| <p> [[A]] [[Syriac]] word, signifying Father. It is thrice used in the New Testament. Once, by the Lord Jesus, ( Mark 14:36.) and twice by his servant the apostle Paul. ( Romans 8:15. and Galatians 4:6.) It is a word of peculiar tenderness; and [[I]] could wish that the real and full meaning of it was strongly impressed on the mind of every regenerated believer. It would tend to give great confidence and comfort in a dark and trying hour. David, Levi, in his Lingua Sacra, derives it from a root, which signifies, desire, delight, complacency, satisfaction: and implying no less, special interest of relationship, as between the nearest of all connections. And agreeably to this account of the word, it is remarkable, that though the word, in its extensive sense, signifies the Ab, or Head, and Lord of a family; yet a slave, or menial servant, was never allowed to use it in addressing the Ab. </p> <p> [[I]] very earnestly beg the reader not to lose sight of this view of the word Abba, but to let it possess a suitable place, equal to its importance, in his remembrance. For if it was so specially confined, among the people of the East, to the children of a family; and Jesus and his people in him, are enjoined to use it on this account; can any thing more strikingly prove their relationship? And [[I]] cannot but express my hope, that if the reader of this Poor Man's Concordance, is enabled, by grace, to see his own personal privilege herein, and can enter into a proper apprehension of the word, in this most endearing view, he will be led to discover the sweetness and blessedness of it, and from henceforth adopt it, in all his approaches to the throne of God in Christ. And how delightfully in this sense, doth it explain to us that passage of the apostle, in his epistle to the Galatians; where he saith, "Because ye are sons, [not because ye are to be made so, but because ye are already sons] God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying Abba, Father." ( Galatians 4:6.) </p> <p> While [[I]] am upon this word Abba, Father, [[I]] cannot forbear adding to those observations, though in a cursory manner, a remark upon the word Ammah, Mother. For it is from the same root, and is also of the like peculiarity of tenderness, in reference to the church of Jesus; which, as the apostle saith, (including both that in heaven and in earth, for they are but one and the same,) "is the mother of us all." ( Galatians 4:26.) We meet with the several branches of the same root in Scripture, according to the several relations arising out of it; but they are all one and the same family. ( Ephesians 3:14-15.) Hence [[Zion]] is called, and by the Lord himself, the "Virgin daughter (the Almah) of Zion." ( Isaiah 37:22.) So again she is spoken of as the sister (Ruhamah) ( Hosea 2:1.) And it is no uncommon thing for Christ to call his church by all these names. (See Song of Song of [[Solomon]] 4:9-10; Son 4:12.) And when Isaiah was commissioned to proclaim to the church, the subject of the miraculous conception, he used the same word as the Lord did of Zion. "Behold, a virgin, (Almah) shall conceive." ( Isaiah 7:14.) [[I]] venture to believe that if the recollection of these names, all springing as they do from one and the same source, were frequent in the believer's remembrance, they would much refresh the soul. And [[I]] think it worthy of yet farther remark, that there is a beautiful sameness between the first cry of nature, in the infancy of our being, and this language of grace when the souls of believers are first born to God. It was said by the prophet concerning Him, whom he predicted, that "before the child should know to refuse the evil and choose the good," the event leading to it should be accomplished. ( Isaiah 7:16.) And it must be truly said, that before the cry of the soul, in the new birth of grace, goes forth in Abba, or Ammah, the apprehending union, interest, and relationship in Christ with his church, had been settled long before, even from all eternity. </p> <p> Though [[I]] have already far exceeded, under this article, the ordinary limits to be observed in a work of this kind, yet [[I]] must beg to trespass a little farther, by way of confirmation of the observations made upon it. </p> <p> The special and personal interest of the word Abba, derives another authority, from the customs and manners of the East. It is well known, that the ancient nations of the Arabs, retain many of the usages we read of in sacred history. And although they know nothing of the true religion of the patriarchs, yet in provincial acts and habits, they are much the same people that they were, two or three thousand years ago. Hence, among many proofs in point, which might be given in confirmation of this sameness of manners, the mode of salutation is one, in which there is nothing changed. We find among the patriarchs, the general expression was, "Peace be to you." ( Genesis 43:23.) In the days of the Judges, the salutation was the same. ( Judges 19:20.) So in the days of David, ( 1 Samuel 25:6.) and in the days of our Lord, and by Christ himself. ( John 20:19.) In like manner the limitation of the word [[Abba]] is still the same as ever, not being brought into common use, but wholly restricted to relations, and of the nearest and tenderest kind. </p> <p> One proof more. In the common acts of respect observed in the East, when servants do reverence to their masters, or superiors, it is always done by kissing the feet, or the garment. Hence the poor woman we read of, Luke 7:38. But when children meet their parents, and do reverence, they kiss the hand, or the head. Hence the father in the parable. ( Luke 15:20.) Moreover, the posture which is observed upon those occasions, differs materially according to the rank of the parties. From inferiors, in giving what is called the Asslem-mah, (Salutation) they always offer it, by laying their right hand upon their breast. [[Persons]] of equality, or relations, do it by kissing the hand, head, or shoulder of each other. So Dr. Shaw relates in his Travels to Aleppo, page 301. Let the reader connect this with Jacob kissing his son, and the church's call unto Christ. ( Song of Song of Solomon 1:2.) How beautiful and striking both cases! How little the change made in those things, in a period of near four thousand years! </p> <p> From the whole of these observations, [[I]] cannot but conclude, that the word Abba hath a peculiar sweetness in it, and is intended to intimate what a nearness and dearness of affinity there is, between Christ and his church. And [[I]] venture to believe, that our holy faith, not only warrants the use of it, but enjoins it, from the personal union, and oneness, of the Lord Jesus Christ with our nature. And under such high encouragement and authority, [[I]] confess, that [[I]] feel a disposition, upon every occasion, to adopt it, considering it the peculiar privilege of all true believers in Christ, to bring it into constant use, whenever they draw nigh to a throne of grace. See Ammi. </p> | | <p> <b> [[Abba.]] </b> —An [[Aramaic]] word preserved by St. Mark in our Lord’s prayer in [[Gethsemane]] ( Mark 14:36 Ἀββᾶ ὁ πατήρ, πάντα δυνατά σοι), and given twice in the same association with ὁ πατήρ by St. Paul ( Romans 8:15 ἐλάβετε πνεῦμα υἱοθεσίας ἐν ᾧ κράζομεν, Ἀββᾶ ὁ πατήρ; and Galatians 4:6 ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸ Πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν κρᾶζον, Ἀββᾶ ὁ πατήρ). [[A]] difficulty arises both as to the spelling and the pronunciation of the word Abba, and also as to its being found in all the above passages joined to ὁ πατήρ. </p> <p> <b> 1. </b> [[Abba]] (ἁββᾶ) corresponds to the Aramaic אַבְא abbâ, which is the definite state of אַב âbh (construct state אִב abh), and means ‘Father,’ unless it is used for ‘my Father’ (אַבּ֖א for אִבֽי) as in Genesis 19:34 a (Targ. [Note: Targum.] of Onkelos and pseudo-Jonathan; see Dalman, <i> Aramaisch-Neuhebräisches Wörterbuch, s.v., Gramm </i> . p. 162, and <i> Words of Jesus </i> , p. 192 [Dalman says that the suffix of 1 pers. sing. is ‘deliberately avoided with אָב and is supplied by the determinative form’]). It is not, however, quite certain that the word was pronounced <i> abbâ </i> in [[Palestine]] in our Lord’s time. As the points were not invented till many centuries after, we cannot be sure that <i> abbâ </i> was then the definite state rather than <i> abhâ </i> as in Syriac; and we have no indication except the Greek transliteration that the <i> b </i> was then doubled. But the fact that, when points were first used (a.d. 700?), the <i> daghesh </i> was employed for the definite state of this word in the Targnmic literature, coupled with the doubling of the [[Β]] in the Greek, affords a presumption that the <i> b </i> was hard and doubled in this word at the beginning of our era [Dalman gives for the definite state אַבָּא Genesis 44:19, or בָּא Numbers 25:14, or in Palestinian [[Targum]] also אִבָּא; with other pronominal suffixes we have אֲבוּהי etc., and the pl. definite state is אֲבָהָחָא]. The Syriac, on the other hand, has <i> b </i> aspirated throughout, ܐܰܒ <i> abh </i> , ܐܰܒܳܐ <i> abhâ </i> (pron. <i> av, avâ </i> , or <i> aw, awâ </i> ), etc., and the distinction between <i> abâ, a spiritual father </i> , and ܐܒܼܐ <i> avâ, a natural father </i> , which the grammarians make, appears not to be founded on any certain basis, nor to agree with the manuscripts (Payne-Smith, <i> Thesaurus Syriacus, s.v. </i> ). The proper name ܐܰܒܳܐ also in [[Syriac]] has always aspirated <i> b </i> , while Dalman (Wörterbuch) gives for Targumic אַבֽא, and says it is an abbreviation of אֲבִיָה. In Mark 14:36 (Peshitta) Pusey and Gwilliam give ܐܰܒܼܳܐ as in Massora 1 in the British Museum (Codex Additionalis 12138, Nestorianus, a.d. 899); the American edition prints ܐܲܒܵܐ ( <i> i.e. </i> with ܒܿ) in all three [[Nt]] places; but this is rather a following of the grammarians than of good manuscripts. It is very noteworthy, however, that the Harkleian version in the Markan passage spells the word ܐܰܒܒܰܐ, transliterating the Greek directly back into Syriac, rather than using the Syriac word itself. </p> <p> John Lightfoot ( <i> Horae Hebraicae </i> on Mark 14:36) remarks that the Targum, in translating the [[Ot,]] never renders a ‘civil’ father, <i> i.e. </i> a master, prince, lord, etc., by אַבָא, but only a natural father, or a father who adopts; in the former sense they use some other word. But this throws no light on the pronunciation of Abba. </p> <p> It is to be noticed that it is not certain how the [[Greeks]] of the 1st cent. themselves pronounced ἀββᾶ, whether <i> abbâ </i> or, as the modern Greeks pronounce it, <i> avvâ </i> . The word is not found in the [[Lxx]] Septuagint. It passed into ecclesiastical Latin with a doubled <i> b </i> , and gave us such words as ‘abbot,’ ‘abbacy,’ etc. </p> <p> But does it mean ‘Father’ or ‘my Father’? If it be a [[Jewish]] formula or fixed manner of beginning prayer, it may well be the latter. We must, however, note that whatever be the way of accounting for Ἀββᾶ ὁ πατήρ (see below), the originators or originator of that phrase in Greek, whether the Jews, or our Lord, or St. Paul, or the Second Evangelist, seem to have taken Ἀββᾶ to mean merely ‘Father.’ And the same is probably true of the translators of the Peshitta. The Sinaitic Syriac, however, appears to read ܐܳܒܼܝܝ my Father (see below). The Curetonian Syriac is wanting here. </p> <p> <b> 2. </b> We have next to account for the association of Ἀββᾶ in its Greek dress with ὁ πατήρ in all the three places where it occurs in [[Nt.]] In Mark 14:36 the Peshitta reads ܐܰܒܼܳܐ ܐܳܒܼܝܝ ‘Father, my Father,’ and the Sinaitic Syriac has simply ܐܳܒܼܝܝ ‘my Father.’ In Romans 8:15 and Galatians 4:6 the Peshitta reads ܐܰܒܳܐ ܐܰܒܰܘܢ. All these appear to be mere expedients adopted to avoid the awkwardness of repeating ܐܰܒܳܐ, and they do not really throw light on the origin of the Greek phrase. </p> <p> We may first take as a supposition that our Lord, praying in Gethsemane, used the Aramaic language, and therefore said ‘Abba’ only, and that ὁ πατήρ is the Evangelist’s explanation, for Greek readers, of the Aramaic word. St. Mark undoubtedly reports several Aramaic words, and except in the case of the well-known ‘Rabbi,’ ‘Rabboni’ ( Mark 9:5; Mark 10:51 etc.), explains them. But then he always uses a formula, ὅ ἐστιν ( Mark 3:17, Mark 7:11; Mark 7:34) or ὅ ἐστι μεθερμηνευόμενον ( Mark 5:41, Mark 15:34). It is suggested that in the case of Abba the familiarity of the word would make the connecting formula unnecessary; but the same consideration would make it unnecessary to explain it at all. Another suggestion is that the solemnity of the context would make the formula incongruous. The strongest argument for ὁ πατήρ being an addition of the [[Evangelist]] is that, whatever view we take of our Lord’s having made use of Greek in ordinary speech, it is extremely unlikely that His prayers were in that language; and if He prayed in Aramaic, He would only say ‘Abba.’ It is the common experience of bilingual countries that though the acquired language may be in constant use for commerce or the ordinary purposes of life, the native tongue is tenaciously retained for devotion and prayer. Sanday-Headlam’s supposition ( <i> Romans, in loc. </i> ), that our Lord used both words spontaneously, with deep emotion, might be quite probable if He prayed in the foreign tongue, Greek; but scarcely so if He prayed in the native Aramaic (see, however, below). </p> <p> If ὁ πατήρ be due to St. Mark, it is probably not a mere explanation for the benefit of Greek readers. The suggestion that Ἀββᾶ ὁ πατήρ had become a quasi-liturgical formula, possibly even among the Jews, or more probably among the Christians, would account for its introduction in a prayer, where interpretations would be singularly out of place. And this suggestion would account for St. Paul’s using the phrase twice, in two [[Epistles]] written about the same time, indeed, but to two widely distant Churches. St. Paul is not in the habit of introducing Aramaic words (‘Maranatha’ in 1 Corinthians 16:22 is an exception), and if he were not quoting a well-known form, it is unlikely that he would have introduced one in writing to the Romans and Galatians. It is not probable, however, that he is quoting or thinking of our Lord’s words in Gethsemane, for there is nothing in the context to suggest this. </p> <p> If the phrase be a liturgical formula, we may account for it in various ways. [[J.]] [[B.]] Lightfoot ( <i> Galatians, in loc. </i> ) suggests that it may have originated among [[Hellenistic]] Jews; or else among Palestinian Jews, after they had learned Greek, as ‘an expression of importunate entreaty.’ He prefers the latter view, thinking that perhaps our Lord Himself used both words. He apparently means that Jesus took the Greek word into His Aramaic prayer; and he quotes from Schöttgen a similar case where a woman entreats a judge and addresses him as מריבירי ‘My lord, lord,’ the second word being equivalent to the first, except for the possessive suffix, and being a transliteration of κύριε. Chase (‘The Lord’s [[Prayer]] in the Early Church,’ in the [[Cambridge]] and Studies, vol. i. p. 23) has suggested another origin for the phrase, which would place its home, not among the [[Jews]] (for which there is no evidence), but among the Christians. He suggests that it is due to the shorter or Lukan form of the Lord’s Prayer ( Luke 11:2 ff.). The Aramaic shorter form would begin with Abba, for the Greek begins with Πάτερ; and the hypothesis is that the early [[Christians]] in the intensity of their devotion repeated the first word of the prayer in either language. [[A]] somewhat similar phenomenon is seen in the repetitions for emphasis in Revelation 9:11; Revelation 12:9; Revelation 20:2, where the names are given in both languages. Such a repetition is possible only in a bilingual country. That it is the shorter form of the Lord’s Prayer that is used (if Dr. Chase’s hypothesis be true), is seen from the Aramaic אַבָא Abba. If the longer form had been in question, Πάτερ ἡμῶν, the initial word of the Aramaic would have had the possessive pronominal suffix of 1 pers. pl., and would be אֲבוּנָא ăbhûnâ. </p> <p> It is a confirmation of this theory that the words which follow, ‘Not what [[I]] will but what thou wilt,’ recall ‘Thy will be done’ of the Lord’s Prayer; compare especially Matthew 26:42 γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου, the exact words of the longer form of the Lord’s Prayer. This shows that both [[Evangelists]] had that prayer in their minds when relating the agony. The only consideration which militates against the theory is that ὁ πατήρ is used for Πάτερ. The nominative with the article is, however, often used in [[Nt,]] by a [[Hebrew]] analogy, for an emphatic vocative, and the desire for emphasis may account for its use here. </p> <p> [[A.]] [[J.]] Maclean. </p> |
| <p> Abba is the emphatic form of the Aram. word for ‘father’ (see Dalman, <i> Aram. Gram. </i> p. 98, for אב and its various forms; also Maclean, in <i> Dict. of Christ and the [[Gospels]] </i> , <i> s.v. </i> ). It is found only in three passages in the [[Nt,]] viz. Mark 14:36, Romans 8:15, Galatians 4:6; in each case ὁ πατήρ is subjoined to Ἀββᾶ, the whole expression being a title of address. [The use of ὁ πατήρ, nominative with the article, as a vocative, is not a Hebraism, as Lightfoot thought, but an emphatic vocative not unknown to classical Greek and common in the [[Nt:]] ‘nearly sixty examples of it are found in [[Nt’;]] sea Moulton, <i> Gram. of [[Nt]] Greek </i> , Edinburgh, 1906, p. 70.] </p> <p> Lightfoot on Galatians 4:6 argues that the bilingual expression is a liturgical formula originating with [[Hellenistic]] Jews, who, while clinging to the original word which was consecrated by long usage, added to it the Greek equivalent; but he supports an alternative theory that it took its rise among [[Jews]] of [[Palestine]] after they had become acquainted with the Greek language, and is simply an expression of importunate entreaty, and an example of that verbal usage whereby the same idea is conveyed in different forms for the sake of emphasis. As illustrations of this repetition, he quotes Revelation 9:11 (Ἀπολλύων, Ἀβαδδών) Revelation 12:9; Revelation 20:2 (Σατανᾶς, Διἀβολος). Thayer, in <i> Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols) </i> ( <i> s.v. </i> ), points out that, though devotional intensity belongs to repetition of the same term ( <i> e.g. </i> κύριε, κύριε), it is also expressed by such phrases as ναὶ ἀμήν, ‘Hallelujah, [[Praise]] the Lord,’ where the terms are different. The context of each passage where ‘ <i> Abba </i> , Father’ is found appears to prove that the Greek addition is not merely the explanation of the [[Aramaic]] word, such as, <i> e.g. </i> , St. Peter might have added in his preaching-a custom to be perpetuated by the Evangelists, as suggested by the passage in Mk.; but is rather an original formula, the genesis of which is to be sought further back, perhaps in the actual words used by our Lord Himself. Thus Sanday-Headlam on Romans 8:15 ( <i> International Critical [[Commentary]] </i> , 1902) remark: </p> <p> ‘It seems better to suppose that our Lord Himself, using familiarly both languages, and concentrating into this word of all word such a depth of meaning, found Himself Impelled spontaneously to repeat the word, and that some among His disciples caught and transmitted the same habit. It is significant however of the limited extent of strictly [[Jewish]] [[Christianity]] that we find no other original examples of the use than these three.’ </p> <p> Thus, the double form is due to the fact that the early [[Christians]] were a bilingual people; and the duplication, while conveying intensity to the expression, ‘would only be natural where the speaker was using in both cases his familiar tongue.’ [[F.]] [[H.]] Chase ( <i> Texts and Studies </i> i. iii. 23) suggests that the phrase is due to the shorter or [[Lucan]] form of the Lord’s Prayer, and that the early Christians repeated the first word in the intensity of their devotion, coupling a Hellenistic rendering with the Aramaic <i> Abba. </i> He argues that the absence of such a phrase as ὅ ἐστιν, or ὅ ἐστι μεθερμηνευόμενον, in Mark 14:36 is due to the familiarity of the formula; and that, while the [[Pauline]] passages do not recall Gethsemane, they suggest the Lord’s [[Prayer]] as current in the shorter form. Moulton ( <i> op. cit. </i> p. 10), combating Zahn’s theory that Aramaic was the language of St. Paul’s prayers-a theory based on the Apostle’s ‘ <i> Abba </i> , Father’-remarks that ‘the peculiar sacredness of association belonging to the first word of the Lord’s Prayer in its original tongue supplies a far more probable account of its liturgical use among [[Gentile]] Christians.’ He mentions the analogy (see footnote, <i> loc. cit. </i> ) of the Roman [[Catholic]] ‘saying <i> Paternoster </i> ,’ but adds that ‘Paul will not allow even one word of prayer in a foreign tongue without adding an instant translation’; and further refers to the [[Welsh]] use of <i> Pader </i> as a name for the Lord’s Prayer. </p> <p> It seems probable (1) that the phrase, ‘ <i> Abba </i> , Father,’ is a liturgical formula; (2) that the duality of the form is not due to a Hebraistic repetition for the sake of emphasis, but to the fact that the early Christians, even of non-Jewish descent, were familiar with both Aramaic and Greek; (3) that <i> Abba </i> , being the first word of the Lord’s Prayer, was held in special veneration, and was quoted with the Greek equivalent attached to it, as a familiar devotional phrase (like <i> Maran atha </i> [ 1 Corinthians 16:22], which would be quite intelligible to Christiana of Gentile origin, though its Greek translation, ὁ Κύριος ἐγγός [ Philippians 4:5], was also used; cf. <i> Did. </i> 10. 5, where ‘Maran atha’ and ‘Amen’ close a public prayer); and (4.) that our Lord Himself, though this cannot be said to be established beyond doubt, used the double form in pronouncing the sacred Name, which was invoked in His prayer. </p> <p> In conclusion, it should be noted that, while the phrase is associated with the specially solemn occasion of the [[Gethsemane]] agony, where our Lord is reported by St. Mark to have used it, both examples of its use in the Pauline writings convey a similar impression of solemnity as connected with the [[Christian]] believer’s assurance of sonship-and sonship (let it be noted) not in the general sense in which all humanity may be described as children of God, but in the intimate and spiritual connotation belonging to υἱοθεσίαν, or ‘adoption,’ into the family of God. </p> <p> Literature.-See article‘Abba’ in Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols), <i> Dict. of Christ and the Gospels </i> , and <i> Jewish Encyclopedia </i> , an art in <i> Expository Times </i> xx. [1909] 358, and the authorities cited above. </p> <p> [[R.]] Martin Pope. </p>
| |