^{page 327 note 1} Cf. Linton, O., ‘The Third Aspect’, Studia Theologica, III (1949), 79–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 327 note 2} J.B.L. LXV1 (1947), 211–19.Google Scholar

^{page 327 note 3} ‘The Double-Minded Man in the Light of Essene Psychology’, A. T.R. XXXVIII (1956), 166–75.Google Scholar

^{page 328 note 1} Cf. Prov. xix. 21.Google Scholar

^{page 328 note 2} Cf. Ps. xxvi. 3–4, 10; English versions use ‘mischief’ to represent Zimāh, which I have translated here as ‘plan’.Google Scholar

^{page 328 note 3} Cf. Deut. xxix. 17–19.Google Scholar

^{page 328 note 4} Heb. b'gilûlîm; in Ezek. xiv. 3ff. these ‘idols’ are said to be set up in the heart, i.e. made objects of thought; hence in D.S.D. 11. 12 ‘with idols of his heart’ (b'gilûleî libô), i.e. with wrong mental images, or unclean thoughts.Google Scholar

^{page 328 note 5} Cf. Ezek. xiv. 3–4, 7, 9; xiii. 2–3, 6–9; also I Kings xxii. 21–3.Google Scholar

^{page 328 note 6} The Dead Sea Scrolls of the Hebrew University, ed. Sukenik, E. L. (Jerusalem, 1955), pl. 38; the passage cited is in 11. 12–16.Google Scholar

^{page 328 note 7} In Sim. VI, Hermas contrasts this (good) Shepherd with two others, one being an Angel of Deceit who turns God's servants from the truth and deceives them with evil desires by which they are brought to destruction; cf. Jer. xxiii. 1ff. where false shepherds (i.e. prophets, vv. 9ff.) destroy the Lord's flock.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 1} Gk. διάνοα, corresponding perhaps to Heb. mahašābāh, or mah'š'bôt, as in Gen. vi. 5 LXX; in the Thanksgiving Psalm, I have rendered this as ‘device’ in reference to the double-minded, but also in reference to God, as ‘thought’.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 2} Or ‘the faithful’, in contrast to the double-minded who are characterized in Mand. IX. 5 aS doubting in their heart.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 3} Gk. psvnc, as in jer. xxix. 8 LXX; cf also Ezek. xiii. 6, 23.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 4} Cf. Ezek. xiii. 2–3, where false prophets speak from their own heart and walk after their own spirit; cf Jer. xxiii. 16.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 5} Lit. ‘desire of wickedness’, as in Mand. XII where it is opposed by the ‘desire of righteousness’, corresponding to the Heb. yēser hā-ra’ and yēser lôb.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 6} I.e. to tear them away from their allegiance to God, or to divide and overthrow them.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 7} Gk. , i.e. their double-mindedness is shown by repeatedly ‘turning to the Lord’ and turning away again; they do not ‘turn to him with all their heart’; cf. Jer. xxiv. 7; Joel. ii. 12.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 8} Or ‘foolish’; the adjective is applied to false prophets themselves in Ezek. xiii. 3.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 9} Demonstrable from other passages where the scriptural allusions of Hermas depend for their point on LXX wording.Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 10} In Ezek. xiv. 3–7 gilûlîm is rendered by various Gk. terms indicating thoughts or mental images, but elsewhere in Ezekiel frequently by .Google Scholar

^{page 329 note 11} This idiom occurs in Ps. xii. 3 Heb. (LXX is slavishly literal) preceded by (LXX χείλη δόλια), which R.V. renders ‘with flattering lips’. I am indebted to Meir Gertner of Oxford, St Catherine's Society, for bringing to my attention two texts which afford assistance for the interpretation: Hos. x. 2 hālak libām, ‘their heart is divided’; Ps. lxxviii. 36–7, referring to those who sought to ‘entice’ wa-y'patûhû (R.V. ‘flatter’) God with their lips, but their heart did not ‘stand fIrm’ with him, i.e. they wire not steadfast in the professions made when entering into his covenant. The Scroll writer says such men are themselves ‘enticed’ (m'pûteî) or deceived by error. But see Ezek. xiv. 9. On Ps. xii. 3 Midrash Tehillin comments: they have ‘one thing on their lips, and another in their hearts’; or as the Scroll writer says: ‘not constant in the truth’; cf Jas. i. 8, ‘a double-minded man is unstable in all his ways’.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 1} LXX (xxxvi. 8) reads , the adjective being implied by the context.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 2} For here LXX uses forms pf , which Hermas rarely employs in a religious sense, using instead , as in Ezek. xiv. 7 LXX; Hermas frequently connects with other verbs.

^{page 330 note 3} Cf. Jer. xxiv. 7; Joel ii. 12.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 4} Cf. Jas. i. 6–8; iv. 8.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 5} Test. Ash.s. 3ff.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 6} Did. I–VI; Barn. XVIII–XX.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 7} D.S.D. nt. 20–1; IV. 2.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 8} Sifre, Deut. Re'eh § 53 ed. Friedmann 86a; Tanhwna, Debarim, Re'eh § 3;Google ScholarEccles. R. i. 14 § 1.Google Scholar

^{page 330 note 9} Cf. Jer. xxxi. 31–3 ‘new covenant’.Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 1} Wisd. i. 1–2.Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 2} Barn. xix. 2, 5.Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 3} Mand. 11. 7;. unfortunately ℵ fails us just at this point; as Lake noted, the text of A is almost illegible; while άκακία is a possible reading, adopted by M. Whittaker, the reading is supported by cor in L¹ and Hermas has numerous other references to a pure heart.Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 4} I. Clem. XXIII. 3–4; II Clem. xi. 2–4 calls it ‘the prophetic word’.Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 5} Midrash Tehillin, ed. Buber 56a; Tanhuma, ed. Buber, V, 23b, § 3.Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 6} That these are ‘idols of the heart’, or wrong thoughts of God, does not really alter the suitability of this translation.Google Scholar

^{page 331 note 7} Hermas, conscious of the temptations of a heathen environment, was under special constraint to take the term as referring to material, as well as mental images.Google Scholar

^{page 332 note 1} So Midrosh Tehillin, cited above.Google Scholar

^{page 332 note 2} D.S.D. IV. 5; VIII. 3yēser samûk; cf. Isa. xxvi. 3; D.S.D. V. 4–5 alluding to Gen. vi. 5, followed by the characterization of the yēser as ‘uncircumcised’, a name given to it in Sukkah 52 a, on the basis of Jer. iv. 4.Google Scholar

^{page 332 note 3} Mand. xix.Google Scholar

^{page 332 note 4} Mand. III and V.Google Scholar

^{page 332 note 5} Mand. XI. 7.Google Scholar

^{page 332 note 6} See Shepherd, Massey H. Jr, ‘The Epistle ofJames and the Gospel of Matthew’, J.B.L.Lxxv (1956), 41, n. 3.Google Scholar

^{page 332 note 7} See my earlier article: ‘The Relationship of the Shepherd of Hermas to the Epistle of James’, J.B.L. LXIII (1944), 133f.Google Scholar

^{page 332 note 8} Num. xi. 26–9. Rabbinic exegesis held that all other prophets prophesied and ceased, but they did not cease; they prophesied concerning the downfall of Gag and Magog, Sanhedr. 17a; Midr. R. on Num. 15, § 19.Google Scholar

^{page 333 note 1} See James, M. R., The Lost Apocrypha of the Old Testament (London, 1920), pp. xif., and 38–40.Google Scholar

^{page 333 note 2} Vis. 11. ii. 4, 7.Google Scholar