ter. What, then, is the " trouble,'' and what the '' black eye " ? To define the latter first, the term clearly has here no meaning of a physical import; there was no danger that the kadi, sitting in a public place, attended by servants and officers of his court to keep between himself and the suitors and audience such respectful distance as would secure due main- tenance of dignity and safety, would be struck in the face and under the eye by the fist of the woman in a fit of desperation and despair. The term has only an ethical meaning here, the same as it has with us to-day ; that is, to get a black eye means to have one's plans defeated, to be disappointed as to results expected from certain events or acts, to be overthrown by some sudden and un])reventable disaster. Paul used it in such ethical sense when describinor his manner of fio-htino- tlie entano-lino' lusts of the body; he made no feint of the fight- ing, throwing out his fists at random as one that beateth the air, but straight, solid blows were de- livered right "under the eye," and thus his pas- sions were sent to grass and thei'c kept under. Ilis figures were borrowed from the prize-ring in this instance, as they Avere in some others. What was 30 Four Bible Studies. the particular ethical character of this black eye in the judge's case ? For an Eastern judge there were no set codes of laws as in Western countries, carefully and elabo- rately framed, defining and classifying offences, and appointing a fit and well-measured punishment for each ; with no guide of this sort, and unfettered by any rules confining his action within well-set bounds, he was free to give judgment according to a few plain general principles of right as he might apprehend them, and to order his decrees under that simple moral code, short and unwritten, which in all ages and nations has bounded almost tlie entire scope of duty as betAveen man and man. With a power thus practically unlimited, he both made and executed his law ; with good common sense, ready seizure of the main points of a case, quick sagacity in applying the remedy or penalty, and, lastly, an honest purpose to do right, he was the ideal kadi of the Orient, well equipped for dis- pensing a rude justice fairly and efficiently; there, as here, the impartial judge is in high honour, and his decrees are accepted and obeyed as the un- avoidable decrees of fate. Before such a judge of righteousness immediate and complete relief is the result of his trial to everj^ suitor, and he would not be put off unless for the purpose of obtaining new evidence. The judgment rendered b}^ King Solo- mon (1 Kings iii. 16-28) in the case of a claim by two women of the same living child, is a fine ex- ample of the methods and ways open to an honest Eastern judge in arriving at a just and instant de- cision ; the whole transaction might not have occu- Revenge. 31 pied more than fifteen minutes. To the mind of an Oriental, therefore, delay by a judge for days in giving judgment would appear strange and unac- countable; inquiries would arise as to the reasons for a suitor to be "continually coming"; if sus- picions were well founded that he had a case too complicated for him to master, or, if able, he was unwilling for sordid or dishonest reasons to give a decision, then, and in either instance, his capacity and integrity would, in the popular thought, re- ceive a serious blow ; all trust in his uprightness would be gone, his unfitness for the office made clear; he would receive (almost without metaphor) a black eye in the loss of his reputation and of the confidence of the community ; for it is true in East- ern, as in Western lands, no judge can long hold office who administers it w^ithout the " fear of God or the regard of man." And the consequences might not stop there; reports of his inefficiency and dishonesty would reach the ears of his supe- riors, and if proved true, he would lose his office, and might lose his head. It is clear, therefore, that the continual coming of this woman must be stopped if this unjust judge would avert the disaster sure to follow ; and so far from allowing her any exercise of " importunity," it is the very condition most to be dreaded and avoided. The "for-a-while" has been already too far prolonged ; the trouble she'is bringing will surely draw on its dread result if any importunity is per- mitted, lie will prevent it at once by granting her prayer, giving her the revenge she asks; to give mere justice would not be enough; it would not 32 Four Bible Studies. stop her coming; she could and would, with a woman's persistence, come again. She knew that from an unjust judge she could as well have re- venge as justice ; she held the key of the situation, so that he " who feared not God nor regarded man " is constrained to do the behest of a defence- less, powerless woman. The tables are, in a man- ner, turned ; the two parties change positions : she is the real judge and arbiter of his fate ; he is help- lessly compelled to do her wishes, and there is no other resource left him. He might now offer to give her justice, to have her adversary appear with her before him, to hear both sides, and decide im- partially and justly ; but it is not the nature of an unjust judge to do that. It is also too late now ; his office and possibly life are in instant peril ; the one thing to do is to grant her prayer and stop her coming. In the work by Canon Tristam, entitled " East- ern Customs in Bible Lands," there is an interesting passage in the chapter entitled '' Eastern Jurispru- dence," pages 228 and 229, as follows : " I well re- member a scene which vividly re-enacted the par- able of the ' Unjust Judge.' It was in the ancient city of [Nisibis, in Mesopotamia. Immediately on entering the gate of the city, on one side stood the prison with its barred windows, through which the prisoners thrust their arms and begged for alms. Opposite was a large open hall, the court of justice of the place. On a slightly raised dais at the further end sat the kadi or judge, half buried in cushions. Round him squatted various secretaries and other notables. Tlie populace crowded into Revenge. 38 the rest of the hall, a dozen voices clamouring at once, each claiming that his cause should be first heard. The more prudent litigants joined not in the fray, but held whispered communications with the secretaries, passing bribes, euphemistically called fees, into the hands of one or another. When the greed of the underlings was satisfied, one of them would Avhisper to the kadi, who would promptly call such and such a case. It seemed to be ordi- narily taken for granted that judgment would go for the litigant who had bribed highest. But mean- time a poor woman on the skirts of the crowd per- petually interrupted the proceedings with loud cries for justice. She was sternly bidden to be silent, and reproachfully told that she came there every day. ' And so I will,' she cried out, ' till the kadi hears me.' At length, at the end of a suit, the judge impatiently demanded, ' What does that woman want ? ' Her story was soon told. Her only son had been taken for a soldier, and she w^as left alone and could not till her piece of ground ; yet the tax-gatherer had forced her to pay the impost, from which as a lone widow she should be exempt. The judge asked her a few questions, and said, ' Let her be exempt.' Thus her perseverance was re- warded. Had she had money to fee a clerk, she might have been excused long before." Here we see that the woman was reproached, not for her importunity, but for her coming every day ; the other suitors were just as importunate, each crying out for a hearing, but it was for this one day, no evidence appearing that, like the woman, they had been coming every day. With 3 34 Four Bible studies. her, as with the widow of the parable, it was not importunity for one day, but the " continual com- ing " that in both cases brought the favourable decree. A clear distinction must thus be made in the meanings of the two expressions ; it is a con- clusion altogether unwarranted to say that they are of interchangeable application. The main dif- ference between the w^oman in this account and the widow of our parable is, that the one was ask- ing for w^hat was clearly just, but the other for revenge. The judge whom Canon Tristam saw, had been delaying justice for the sake of a bribe, and yielded to the woman Tvhen it turned out that she had no bribe to give ; but the judge in our parable gave the widow her answer for a more hon- est and serious reason. From the soliloquy which our Lord puts in his mouth we see the workings of his heart; pi'ide and haughtiness were there in abundant measure, but no dishonesty ; the words in which Jesus makes him open to us his innermost thought show that fear of a '* black eve '' was the only but sufficient motive with him for granting her revenge. Now^ w^e have come to the proper application of the parable. We who pray are like the wndow, and are to come and ask, not for justice, but for " revenge." There are two passages in the JN^ew Testament from which we may obtain the ethical and spiritual meaning of that word as it relates to the subject-matter and to the manner of our pray- ers ; for, as it means, when used in its ordinary and bad sense, an excessive retaliation of evil in return for evil suffered, so, when used, as here, in its good Bevenge. 35 sense it means an excess of good action, an over- plus of well-doing. In 2 Cor. x. 6 Paul com- mends the obedience to the Gospel of some and condemns the disobedience of others, and declares that after the fulfilment of the obedience of the faithful ones, the disobedience of those hitherto unfaithful shall be " revenged " ; that is, through the operation of the spiritual, uncarnal weapons brought to bear upon them, all in them that exalts itself against the knowledge of God shall be cast down, and every thought bi'ought into captivity to the obedience of Christ. In 2 Cor. vii. 10 and 11, speaking of the effect upon those to whom he was writing of that godly sorrow which worketh re- pentance unto salvation, the Apostle testifies to the carefulness, the clearing of themselves, the indigna- tion, fear, desire, zeal, and revenge it wrought in them. Here the particular meaning of " revenge " is made clear from the text preceding ; the church at Corinth had for a season dropped into such laxity of discipline as to suffer among them without cor- rection or rebuke a most heinous example of evil as recorded in 1 Cor. v., and when, under the sting of Paul's sharp letter, they had been made con- scious of their own sin and had repented, they were most eager to repair the wrong, to purify the church ; and then, proceeding further than was re- quired of them strictly in the case, they made for a so much higher spiritual life and for so much purer morals as their life and morals before then had been low and slack ; and thus their godly sor- row had wrought upon them its proper and whole- some " revenue." 36 Four Bible Studies. Such, therefore, must be the true tenor of the word as apphed by our Saviour to the prayers of God's elect ; they are to ask for such abundance as to quantity, such excellence as to quality, of all the good things He has to give, as will be far in excess of what, in men's judgment, would be deemed reasonable and fair ; they are to go beyond justice, and ask for revenge. And He can grant it. Bound by no consideration whatever as limiting His will and power, high above all law (as He is the author of all law), high above that realm where what we apprehend as causes and effects are in action, " He is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think " ; in all these respects He is like the unjust judge. Like him also in another and wonderful respect ; for as the judge is compelled by the widow, and must comply under peril of disgrace and loss, so our gracious God represents Himself here as placing at stake His character as the hearer and answerer of prayer, and as resting upon it His very title to office as our Father and God. This thought controls in the application by our divine Lord, "He will (or shall) work out the aveno^ino: of His own elect." He shows God as having a certain relation to His people ; they are His chosen ones, and therefore, as in all other instances where persons or people are spoken of as " chosen," there is implied a mutual cove- nant. God's elect have duties to perform toward Him, and, on the other hand, God has duties to perform toward His elect. It is God's side of this covenant which our Saviour lays stress upon in this application ; He puts it in the strong inter- Mevenge. 37 rogative form, " And shall not God work out the avenging of His OAvn elect ? " as if to say : " How preposterous to think that God shall not work out the aveng-ino^ of His own elect ! He shall, and from the very fact that He has chosen them." God is under constraint and tied up to just such a course with His elect ; He cannot free Himself from it except He cast them off utterly and disown them as His elect, something He has never yet done and never can do while they are faithful to Him. Our Master assuredly intended to emphasize these cove- nant relations, as constituting a strong and inde- feasible claim upon our Heavenly Father, making impossible the refusal of any prayer. This is the all-sufficient reason why " men ought always to pray and not faint." It remains to notice some expressions in the 6th and Yth verses. " Hear what the unjust judge saith." Our attention is directed, not to what the judge does, not to what the widow does or says, but only to what the judge says; he will avenge her lest she give him a black eye ; so he declares ; he could not suffer her coming any more ; the motive for his action is selfish, not dictated by any benevolent feeling toward the supplicant ; never- theless, the action promptly relieves the widow. God is the fountain of love and mercy ; nay. He is love itself ; and if He would be God, then He must for his own sake and of necessity answer prayer ; and, further, all the while that He is work- ing out revenge for His chosen. He is also fAanpo- OvfABi (" broad-hearted ") toward them. This word, translated " long-suffering " and " having patience " 38 Four Bible Studies, in other parts of the l^ew Testament, is not well given the right sense here in the English word " long-suffering " ; as intended by Luke, tiie Greek word has a meaning different from that conveyed by the English word into which it is translated ; it is not the true thought that God is bearing with us beyond what we ought to expect, tliat we are, so to speak, trespassing on His kindness and good- will nearly to the exhaustion of His patience. This English double word has been changed in its ap- plication since the translation of the Bible two hundred and eighty years ago; then it had a meaning purely and singly good, that of kind- ness and forbearance without implication of un- merited toleration toward a sinful person or sinful act ; as used in this parable, therefore, it has that singly good meaning, and, in fact, it has such in all the other New Testament uses. A good example of this is shown in 2 Peter iii. 15 : "And account that the lono^ sufferino^ of our Lord is salvation ■' ; the context both before and follow- ing this passage shows Peter as addressing, not a church that was provoking God by inconsistent and blameworthy lives, but a church of those chosen ones who were honouring Him ''in all holy living and godliness." So in 1 Peter iii. 20 ; God's plan in waiting one hundred and twenty years was full of broad, generous love to the people of !Noah's time. Maupos has the meaning of large- ness in all directions — broad, deep, long ; dv/Ao? is the soul, heart, the emotional nature as contrasted on one side with nvav^a, which is the spiritual nature, human or divine (Green's K. T. Syno- Revenge. 39 nyms), and on the other side with fvx^'h which is the life or soul common to man and irrational animals. So that i.iaHf>odvf.iei, thus derived, gives a clear perception of the receptive, all-embracing kindness and partiality of God toward His chosen, and it is the only right word here; by the use of any other, such as fJsyaXoipiDxi^ or f.ieya'Ko