Basic HTML Version
2.
$
(
#
"
, 1746), (Eng., “endue”), signifies “to enter into, get into,” as into
clothes, “to put on,” e.g., Mark 1:6; Luke 8:27 (in the best mss.); 24:49 (
KJV
, “endued”);
2 Cor. 5:3; Rev. 1:13; 19:14. See
ARRAY
,
ENDUE
,
PUT
ON.
3.
$
(
#
"
, 1737) has the same meaning as No. 2; the termination,—
suggests the beginning or progress of the action. The verb is used in the middle voice
in Luke 16:19 (of a rich man). Some mss. have it in 8:27, for No. 2 (of a demoniac). In
Mark 15:17 the best texts have this verb (some have No. 2). See
WEAR
.¶
4.
$
(
#
"
, 1902), a strengthened form of No. 2, used in the middle
voice, “to cause to be put on over, to be clothed upon,” is found in 2 Cor. 5:2, 4, of the
future spiritual body of the redeemed.¶
5.
(
,
&
, 2439) means “to put on raiment” (see
, below), Mark
5:15; Luke 8:35.¶
6.
, (
$ 1
, 4016), “to cast around or about, to put on, array,” or, in the
middle and passive voices, “to clothe oneself,” e.g., Matt. 25:36, 38, 43, is most frequent
in the Apocalypse, where it is found some 12 times (see
, below). See
CAST
,
No. 10,
PUT
, No. 9).
Note:
The verb
, “to gird oneself with a thing,” in 1 Pet. 5:5, is
rendered in the
KJV
, “be clothed with.”
CLOTHING, CLOTHS, CLOTHES, CLOKE, COAT
1.
, or
(
1$
, 534), probably by metathesis from
(Latin
$
), “a mantle,” denotes a traveling “cloak” for protection against stormy
weather, 2 Tim. 4:13. Some, however, regard it as a Cretan word for
, “a tunic.” It
certainly was not an ecclesiastical vestment. The Syriac renders it a case for writings
(some regard it as a book-cover), an explanation noted by Chrysostom, but improbable. It
may have been “a light mantle like a cashmere dust-cloak, in which the books and
parchments were wrapped” (Mackie in
B
4 !
7
0
).¶
2.
(
, 1
, 2440), “an outer garment, a mantle, thrown over the
” In
the plural, “clothes” (the “cloke” and the tunic), e.g., Matt. 17:2; 26:65; 27:31, 35. See
APPAREL
, No. 2.
3.
(
0
, 5509) denotes “the inner vest or undergarment,” and is to be
distinguished, as such, from the
. The distinction is made, for instance, in the
Lord’s command in Matt. 5:40: “If any man would go to law with thee, and take away
thy coat (
), (
) also.” The order is reversed in Luke 6:29, and the difference
lies in this, that in Matt. 5:40 the Lord is referring to a legal process, so the claimant is
supposed to claim the inner garment, the less costly. The defendant is to be willing to let
him have the more valuable one too. In the passage in Luke an act of violence is in view,
and there is no mention of going to law. So the outer garment is the first one which would
be seized.