he beheld four huge beasts coming up out of the sea, these creatures representing human governments. (Dan. 7:1, 3, 17; see BEASTS, SYMBOLIC.) Daniel also saw the Ancient of Days, from whom “someone like a son of man” received lasting “rulership and dignity and kingdom.”—Dan. 7:13, 14.

Joel foretold the figurative dreaming of dreams under the influence of God’s spirit, evidently indicating that Jehovah’s servants would see fulfilled the dreams the prophets saw in ancient times. (Joel 2:28) One fulfillment occurred at the outpouring of the holy spirit on Pentecost of 33 C.E., when persons speaking many languages understood Jesus’ disciples who spoke to them in various tongues “about the magnificent things of God.” (Acts 2:1-18) The major fulfillment would be realized during the last days of this system of things.

When Jesus Christ stood on trial before Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor’s wife sent him this message respecting Jesus: “Have nothing to do with that righteous man, for I suffered a lot today in a dream because of him.” (Matt. 27:19) The Bible does not state that the dream was of divine origin, but if it was from God, the report of it may have served to warn Pilate that Christ’s case was one of extreme importance.

NATURAL DREAMS

Natural dreams may be stimulated by certain thoughts or emotions, sensations or daily activities (anxiety, one’s physical condition, his occupation, and so forth). These dreams are of no great significance. (Ps. 73:20) A hungry person may dream of eating, a thirsty one of drinking, but he awakes unsatisfied. Comparable delusion was in store for all the nations “waging war against Mount Zion.”—Isa. 29:7, 8.

Concerning the pagan view of dreams, it is stated: “Babylonians had such trust in dreams that on the eve of important decisions they slept in temples, hoping for counsel. Greeks desiring health instruction slept in shrines of Aesculapius, and Romans in temples of Serapis. Egyptians prepared elaborate books for dream interpretation.” (Harper’s Bible Dictionary, 7th ed., 1961, p. 141) But such practices did not exist among faithful Hebrews and early Christians. The Scriptures warn against looking for omens, whether in natural dreams or in various incidents.—Deut. 18:10-12; see DIVINATION.

FALSE DREAMS

False dreams are Biblically condemned. According to the Law, a false dreamer who urged the committing of idolatry was to be put to death. (Deut. 13:1-5) God might sometimes speak to his true prophets by means of dreams (Num. 12:6), but he was against the “prophets of false dreams,” who led his people away from true worship. (Jer. 23:25-32; 27:9, 10) Practicers of divination were described as speaking “valueless dreams.”—Zech. 10:2.

The Bible speaks of dreams in a figurative sense in describing the ungodly defilers of the flesh who slipped into the Christian congregation. Jude warned fellow believers against such men “indulging in dreams,” these persons apparently dreaming (imagining) that they could with impunity violate God’s Word and defile flesh in the congregation. This was a mistake, for they would inescapably receive adverse judgment from the Supreme Judge, Jehovah.—Jude 8; 1 Cor. 6:9, 10, 18-20.

DREGS

In the Scriptures the term occurs five times, always in the plural (Heb., sh^ema·rimʹ). It is generally rendered “lees” by Bible translators, and has reference to suspended particles that precipitate and settle to the bottom when wine is allowed to stand undisturbed. Keeping a good wine “on the dregs” for a long time to age fully gives it clarity, strength and mellowness. (Isa. 25:6) On the other hand, when a wine that is bad to start with due to a poor quality of grape is left to congeal on the dregs, it does not improve in taste or smell, facts to which the prophets refer in illustrations. (Jer. 48:11; Zeph. 1:12) Also, in a figure of speech the psalmist says that “all the wicked ones of the earth” will be compelled to drain the cup of Jehovah’s anger, drinking the dregs and all, down to the last bitter drop.—Ps. 75:8; compare Ezekiel 23:32-34; see WINE AND STRONG DRINK.

DRESS

Apart from mention, with some description, of various articles of clothing in the Bible, there is little historical information as to the dress worn by the Hebrews—far less than that of the Egyptians and Assyrians. The reason is that the nation of Israel did not erect monuments or make inscriptions lauding their military victors, with figures of themselves from which we could get an idea as to their style of dress. Numerous Egyptian and Assyrian bas-reliefs, and those of other nations, illustrate the dress of their own peoples, and several show captives of different nationalities. Some of those depicted are believed to be Hebrews, but this cannot be proved. It seems reasonable, however, that some of the clothing worn today by people in many parts of the Bible lands may be roughly similar to what was worn centuries ago, since the same purposes are served, and since some customs have remained unchanged for centuries. On the other hand, archaeological evidence seems to show that the Hebrews used color in their dress to a greater extent than the modern Arab bedouins. Additionally, the dress worn by modern-day Jews and by other people in those lands has often been greatly influenced by religion and by Greek, Roman and Western customs, so that we can at best get only a general idea by comparison.

MATERIALS

The very earliest clothing material was the fig leaf, Adam and Eve sewing fig leaves together to make loin coverings. (Gen. 3:7) Later, Jehovah made them long garments of skin. (Gen. 3:21) A “hair garment” was used by Elijah and by Elisha as the “official garment” of the prophetic ministry. Elijah also wore a belt of leather. John the Baptist dressed similarly. (2 Ki. 1:8; 2:13; Heb. 11:37; Matt. 3:4) Sackcloth, usually made of hair (Rev. 6:12), was worn by mourners. (Esther 4:1; Ps. 69:10, 11; Rev. 11:3) Linen and wool were the principal fabrics. (Lev. 13:47-59; Prov. 31:13) The coarser fabrics of the poor were made of goat’s hair and camel’s hair, although they also used wool. Linen was a more expensive material. Cotton may also have been used. In only one place in the Bible is it certain that silk is mentioned, it being listed as an article of Babylon the Great’s commerce. (Rev. 18:12) Garments were of various colors, variegated and striped, and some were embroidered. (Judg. 5:30) Varieties of weave existed. The high priest’s white linen robe was woven “in checker work.” (Ex. 28:39) The Israelites might wear a garment of linen and another of wool, but were forbidden by God’s law to wear a garment of two sorts of thread, mixed.—Lev. 19:19; Deut. 22:11; see CLOTH; DYES, DYEING.

GARMENTS

The general term for garment most often used in the Hebrew Scriptures is beʹghedh. Other terms were used, sometimes in a general way, but they also appear in places as applying to specific articles of clothing.

Inner garments

There seems to have been an innermost garment in the form of a loincloth, or perhaps drawers, worn next to the skin, for the exposure of absolute nakedness was shameful. The priests were required to wear linen drawers (Heb., mikh·n^esaʹyim) to prevent indecent exposure when they served at the altar. Pagan priests sometimes served naked, a thing disgusting to Jehovah.—Ex. 28:42, 43.

The sa·dhinʹ (Heb.) was an “undergarment” worn by both men and women. (Isa. 3:23) Some think that one form of this inner article of clothing was in the nature of a wraparound garment. It would be worn without outer garments by workmen such as the Israelites in Egypt’s brick fields, or fishermen, carpenters, hewers of wood and drawers of water, and so forth. When worn beneath outer clothing the style of it appears to have been shirtlike, reaching to or below the knees, having sleeves and worn with or without a sash. It was made of wool or linen.

The Hebrew kut·toʹneth (or, k^ethoʹneth), a type of robe, seems to correspond with the Greek khi·tonʹ. Both terms are most widely used to refer to a tunic or shirtlike article of apparel, long or half-sleeved, reaching to the knees or to the ankles. It was the indoor costume for family life and familiar outdoor surroundings. In some styles of the kut·toʹneth or the khi·tonʹ, it may have been draped over one shoulder, leaving the other bare, and was white or of varied colors. The longer style would be slit in each side from the hem up about a foot (c. 30 centimeters) for freedom of walking. Some were of linen, but probably more often of wool, especially among the poor. This garment was also worn by both men and women, the women’s robe likely being longer.

Kut·toʹneth is the word used for the robe of the high priest and the underpriests. (Ex. 28:39, 40) The word is also used for Joseph’s long striped shirtlike garment (Gen. 37:3), and for Tamar’s striped robe, which she ripped apart in grief and humiliation. (2 Sam. 13:18) Jesus’ inner garment (khi·tonʹ), over which the soldiers cast lots, was woven in one piece without a seam. (John 19:23, 24) The kut·toʹneth or khi·tonʹ could be worn with a sash, as in the case of the priests, or without; likely, in most cases, a sash was used. Probably different styles of it were worn, depending on the activity of the wearer. One engaged in work or physical activity would reasonably wear a shorter version of the garment, for more liberty of movement. Jude’s illustration, at verse 23, is appropriate, for the khi·tonʹ would be in contact with the flesh.

Outer garments

The m^eʽilʹ, a sleeveless coat, was worn on top of the kut·toʹneth or white linen robe of the high priest. (Lev. 8:7) The m^eʽilʹ was not restricted to the priesthood, however, but was a common item of apparel. Samuel, Saul, David, and Job and his three companions are among those mentioned as wearing sleeveless coats. (1 Sam. 2:19; 15:27; 18:4; 24:4; 1 Chron. 15:27; Job 1:20; 2:12) In each case it is quite clear that it refers to an upper or secondary garment worn over another one. The Septuagint Version often renders m^eʽilʹ in Greek as sto·leʹ and hi·maʹti·on, terms denoting an upper garment. This article of dress may have been usually longer than the kut·toʹneth. The sal·mahʹ (Heb.) may also have been a form of outer garment.

The sto·leʹ, as referred to in the Christian Greek Scriptures, was a stately robe reaching down to the feet. Jesus criticized the scribes for loving to wear this type of robe in public places to attract attention and to impress people with their importance. (Luke 20:46) The angel at Jesus’ tomb was wearing this form of clothing. (Mark 16:5) It was this robe, “the best,” that was put on the prodigal son at his return. (Luke 15:22) And the martyred servants of God in John’s vision are clothed with the sto·leʹ (Rev. 6:11), as are also the members of the “great crowd.”—Rev. 7:9, 13, 14.

E·sthesʹ (Gr.) usually had reference to a robe or garment that was ornate, splendid. Angels appeared in such attire. (Luke 24:4; see also James 2:2, 3.) Herod clothed Jesus in such a robe in mockery. (Luke 23:11) After Jesus was scourged at Pilate’s orders the soldiers put on him a scarlet cloak (a khla·mysʹ) (Matt. 27:28, 31), or hi·maʹti·on. (John 19:2, 5) This was apparently a cloak or robe worn by kings, magistrates, military officers, and so forth.

The sim·lahʹ (Heb.), “mantle,” was the outermost garment worn by the majority. It was also the largest and heaviest, made of wool, linen, or goat’s hair, and perhaps, in some cases, of sheepskin or goatskin. The mantle was often the garment that was ripped to express grief. (Gen. 37:34; 44:13; Josh. 7:6) It seems to have been a large rectangular piece of material, usually placed on the left shoulder, brought up under the right arm from behind, drawn across the chest and thrown back over the left shoulder again, leaving the right arm free. In bad weather it was drawn around the body more closely, over both arms, and even covering the head. Some believe that it was occasionally in the form of a square cloak with an opening in front and slits in the side for the arms, but, if so, this would seem to be a less common style. The mantle, comparable in some respects to our shawl, could be used as a covering (Gen. 9:23); as bed clothing (Ex. 22:27; Deut. 22:17); and to bind or wrap up articles.—Ex. 12:34; Judg. 8:25; 1 Sam. 21:9.

The sim·lahʹ was worn by both men and women, the woman’s being distinguishable from the man’s, perhaps in size, color and decoration, such as embroidery. God commanded that a woman should not wear a man’s garment, nor a man a woman’s mantle, this command doubtless being given in order to prevent sex abuses.—Deut. 22:5.

A poor man might have only one mantle, but the well-to-do had several changes. (Ex. 22:27; Deut. 10:18; Gen. 45:22) Because it was the poor person’s covering during the chilly Palestinian nights, it was forbidden to take a widow’s garment as a pledge or to keep the garment of a poor man overnight, the mantle here being referred to primarily.—Deut. 24:13, 17.

The Greek hi·maʹti·on, “outer garment,” probably corresponds largely to the mantle (sim·lahʹ) of the Hebrew Scriptures. In some cases it appears to have been a loose robe, but more often a rectangular piece of material. It was easily put on and thrown off. Usually it was taken off when its owner was working nearby. (Matt. 24:18; Mark 10:50; John 13:4; Acts 7:58) Jesus spoke of this piece of apparel when he said: “From him that takes away your outer garment [hi·maʹti·on], do not withhold even the undergarment [khi·toʹna].” (Luke 6:29) He may refer here to a forcible or illegal removal of garments, the outer garment naturally being first to be pulled off. At Matthew 5:40, he reverses the order. There he is discussing legal action, in which the judges might first award the complainant the khi·tonʹ, the inner garment, which was of less value.

That hi·maʹti·on and khi·tonʹ may have been used at times interchangeably to mean “garment” is indicated in the accounts of Jesus’ trial by Matthew and Mark. The high priest ripped his clothing to demonstrate forcibly his sanctimoniously assumed horror and indignation. Matthew uses the word hi·maʹti·on here, while Mark uses khi·tonʹ. (Matt. 26:65; Mark 14:63) Or it is possible that in his fervor he ripped one garment, then another.

The phe·loʹnes (Gr.), which Paul asked Timothy to bring to him in prison, was likely a traveling cloak for protection against cold or stormy weather. It was not a religious or ecclesiastical vestment.—2 Tim. 4:13.

The ʼad·deʹreth (Heb.) was the official garment of