Seven

Seven (שֶׁבִע, sheba). The frequent recurrence of certain numbers in the sacred literature of the Hebrews is obvious to the most superficial reader; and it is almost equally obvious that these numbers are associated with certain ideas, so as in some instances to lose their numerical force, and to pass over into the province of symbolic signs. This is more or less true of the numbers three, four, seven, twelve, and forty; but seven so far surpasses the rest, both in the frequency with which it recurs, and in the importance of the objects with which it is associated, that it may fairly be termed the representative symbolic number. It has hence attracted considerable attention, and may be said to be the keystone on which the symbolism of numbers depends. The origin of this symbolism is a question that meets us at the threshold of any discussion as to the number seven. Our limits will not permit us to follow out this question to its legitimate extent, but we may briefly state that the views of Biblical critics may be ranged under two heads, according as the symbolism is attributed to theoretical speculations as to the internal properties of the number itself, or to external associations of a physical or historical character. According to the former of these views, the symbolism of the number seven would be traced back to the symbolism of its component elements three and four, the first of which = Divinity, and the second= Humanity, whence seven =Divinity+ Humanity, or, in other words, the union between God and man, as effected by the manifestations of the Divinity in creation and revelation. So again the symbolism of twelve is explained as the symbolism of 3 x 4, or a second combination of the same two elements, though in different proportions, the representative number of Humanity, as a multiplier, assuming a more prominent position (Bähr, Symbolik, 1, 187, 201, 224). This theory is seductive from its ingenuity and its appeal to the imagination, but there appears to be little foundation for it. For

(1) we do not find any indication, in early times at all events, that the number seven was resolved into three and four, rather than into any other arithmetical; elements, such as two and five. Bengel notes such a division as running through the heptads of the Apocalypse (Gnomon, at Re 16:1), and the remark undoubtedly holds good in certain instances, e.g. the trumpets, the three latter being distinguished from the four former by the triple "woe" (Re 8:13); but in other instances, e.g. in reference to the promises (Gnomon, at Re 2:7), the distinction is not so well established; and even if it were, an explanation might be found in the adaptation of such a division to the subject in hand. The attempt to discover such a distinction in the Mosaic writings — as, for instance, where an act is to be done on the third day out of seven (Nu 19:12) appears to be a failure.

(2) It would be difficult to show that any associations of a sacred nature were assigned to three and four previously to the sanctity of seven.. This latter number is so far the sacred number κατ᾿ ἐξοχήν that we should be less surprised if, by a process the reverse of the one assumed, sanctity had been subsequently attached to three and four as the supposed elements of seven. But